Calling this a formulaic thriller would be an exaggeration. It wasn't even that good. Not that the idea was bad, but the writing and (most of) the acting was pretty awful. (Can't discount the power of Nathan Fillion, although even he wasn't in top form.)
Basically, an author and his wife are having a hard time in life, so they move out to his dad's old cabin in the middle of nowhere America. (Sounds like both of the horror/thriller type movies I watched recently—but without Kristen Stewart.) When he's out in the woods one day, he stumbles upon the county sheriff beating a woman to death. Well, he can't have that, so he shoots the sheriff. (Can you hear the cheesy music playing in the background?)
Husband and wife proceed to uncover a web of sex, lies, and murder in small town America. Most of the characters' motivation is unclear, as are several of the plot twists. All in all, a pretty awful piece of filmmaking. But hey, if you love Nathan Fillion, go ahead and watch it anyway.
Rating: 2.0
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Waitress (2007, U.S.)
This film had some great potential, and it lived up to most of it. Keri Russell is adorable as a waitress (and good cook) who works at a pie restaurant, stuck in a marriage to an abusive scumbag. She finds herself pregnant with her husband's child and is less than thrilled. And somewhere along the way, she falls for her OB/GYN. Come on, you would too if it were Nathan Fillion!
Really, this was an amazing indie. The ensemble cast was terrific, all the way down to Andy Griffith, who makes an appearance as the grouchy owner of the pie place. I loved the way she invents pies that have to do with her life: "I Hate My Husband Pie," "Earl Murders Me Because I'm Having an Affair Pie," "Pregnant Miserable Self-Pitying Loser Pie," etc. The ingredients somehow make sense for the feeling, and they show the pie being made from the crust up. It's pretty neat. And I love the way how she and the doctor she has an affair with seem to have a real connection. They talk, he listens to her, they're friends as much as lovers. Movies aren't always like that. Because her husband is awful, you're glad she is having an affair—until you meet the doc's wife, and she's a perfectly normal human being and a good wife. Because the affair suddenly made no sense to me from the doc's viewpoint, I completely lost it with the movie there. And that was sad.
Still, there's a lot of good stuff in there. It's a slice of real life, if you'll excuse the pun.
Rating: 3.5
Really, this was an amazing indie. The ensemble cast was terrific, all the way down to Andy Griffith, who makes an appearance as the grouchy owner of the pie place. I loved the way she invents pies that have to do with her life: "I Hate My Husband Pie," "Earl Murders Me Because I'm Having an Affair Pie," "Pregnant Miserable Self-Pitying Loser Pie," etc. The ingredients somehow make sense for the feeling, and they show the pie being made from the crust up. It's pretty neat. And I love the way how she and the doctor she has an affair with seem to have a real connection. They talk, he listens to her, they're friends as much as lovers. Movies aren't always like that. Because her husband is awful, you're glad she is having an affair—until you meet the doc's wife, and she's a perfectly normal human being and a good wife. Because the affair suddenly made no sense to me from the doc's viewpoint, I completely lost it with the movie there. And that was sad.
Still, there's a lot of good stuff in there. It's a slice of real life, if you'll excuse the pun.
Rating: 3.5
Labels:
3.5,
adrienne shelly,
adultery,
andrew hollander,
andy griffith,
cheryl hines,
indie,
keri russell,
marriage,
nathan fillion,
pie,
pregnancy,
waitress
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Serenity (2005, U.S.)
I'm really glad this movie got made. It was so nice to have answers to all the big questions, like where the Reavers came from and what "two by two, hands of blue" actually meant. (Although the Reavers made my skin crawl a lot more when I didn't know where they came from.) On the other hand, it definitely felt like they were trying to cram a whole lot of information into a film that wasn't even two hours long. I think they could have stretched it out a bit.
Still, they did an amazing job. It's really hard to talk about it without comparing it to the series, though, and I'm guessing not many people reading this (if anyone even does) have seen the series. Suffice is to say that the acting, writing, and effects were on par with the series (and sometimes better.)
Even with this "conclusion," Firefly will always be one of those series that could have gone a lot farther. Since it didn't, Serenity was just what the captain ordered.
