The Adventures of Tintin (2011) Review

I am sad. Really, really sad. Sad as in "Today, my childhood memories got shat on"-sad. "The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn" was quite bad. Not abysmally "Battlefield Earth"-meets-"Spiceworld"-bad but still, really really bad and, more importantly, very disappointing.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (2011) Review

Just when you thought Tom Cruise was done in Hollywood he comes back with a movie so exciting, so exhilarating and ultimately so much fun that you are happy about his return. This movie is "Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol" and not to give anything away but it is a great popcorn flick.

The "Mission Impossible" franchise had its fair share of ups and downs over the last 15 years. The first entry in 1996 was a box office smash that, together with "Goldeneye" the year before, managed to revive the spy genre. Then the inevitable sequel in 2000 uped the ante and thanks to director John Woo replaced the twisty plot of the original with a lot of ridiculous over the top action sequences. For better or worse (I didn't like the second one at all) this film grossed even more than the first one and so another sequel was a necessity. Unfortunately there were personalities clashing behind the scenes, directors and writers were constantly replaced so there wasn't another "Mission Impossible" until 2006. The third entry directed by J.J. Abrams tried to shake things up by adding a whole bunch of new characters and gave main character Ethan Hunt not just a love interest but a fiancee. While definitely a step up from the second one, "M:I III" didn't match the box office success of its predecessors.

And here we are now in December 2011 and we finally have a fourth installment in the series and again, we have a new director at the helm. Enter Brad Bird who started out directing episodes of "The Simpsons" back in the 90s and the underrated kiddie flick "The Iron Giant" before he made the Pixar hits "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille". It's great to see how well he handles the jump from his animated flicks to big scale action movies, his back-to-the-roots approach is successful by keeping the pace up and dropping most of the ludicrous character drama from the third entry.

Instead we get breathtaking action set pieces (especially the Dubai sequence is incredibly awesome), side characters that work in the context of the film and Tom Cruise back at his personal best after his questionable last action movie "Knight and Day". If you want to watch only one movie in theaters this Christmas, this film should leave you quite satisfied.

Zodiac (2007) Review

It's interesting to see how director David Fincher has evolved as a filmmaker over the last 20 years. Initially blamed in 1992 for the misfire that was "Alien 3" he made the (arguably) definitive serial killer movie "Se7en" in 1995. Movies like "Fight Club", "The Social Network" and the upcoming adaptation of "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" just helped cement his status as a diverse and talented director. But in my opinion there is one movie in his filmography that often gets overlooked and that film is "Zodiac".

Upon its release in 2007 Fincher hadn't made a feature length film in almost 5 years so people were excited to see him back as a director and have him also return to the genre that made him famous, the serial killer thriller. But while critics mostly gave out favorable reviews the general public dismissed "Zodiac" with an underwhelming gross of just $33 million in the US. What happened?

"Zodiac" is the true story of how journalists and the police tried to track down the Zodiac killer who haunted San Francisco in the late 60s and early 70s. Just like in his other masterpiece "Se7en" Fincher focuses on the detectives and sleuths instead of the killer but the approach is very different. While "Se7en" had two main characters in Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman the audience could emotionally connect with, "Zodiac"'s focus constantly shifts from wannabe detective Jake Gyllenhaal to reporter Robert Downey Jr., inspector David Toschi and a couple others. This gives the film an almost documentary feel with great attention to detail. There are no unnecessary subplots, the main purpose is to document the obsessive work behind the case. The actual killings are almost insignificant to the overall story as they only serve as catalysts for the main protagonists. Not to give anything away but the Zodiac case was never solved.

I think the main reason for the film's poor box office was the audience's expectation of a second "Se7en". Of course, if you watch "Zodiac" with the hope to see another gore based serial killer film you will most likely be disappointed. But taking it for what it is, a very precise reworking of the Zodiac case and by that an exciting dedication to people's fascination for puzzle solving, this movie will be worth your time.

I heard criticisms that the performances were lacking emotional depth and the movie was too slow paced. In my opinion that couldn't be more wrong. As I said before there are no subplots distracting from the grand topic of solving the case so the performances are all precise and realistic, especially Mark Ruffalo as inspector David Toschi is great in his role. And the slow pace? Nowhere to be found, the dialogue-driven scenes create tension and excitement in an old-school way that probably doesn't translate well to the visually overfed crowd of brain dead "Transformers" fanboys.

So if you haven't seen "Zodiac" yet, go check it out, it is one of Fincher's best.

Hall Pass (2011) Review

This movie doesn't have any balls! None! Zero! And that's a shame because it has a premise that in the right hands would have made an amazing comedy.

We have Owen Wilson and Jason Sudeikis as our leads who are best friends and both get a hall pass from their wives which means they get a week off of marriage to do whatever they want. Holy hell! Doesn't that sound like the most fun idea for a comedy ever?

So what can go wrong from here on? EVERYTHING!!! The first and biggest flaw of all: Although this movie is rated R it chickens out and forces some hollow moral upon the viewer. While we have some really funny laugh-out-loud moments early on there is a tonal shift that completely ruins it. We go all the way from raunchy and bold to family friendly and tame within mere seconds and by then the film has already lost.

Add to that Owen Wilson who gives a lackluster performance and the Farrelly's obsession with obscure and unnecessary side characters and sub plots and we get a perfect mess. What could have been something along the lines of the legendarily mean and awesome "Bad Santa" ends up being a film of missed chances and cowardice.

When exactly did the Farrellys lose their touch for great comedies like their 90s blasts "There's Something About Mary" and "Dumb and Dumber"? Was it sometime around the underwhelming "Stuck On You"? Or even before that with the horrendous "Say It Isn't So"? I am already dreading their remake of "The Three Stooges" due next year.

I wish there was a saving grace for this film but even the great scene on the golf course and a final moment involving Stephen Merchant that nails the tone this film should have had can't save "Hall Pass" from what it ultimately is: a huge disappointment.

