Water for Elephants

Did I like it all that much?  Not exactly, but not for the reasons you think.

Water for Elephants is about a man named Jacob (played by Robert Pattinson), living in the 1930s during the great depression, where in the midst of bad times, he chooses to join the circus.  He meets the main attraction (played by Reese Witherspoon) who is married to August (played by Christopher Waltz)- an unpredictable, unsympathetic, and dangerous man who happens to be in charge.  Jacob, finding himself in conflict with the way the place is being run, how he feels about Reese's character, and how the animals are being treated, decides to take matters into his own hands.  

Let me just say- there is a lot about this film that stands out.  It has its good qualities and its bad qualities.  For one, it seemed deeply concerned with lighting and the power of casting shadows.  It reminded me what power lighting truly has on the appearance of a character, of a story, of an environment in a scene.  The silhouette's were something to note and the way a face could change from sensitive to rugged with just a slant of the light was impressive.  But, they were overcompensating.  For what, you might ask?  I have to say, Robert Pattinson's weaknesses as being the male lead.   

Now don't get me wrong, he wasn't all that bad.  At times he even seemed good.  But one major problem that he makes obvious time and time again- he's not comfortable.  He's not comfortable in the skin of the character he's playing.  I know this because his posture, his facial expressions, his muscles are never relaxed.  He always seems tense for attack.  But he tries so hard, you can tell.  And for that you have to give him props.  But jeeze Pattinson, flex your face muscles every now and then and stop pouting!

Okay, so let's move on from the male lead for a moment.  Reese Witherspoon.  I love her, but this film either didn't give her enough to work with or she was just not into it.  I didn't feel it from her.  She was not as strong as I know she's capable of.  I was a little disappointed.

Christopher Waltz was amazing as usual.  For all of you who don't know where he is from, he was in Inglorious Bastards and he was fabulous in that as well.  That is acting!  No one could keep up with him.  When you want to play a good versus evil dynamic and the good is supposed to win, well, you have to make the good stronger than the evil.  That just did not happen in this film.  Waltz was so far beyond the others, he made them look weak and slightly pathetic in comparison.  He put talent into perspective.

So all in all, wonderful cinematography and lighting, extremely weak screenplay, good and bad acting as well as 2 hours that felt like 3.  So what am I supposed to mark this film as?

I give this film 5.5/10 for trying so hard, but just not making memorable.     

Hanna

It was pretty good... I guess.

Hanna is about a teenage girl (played by Saoirse Ronan: the girl from The Lovely Bones/Atonement) who, for the first time, goes out in the world with the knowledge that her life will always be in danger; something her father (played by Eric Bana) tries to prepare her for.  Along the way, she learns about friendship and family.  This film plays like a thrilling chase that never truly ends.

I'm feeling indifferent about this film.  I should be clear- there was nothing blatantly wrong with it.  The acting was good, sometimes even excellent.  The music along with the fight scenes were well done (it keeps your attention and slows things down so that you could actually see the movements being done).  The shot closeups and side shots were decent, nothing really stood out in that category though.  Not that that's a big deal. 

Then, why do I feel so divided from this film?
I think I wanted more.  The plot's solution was lacking and just not fulfilling.  You leave wishing the ending was different, more explosive.  The revelations aren't as big as you hoped they would be.  I also think the movie felt a little long because not much really changes. I mean, yes the plot somewhat moves forward, but it very clearly ends right where it started.  The problem with this is, from the beginning, you can almost guess the ending, which makes the rest of the film (the middle) somewhat of a letdown.

Random Note: Cate Blanchett's forced southern accent was not consistent and would come out randomly, which took away from her character. 

Maybe I was just in a mood, I don't know.

Ultimately, I recommend this movie despite my own quarrels with it.  It is a good movie.  Eric Bana's not bad to look at either.  I give this film a 7.2/10.

Up and Coming - Summer Hits?

The question here is....potential?

Something Borrowed

I mentioned before, all the way back in December, a few films I was looking forward to in 2011.  Something Borrowed was one of them. I'm not going to mention the plot summaries for these films only because you can pretty much figure them out from the trailers. Above is the trailer for this book turned film, that I've been anticipating all year.  I read the book, for the record, and thoroughly enjoyed it.  The characters were completely relatable, especially regarding female friendships.  I really hope I can say the same about the movie.  Its actors include Kate Hudson, Gennifer Goodwin,  and John Krasinski.  It comes out May 6, 2011.

