Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011, U.S.)

I just don't know what to say about this one, so I won't say much. I think the whole thing is just tired. I loved the first one when it came out (so much that I saw it 8 times in the theater before buying it on DVD the day it came out). I really liked the second and third ones (when nobody else seemed to), though I thought they should stand alone more like the first one did. Now somehow, I was really disappointed by POTC4, while every other review I've read seems to call it as good as the first one or even the best of the four. What?!

Change is good, and their stories were definitely complete, but that didn't stop me from missing Will and Elizabeth. Instead, Penelope Cruz appears as a former flame of Jack's. Now normally she irritates me to no end, but I thought she was actually pretty good in this movie and even had believable chemistry with Depp (who, I doubt I have to tell you, was just as awesome as ever). But then we have her father Blackbeard, played by Ian McShane. They keep talking about how evil he was, but I just didn't see it. He definitely wasn't as evil as Davy Jones, he wasn't as evil as Cutler Beckett. Heck, he wasn't as evil as Barbossa was in the first movie. This was especially disappointing because normally I find Ian McShane to be a very strong actor. So that's it for new main characters. Secondary characters? Forget about it! There was no Pintel and Ragetti, no Annamaria, no Mr. Cotton (or parrot), no midget worth his salt, no Marines-turned-pirates. Even Mr. Gibbs was rather blah in all this. Instead, we have a priest who was captured by Blackbeard, who is constantly preaching about the importance of faith and who falls in love with a mermaid. The preaching was downright annoying, and the romance was a chemistry-less flop. (No pun intended. Get it? Mermaid!)

The plot was also a huge disappointment. The third movie sets up the story of Jack off to find the Fountain of Youth, because he's terrified of death and wants to live forever. Instead, we find him on a quest for the fountain of youth for somebody else, and he doesn't seem that disappointed when it's not for him. That just doesn't make sense for his character, which further illustrates how badly done the characters were in this movie. Actually, I was really excited in the beginning because it started off with an amazing bang. Jack fights with a pirate who's masquerading as Sparrow, and their fight scene is beautifully choreographed and actually someone reminiscent of the Jack/Will sword fight in the first one. Then Jack is captured and brought before the king of England. Their scene together is great, especially Jack's escape attempt when he's almost more focused on getting a bite of cupcake than getting away. (That is classic Jack, so you can see why I had a good feeling about the movie.) Then he's tearing through the streets in a carriage filmed with flaming coal, which was pretty sweet, and I'm still thinking, "This movie is going to be great." And then he hooks up with Blackbeard, and it's all downhill from there. The remainder of the plot is meandering and boring, especially when added to the flat characters. There are extra plot points (like the whole mermaid thing, and especially the mermaid/preacher romance) that could have been left out entirely or at least done much, much better. Then the ending makes no sense at all. What a travesty.

On top of all that, the score was underwhelming. I had listened to the previews on iTunes before seeing the movie, and it seemed very guitar heavy (like they were going for a more modern South American/Caribbean feel) and didn't quite work. In the context of the movie it was passable, but it didn't stand out and it wasn't nearly as memorable as the first three scores. Like the stories, the music is getting tired too.

There were some pretty awesome special effects. I already mentioned the fiery coal carriage careening through the streets. The other awesome thing was that Blackbeard keeps all the ships that he has defeated in bottles in a cabinet on his ship. The bottles were full of thunder and lighting and crashing waves, and ***spoiler alert*** even Cotton's parrot appeared in the bottle with the trapped Black Pearl. Because of this whole bottle thing, a definite sequel is implied. It could be good, based on the hints, but then the whole search for the Fountain of Youth hinted at in At World's End sounded good too. So we'll see.

Rating: 2.5

Cutthroat Island (1995, U.S.)

I didn't realize this when I watched it, but apparently this movie bankrupted the production company and is in the Guinness Book of World Records as the biggest box office flop of all time.