Can't Hardly Wait (1998) Review

Do I really have to say anything about this movie? "Can't Hardly Wait" is about the party after a high school graduation. Which is generic. And it was made in the late 90s. Which is totally radical!

It's a fun watch but oh, so predictable and forgettable. We have all kinds of stereotypes: The douchebag star quarterback who is dating the hottest girl in school. The nerdy smart kid who is about to have the time of his life. The pretentious alternative girl who thinks she's cooler than everyone else. The whitest kid in town who thinks he's black.

There's no focus on a single character, instead we get a whole ensemble. One can see the influence of other (better) teen movies such as "American Graffiti" and "Dazed and Confused" and while it is far from being as memorable as the latter ones it still succeeds in what it sets out to be, pure innocent late 90s popcorn entertainment.

There's really not much else to say. Personally the most fun part was to spot all the actors who were big back then and are gone now or reversed. Jennifer Love Hewitt? First teenie and slasher movies and now a regular on TV. Seth Green? Hit it big with the Austin Powers movies and is still around on the big and small screen. Charlie Korsmo? Big shot roles in "Hook" and "Dick Tracy" before he ended his acting career with "Can't Hardly Wait". Jason Segel? Watermelon Guy here and now major star thanks to "How I Met Your Mother", "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" and "The Muppets".

This film is a time capsule, captivating the lost innocence of teenie films in the spirit of the late John Hughes and also the style and music of the late 90s. It might sound pathetic but here it comes: They just don't make 'em like that anymore.

The Descendants (2011) Review

 

It's been about 2 weeks that I've seen "The Descendants" (I know, I know, had to take some time off to study and everything) but there is one feeling that stuck with me, and let me tell you, it might be a surprise but I was slightly underwhelmed.

Friends told me beforehand how much they liked the film, how great and emotional it was and, judging from rave critics, a very high Rotten Tomatoes score and now the load of Golden Globe nominations, it should be an outstanding film. It might just have happened that all the hype around "The Descendants" couldn't possibly live up to the actual movie.

First of all, let me get one thing straight: I love Alexander Payne directed movies. I can watch "About Schmidt" any time and this masterpiece never gets old. Although I was never as big a fan of "Sideways" as many others I still think it's one of the best dramas of the last 10 years. "Election", in my opinion, might just be the best High School movie ever made and it's a shame that barely anyone knows about it. So what about "The Descendants" then?

The film stars George Clooney as a land baron on Hawaii whose wife falls into a coma after a boating accident. On top of that he has to deal with his two estranged daughters and the one deal that could save his retirement. Finding out that his wife had an affair just adds up to the whole conflict.

This might sound like it is gonna end up being a pathetic tearjerker but, interestingly enough, the movie mixes the emotionally heavy scenes with a light-hearted touch that gives it an almost bittersweet feel. Clooney in the lead gives a very understated and controlled performance which at times comes in handy but sometimes feels like a lack of emotion. He is the sole focus of the film so it is rather distracting to see him at times not act naturally at all.

This might be a minor flaw for others but it took me right out of the movie, especially since the stage is set to create something moving and I know that Alexander Payne can pull it off but it didn't have the grip it should have had in my opinion.

The rest of the film is just about as perfect as it could get. The cinematography is gorgeous, the writing realistic but heartfelt, the soundtrack more than fitting for the Hawaii setting and the supporting actors all do a great job. I was especially happy to see movie stars of yesteryear such as Beau Bridges, Matthew Lillard and particularly Robert Forster excel in their roles.

It might just be that I have to watch it again to really appreciate it and see what a dummy I've been for missing how great of a movie it is but for the time being it was a good if not great experience.

Crazy Stupid Love (2011) Review

I like Steve Carell, I think he's one of the funniest actors we currently have. I like Julianne Moore who is a terrific actress and just doesn't get the roles she deserves. I like Ryan Gosling, especially after seeing his badass performance in "Drive", this guy has a bright Hollywood future. But did I like "Crazy Stupid Love", the romantic comedy that unites all of them? Well, sort of.

The movie sees Carell being left by his wife, played by Moore, for her colleague at work, played by Kevin Bacon. Then Carell meets playboy Gosling and the latter also makes him a fellow womanizer. What a great setup, I thought when I first heard about the movie. Knowing that directors John Requa and Glenn Ficarra had written the refreshingly insane "Bad Santa" and "I love you, Phillip Morris" I was hoping for another remarkably bold movie.

Unfortunately the story plays it safe and has Gosling falling in love with Emma Stone while Carell and Moore realize that they still have a thing for each other. It would have been nice to see a film that's braver than your average Hollywood flick in its depiction of relationships but "Crazy Stupid Love" has more problems to fight with.

There are just too many unanswered questions that kept popping up in my head. Why does Gosling pick Carell as his scholar and not anybody else? What exactly drives Moore back to Carell, is it just his new way of dressing sharply? Why does Carell's son adore his dad so much for his love to his wife if he gets divorced? Why are Kevin Bacon and Marisa Tomei, two outstanding actors, wasted in filler roles? Why does Emma Stone's role feel so tacked on? And did we really need the part about the underage babysitter being in love with Carell?

If you didn't get my point, there's a whole lot of "too much" going on and none of the separate parts feels fully completed, it seems too many crucial scenes either ended up on the editor's floor or were just totally over-written. In the case of "Crazy Stupid Love" less would definitely have been more.

Don't get me wrong, the film makes for an entertaining watch, the actors give it their best shot and there are sequences that definitely work but in its entirety the movie just feels like three really good movies blended together, it never adds up to the sum of its parts.

The Strangers (2008) Review

I like writing about films, it's fun to me. That's actually the main reason I started this whole blog, because I'm  enjoying writing about movies. But as much as I enjoy it, sometimes it can be a pain in the ass and that's mostly the case when I am dealing with a film so generic and uninspiring that it is mental torture to come up with anything at all. So here we go, welcome to "The Strangers"!

