Plot: This film is based on a true story. This film takes place in 1966. Gertrude (Catherine Keener) is on trial for the murder of Sylvia Likens (Ellen Page). Gertrude, a single mother of six children, agrees to take in Sylvia and her sister Jenny (Hayley MacFarland). The Likens are carnival workers who constantly travel and leave their daughters with Gertrude and give her twenty dollars every week as payment for the care of their daughters. Sylvia, who is accused of stealing and spreading rumors that one of Gertrude's daughters is pregnant, is burned with cigarettes and eventually forced to stay in the basement. Gertrude's children and neighborhood kids repeatedly torture Sylvia, which ultimately leads to her death. The film alternates between the trial and the flashbacks that are being described by the witnesses.
Review: This is a TV movie and honestly probably one of the most difficult films I've ever had to watch. I heard about this film from an interview with Ellen Page and I was intrigued. When I heard about the story and everything, I decided to watch it. And I was shocked and disturbed. The fact that this happened in the United States not even fifty years ago shacks me to my core. You watch this movie and you see what this 16-year-old girl went through at the hands of others honestly makes you question their humanity. And they did have to leave certain aspects of the abuse out of the film because it was too graphic to show on television.
The acting is simply amazing. Catherine Keener is brilliant in this. Despite the fact that her character is completely a mess and probably mentally unstable, she gives a powerful performance of a woman who was not in touch with this reality (this is just my own perspective from I watched on-screen). The supporting cast, which consist of many relatively unknown actors, do a good job of portraying people who have no sympathy and just believe what they're doing is normal and not completely wrong. James Franco has a brief supporting role as the father of Gertrude's youngest child. He is a completely vile human being in this, but still plays the part well. Hayley MacFarland is simply incredible as Jenny. You see her fear and anxiety from what she's going through and witnessing what's happening to her sister. But the real star of the movie for me is Ellen Page. Her performance is beyond amazing. Her facial expressions as she's going what she's going through. The only characters I had sympathy for throughout the film were Sylvia, Jenny and their parents. All of the other characters in the film were completely unlikable and inhuman to me.
As I said before, this is a disturbing film and very uneasy to watch. Is it the greatest film I've ever seen? No. But why do I give such praise? Because the topics that we see in this film, child abuse, is an endless topic in our society. We're afraid to confront it and talk about it. Child abuse led to the death of a 16-year-old girl. We even had a scene where Sylvia is being abused and we see neighbors outside who hear it, but say "better to stay out of it I think". It's very sad to think that happened then and the reality is that that possibly still happens today.
I've only watched this film three times because I cannot bear to see the horror and torture this young woman went through. It's so uncomfortable to see everything unfolding in front of you. But this film shows you what can happen behind closed doors and what could happen if no one does anything to stop it.
Rating: 4/5
Friday 30 December 2011
Waitress (2007)
Plot: Jenna (Keri Russell) is a woman who's in an unhappy marriage with the abusive Earl (Jeremy Sisto). She works as a waitress at Joe's Pie Diner, where her job includes creating inventive pies, which are inspired by her own life. Jenna soon learns that she's pregnant and isn't entirely pleased. Her coworkers and only friends Becky (Cheryl Hines) and Dawn (Adrienne Shelly) encourage her to start a new life for herself. Jenna hopes to win a pie contest where the prize is 25,000 dollars. Her life takes another turning point when she meets her new physician Jim (Nathan Fillion) and they start having an affair. Will Jenna be able to have a new life or is she forever doomed?
Review: This is a brilliant film. Firstly, what I like about the film's plot is that it's not entirely cliche. I like that we have a film where we see a woman who is not happy that she's pregnant. It's probably seen as not normal behavior. Women should be happy to be having a baby. But the truth in the matter is that some women aren't always thrilled that they're pregnant and I'm happy that we have some films, such as this one, that shows this side of impending parenthood.
The film has a genius blend of humor and drama. The humor isn't over the top. It's just fun to watch.
The scenes with the pies, where Jenna creates them in her mind and what she calls them is fun entertainment. For example, when she comes up with a pie after finding out she's pregnant and calls it "Bad Baby Pie".