I didn't think it was that bad, though it was very 1995. The score was no Pirates of the Caribbean, but it was pretty good pirate movie music nonetheless. The plot was decent plot, and the script was sprinkled with mildly amusing one-liners and good fight scenes.

Every now and then I would notice an anachronism, such as the cannons not rolling backwards when fired in an early fight scene, but in a later scene they were. Small compared to the whole female pirate, treasure maps on scalps, and other odd elements of the story.

Still, if you like campy pirate flicks, this one's for you.

Rating: 3.0

The Adventures of Milo and Otis (1986, Japan)

I remembered this movie very fondly from my childhood. I couldn't remember what it was about, other than the obvious cat/dog friendship. I decided to check it out from the library to "watch with my cats," two orange tabbies. This ended up being quite amusing, because one of them sat and watched almost the entire thing, and the other investigated for at least a few minutes.

You really have to appreciate the dedication of a crew that would spend four years filming live animals. I gather that there were some accusations of animal cruelty, but I don't know what came of that. It seemed to me that most of the action was realistic in terms of animals' real lives. I was surprised to see that the two had litters of kittens and puppies, which I don't recall from my childhood viewings. Still, it was done tastefully enough that a young child can watch it without figuring out what's going on (as I must have once).

I was shocked to find that I still loved this movie, which I have such fond memories of, as an adult. I think this is a wonderful, wonderful family movie. Very sweet. And two out of two cats agree!

Rating: 4.0

The Last Drop (2005, UK)

Here I go again, following a certain Swede's career all over the place. I was really glad he brought me to this one. It wasn't at all what I thought it would be like. I thought it was going to be about a real World War II military operation. Instead, it was a heist film set during the war. Think Ocean's 11 with Nazis.

I don't know how historically accurate it was, but they did cut archive footage from newsreels and the like into it, which was neat. It was war, adventure, crime, comedy... everything mixed into one.

The one thing that was awful about this one was the sound mixing.
Gunfire and explosions were so much louder than dialogue and music, it was very hard to hear. On the other hand, the writing and acting were great. Billy Zane thought he was Indiana Jones, Alexander Skarsgård was pretty convincing as a German mocking Americans, and the camaraderie between the American soldiers was well played. I never do this, but I can't help it this time: watch this clip from about 0:55 to 1:55. It is priceless!

Rating: 4.0

Shrek Forever After (2010, U.S.)

I was kind of surprised how complicated this plot was for a family movie. Shrek is having a mid-life crisis (in itself a rather strange plot for a kid flick). He is constantly surrounded by his his wife, three children, best friend, and best friend's three children. It gets monotonous, and he misses being a real ogre. So he makes a deal with Rumplestilskin to go back to being a real ogre for today. In exchange, he gives Rumplestilskin one day of his past. Rumple is a tricky bugger and he takes the day Shrek was born. This somehow results in the King and Queen signing Far Far Away over to Rumple as well.

In the alternate universe, Fiona was never saved from the tower and she is the leader of an ogre resistance against Rumple. Rumple has a witch army, and they're pretty amusing, as is Rumple. (He has a business wig and an angry wig, for starters.) But the plot was convoluted and hard to follow, and the jokes were few and far between. It was okay, but not nearly as good as the first, second, or third Shreks. The score wasn't too bad, and it reused some themes from the earlier movies, which lent some continuity.

And then we wait for true love's kiss, yadda yadda. Eh. Perhaps it didn't help that I was crammed into a theater full of kids.

Rating: 3.0

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009, U.S.)

Dr. Parnassus makes a deal with the devil for immortality, promising the devil his first-born child when he/she reaches 16. A thousand years later, when his daughter Valentina is reaching her 16th birthday, he makes another deal with the devil that he can get five souls first.

Dr. Parnassus has a very unique traveling show, where the audience gets invited behind a mirror where all their dearest dreams and worst nightmares, basically the products of their imagination, await. The land behind the mirror is something you'd have to see—or imagine—to believe. Major CGI work, definitely. Words cannot explain.