The story, if you actually care, is barely existent, we have a couple, played by Liv Tyler and Scott Speedman, being terrorized by some strangers in a house in the woods. So far, so generic. The setup is nice and creepy, the intruders wear some freaky masks and the movie is (for today's standards) surprisingly low on gore.

The end result is a mostly chilling but never scary horror film that suffers from the same weaknesses others did before. Too often we question the stupid actions of our supposedly heroes Tyler and Speedman who behave according to the rules that Wes Craven so perfectly parodied in 1996's "Scream". The big problem is that there is no post modern subtext or self awareness of the characters to generate any kind of originality.

"The Strangers" is outspokenly old-schoolish but that doesn't help the fact that we've seen all of its scenes in other (and mostly better) movies. On top of that we get some unnecessary religious symbolism at the end in the form of two Mormon boys.

If you've never seen any horror or slasher movie in your life then "The Strangers" might offer you some scares but everyone else will have forgotten the movie by the time the credits roll.

Martyrs (2008) Review

I think I've seen a couple of really weird movies in my life but I feel there has never been a movie like "Martyrs" that just made me want to stop watching. Not because it is a terrible movie but because of how gruesome, disturbing and unpleasant it is. Seriously, this was a real test of endurance but let's break it down.

"Martyrs" is a French horror movie from 2008 that has since its release repeatedly been named one of the most shocking movies of all time. I was not sure whether this should be taken as a compliment or as a warning but now that I've made it trough I know viewer discretion definitely is more than advised.

Part of the whole experience is not knowing what's about to come so I won't spoil you the story besides the fact that after a rather generic first half about a tortured girl taking revenge the movie takes an unexpectedly hellish turn. From this point on "Martyrs" will split audiences, there will be a) the ones who just get sickened by what's presented on screen or b) the ones who see beyond what's being shown and get the critical message writer and director Pascal Laugier tries to bring across.

The film's really well done, the bleached colors and the shaky cam are used perfectly to create a feeling of terror in the audience and the minimalist approach with basically just one location and a handful of actors and actresses helps heighten the tension. As an example of the modern gore film craze this movie will remain as one of the most terrifying but it will leave audiences alone who will be put off by the questionably sadistic and misogynistic execution.

I don't believe there are people who actually enjoy "Martyrs" for what it is but if you feel like you've seen everything and want to really test your limits then check out this more than controversial film.

Happy Gilmore (1996) Review

Ah, Adam Sandler, hated by critics everywhere and loved by the American audience. Say whatever you want about him but there's no denying that this guy makes some serious cash at the box office. Which makes me wonder why. In all honesty, he's not that funny of a comedian and he's definitely not that good of an actor. His characters are mostly just variations of the same chauvinist stereotype and that stuff gets old really quickly.

BUT, it's not that he's never made a good movie. In my humble opinion his best is without a doubt Happy Gilmore, one of my childhood favorites and together with Billy Madison one of the first successes of Sandler.

The story of Happy Gilmore isn't much more than warmed up sport film cliches about a failed hockey player who becomes a rowdy golf sensation. But what the film lacks in script is made up for by the clash of the fancy golf world with the redneck mentality of Sandler. Mash that with a great performance by Christopher MacDonald as the perfectly named villain Shooter McGavin and a hilarious cameo by Ben Stiller and you get a simple, funny and entertaining movie.

Some might complain about the main character who's not always sympathetic or the alarmingly underdeveloped supporting characters but you know what? I don't care, this movie will always be fun to me!

The Ides Of March (2011) Review

A new school year has started and that means automatically less time for me to watch movies. That's a pity because now that Autumn has come all the blockbuster rubbish from the summer gets wiped away from theaters to make space for the more ambitious crowd of movies. And who could be more ambitious than our good old beloved ex-Batman George Clooney?

His new film The Ides of March is his fourth outing as a director and features a more than impressive cast: Clooney himself, Ryan Gosling, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Marisa Tomei and a couple more better-than-average actors. I mean, honestly, I did the math, his cast was nominated for 11 Academy Awards including 3 wins, wouldn't you expect nothing short of greatness?

The story revolves around young and idealistic Stephen Meyers, played by Gosling, who works as a campaign manager for presidential candidate Governor Mike Morris, played by Clooney. But how long can Stephen preserve his ideals in the dirty world of politics?

Everybody knows how liberal of a guy Clooney is so it is no surprise what kind of message he is delivering here: Power corrupts and if you want to swim with the sharks then you have to learn to play dirty. Of course that is a valuable lesson that's being taught here, the only problem is that it is not particularly new. Have you never heard of All the King's Men? Citizen Kane? The Candidate?

Of course the movie is extremely well acted, everybody in the cast shines, even the characters with minor roles such as Marisa Tomei and Paul Giamatti get their fare share of good scenes and unsurprisingly it is also another stepping stone for soon-to-be Hollywood leading man Ryan Gosling. The dialogue is sharp, the pacing perfect and Clooney keeps growing as a serious filmmaker. The only thing that prevents the movie from being the masterpiece it should have been is its unoriginal storyline and its not very relevant message. 

Don't get me wrong, I'd recommend this film without hesitation to anyone, I just can't help but see The Ides of March as a failed opportunity on a very high level.

The Slammin' Salmon (2009) Review

If you're ever in the mood for crappy movies, the quickest way to watch one is to switch on your TV, go to Free Movies on Demand and take your pick. Who actually likes watching these films? The majority is Direct to Video rubbish and there's barely a hidden gem in the mix. But when you just made lunch and hang out with your roommates, who knows, maybe you happen to find something good in there that goes well with pizza and chips.

Well, that's what I thought today when we stumbled over The Slammin' Salmon, the latest movie by comedy group Broken Lizard, known mostly for Super Troopers and Beerfest. I remember hearing about the movie back in 2009 when it was released without any press or commercials on TV. It played in empty theaters and made a laughable $60K worldwide. If you don't get it, these are never good signs and normally point to the fact that you're dealing with a total cinematic turd. But we felt lucky so we checked it out.