The acting is top notch. Keri Russell is great as Jenna. What I like about Keri's performance is that we're able to have sympathy for somebody that we might not necessarily like. Think about it: she's pregnant and not happy about it and having an affair with her doctor. But Keri's charisma and charm is able to have us draw sympathy towards this character. Jeremy Sisto is completely unlikable as the abusive husband Earl- he's does a tremendous job. Cheryl Hines provides a hilarious performance as Becky. She's the comic relief in this and we need it. Adrienne Shelly is so good as the shy and timid Dawn and provides just as much comedy as Cheryl Hines does. Andy Griffith plays Joe, the diner owner who also tries to encourage Jenna to go to a bigger and better life. He provides humor and wisdom, sometimes in the same sentence and it's very touching to watch.
Adrienne Shelly directed, wrote and acted in this. She was tragically murdered in 2006, before the film was released and it's dedicated to in her memory. I watched the behind-the-scenes footage and Adrienne Shelly put her heart and soul into this and it shows.
This is a funny, touching and entertaining film. The film was well-received critically and in my opinion, is one unappreciated film by fellow movie goers.
Rating: 4.5/5
Review: This is a brilliant film. Firstly, what I like about the film's plot is that it's not entirely cliche. I like that we have a film where we see a woman who is not happy that she's pregnant. It's probably seen as not normal behavior. Women should be happy to be having a baby. But the truth in the matter is that some women aren't always thrilled that they're pregnant and I'm happy that we have some films, such as this one, that shows this side of impending parenthood.
The film has a genius blend of humor and drama. The humor isn't over the top. It's just fun to watch.
The scenes with the pies, where Jenna creates them in her mind and what she calls them is fun entertainment. For example, when she comes up with a pie after finding out she's pregnant and calls it "Bad Baby Pie".
The acting is top notch. Keri Russell is great as Jenna. What I like about Keri's performance is that we're able to have sympathy for somebody that we might not necessarily like. Think about it: she's pregnant and not happy about it and having an affair with her doctor. But Keri's charisma and charm is able to have us draw sympathy towards this character. Jeremy Sisto is completely unlikable as the abusive husband Earl- he's does a tremendous job. Cheryl Hines provides a hilarious performance as Becky. She's the comic relief in this and we need it. Adrienne Shelly is so good as the shy and timid Dawn and provides just as much comedy as Cheryl Hines does. Andy Griffith plays Joe, the diner owner who also tries to encourage Jenna to go to a bigger and better life. He provides humor and wisdom, sometimes in the same sentence and it's very touching to watch.
Adrienne Shelly directed, wrote and acted in this. She was tragically murdered in 2006, before the film was released and it's dedicated to in her memory. I watched the behind-the-scenes footage and Adrienne Shelly put her heart and soul into this and it shows.
This is a funny, touching and entertaining film. The film was well-received critically and in my opinion, is one unappreciated film by fellow movie goers.
Rating: 4.5/5
Disturbia (2007)
Plot: Kale (Shia LeBeouf) is a teenager who is put under house arrest after assaulting his Spanish teacher. Bored, he begins spying on his neighbors. He then later suspects that his neighbor Robert (David Morse) is a serial killer. Kale enlists the help of Ashley (Sarah Roemer), a new neighbor, to prove that Robert is a serial killer. Will they succeed or will they get caught in a bigger trap?
Review: This is a good thriller. The plot resembles the plot to Rear Window, which is seen as a classic Alfred Hithcock film. The plot is very interesting and keeps the audience invested. There are numerous twists and turns that don't keep the audience constantly guessing, but keeps us entertained.
What I like about the film is that it isn't entirely cheap thrills. There are good thrilling, scary moments that you wouldn't see coming. There are also many scenes, which some are just conversations, that are very intense and will give you shivers. It's that good. The film also has a good blend of humor to it, which I like. Because in this kind of suspenseful and intense film, it's good to have a couple of laughs. Especially in the beginning, because it's towards the middle and end that the intensity starts to surface.
The acting is fantastic. Shia LeBeouf really holds his own as the lead. Sarah Roemer is very good as Ashley, the neighbor who willingly participates in Kale's plan. But the real star of Disturbia to me is David Morse, who plays the serial killer neighbor. He's very creepy and intense in this role. What I like about his character is that he has a charm to him that makes others oblivious to Kale's suspicions and that charm allows him to escape suspicious circumstances and situations. Almost every scene he was in I had chills. The supporting cast, which include characters like Kale's mother, the police, the parole officer, mold into the plot very well. A well-rounded cast and there's no major weak player.