The traveling players meet a stranger (Tony) who proves to be a great help in the quest for five souls. When Tony and Valentina spark up a romance, their fellow performer Anton is jealous and suspicious... with good reason.

Of course the major topic of interest regarding this film is the performances of Heath Ledger and his three stand-ins. They did choose a good way to divide the roll. The Tony character takes three trips into the mirror, so they used the three stand-in actors for one trip each. It almost makes sense for Tony to take a different form in his imagination, if you try to force it in your brain. Depp, Farrell, and Law all did brilliantly with their five minutes of on-screen time. I feel like the sketchiest was Ledger. There were gems in his performance, but it was obvious that other parts were unfinished. It gave the film a disjointed feel, but because the plot was so out there anyway, it kind of worked.

It was really an interesting concept and execution, but to be honest I was a bit busy memorizing every part of Ledger's performance and trying to keep up with a confusing plot at once. I need a better viewing for a better review.

Rating: 3.5

Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief (2010, U.S.)

You should never judge a book by its movie. One of my mantras, and that definitely goes for this one too.

I will say there were some great things about it, namely Logan Lerman. Ever since I saw him in The Patriot, Riding in Cars with Boys, Jack & Bobby, and The Butterfly Effect when he was kid, I've loved him. If you can act that well when you're 8, you can only get better. He was great in this as Percy. (Although he was actually a bit old to be playing Percy, who's supposed to be about 12 or 13 in the first book. And wow, Lerman's sexy 18-year-old muscles should not be allowed!) His sidekicks were also pretty good. His centaur mentor, played by Pierce Brosnan, was pretty awful—although that could have been partially due to some pretty awful CGI.

The film did capture the adventure and humor of the books to some extent, although a lot of it would be lost if you weren't able to fill in plot holes with knowledge of the book. On the other hand, it also brought some of the settings more alive than I was able to with my imagination when reading the book—namely the Lotus Hotel (wow!), and to a lesser extent Medusa's lair and Hades. And speaking of the Lotus Hotel... Brandon T. Jackson as Grover the Satyr dancing to Lady Gaga was puh-riceless.

It's hard for me to judge whether it could stand alone as a movie since I read the book first, but it was pretty entertaining. Toward the end I found myself glancing at my watch quite a bit, but hey. It wasn't any worse of an adaptation than the later Harry Potter films.

Wonder if it was successful enough to finish the series or whether it will die a painful death like the His Dark Materials trilogy (The Golden Compass).

Rating: 3.5

The Count of Monte Cristo (2002, UK)

To be honest, I can't really write a good review of this film because I was halfway asleep (or maybe something else...) when I watched it.

However, I did really enjoy it. I've never read the book, but the film had a very good combination of history and adventure.

The thing I remember most clearly is the sets. The prison was especially well-done, I thought.

I think I better watch this one again!

Rating: 3.5

Hook (1991, U.S.)

I am a huge Peter Pan fan. I like the old Mary Martin version, I like the Disney cartoon version, I like the 2003 version (with Jason Isaacs as Hook!), I like Finding Neverland... I just love Peter Pan. I've never seen Hook, however. (I remember something about it being inappropriate for children, and I wouldn't have been allowed to watch it.)

On one hand, I thought the concept of this film was pretty interesting. Peter Pan finds something worth leaving Neverland for, grows up, has his own children. On the other hand, I don't think that scenario is consistent with the Pan character. And even if it was, I don't think he ever would have become a high powered corporate executive. Because of this, none of the rest of the film fell into place.

I did love Maggie Smith as Granny Wendy, and the concept of her becoming a rescuer of orphans. She was great. However, I've never really cared for Robin Williams, and I didn't like his Pan. And while I do like Dustin Hoffman, he just isn't a hook, like Cyril Richards or Jason Isaacs. Lastly, the Lost Boys just aren't the loveable, adventurous, stereotypical boys they are in other versions, with the exception of one or two of them. Mostly they were a rude mass, rather than adorable individuals.