Rating: 4.0
Still, they did an amazing job. It's really hard to talk about it without comparing it to the series, though, and I'm guessing not many people reading this (if anyone even does) have seen the series. Suffice is to say that the acting, writing, and effects were on par with the series (and sometimes better.)
Even with this "conclusion," Firefly will always be one of those series that could have gone a lot farther. Since it didn't, Serenity was just what the captain ordered.
Rating: 4.0
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Haunted Airman (2006, UK)
What a crazy film. There was a lot of psychological baggage to cram into 68 minutes, and it was definitely a head trip. I went into it thinking that I would probably like it, because the previews looked incredible. And I will say that I did, in fact, like it, though I say this with reservations. Because mostly I was confused.
From what I gathered, this British pilot was shot down during World War II and lost the use of his legs. He goes to a creepy recovery home, as far from the war as he could be. He starts to lose his mind, feeling spiders everywhere and seeing things that aren't there. Or perhaps he doesn't. Perhaps his doctor is actually pushing him into these delusions. Meanwhile, the RAF pilot has been having an affair with his deceased uncle's wife, and they let her come stay at the hospital too. It's just a bunch of weirdness. And the end will really blow your mind.
I definitely need to see this again to understand it better. But I can say that the cinematography was incredible. And the acting was superb. This is a 20-year-old Pattinson who acts like he's been at it for decades. (In reality, he'd just been in Vanity Fair, where his scenes were cut; a made-for-European-tv movie, where he had very few lines; and The Goblet of Fire, in which he made us all fall in love with Cedric Diggory.) The intensity with which he portrayed this character and his fractured mind was simply mind-blowing. Previously unknown gems like this make it clear that Pattinson has real talent, and isn't just a lucky boy (to land HP and Twilight roles) with a pretty face (and musical talent and bad hygiene).
Rating: 3.5
From what I gathered, this British pilot was shot down during World War II and lost the use of his legs. He goes to a creepy recovery home, as far from the war as he could be. He starts to lose his mind, feeling spiders everywhere and seeing things that aren't there. Or perhaps he doesn't. Perhaps his doctor is actually pushing him into these delusions. Meanwhile, the RAF pilot has been having an affair with his deceased uncle's wife, and they let her come stay at the hospital too. It's just a bunch of weirdness. And the end will really blow your mind.
I definitely need to see this again to understand it better. But I can say that the cinematography was incredible. And the acting was superb. This is a 20-year-old Pattinson who acts like he's been at it for decades. (In reality, he'd just been in Vanity Fair, where his scenes were cut; a made-for-European-tv movie, where he had very few lines; and The Goblet of Fire, in which he made us all fall in love with Cedric Diggory.) The intensity with which he portrayed this character and his fractured mind was simply mind-blowing. Previously unknown gems like this make it clear that Pattinson has real talent, and isn't just a lucky boy (to land HP and Twilight roles) with a pretty face (and musical talent and bad hygiene).
Rating: 3.5
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Silk (2007, ?)
Look, I just didn't like it. I don't know what else to say. Keira Knightly was beautiful and perfect in her role, which was a minor one. Michael Pitt I can always live without. And I think anyone can live without an in depth look at the Belgian silk trade and an unattractive man who cheats on his beautiful wife with a beautiful Japanese woman who he can't even speak to. Where's the appeal here?
Something tells me that the novel was a lot more about the wife, but the script sure didn't show it. It was long and slow and underwhelming. While these can be good qualities, they weren't in this case.
I can safely say that the cinematography was beautiful. But a good DP can only take a film so far.
Rating: 2.0
Something tells me that the novel was a lot more about the wife, but the script sure didn't show it. It was long and slow and underwhelming. While these can be good qualities, they weren't in this case.
I can safely say that the cinematography was beautiful. But a good DP can only take a film so far.
Rating: 2.0
James Dean (2001, U.S.)
I'm a huge Dean fan. Own all his movies (and a few tv performances), read several biographies, have visited his hometown/museum/birthplace/grave site. I've been putting off seeing this made-for-tv biopic because I just had a feeling they wouldn't do him justice.
I was right.
Surprisingly, I thought the best part of the film was Jame Franco. I say it's surprising partially because I find Franco to be hit or miss with his performances and because I didn't think anyone could really play Dean. Franco wasn't perfect, but it was obvious that he'd gone to considerable effort to study Dean and his mannerisms, and he wasn't bad at all. I thought he came remarkably close to capturing the brilliant, fragile, remarkable, talented, insecure, artistic, unique, and perhaps slightly crazy Dean.