This is one of the better thrillers from the 2000s that I've seen. An intense, suspenseful and thrilling film that will satisfy viewers.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is a good thriller. The plot resembles the plot to Rear Window, which is seen as a classic Alfred Hithcock film. The plot is very interesting and keeps the audience invested. There are numerous twists and turns that don't keep the audience constantly guessing, but keeps us entertained.
What I like about the film is that it isn't entirely cheap thrills. There are good thrilling, scary moments that you wouldn't see coming. There are also many scenes, which some are just conversations, that are very intense and will give you shivers. It's that good. The film also has a good blend of humor to it, which I like. Because in this kind of suspenseful and intense film, it's good to have a couple of laughs. Especially in the beginning, because it's towards the middle and end that the intensity starts to surface.
The acting is fantastic. Shia LeBeouf really holds his own as the lead. Sarah Roemer is very good as Ashley, the neighbor who willingly participates in Kale's plan. But the real star of Disturbia to me is David Morse, who plays the serial killer neighbor. He's very creepy and intense in this role. What I like about his character is that he has a charm to him that makes others oblivious to Kale's suspicions and that charm allows him to escape suspicious circumstances and situations. Almost every scene he was in I had chills. The supporting cast, which include characters like Kale's mother, the police, the parole officer, mold into the plot very well. A well-rounded cast and there's no major weak player.
This is one of the better thrillers from the 2000s that I've seen. An intense, suspenseful and thrilling film that will satisfy viewers.
Rating: 4/5
Big Fat Liar (2002)
Plot: 14-year-old Jason (Frankie Muniz) is a compulsive liar. When he lies about the reason why he couldn't write an English paper and is caught, he's told unless he finishes the paper in a certain amount of time, he'll have to attend summer school. He manages to finish the paper, writing a story called "Big Fat Liar". While riding on a bike to hand the paper to his teacher (Sandra Oh), he hits the limo of Marty Wolf (Paul Giamatti), a Hollywood producer who like Jason, is a compulsive liar, but believes it helps his career. "Big Fat Liar" falls out of Jason's backpack and Marty steals it and plans to make it his comeback movie. Jason tells his parents and teacher about what happened, but they don't believe him. To prove he's telling the truth, Jason goes to Los Angeles and takes his best friend Kaylee (Amanda Bynes) with him. But Wolf proves to be reluctant, refusing to admit the truth. Jason and Kaylee make numerous plans to prove Jason's innocence. But will they work?
Review: I really like this movie. I like the plot and it's references to Hollywood. The plot is cliche at certain points, but they worked. They're still there and they're noticeable but they work well into the film's plot.
What I like about the film's humor is that while it is cartoonish and will please kid viewers, it doesn't go completely over the top. The gags and pranks that Jason and Kaylee pull on Marty reminds me a lot of those that were used in the Home Alone movies. Even though it's cartoonish and ridiculous, it still entertains.
The acting is surprisingly good. Frankie Muniz does a good job as lying Jason who is desperate to prove himself worthy of his father's trust. When he does prove that he was telling the truth, we're satisfied that the protagonist succeed in his goal. Paul Giamatti does nice work as Marty. He is a cartoonish villain, much like the burglars from Home Alone, but he still manages to entertain and make us laugh. Amanda Bynes does fine as Kaylee. She has great comedic timing and she shines in certain moments with Frankie Muniz. The supporting cast is also very good.
Overall, this is an energetic, funny, entertaining and fun movie that kids will certainly enjoy and that adults will probably too.
Rating: 3.5/5
Review: I really like this movie. I like the plot and it's references to Hollywood. The plot is cliche at certain points, but they worked. They're still there and they're noticeable but they work well into the film's plot.
What I like about the film's humor is that while it is cartoonish and will please kid viewers, it doesn't go completely over the top. The gags and pranks that Jason and Kaylee pull on Marty reminds me a lot of those that were used in the Home Alone movies. Even though it's cartoonish and ridiculous, it still entertains.
The acting is surprisingly good. Frankie Muniz does a good job as lying Jason who is desperate to prove himself worthy of his father's trust. When he does prove that he was telling the truth, we're satisfied that the protagonist succeed in his goal. Paul Giamatti does nice work as Marty. He is a cartoonish villain, much like the burglars from Home Alone, but he still manages to entertain and make us laugh. Amanda Bynes does fine as Kaylee. She has great comedic timing and she shines in certain moments with Frankie Muniz. The supporting cast is also very good.
