You know, for some reason I have this sneaky suspicion I have seen this movie before. If only I had a better memory and could remember. Just kidding. Before I begin I would like to say this. I like apple pie and I like cherry pie. I do like both pies equally the same for the qualities that they have. I love the sweetness of the apples mixed with the cinnamon and the sugar but on the other hand I love the sweet tartness of the cherries and the gooey sauce that surrounds them. With both pies I love how the crust can be flaky and buttery with just the right texture to hold the pies all together but still soft and flaky enough that a fork can cut through and the crust melts in your mouth with caramelized sugar coating the top of it.
That being said, Total Recall with Farrell, Beckinsale and Biel would be like a apple pie that went wrong and Total Recall with Arnie, Stone and Ironside would be like a cherry pie with a few mistakes as well. From now on let me discuss the merits, or flaws, of the apple pie Total Recall with Farrell. The action in this film was quite good. Plenty of jumps, shots, explosions and action to keep a guy like me interested in and almost disguised the flimsy plot and tiny little problems in the film that would have me scratching my head. All I can say is that not only is the population in the future totally stupid but they are apparently living in a world without safety back ups and restrictions. In this day and age where I can't get a coffee without warning labels or even open doors without passcards or keys, apparently you can jump around the inner workings of mass transportation vehicles with a twist of a handle or manually pulling the door open.
Acting wise was not too bad though a little on the flimsy side. Farrell does play a lost and confused person quite well, though I think he had a lot of outside help to draw on for the confusion part. Such as asking himself repeatedly "how exactly did I get convinced to be in this film?". Beckinsale does a great job playing the wife/agent assigned to Farrell and is in charge of bringing him down. She convinced me that she is one twisted and vengeful woman. Hell hath no fury than that of a women ticked off for sure in this film. On the whole, I would say that the cast was rather interesting in their performances and had moments of true depth but on the whole nothing really spectacular to write about.
In total I would say that while this movie was not exactly like the Arnie movie of Total Recall it was just another take on the short story "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale". Both movies had their differences like the pies have their apples to cherries, while both movies had their similarities like a pie has crust and sugar topping. They can not really be put side by side and judged but I would say that both of them have gotten the same rating in my mind. I give them 2 out of 5 popped kernels of corn. Not a bad movie to go and kill an afternoon or evening on but don't expect to take a date to this movie and impress them with your cinematography depth and perceptions.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Step Up Revolution - movie review
What is the definition of a 'triple threat'? In the entertainment industry it would be someone that can both sing, dance and act. An example would be, and this is my personal opinion only though I am sure some might disagree, would be Antonio Banderas. An example of someone that is NOT a triple threat would be anyone in the movie Step Up Revolution.
This latest installment of the movie train wreck has a dance crew that is used to public displays of either annoyance or excitement (depending on which person the news crew in the movie asks) known as "The Crew" use their colorful dance crew to go from performance art to protest art to stop the destruction of their homes by the usual 'greedy and corrupt business'. Throw in a bit of Romeo and Juliet in the form of one co-founder of the crew and the daughter of the head of the greedy and corrupt business (sure it is a spoiler but trust me when I say that nothing I say or tell you could possibly hurt this film cause they do a pretty good job themselves in the film making it almost unbearable to watch) and this painful film is born.
I think the only saving factor about the film is that the dancing is quite good. While my knowledge of dance is about on par with my level of current fashion and music, I can appreciate the skill that is required to do what these dancers can do. The only down side that grounds me in a bit of reality is the fact that there is a difference between watching these performers on stage live, watching them on TV reality shows like So You Think You Can Dance? and watching them in a the movies. One has no form of editing and you have to be good to get it on the first take, one could have some mild editing and perhaps they do edit a couple routines here and there for the show which I can not say they do or do not, and the other is edited out the whazoo to get the best form of movie around. After seeing the routines that were done I have to wonder how many of them practiced and then rolled the cameras and got it in one take or had to practice each scene repeatedly again and again.
Regardless of the dancing, the whole movie was simply painful to watch. This film, to me, deserves no popped corns but I would go backwards and give it 2 unpopped corns out of 5 popped corns.