The sets were also great, particularly the sets of the sets of East of Eden. (Incidentally, events during the filming of East of Eden were pretty consistently documented with the least disagreement, and therefore these scenes in the biopic seemed the most realistic.)
For the most part, I was disappointed. For one thing, they tried to cram an incredible life into only 95 minutes, flying here and there and skipping over very important parts of his life. (Though at least they captured his relationship with his father fairly well.) They also skipped over any discussion of his bisexuality. While this could have been a fair choice (since the issue is widely debated), I really didn't like their portrayal of him as so clearly heterosexual either. Perhaps I just didn't like their Pier Angeli.
They should have kept the working title of James Dean: An Invented Life. I think they just tried to hard to present their film as fact, when so much of Dean's life, especially his personal life, was clouded.
Rating: 2.5
I was right.
Surprisingly, I thought the best part of the film was Jame Franco. I say it's surprising partially because I find Franco to be hit or miss with his performances and because I didn't think anyone could really play Dean. Franco wasn't perfect, but it was obvious that he'd gone to considerable effort to study Dean and his mannerisms, and he wasn't bad at all. I thought he came remarkably close to capturing the brilliant, fragile, remarkable, talented, insecure, artistic, unique, and perhaps slightly crazy Dean.
The sets were also great, particularly the sets of the sets of East of Eden. (Incidentally, events during the filming of East of Eden were pretty consistently documented with the least disagreement, and therefore these scenes in the biopic seemed the most realistic.)
For the most part, I was disappointed. For one thing, they tried to cram an incredible life into only 95 minutes, flying here and there and skipping over very important parts of his life. (Though at least they captured his relationship with his father fairly well.) They also skipped over any discussion of his bisexuality. While this could have been a fair choice (since the issue is widely debated), I really didn't like their portrayal of him as so clearly heterosexual either. Perhaps I just didn't like their Pier Angeli.
They should have kept the working title of James Dean: An Invented Life. I think they just tried to hard to present their film as fact, when so much of Dean's life, especially his personal life, was clouded.
Rating: 2.5
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Enchanted (2007, U.S.)
I wasn't expecting too much from this one, but I actually ended up liking it. A mixed live action and animated film is always risky, but I think it worked in this case. Amy Adams is a fairytale princess who is sent to New York City in the real world by an evil queen. Princess Giselle begins to change her views on life and love after meeting a handsome lawyer played by Patrick Dempsey.
Patrick Dempsey was just an unfortunate casting choice. The man is not a great actor, or even that attractive. Thankfully, Amy Adams is so vivacious she takes over the screen, and everyone else pales in comparison anyway. (Also, casting Idina Menzel in a minor, non-singing sort of role is really unfortunate.) Anyway, plus Susan Sarandon as the evil witch, and this was pretty engaging for a kids' flick.
As for music, wow. This was Disney at its best, especially Princess Giselle's house cleaning song. I was almost tempted to download the soundtrack!
Rating: 3.5
Patrick Dempsey was just an unfortunate casting choice. The man is not a great actor, or even that attractive. Thankfully, Amy Adams is so vivacious she takes over the screen, and everyone else pales in comparison anyway. (Also, casting Idina Menzel in a minor, non-singing sort of role is really unfortunate.) Anyway, plus Susan Sarandon as the evil witch, and this was pretty engaging for a kids' flick.
As for music, wow. This was Disney at its best, especially Princess Giselle's house cleaning song. I was almost tempted to download the soundtrack!
Rating: 3.5
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Appaloosa (2008, U.S.)
I really have next to nothing to say about this one. I can't really even remember what the plot was about. I do remember that Renée Zellweger was underwhelming (unusual), Ed Harris was Ed Harris (underwhelming), and Viggo Mortensen was Viggo Mortensen (understated but wonderful performance).
I think westerns just aren't my thing. Maybe this movie wasn't bad, but it bored me to tears. Disappointing.
Rating: 2.0
I think westerns just aren't my thing. Maybe this movie wasn't bad, but it bored me to tears. Disappointing.
Rating: 2.0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)