Overall, this is an energetic, funny, entertaining and fun movie that kids will certainly enjoy and that adults will probably too.
Rating: 3.5/5
The Cat in the Hat (2003)
Plot: Siblings Conrad (Spencer Breslin) and Sally (Dakota Fanning) are left home at the hands of a babysitter while their mother (Kelly Preston) goes to work. Suddenly, the Cat in the Hat (Mike Myers) comes, declaring their going to have a day of fun and nothing bad will happen. Is this true?
Review: When I heard they were doing a live-action version of one of Dr. Seuss' books, I was skeptical. I felt this way because of How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000), the live-action film based on the Dr. Seuss book. I wasn't expecting much when I went to watch this and I wasn't let down because my expectations weren't that high. This isn't a good adaptation of the classic children's book.
The film runs for 82 minutes, so they added new characters and subplots to meet the film's length. For example, they added a love interest for the mother, Larry (Alec Baldwin), gave the fish a more significant role and they added tension in the relationship between Conrad and his mother. These are just a few examples.
The film's humor is ridiculous and hilarious. I'm honestly surprised that they used this kind of humor in what is seen as a family movie. The comedy used is very slapstick. It goes beyond the boundaries of reality. And I can understand it to an extend because the film is fantasy. It's so exaggerated that I can't wrap my head around it. The use of toilet humor is simply too much. I think writers expect kids to laugh when they use that kind of humor. And some of the comedy they use is very mature. For example, they have a hoe (the garden tool) and the Cat says "dirty hoe". There's one joke where the Cat says the S.L.O.W. car was originally called something that was known as S.H.I.T. It's that kind of humor that I find crude and mature for a kid movie. It feels more like a teen version of The Cat in the Hat.
The acting is alright. Mike Myers is entertaining as the Cat in the Hat and does the best he can with the material, which isn't much. Spencer Breslin is fine as Conrad. Dakota Fanning is good as Sally, even though I found the character incredibly annoying. Alec Baldwin and Kelly Preston weren't that good in their respective roles. I didn't find their characters interesting and found both characters flat and boring. The only characters that weren't a pain for me as a movie watcher were the Cat in the Hat, Conrad (for the most part) and the fish.
I'll admit that I laughed and the movie itself can be entertaining. But that doesn't change the fact that this is a horrible adaptation of Dr. Seuss' classic book. And that this shouldn't be seen by younger kids. I'll go as far to say that kids under the age of 8-9 shouldn't see this because of its mature content. Yet I can't help but to enjoy this movie. I honestly think Dr. Seuss is rolling in his grave because of this adaptation.
Rating: 2.5/5
Review: When I heard they were doing a live-action version of one of Dr. Seuss' books, I was skeptical. I felt this way because of How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000), the live-action film based on the Dr. Seuss book. I wasn't expecting much when I went to watch this and I wasn't let down because my expectations weren't that high. This isn't a good adaptation of the classic children's book.
The film runs for 82 minutes, so they added new characters and subplots to meet the film's length. For example, they added a love interest for the mother, Larry (Alec Baldwin), gave the fish a more significant role and they added tension in the relationship between Conrad and his mother. These are just a few examples.
The film's humor is ridiculous and hilarious. I'm honestly surprised that they used this kind of humor in what is seen as a family movie. The comedy used is very slapstick. It goes beyond the boundaries of reality. And I can understand it to an extend because the film is fantasy. It's so exaggerated that I can't wrap my head around it. The use of toilet humor is simply too much. I think writers expect kids to laugh when they use that kind of humor. And some of the comedy they use is very mature. For example, they have a hoe (the garden tool) and the Cat says "dirty hoe". There's one joke where the Cat says the S.L.O.W. car was originally called something that was known as S.H.I.T. It's that kind of humor that I find crude and mature for a kid movie. It feels more like a teen version of The Cat in the Hat.
The acting is alright. Mike Myers is entertaining as the Cat in the Hat and does the best he can with the material, which isn't much. Spencer Breslin is fine as Conrad. Dakota Fanning is good as Sally, even though I found the character incredibly annoying. Alec Baldwin and Kelly Preston weren't that good in their respective roles. I didn't find their characters interesting and found both characters flat and boring. The only characters that weren't a pain for me as a movie watcher were the Cat in the Hat, Conrad (for the most part) and the fish.