This latest installment of the movie train wreck has a dance crew that is used to public displays of either annoyance or excitement (depending on which person the news crew in the movie asks) known as "The Crew" use their colorful dance crew to go from performance art to protest art to stop the destruction of their homes by the usual 'greedy and corrupt business'. Throw in a bit of Romeo and Juliet in the form of one co-founder of the crew and the daughter of the head of the greedy and corrupt business (sure it is a spoiler but trust me when I say that nothing I say or tell you could possibly hurt this film cause they do a pretty good job themselves in the film making it almost unbearable to watch) and this painful film is born.
I think the only saving factor about the film is that the dancing is quite good. While my knowledge of dance is about on par with my level of current fashion and music, I can appreciate the skill that is required to do what these dancers can do. The only down side that grounds me in a bit of reality is the fact that there is a difference between watching these performers on stage live, watching them on TV reality shows like So You Think You Can Dance? and watching them in a the movies. One has no form of editing and you have to be good to get it on the first take, one could have some mild editing and perhaps they do edit a couple routines here and there for the show which I can not say they do or do not, and the other is edited out the whazoo to get the best form of movie around. After seeing the routines that were done I have to wonder how many of them practiced and then rolled the cameras and got it in one take or had to practice each scene repeatedly again and again.
Regardless of the dancing, the whole movie was simply painful to watch. This film, to me, deserves no popped corns but I would go backwards and give it 2 unpopped corns out of 5 popped corns.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
The Intouchables - Movie Review
I saw the trailer for this movie a few weeks ago and the first thing that popped into my head was "I have to watch this movie". After speaking with a couple friends who saw the movie in an advanced screening my next thought was "I can not miss this movie". So when it came time to go and see a movie, my wife and I both immediately selected this one as our first pick for the evening. Neither of us was disappointed in our choice.
The movie follows the growing friendship bond between an aristocrat quadriplegic and a good hearted young man from the 'other side of the tracks' who is hired on as a care giver. The rest of the story is all about how the two slowly become friends and the things that they do for each other to strengthen their friendship.
Why this is such a funny movie is that the situations and humor are not forced ones like all the other comedies that are out there. An extreme example would be humor like The Hangover where granted there might be some bachelor parties that come like that those situations are more like the chances of being hit by a meteor after winning the lottery. The humor in this movie are all realistic one liner bantering that could happen in your every day life with friends or family, spur of the moment jabs and jokes that make you smile and laugh and even go and repeat it to friends as a 'guess what she said' kind of stories.
The two main characters are great together. They play off each others timing to a T and even made me believe that they were actual friends for life and not just actors portraying friends in a movie. The supporting actors are great as well. The attractive yet unattainable assistant to the aristocrat that the caregiver keeps hitting on relentlessly does an amazing job, and even the house keeper does a great job of playing the frumpy yet friendly person. The only down side is that at the end of the movie you get to see a real video of the two people in the film. The difference in looks are quite apparent. It would be like if I had a movie made about my life and I was played by George Clooney or Tatum Channing instead of someone like Neil Patrick Harris or Michael Cera (geeky main character from SuperBad).
The only really negative thing that I can say about this movie would be the same thing that I say about all foreign subtitled films that both my wife and I disagree on 100%. She likes to have the film played in the original language and subtitled while I prefer to have it dubbed in English, even if the dubbing is horrible and the words don't match the lip movements. There were many times in the movie where one of the characters would go on a rant or discussion and they would take for a good 30-45 seconds of fast talking ranting and the subtitles would come up as reading "No, get out". I, at these moments, sat back and had this sneaky suspicion that something else was said in the exchange but not given. Granted, I do understand that they can't put up a direct translation but only a paraphrase because if a direct translation was up you would be having to read about 20 words a second to keep up with everything. Just sits a bit uneasy with me is all.
I would have to rate this movie at 4.5 popped popcorns out of 5. I would have given it a 5 but that would make a perfect movie and there can be no such thing as a perfect movie....but this one comes close.
The movie follows the growing friendship bond between an aristocrat quadriplegic and a good hearted young man from the 'other side of the tracks' who is hired on as a care giver. The rest of the story is all about how the two slowly become friends and the things that they do for each other to strengthen their friendship.