The film's plot is more or less an excuse to connect all the poorly executed jokes but if you really care, here it comes: A group of waiters in a seafood restaurant compete to see who makes the most money in one night. Sounds like the perfect comedy plot to me, I mean, Broken Lizard's other movies didn't have plots either and were hilarious nonetheless.

Too bad this film is far from being as funny as their other ones. The timing which is the most crucial element in the comedy genre is mostly off and many gags are either absolutely silly and dumb or just so predictable that the whole mess feels like a bad copy of a much better comedy. The only redeeming quality comes in the form of Michael Clarke Duncan who plays the owner of the restaurant, a Mike Tyson style boxing giant and while he's also not consistently funny he at least has the highest gag hit rate of all the actors involved.

I don't really know what else to say about this film, if you've never heard about it then you probably won't care in the future and if you're a fan of Broken Lizard, then do yourself a favor and just skip The Slammin' Salmon, it's not worth your time.

50/50 (2011) Review

How do you make a comedy about something that you shouldn't make fun of? Honestly, how do you pull that off? I for myself don't have any clue but obviously some filmmakers do. Look at La vita e bella by Roberto Benigni. A comedy set in a concentration camp? It works! Look at Life of Brian. A comedy mocking the life of Jesus Christ? Controversial but also laugh-out-loud funny. (Also, thank you Monty Python for one of the most quotable movies ever.)

You get the idea, it's possible to make comedies about tough subjects. And here comes one about cancer. 50/50 is about Adam, a 27 year old radio show writer living in Seattle. He has a best friend who is all about getting some with the ladies and a girlfriend who is just a complete tool. Oh, and he also gets diagnosed with cancer.

Our lead Adam is played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and he does a great job. His performance is very understated, he rarely plays it for tears and never goes over the top. He's not always likable but that just adds to the authentic feel of the movie. Seth Rogen as his best friend Kyle is just perfectly cast, he has the funniest lines and shares a good chemistry with Gordon-Levitt. Normally I am not too big of a fan of him, too much of his humor seems to be just unoriginal, annoying stoner talk but here Rogen is just in his element.

The performance that got my closest attention was the one by Anjelica Huston as Adam's overly worried mother. While she doesn't have too many scenes, she's outshining everyone else on screen. I bet she's gonna be snubbed by the Academy but in a just world she'd get nominated for Best Supporting Actress.

What makes this movie ultimately succeed is not just the great acting but also a very authentic and realistic feel. There are so many hilarious scenes in it that are just perfectly balanced with very well written characters that one can't help but go with it. I really want to see this film get the audience it deserves, especially considering that it's gonna be released one week after the crappy Taylor Lautner vehicle Abduction. Just think about it, what would you rather see, a talentless laughingstock starring in an awful Bourne rip-off or a well acted, remarkably funny film that will stick with you long after you've left the theater? Tough call...

Drive (2011) Review

You know what's the worst thing that can happen to a good director? Selling out. Big time. And do you know what's the easiest way to sell out? Going to Hollywood and making a movie for a big studio. Remember Gavin Hood? His Tsotsi won an Academy Award in 2006. Then he went to Hollywood, directed the god-awful X-Men Origins: Wolverine and is now working for TV. And do you remember Oliver Hirschbiegel? He made the excellent Das Experiment and the highly praised Downfall. Then he went to Hollywood, directed the über-flop Invasion with Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig and is now making movies back in Germany.

That's why it's a good thing to see a European director coming to Hollywood and making a movie that still has his style and doesn't bow down to any studio executive's demands. Enter danish auteur Nicolas Winding Refn and his remarkable Drive.

Drive is a crime movie with a minimal approach. The story is simple, a stunt driver played by Ryan Gosling who is also a wheelman gets mixed up in a heist gone wrong and starts going on a rampage against the people who are trying to get rid of him. That's it, nothing more, nothing less.

What makes this movie so much more than just another crime thriller is the atmosphere and the top notch performances. Gosling is the epitomized coolness, a man of few words and gestures. Carey Mulligan is perfectly cast as his doe-eyed love interest and creates a nice chemistry between the two. But it's Albert Brooks who takes the cake. He is Bernie, Gosling's boss and most terrifying screen presence I've seen since Melissa Leo in The Fighter. Academy, here's a sure bet for the upcoming Oscars next February.

While the film just breathes cool with beautiful shots of Los Angeles, a dreamlike score and long-lasting shots it is the sudden bursts of graphic violence that will leave you breathless and shocked. It might be a bit early to call it but Drive ranks up there next to classics such as Bullitt, The French Connection and Vanishing Point. I honestly doubt that there's gonna be another movie this year that is as badass and cool as this one.

So what are you waiting for? Go and watch this awesome movie, give it the audience it deserves!

Casablanca (1942) Review

Don't you hate when you watch a movie that has such a big reputation, won so much acclaim, is beloved by everyone, always pops up on lists of best films of all time and you realize that it's all just much ado about nothing? I watched Casablanca for the first time last night and let me tell you directly, it is a good movie but it's far from being as grand, important, lifechanging and whatnot as it is made up to be.

What we're dealing with here is basically just a love story, albeit an interesting one. Humphrey Bogart plays Rick who owns a night club in World War II Casablanca and he's a tough guy, as cynical a badass as there has ever been one. But when he is confronted with his long lost love Ilsa we realize he's a nice guy inside, he's just been hardened by the heartbreak she caused him.

If you really don't have any idea what Casablanca is about then I'm not gonna spoil the rest for you. This movie has been referenced, spoofed and honored so many times that any cinephile should recognize most of the shots. We get classic lines such as "Here's looking at you, kid" and "I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship" while Bogart plays his signature role to a tee and Ingrid Bergman as Ilsa just shines throughout the film. My favorite character nonetheless is Claude Rains as Captain Renault, a corrupt official who you can't really figure out until the very end.

So one might ask, what is there not to like about this film and frankly, there's not much not to adore but one thing that just kept bugging me and in the end ruined the film for me and brought it down to "just" a good level. As great as Bogart is in his role, I didn't feel much chemistry between him and Ingrid Bergman. She is this beautiful and fragile woman and he is just tough, I felt it just didn't click between them. I bet lots of people would disagree with me on that but hey, this is my blog and my opinion!