I'll admit that I laughed and the movie itself can be entertaining. But that doesn't change the fact that this is a horrible adaptation of Dr. Seuss' classic book. And that this shouldn't be seen by younger kids. I'll go as far to say that kids under the age of 8-9 shouldn't see this because of its mature content. Yet I can't help but to enjoy this movie. I honestly think Dr. Seuss is rolling in his grave because of this adaptation.
Rating: 2.5/5
Let Me In (2010)
Plot: 12-year-old Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is neglected by his divorcing parents and is constantly harassed by bullies. He befriends Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz), a young girl who has moved into the apartment next door. Owen eventually learns the truth about Abby- she's a vampire. Chaos soon ensues as Owen tries to handle the bullies and protect Abby.
Review: I'm a fan of vampire films and literature so I was hoping that I wouldn't be let down by this. This film completely passed my expectations.
This is a remake of the 2008 Sweden film. Both of these films are adaptations of a novel. I haven't read the novel and watched the original film which this is based on, so I can't compare this film to the original film and the remake. I'm looking it as an entirely separate entity altogether.
Firstly, what I like about the film's plot is that it feels like real life. Many horror films I've seen, it feels like the characters lives have been exaggerated. Here, we have a young boy who is going through a rough time in his life. His parents are getting divorced, he's being bullied and just trying to survive it all. In all of this, we're introduced to a vampire child. It's not what you would expect, but I like it because it's fresh and feels unique. And the film doesn't sugarcoat what Owen is going through. We see the ugly side of what he's going through, when most films would have other characters say what he's going through. We witness it and makes it much more gripping.
Kodi Smith-McPhee and Chloe Grace Moretz's acting in this is fantastic. The chemistry between the two lead actors is unbelievable. They both have such maturity and chemistry on-screen that surpasses their teenage years. The way they click on-screen shows and I'm amazed that such young actors could have chemistry that actors twice their age hope to have with their co-stars.
Kodi Smith-McPhee's ability to portray his pain, frustration and determination to escape from his life in a simple facial expression is outstanding to me.
Chloe Grace Moretz is in my opinion one of the better child actors working today. She's a great actress and is brilliant in this. What I admire about how she portrays Abby is that even though Abby is an immortal, she's still a vulnerable child at heart who wants to find some sort of connection with humanity since that connection was taken away from her.
You kind of forget that this is supposed to be a vampire film. It doesn't feel like a vampire film. Owen's destructive home life and school life take up a good portion of the film's plot. And I think that adds a human element to a horror film. That pre-adolescent life can be hell. Even when we find out that Abby is a vampire, it's kind of like an afterthought because there's so much else going on.
This is one the better vampire movies I've seen in a long time that I think any horror film fan will appreciate.
Rating: 4.5/5
Review: I'm a fan of vampire films and literature so I was hoping that I wouldn't be let down by this. This film completely passed my expectations.
This is a remake of the 2008 Sweden film. Both of these films are adaptations of a novel. I haven't read the novel and watched the original film which this is based on, so I can't compare this film to the original film and the remake. I'm looking it as an entirely separate entity altogether.
Firstly, what I like about the film's plot is that it feels like real life. Many horror films I've seen, it feels like the characters lives have been exaggerated. Here, we have a young boy who is going through a rough time in his life. His parents are getting divorced, he's being bullied and just trying to survive it all. In all of this, we're introduced to a vampire child. It's not what you would expect, but I like it because it's fresh and feels unique. And the film doesn't sugarcoat what Owen is going through. We see the ugly side of what he's going through, when most films would have other characters say what he's going through. We witness it and makes it much more gripping.
Kodi Smith-McPhee and Chloe Grace Moretz's acting in this is fantastic. The chemistry between the two lead actors is unbelievable. They both have such maturity and chemistry on-screen that surpasses their teenage years. The way they click on-screen shows and I'm amazed that such young actors could have chemistry that actors twice their age hope to have with their co-stars.
Kodi Smith-McPhee's ability to portray his pain, frustration and determination to escape from his life in a simple facial expression is outstanding to me.
Chloe Grace Moretz is in my opinion one of the better child actors working today. She's a great actress and is brilliant in this. What I admire about how she portrays Abby is that even though Abby is an immortal, she's still a vulnerable child at heart who wants to find some sort of connection with humanity since that connection was taken away from her.