The last thing I wanted to mention was the music. The whole time, I kept thinking it sounded familiar. This is usually a good sign that I know the composer. However, when it sounds this familiar, it's usually a good sign that John Williams did the composing. Well, surprise surprise, he did! Which explains why it sometimes sounded like the mischievous music from Home Alone and sometimes like the more mystical themes from Star Wars. Still, it was pretty good music for Neverland. (Though nothing can touch the score written by James Newton Howard for the 2003 version.)

To summarize, my general reaction to this movie was "Eh." A swing and a miss for Spielberg, I'd say.

Rating: 2.5

Up (2009, U.S.)

I really, really liked this film. It was funny, sad, beautiful, touching, engaging, lovely. A man who misses his wife decides to go on a journey to South America that they'd always planned together, and he travels by house, attached to a zillion balloons. The possibilities are truly endless here, aren't they?

The animation was awesome. The voice talent was spot-on. Good jokes. Suitable for small children but probably even more enjoyable for their parents. What more can I say?

There were a few parts that were just a bit too much for me, such as the ridiculous talking dogs. Still, the good stuff outweighed these goofy bits enough to make it a really enjoyable movie.

Oh, and the short played before the film, about clouds making babies for storks to deliver to earth, was priceless.

Rating: 4.0

The Goonies (1985, U.S.)

Apparently I am not a true child of my generation since I had yet to see The Goonies. So now I've seen it, and all is right with the world again.

I have to say, it wasn't terrible. It was a good adventure story, and the acting wasn't that bad, for a bunch of kids. Sean Astin was absolutely adorable, and his character was completely believable. I still can't believe that was Josh Brolin playing his older brother—the last film I saw him in was W. Of course, the one I loved the most was Jonathan Ke Quan, who most people would know as Short Round. His character was quite similar to that in Temple of Doom, but with a James Bond twist. Very cute! The interaction between all of the kids was really well played, as if they really had known each other their whole lives.

The story was a cool adventure for young kids (and I guess older ones too). Hidden tunnels, opera singing villians, pirate ships, and, perhaps most importantly, kids who are able to do something to save their neighborhood—but in a cool way. Most of the "even the smallest person can do big things" stories don't involve such fun adventures that the average child would love to participate in.

I think the thing I liked the least about the whole thing was Sloth. Without him, you could almost believe that this all may happen to a group of neighborhood kids, but with "the thing" wandering around, it just doesn't seem as realistic.

Still, I can definitely see why this one was so popular in the '80s.

Rating: 3.0

Pirates of the Caribbean (2003, U.S.)

I was skimming through the enormous list of movies I've seen, and it was five years ago today that I first saw The Curse of the Black Pearl. Following the path started by Heath Ledger, there was another thing that led me on the journey to becoming a cinephile. Love it. (When it first came out, I saw it 8 times "in the theater"—5 in the regular theater, 1 at the dollar theater, and 2 at the Georgia Tech theater.)

This might have been when I started the print version of my movie journal. I fell in love with Johnny Depp, I fell in love with Orlando Bloom, and I fell in love with Klaus Badelt / Hans Zimmer (because apparently one takes a lot of cues from his mentor).

Anyway, of course it got the highest rating possible! Happy Anniversary, Pirates.

Rating: 5.0

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948, U.S.)

For liking old movies so much, it's strange that I haven't seen more Bogart films. I thought I would correct that by watching this classic adventure. It was pretty good, for the type of movie it was. My dad would have liked it a lot more -- it's his kind of movie. I liked that it was more about what wealth can do to men, psychologically speaking, than a string of dramatic action sequences. It did get a bit long towards the end, but between Bogart's genius acting (as a man driven crazy by greed) and a refreshingly surprising ending, it was worth it.

Rating: 3.0