Maybe it's better to see films like Casablanca, Citizen Kane, The Godfather and any other classic without bias, just take them for what they are and appreciate what you actually get. Then you might avoid the slight disappointment I experienced with Casablanca.

Cool Runnings (1993) Review

I hate to admit it but here it comes: I am a sucker for cheesy sports movies. I don't know what it is but when some sport gets glorified on screen and decade old clichés get warmed up I just can't help myself but go with it. Without a doubt one of the best cheesy sports films (and most definitely one of my childhood favorites) is Cool Runnings.

The film is about the first Jamaican bobsled team to go to the Olympic Games in 1988. It is loosely based on a true story and plays it safe and family-friendly all the way. The four very different main characters together with their unlikely coach played by John Candy are really well cast and share a great chemistry. Granted, they go through every sport film cliché in the book but hey, do you really care when it's so much fun?

You can bash this film for all the cheesiness it exhales, every 90s style montage it includes, every grand speech it takes pride in. Or you can just relax and take it for what it is, a pitch perfect sports film that doesn't care about its unoriginal underdog story, a family film that even gore fans don't need to be ashamed of liking, a comedy that treats its characters with warmth without mocking them.

I don't know what else to say, this is a great simple film that doesn't try to change the world but charms the audience all the way through. If you are not entertained by Cool Runnings then go and check whether you're still alive.

Frida (2002) Review

Oh my, looks like I haven't watched any movie for about two weeks, unbelievable! So let's not waste any valuable space on ridiculously stretched introductions and dive right into Frida!

If you're not living under a rock chances are that you've probably heard about Frida Kahlo, one of the most influential female painters of all time. If you haven't heard of her although you consider yourself somehow sophisticated then don't worry, there's always gonna be some snob like me who's willing to help you out of your misery.

Frida is the movie adaptation of Kahlo's life as an artist and especially focuses on her relationship with fellow artist Diego Rivera. Let's break it down into the parts the movie gets right and the ones where it fails miserably.

The film is directed by Julie Taymor, a strong creative force with a great background in theater and opera work. Mostly thanks to her involvement the film at times rises to be more than just your ordinary conventional biopic and manages to live up to the creativity behind the art genius that was Frida Kahlo. It's like a breath of fresh air to have Taymor play out the New York scenes as if being staged in theater or Frida's imaginations after an accident being acted out by Mexican death dolls.

The casting is perfect, Salma Hayek in the title role and Alfred Molina as her lady-killing husband are extraordinary and share a great chemistry on screen. The minor roles are also prominently cast with roles played by Antonio Banderas, Ashley Judd, Edward Norton and Geoffrey Rush. But here the failure starts.

The movie tries to cram an exceptional life into two hours of screen time and the overwhelming amount of supporting actors and events doesn't give the film enough room to breathe, there's a lack of coherence which becomes more evident towards the end of Frida when the audience realizes how pointless and superfluous many parts were. Geoffrey Rush was wasted as Leon Trotsky and can someone please explain to me what Diego Luna's character was needed for?

Don't get me wrong, Frida is a marvel to look at and has moments when it truly shines but it too often feels patchy or messy or, even worse, just like your conventional biopic. If you're a Kahlo fan, there's no way around this film but everybody else might be disappointed in what can only be seen as a missed opportunity.

Don't Look Now (1973) Review

Controversial movies are good. And I don't mean controversial as in "Man, Hostel is probably the goriest and most violent film ever"-controversial. That's what I normally call BS with a capital B. What I mean by controversial are movies that challenge the viewer not on an entertainment basis but on an interpretive one, movies like Don't Look Now.

Black Dynamite (2009) Review

It's a thing with spoofs. If you haven't seen the originals that are being parodied you might end up not getting the overall joke because, funnily enough, the best film parodies in existence often perfectly fit into the genre that's being spoofed. Take out their jokes and movies like Airplane!, The Naked Gun or Blazing Saddles become just generic genre movies, using the same clichés and formulas as the originals.

Tonight I watched a film that falls into this category called Black Dynamite, spoofing blaxpoitation flicks of the 70s, and let me tell you, this is one of the better parodies, not like these horrendous Friedberg-Seltzer abominations Meet the Spartans, Epic Movie, Date Movie, Disaster Movie, Crap Movie, Analbag Movie, and so on, and so on, you get the idea. Honestly, where do they get the money from to keep making these films? Who likes this crap??? Anyways, back to Black Dynamite.

Black Dynamite is the badest of all badasses, he goes around wooing the ladies and kicking everyone's ass. Much like Shaft, remember him? When his brother gets killed he uncovers a ridiculous conspiracy and goes on a rampage to take down the ones behind it all. That's all you need to know, no surprises plotwise. But honestly, do you really care about the story in a parody?

The film shows great attention to detail, clothes, haircuts, everything feels like the 70s, even the editing, goofs, the stock music and cheap production values, this flick is as much homage as it is a spoof. On top of that we get hilarious one liners and totally absurd fight scenes nonstop. There's just one question that I kept asking myself throughout: Who would watch this film nowadays? Black Dynamite was made just two years ago and audiences these days might have a hard time relating to a movie that spoofs something that hasn't been around for more than 30 years. Looking at the shockingly low worldwide box office of less than $300,000 it's rather sad to see a genuinely good movie playing for no one.

But then again, I watched it and it was great fun. Seriously, what is not to like about a film where a big black guy with an afro and a mustache has a kung fu fight with a nunchuck armed Richard Nixon? Give Black Dynamite the chance it deserves!

Nowhere Boy (2009) Review

What's it with all those music biopics in the last years? First we got the Ray Charles movie Ray, then Johnny Cash flick Walk the Line, they even made one about Notorious B.I.G., simply called Notorious. Hell, there was even a spoof of the whole craze, Walk Hard - The Dewey Cox Story with John C. Reilly. So it was only a matter of time until there was one about legendary John Lennon (and if you don't know who that is, then go, feel embarrassed and google it), Nowhere Boy!