Why this is such a funny movie is that the situations and humor are not forced ones like all the other comedies that are out there. An extreme example would be humor like The Hangover where granted there might be some bachelor parties that come like that those situations are more like the chances of being hit by a meteor after winning the lottery. The humor in this movie are all realistic one liner bantering that could happen in your every day life with friends or family, spur of the moment jabs and jokes that make you smile and laugh and even go and repeat it to friends as a 'guess what she said' kind of stories.
The two main characters are great together. They play off each others timing to a T and even made me believe that they were actual friends for life and not just actors portraying friends in a movie. The supporting actors are great as well. The attractive yet unattainable assistant to the aristocrat that the caregiver keeps hitting on relentlessly does an amazing job, and even the house keeper does a great job of playing the frumpy yet friendly person. The only down side is that at the end of the movie you get to see a real video of the two people in the film. The difference in looks are quite apparent. It would be like if I had a movie made about my life and I was played by George Clooney or Tatum Channing instead of someone like Neil Patrick Harris or Michael Cera (geeky main character from SuperBad).
The only really negative thing that I can say about this movie would be the same thing that I say about all foreign subtitled films that both my wife and I disagree on 100%. She likes to have the film played in the original language and subtitled while I prefer to have it dubbed in English, even if the dubbing is horrible and the words don't match the lip movements. There were many times in the movie where one of the characters would go on a rant or discussion and they would take for a good 30-45 seconds of fast talking ranting and the subtitles would come up as reading "No, get out". I, at these moments, sat back and had this sneaky suspicion that something else was said in the exchange but not given. Granted, I do understand that they can't put up a direct translation but only a paraphrase because if a direct translation was up you would be having to read about 20 words a second to keep up with everything. Just sits a bit uneasy with me is all.
I would have to rate this movie at 4.5 popped popcorns out of 5. I would have given it a 5 but that would make a perfect movie and there can be no such thing as a perfect movie....but this one comes close.
Monday, July 23, 2012
The Dark Knight Rises - Review
There has always been one thing I have always liked about the new batman movies (and by the 'new' ones I mean the ones with Bale as opposed to Kilmer/Keaton/*shudder*Clooney) is the sense of realism in the new as opposed to the older. In the older versions I always found it hard to believe all the toys that he had and things that he could do with such ease and grace. The newer ones I found more believable in his lack of toys, or at least watching him develop his new play things. In The Dark Knight Rises I was not disappointed in this aspect.
The Dark Knight Rises is definitely one of your more serious and down to earth movies. Gone are the super hero action scenes where the guy is thrown through a building and a concrete wall and comes out shaking his head like someone just slapped him in the face with a wet rolled up newspaper. Gone are the excellent little party favors that are usually laced throughout batman's utility belt and the extra smart computer from the old TV series (Holy bat-crap batman, we don't know where the Riddler is..well let's just input all the info that we know into the bat-computer and *cha-ching cha-ching out pops a piece of paper* yes, looks like the Riddler is at this address and this is his plan). Here we have serious reality based problems with a hero that does it all with strength and items that he develops or Wayne Industries develops. Though just once I would love to see a fight scene in the movies were 10 guys surround the hero and instead of taking turns attacking him one by one when he is ready for the next guy, all 10 just jump him at the same time and pummel him.
Story wise it was a pretty decently thought out one. It is nice to see that in Gotham City that villains are becoming more complex and multi-layered and are not just one sided/one plan individuals. As much as I loved seeing the Penquin sit around his penquin-A-bomb and mock batman relentlessly about how he is going to use it and not really explore other options, having a villain work multiple plans at multiple times (like the Joker from the other film) is always something that is nice to see.