Crazy, Stupid Love

The next trailer that caught my eye is that of Crazy, Stupid Love.  This group of characters are confident, lost, vulnerable and seductive.  They give the audience a very enticing dynamic.  It also helps when the actors are all extremely talented.  This film includes Ryan Gosling, Steve Carrel, Emma Stone, and Julianne Moore.  If that doesn't get you excited, then I have no idea what will.  It comes out July 29, 2011.  It looks promising.

Thor

Another film I am looking forward to is Thor.  I'm not sure I know exactly why I'm excited for this film, except that I enjoy the idea of gods on earth and of bringing something beyond reality to the screen.  This film contains Chris Hemsworth as the male lead, Natalie Portman as the love interest (most likely) and Anthony Hopkins as some other worldly god.  It comes out May 6, 2011.  

The Hangover 2

For me, this film is up in the air.  It's either going to be a hit or miss.  The first film was so good, I just don't see how they'll top it.  But, I am more than willing to watch them try.  This delightful cast includes Zack Galifinakis, Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Justin Bartha.  It comes out May 26, 2011.  

Other summer films include the comic book continuations, spin offs and first attempts: 

-Captain America coming out July 22, 2011, starring Chris Evans

-X-men First Class comes out June 3, 2011.   

-The Green Lantern starring Ryan Reynolds comes out on June 17, 2011 (A lot of comics).  

This is also the summer of continuations and franchises:  

-Pirates of the Caribbean 4 On Stranger Tides coming out May 20, 2011 

-Transformers 3 Dark of The Moon coming out July 1, 2011 

-Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part 2 coming out July 15, 2011.

If there are any films you're excited for, let me know!  Comment!

Shout Out!!!!!!!!!!

Okay, so recently I've been thinking, and it kind of bothers me when the critics and the viewers don't really give credit where its due.  Especially when it comes to the acting and the characters.  Yes, the directors of films are incredible people who have extreme talent most of the time, but the actors are also what brings their image to life.  Even if a film as a whole doesn't pass your level of expectations, doesn't mean that there isn't some amazing work being done within it.  In some cases, entire films that really are wonderful, don't get recognized because of timing or distraction.  Sometimes, during all the chaos of a film, looking at all its flaws, the viewers forget to appreciate what makes the film special... or, who makes the film special.  So I'd like to just give a few or more shout outs to some characters/acting/films that I felt didn't get their due.

To start, I'd like to point to a film that has large amounts of issues which prevented it from becoming a success.  Actually, the entire film isn't exactly worth watching to be completely honest, especially the ending.  Talk about a let down.  But because of just one scene, with just one actor, I feel that this deserves a shout out!  American Psycho (yr 2000). The scene I'm referring to includes the main character played by Christian Bale as he is about to kill a man in his apartment simply because he enjoys it.

Now I couldn't, for some reason, upload the clip I wanted onto the page here, but I'm going to give the link, so that you can see the scene for yourself...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwicLgOGJOI    

The next film I chose was an incredible film in all.  Why it wasn't recognized when it was released, I don't know...  It could have had to do with timing; it was too early for its time?  But in my opinion, it is an incredible film that Guy Pierce did not get recognized enough for being in.  He was wonderful to watch and the writing was truly original.  For those who are interested enough to check it out, it is a film about a man with short term memory loss trying to catch his wife's murderer.  However, with his condition, memory becomes unreliable and keeping track of the facts proves to be difficult to say the least.  Check it out! I promise, you won't regret watching it!  Here's a clip from Memento... (about memory)

A third shout out I want to give is to the film Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon and its incredible male lead played by Nathan Baesel.  This film plays as a mockumentary of horror films and their many predictable plots and techniques throughout history.  It is a comedy about horror which is hilarious if you sit down and watch it.  The film's plot is based around a documentary film maker who agrees to follow around a murderer as he picks his victims and prepares for a night of terror.  Little does she know what she's actually in for....  

And now just a few honorable mentions....

-Matthew Goode as Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias in Watchmen (excellent transformation into a character)

-James Franco as Saul Silver in Pineapple Express (he's hilarious and his voice is really well done)

-Leonardo DiCaprio as Cobb in Inception (yes the movie was recognized, but his acting wasn't truly appreciated)

-Garret Hedlund as Bo in Country Strong (for his country singing, I was impressed!)

I'm sure there are many more and If I remember or notice them in the future, I'll be sure to point them out.  

If you have any of your own shout outs you want to share, feel free to comment!  