First off a warning: This film is not about the Beatles, it's not about Lennon's whole life, in a way it's not even really about the music behind the genius. It rather focuses on the family and especially mother issues Lennon had to deal with when he grew up. By taking this refreshingly different approach to the whole idea of biopics director Sam Taylor-Wood brings in a new perspective and tries to be different from other rather generic film biographies. But Lennon and Beatles fans might be a little disappointed as Nowhere Boy is not really delivering what one might expect. We have a pretty short time frame that's being covered and are essentially given a classical coming-of-age story, as it shows how Lennon discovered his passion for music, struggles with school and his family and ends with him starting his professional career.

It's an enjoyable movie nonetheless, the acting by Aaron Johnson who plays Lennon and especially Kristin Scott Thomas who plays his aunt is top-notch, the atmosphere of 50s Great Britain is captured really well and we get a nice soundtrack that's heavy on rock'n roll. Unfortunately the story itself is nothing too special. If you'd replace the main character's name with anything but John Lennon you'd only have another Sunday afternoon tea movie, there just doesn't seem to be much at stake here.

It's a nice watch but never really gets you to care very much about the whole subject, even the big emotional moments barely raise your heartbeat (besides one scene that comes out of nowhere and leaves you asking WTF?). An influential musician like John Lennon deserves better than that. So if you're a hardcore Lennon fan there's probably no way around Nowhere Boy, but everybody else can just skip this one without missing anything extraordinary.

Me And You And Everyone We Know (2005) Review

I already pointed out in an earlier post how much I like to explore movies off the mainstream. And it seems to just keep going, there's so much more stuff going on than just comic book adaptations, sequels and computer animated children's films. So let's get to business: Miranda July's Me and You and Everyone We Know.

If you haven't heard of her or her films, she's a performance artist-turned-filmmaker and you can feel her origin when watching this movie. I'm not gonna spoil anything for you but it's way more offbeat than I initially thought.

Everything that's happening in the film seems random, ambiguous and improvised and this is essentially the breaking point where your taste has to decide what you'll make of it. If you like your movies in a classic three act structure with flawlessly beautiful people and Hollywood gloss then don't even bother thinking about this film, you won't be pleased.

For everyone else who's more open to experiments there's a lot to be charmed by. The film's improvised but still artsy feeling allows for moments of great emotion and sometimes insane hilarity, as I said I could spoil it for you but I won't, it's just great, these moments made the film for me. If you consider yourself a movie lover who's open to new things then go and experience this unique little motion picture!

Animal Kingdom (2010) Review

Think Australian movies. No, not Crocodile Dundee, think again. No, also not Russell Crowe beating up paparazzi. One more try. NOOOO, no frickin' Mad Max.

Ok, here's the right answer: Gritty urban gangster movie Animal Kingdom. The movie made a little splash last year when it was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actress Jacki Weaver and had critics around the world get a collective cinematic orgasm. How come that a small film from the other end of the world gets this sort of recognition? I wanted to find out for myself and got around to watch the flick last night.

The movie is about 18 year old J who, after the drug death of his mother, moves in with the rest of his dysfunctional crime family of psychos and drug dealers. And from here on shit really starts hitting the fan. So does a film with a premise that simple live up to the hype?

Well, kind of. While I was really drawn in by the extremely uncomfortable atmosphere the film is creating and the stellar acting throughout in combination with a highly hypnotic and unusual soundtrack the film was lacking originality plotwise. I felt any of the characters was fascinating enough to have a movie on their own but Animal Kingdom's plot just didn't live up to the level of tension and atmosphere it deserved. That doesn't make it a bad movie though, there's a lot to adore in this film and talent to be watched for the next years.

So go and give this one a try, while it might not be the best possible movie it has glimpses of perfection that will stick to your mind.

500 Days Of Summer (2009) Review

As much as I love Hollywood and American movies there's one thing that I despise: Generic formula work. If there's a unique success story the big studios try to cash in on that by blatantly copying and rarely coming close to the quality of the original. One of the most overused genres in that respect is the romantic comedy. Honestly I am not a big fan of these movies, too many brainless Katherine Heigl and Jennifer Aniston vehicles have destroyed my belief in the genre. So you can imagine my surprise when (500) Days of Summer came along. I've seen this film probably for the sixth or seventh time now and I'm never getting tired of it so you can probably guess that this is gonna be another rave review.

The film's basic story is just the chronicle of a relationship, that's it, no unnecessary subplots, everything superfluous stripped off. But here comes the twist: The film's strictly told from the male perspective. Enter Joseph Gordon-Levitt, perfectly cast in the role as Tom, naive romantic dreamer. When he meets Summer, played by Zooey Deschanel, he thinks he has found his match. Unfortunately she has strong opinions against any sort of serious relationships which naturally collides with Tom's idea of dating her.

So what we have here is a romance with reversed roles, a story that jumps between different timelines to contrast their happy moments with their unhappy ones. On top of that we get an amazing soundtrack, two leads with perfect chemistry and a creative use of colors and editing.

You must be a real grump not to be charmed by this film, it does everything right that so often gets screwed up by big budget productions, where they have the dollar sign, this film has heart. If you still haven't seen it then go and give it a try, you won't be disappointed.

The Thin Red Line (1998) Review

1998 was an interesting year for dueling movies. We had the asteroid movies Armageddon vs. Deep Impact, the animated bug movies Antz vs. A Bug's Life and two films about World War Two. Both of the latter films were directed by respected auteurs, featured ridiculously long lists of talented actors, were both almost 3 hours long and got lots of Academy Award nominations. The big difference: One movie was Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan, won 5 Oscars and was hugely successful. The other one was Terrence Malick's The Thin Red Line which did poorly at the box office and didn't win a single Oscar. But who cares about awards and profits?