As to the characters, we see some new and some old ones take their place. Gordon (Gary Oldman) has been raised to commissioner, Batman/Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) is back and talking through his teeth in that mysterious/drunken manner that we all know and love, Alfred (Michael Canes) and Fox (Morgan Freeman) are still there giving their helping grandfatherly hand and advice to the rash Bruce Wayne as well as a little appearance by Dr Johnathon Crane/Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy). The old returning cast bring the same level of intensity and fun to the film as all the others. Their characters are the same which I find no fault with. I would have been disappointed if for some strange reason Hollywood decided to change some of them, like perhaps giving Alfred or Fox some idea that they should be a side kick and have Alfred running around in a fake batman suit throwing batarangs around. The new additions are also not too bad. I have to say that Bane was quite an adversary for Batman. Creepy voice, creepy character and just down right eerie person to be up against. Catwoman (Anne Hathaway) was also a little different than the other portrayals of her from other movies. Hathaway is not as sexual as Pfeiffer had her in Batman Returns and not as....well, as bad as Berry played her in Catwoman. Hathaway plays a more down to earth realistic semi-sociopathic catwoman developed more out of a life time of hard knocks and learning to fight for herself as opposed to the other character portrayals of someone who was a meek and mild mannered person their whole life and then either shot or beaten and then wake up with a mental breakdown. As well, attractive young lady in skin tight leather outfits doing flips and driving around on a motor cycle, what is not to love?
On the whole, I would say that despite a couple of movie holes that had me going "umm, how did he do that?" it was a good movie to watch. While others are going all out and giving 5/5 on this one and making it sound like a perfect movie, I would say it is a solid 4/5 and one of the better super hero movies of the summer. Give it a watch, it would be a good 3 hours of your life spent, but don't worry about staying to the end of the credits for extra scenes cause there is none.
The Dark Knight Rises is definitely one of your more serious and down to earth movies. Gone are the super hero action scenes where the guy is thrown through a building and a concrete wall and comes out shaking his head like someone just slapped him in the face with a wet rolled up newspaper. Gone are the excellent little party favors that are usually laced throughout batman's utility belt and the extra smart computer from the old TV series (Holy bat-crap batman, we don't know where the Riddler is..well let's just input all the info that we know into the bat-computer and *cha-ching cha-ching out pops a piece of paper* yes, looks like the Riddler is at this address and this is his plan). Here we have serious reality based problems with a hero that does it all with strength and items that he develops or Wayne Industries develops. Though just once I would love to see a fight scene in the movies were 10 guys surround the hero and instead of taking turns attacking him one by one when he is ready for the next guy, all 10 just jump him at the same time and pummel him.
Story wise it was a pretty decently thought out one. It is nice to see that in Gotham City that villains are becoming more complex and multi-layered and are not just one sided/one plan individuals. As much as I loved seeing the Penquin sit around his penquin-A-bomb and mock batman relentlessly about how he is going to use it and not really explore other options, having a villain work multiple plans at multiple times (like the Joker from the other film) is always something that is nice to see.
As to the characters, we see some new and some old ones take their place. Gordon (Gary Oldman) has been raised to commissioner, Batman/Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) is back and talking through his teeth in that mysterious/drunken manner that we all know and love, Alfred (Michael Canes) and Fox (Morgan Freeman) are still there giving their helping grandfatherly hand and advice to the rash Bruce Wayne as well as a little appearance by Dr Johnathon Crane/Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy). The old returning cast bring the same level of intensity and fun to the film as all the others. Their characters are the same which I find no fault with. I would have been disappointed if for some strange reason Hollywood decided to change some of them, like perhaps giving Alfred or Fox some idea that they should be a side kick and have Alfred running around in a fake batman suit throwing batarangs around. The new additions are also not too bad. I have to say that Bane was quite an adversary for Batman. Creepy voice, creepy character and just down right eerie person to be up against. Catwoman (Anne Hathaway) was also a little different than the other portrayals of her from other movies. Hathaway is not as sexual as Pfeiffer had her in Batman Returns and not as....well, as bad as Berry played her in Catwoman. Hathaway plays a more down to earth realistic semi-sociopathic catwoman developed more out of a life time of hard knocks and learning to fight for herself as opposed to the other character portrayals of someone who was a meek and mild mannered person their whole life and then either shot or beaten and then wake up with a mental breakdown. As well, attractive young lady in skin tight leather outfits doing flips and driving around on a motor cycle, what is not to love?
On the whole, I would say that despite a couple of movie holes that had me going "umm, how did he do that?" it was a good movie to watch. While others are going all out and giving 5/5 on this one and making it sound like a perfect movie, I would say it is a solid 4/5 and one of the better super hero movies of the summer. Give it a watch, it would be a good 3 hours of your life spent, but don't worry about staying to the end of the credits for extra scenes cause there is none.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)