Paul

Okay, now I'm probably going to offend or just simply piss off a lot of people, but, I just didn't get it.
Obviously, I don't mean that literally, but I didn't find it particularly funny.  

For those of you who don't know, Paul is about two sci-fie geeks named Graeme Willy and his best friend Clive Gollings (played by Simon Pegg and Nick Frost), who are on a comic book convention tour across America.  Along their travels they encounter an alien named Paul (voice of Seth Rogen), only to discover that he's being used as a source of information for the government and now he's being held against his will.  The film follows the three of them, and some interesting characters along the way, trying to help Paul get back to his home planet.

Okay, now that the essential is over, I can explain myself a little bit better.  So, it's not that the film doesn't have its funny moments.  I just felt like the humour was more obvious funny, along the lines of silly rather than memorable.  I thought Seth Rogen did a good job with his voice for Paul and I thought the concept was funny in its own right.  But, every time I see Kristin Wiig in a film, my mind directly goes to SNL and that sort of stupid humour.  Like when you laugh because someone walks in to a pole rather than laughing because of an extremely ironic or original joke.  Now, I'm not saying there is no humor in it, it's just not very lasting humor.

The film as a whole runs much like a comedy: crazy coincidences happen, a strange and uncharacteristic romantic element takes place, some sort of "loser" character is the lead.  These are a lot of things you can expect in a raw comedy.  But all in all, for me, it was forgettable.  You really have to be in a specific mood to enjoy these kinds of movies, and frankly, I can see it being appealing for those who enjoy it under the influence.  Which, coincidentally, they do in the film.  The ending was one of your attempts at tying up everything, but ends up being ridiculous and random, as you'd expect.  The acting was okay, the story was okay, the flow of it was okay.   

It was just okay.  Wouldn't see it again.  If you enjoy these kinds of movies, knock yourself out.  I give Paul 6.6/10 ... and I personally think that's kind of generous...

Source Code

 

It was definitely a lot better than I thought it was going to be...

Source Code is about a soldier named Colter Stevens (played by Jake Gyllenhaal) who finds himself in a mission where he is forced to relive a past event over and over, in order to find a bomber who is expected to blow up a train.  He is only given 8 minute intervals to complete this task, and along the way, he discovers details that change the outcome.  It's like Groundhog Day meets a better version of Unstoppable.  

So let's get started.  This was actually a well-rounded movie.  I kept expecting disappointments, but I'm happy to say, I didn't find many.  The story line starts out a little confusing, not because you don't know what is going on, but because there were some holes in the dialogue.  But, luckily, this gets resolved later on in the film, when things are properly explained, to leave out any confusion.  So that was less of a problem.  They actually did a good job of explaining everything.  It plays on the idea that- if there are two versions of yourself, one in your original reality and one in an alternate reality, how would you be able to change your future?  It also explores the dangers of risking your morality for the sake of the world; doing something immoral and unethical, in order to save lives.  This definitely applies to the treatment of soldiers in our world today.  

Anyways, moving away from my dissecting the film's purpose, to simply critiquing its form:

The acting was good.  I was impressed by Jake Gyllenhaal.  I know he's capable of this level of acting, but sometimes I find him lazy about it.  But in this film, he stepped it up a little.  Which I liked.  Then there is the visual appeal of the film.  It wasn't anything special, but it wasn't bad either.  The excitement of the film was limited though.  I realize people are sitting in their seats waiting for something big to happen, but for most of the film, it never really meets those expectations.  One thing that particularly - not bothers me - but sticks in my head, is the ending text.  I won't ruin it for anyone, but if the film suggests an alternate universe, than how is it possible?       

Finally, I was a little taken aback that Russel Peters appears in the film, as a comedian.  It seemed unnecessary to me and simply irrelevant that they asked him in the first place to be in the movie.  Unless he asked them to be in it, for whatever reason.  I thought it was humorous for about half a second and then I just saw it as desperate for publicity or simple attention.  He was pointless.  My advice: stick to what your good at. 

For me this film was a solid, well-put together really good film.  I wouldn't see it again, because nothing about it really stands out to me personally, but I don't regret sitting for an hour and a half to watch it either.  I think it has more to do with the type of person you are, and personally, sci-fi has never truly done it for me.  So, for the majority of you out there, I would say see this film if you enjoy some action, minor suspense, and an attempt at an original/creative plot.  I give this film 7.7/10 for having the essentials, hitting all the marks, but for just not shooting for fantastic!