I'm not sure how well remembered this one is but after just viewing it I really hope that people will give it a second shot, especially now that Malick's The Tree Of Life is another serious Oscar contender. Let's get down to the plot: The whole movie is basically just focusing on the battle of Guadalcanal, an island in the Pacific Ocean, where the USA battled the Japanese. So you might think, what's so special about that? Look again!

Malick who is a philosopher-turned-filmmaker doesn't really care about the actual fight that is going on but instead focuses on many individual characters and their internal struggle using inner monologues. He contradicts the gruesomeness of war with beautiful nature shots and an orchestral score. The fight scenes are mostly there to support the main theme of the movie: the loss of innocence.

If you think that sounds like pretentious rubbish then this won't be your movie. Malick has always split the audience. His followers admire his amazingly beautiful camerawork and thoughtfulness combined with strong performances while his opponents complain his movies are just plain boring.

Fact is that Malick's films remain unique in Hollywood and true to their own narrative rules. You rarely find a filmmaker that so determinedly and without compromise realizes his vision on screen. I love his movies and if you don't then you should at least acknowledge his poetic artistry. Or forget about it and go watch some CGI crap with talking animals.

It Might Get Loud (2008) Review

Jack White? Jimmy Page? The Edge? If it clicked at least once then It Might Get Loud should be the movie for you. SHOULD be. Because unfortunately Davis Guggenheim’s documentary isn’t as awesome as its main characters suggest.

Guggenheim got the three guitar legends together, Jack White from the White Stripes and The Raconteurs, Jimmy Page from Led Zeppelin and The Edge from U2, to see what's going to happen and to create greatness. I mean, what else do you expect other than pure genius when all these musical masterminds are united?

The movie starts out pretty nicely with the three of them looking forward to meeting each other. We get a little bit of back story for each of the musicians, always accompanied by some of their great music. But what comes then? Not much, honestly. Although the three are portrayed as very different characters there is not much tension or excitement going on, they just get together, throw lots of phrases around, most of them empty and meaningless or just painfully cliched, and jam a little bit throughout and in the end. That's it. God, what could have been amazing is just forgettable. As a serious documentary this is just not enough, any TV documentary has more substance than this film. So if you are not an absolute fan boy of their music or total guitar geek you might just skip It Might Get Loud.

The only redeeming feature is that it made me listen to White Stripes, U2 and Led Zeppelin right afterwards because even if this movie is a big disappointment the music is still kick-ass.

The Squid And The Whale (2005) Review

You know what I like more than a good movie? A good movie that's also a hidden gem. I mean we all agree that watching Pulp Fiction is awesome or that The Godfather is remarkable but I get the biggest pleasure out of discovering an amazing movie that barely anyone knows about. Tonight it happened again with Noah Baumbach's The Squid and the Whale.

I know, I know, it's not really a hidden gem, it got rave reviews back in 2005, played at several renowned festivals, even went on to be nominated for an Academy Award. But who actually saw it? Right!? Anyways, I had the pleasure of watching it and I don't regret it at all.

The movie is about a couple who is getting divorced and how they and their two sons deal with the new situation. Sounds rather thin for a plot. But the devil is in the details, or in this case, the acting. I actually don't know where to start, everyone in the ensemble is outstanding. Jeff Daniels is the intellectual douche bag Dad who is an often hilarious and strangely touching character while Jesse Eisenberg as his oldest son proves why he is considered one of the best actors of his generation. I mean, if a movie can make William Baldwin look like a decent actor then you know you are dealing with something special.

Luckily the film doesn't have the heavy handedness one might expect when it comes to a serious topic like divorce but a rather casual tone that, weirdly, allows some comedic highlights, I found myself cracking up quite often.

So is there anything not to like with all the Indie quirkiness around? As with one of Baumbach's other movies, Greenberg, I felt somehow unsatisfied in the end. I know this is not the sort of film that intends to give you the warm and fuzzy Happy End feeling that the average audience is craving for but there are some parts of the plot that seem to be just forgotten about.

Nevertheless, if you're looking for an unusual comedy or are tired of another Adam Sandler idiot fest then you should go and see The Squid and the Whale, it's great.

Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes (2011) Review

Listen to this one: There's a long running film series, getting gradually worse with every entry and suddenly this year there's the big surprise, a sequel that doesn't suck! If you thought I was talking about Fast Five, think again (although I have to admit it was a shitload of fun). I am of course referring to Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

After the original by Franklin J. Schaffner in 1968 there was a flood of four sequels, a regular TV series and an animated TV series during the 70s. Then Hollywood had had enough of the ape craze and didn't rediscover the series until 2001 with a remake by Tim Burton. Unfortunately this film was so crappy that it sent the whole franchise back into limbo. And here we are now, 10 years later, with a new entry. So is Rise of the Planet of the Apes worth anything?

Luckily, it is a great summer blockbuster. The story is a prequel to the original Planet of the Apes and fits surprisingly well into the whole universe of the franchise. Our (human) main character is a scientist played by James Franco who is the foster father to hyper intelligent chimpanzee Caesar. After a nasty incident Caesar has to be put into an ape shelter where he becomes the leader of the primate revolution.

Sounds cheesy? Of course it is, honestly, what else was the original than a better B-movie with some social commentary? That's why it is astounding that this movie works so well. On the one hand there is so much to criticize, starting with the characters who are either entirely pointless (enter eye candy Freida Pinto and old grumpy Brian Cox) or completely one-dimensional (come on Tom Felton, another evil bastard after Draco Malfoy?). Then we also have the very clumsily handled social criticism in the form of Franco's corporate boss David Oyelowo (favorite line to Franco: "You make history and I make the money!").

So why do I still consider it to be a good movie? Because of Andy Serkis, the real actor behind Caesar's motion captured face. Serkis who already brought Gollum to life is great as Caesar, just working with his facial expressions and gestures he is more charismatic than lead Franco. Thanks to him we never lose interest in the story although watchers of the original probably have an idea what it all leads to in the end. So if you want to see a good blockbuster then go and check this one out, you won't be disappointed.

Live Free Or Die Hard (2007) Review

I have to confess: I wasn't one of the kids growing up on lots of stupid 80s action. There was no Seagal, Norris, Lundgren or Stallone for me. But what I did have was Bruce. Bruce Willis to be exact. He was my hero. I remember watching Armageddon in theaters when I was 10 and it blew me away so badly that until this very day I consider it my favorite Willis movie.

But we all know where Bruce's initial fame came from: Die Hard. I have to admit that I didn't watch it until I was 15 or 16 and since I was already spoiled by too much fast cut Bruckheimer bullshit I didn't realize what a good movie it was until after repeated viewings. Die Hard went on to become a blueprint for many copycats and spawned two sequels during the 90s. Then it got quiet around John McClane and his white shirt until the series got revived in 2007 for a fourth movie called Live Free or Die Hard. But how good is it compared to the old ones?

The film confronts John McClane with Internet terrorists who pose a threat to the whole US while he is also protecting a young hacker and trying to win back his lost daughter. Phew, that's quite a bit for the old man. But luckily Bruce hasn't lost any of his wit, power and badassness. Actually he is the most memorable part of the movie, probably because after all these years he has this role nailed down perfectly. Too bad the rest of the fourth Die Hard is not as awesome as old baldy Willis is.

To its credit, the action scenes are really good, there's not too much tiring CGI around and the stunt work is amazing. But what really pissed me off were the unappealing and boring tech surroundings, fighting around grey meaningless machinery gets really old quickly. Then there's the main villain played by Timothy Olyphant who might just be the blandest and least threatening villain ever. I mean, it's hard to follow up big calibers like Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons but Olyphant is just so charisma free, he's the total opposite of Willis. The casting of Justin Long as McClane's sidekick is also rather ambiguous. At times he is really funny and shares a good chemistry with Willis but then there are also scenes where he's just a lighter version of Jar Jar Binks for the Die Hard universe. Nevertheless the most obvious annoyance is the running time of 128 minutes. 128 MINUTES?!? This is an action flick, not a David Lean epic, cut 20 minutes and it'd be a huge improvement.

With all these points being made one might think I didn't like the movie. But that couldn't be further away from the truth. I enjoyed it for what it was, an average action movie with a great hero, that's all there is. If you don't compare it to the old Die Hard movies you will have a good time with this one. Otherwise just go and rewatch Hans Gruber and his minions taking over Nakatomi Plaza.

On The Waterfront (1954) Review

 

How can I call myself a movie lover if I've never seen an Elia Kazan movie? Shame on me. To the younger audiences who consider movies from the 90s to be old, Elia Kazan was one of the most acclaimed directors of all time, creating mostly outstanding motion pictures during the 50s and making actors shine in their roles.

As I said before today I've seen my very first Elia Kazan flick, On The Waterfront starring Marlon Brando and I must say, I was not let down, this film was amazing.

Marlon Brando plays an ex-boxer who tries to get by as a longshoreman while being mixed up as a thug in some criminal activities. Through the love of a girl and a smoking and drinking priest he discovers his conscience and tries to stand up against his corrupt union bosses.

The movie starts out rather bumpy but once you get a glimpse of the top notch acting by Brando, Karl Malden (who plays the priest) and Eva Marie Saint, you'll be drawn in completely. And if that doesn't help you then the classical Leonard Bernstein score will put you into the right mood.

Nowadays the old classics don't get as much as attention as they deserve so if you have the choice of watching an acclaimed film that might be a bit older than your usual flick instead of the newest Harry Potter, comic book movie or Michael Bay idiocy then give the old one a choice, you won't regret it.

Timecrimes (2007) Review

Let me get one thing straight: There are two absolutely awesome movie magazines, Empire and Total Film, both british, both genius. But only Total Film also has a great website, http://www.totalfilm.com/, which is awesome because of one thing: the features!

They just had one on the best time travel movies and on this list I found Timecrimes (Los Cronocrímenes) by Nacho Vigalondo. I knew all the movies on the list besides this one. So I went and finally got my hands on a DVD of the movie and watched it last night.

The setup is interesting with a guy just accidentally stepping into a whole time travel mess and trying to get out of it without causing more trouble. It's mindbending, sometimes ludicrous and at times just plain illogical and silly but boy, this movie kept me at the edge of my seat. It has a dark tone, almost black humorous and is anything but pretty and that's exactly what I liked about it.

So if you're into time travel and like to think while you're watching a movie, give this one a try, you shouldn't be disappointed.

Good Bye, Lenin! (2003) Review

It's a funny coincidence that the first movie I am watching is Goodbye Lenin!. I mean, I am German, the movie is German, I am born in the GDR, the movie deals with the GDR (for the ones that don't know what the heck I am talking about, call it East Germany). I haven't seen this one in quite some time now and although I remembered it as being pretty good, I was surprised how drawn in I was, this movie was great.

The film is about Alex, a boy growing up with his mom and sister in the GDR. When his mom has a heart attack and is in a coma unfortunately the wall goes down and a whole country is more or less disappearing. When she wakes up and is not allowed to be exposed to any sort of trouble Alex is figuring out ways to trick her into believing that the GDR still exists.

Actually this sounds like the pitch to a comedy and there are definitely moments in the movie where you will laugh out loud. But it's also way more than that. The film has a very strong emotional anchor in lead Daniel Brühl and deals with realistic family issues and has scene stealing supporting characters.

Overall this movie was brilliant and I recommend it to anyone who doesn't have an issue with reading subtitles (come on, it wasn't too hard in Dances With Wolves or Inglourious Basterds).

Welcome!

Hey to the world out there!

My name is Tom and for as long as I can remember I've been a cinephile, movie lover, film addict, call it what you want. If you're also into motion pictures then I don't need to tell you how awesome movies are. I set up this blog to keep track of all the movies that I'll watch from this day on. I don't have any preferences, I watch anything if it's worth the time. So check in to see which movies I'll watch and what I think of them.

Cheers, Tom