You kind of forget that this is supposed to be a vampire film. It doesn't feel like a vampire film. Owen's destructive home life and school life take up a good portion of the film's plot. And I think that adds a human element to a horror film. That pre-adolescent life can be hell. Even when we find out that Abby is a vampire, it's kind of like an afterthought because there's so much else going on.
This is one the better vampire movies I've seen in a long time that I think any horror film fan will appreciate.
Rating: 4.5/5
Thursday 29 December 2011
White Chicks (2004)
Plot: Brothers and FBI agents Kevin (Shawn Wayans) and Marcus (Marlon Wayans) are assigned to protect two spoiled heiresses from a kidnapping plot. The heiresses are going to a beauty contest. When the four are in a car accident and the girls refuse to leave the hotel room, Kevin and Marcus decide to disguise themselves as the heiresses in order to save their jobs. Will they be able to fool everyone and stop the kidnapping plot?
Review: This is an okay movie. The plot is okay, but there's nothing really original or something that will throw you on the edge of your seat.
As for the film's humor, it's a typical Wayans movie. Lots of toilet humor, racist jokes and stuff like that. And it is funny. I've laughed countless times whenever I've watched this movie. But I'm laughing because it's crazy, over the top humor.
The film's make-up is very well done, but it's not a convincing look. Let me try and be clearer. The protagonists in White Chicks are African-American men, disguising themselves as white women. While the cosmetics are impressive, they don't look anything at all like the women they're suppose to look like. I wonder if the characters seeing them are just really dumb. But I know it was for the sake of the movie's plot. Also, how fast they change back into their make-up back and forth throughout the film is unrealistic to me. But once again, it's all for the sake of the plot.
The acting is alright. The Wayan brothers are funny and I enjoy them in their respective roles. But they are slightly melodramatic in certain parts of the movie. I felt the same way about the supporting cast. They're all alright actors and play their parts well, but there's really no standout for me. Usually when I see a movie, for me, there's one actor that stands out from the other actors. For me, they were all equal, which isn't a bad thing.
This is an entertaining, funny and over the top comedy.
Rating: 3.5/5
Review: This is an okay movie. The plot is okay, but there's nothing really original or something that will throw you on the edge of your seat.
As for the film's humor, it's a typical Wayans movie. Lots of toilet humor, racist jokes and stuff like that. And it is funny. I've laughed countless times whenever I've watched this movie. But I'm laughing because it's crazy, over the top humor.
The film's make-up is very well done, but it's not a convincing look. Let me try and be clearer. The protagonists in White Chicks are African-American men, disguising themselves as white women. While the cosmetics are impressive, they don't look anything at all like the women they're suppose to look like. I wonder if the characters seeing them are just really dumb. But I know it was for the sake of the movie's plot. Also, how fast they change back into their make-up back and forth throughout the film is unrealistic to me. But once again, it's all for the sake of the plot.
The acting is alright. The Wayan brothers are funny and I enjoy them in their respective roles. But they are slightly melodramatic in certain parts of the movie. I felt the same way about the supporting cast. They're all alright actors and play their parts well, but there's really no standout for me. Usually when I see a movie, for me, there's one actor that stands out from the other actors. For me, they were all equal, which isn't a bad thing.
This is an entertaining, funny and over the top comedy.
Rating: 3.5/5
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Plot: Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now nineteen and set to be engaged to a young man. She follows the White Rabbit down the rabbit hole and finds herself back in Underland, a place she visited thirteen years ago. She's told she's the only one that's able to slay the Jabberwocky, a dragon used by the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter), who terrorizes the Underland inhabitants.
Review: I really enjoyed this movie. This isn't an entirely faithful adaptation of the novel, so if you're looking for one, don't think of watching this. What I like about the plot is that we see Alice as a grownup, instead of the young girl she was when she first visited Underland. I also like that Alice is the opposite of Victorian women.
The acting is top notch. It's an excellent cast. Mia Wasikowska is great as Alice. I will say even though I found Alice's initial refusal to believe in Underland's existence annoying, it's realistic because she's not a child, but becoming a grown woman. Johnny Depp plays the Mad Hatter. I think he did a fantastic job. His loyalty to the White Queen and his attachment to Alice is fun to watch. What I like about this Mad Hatter is that he's mad (crazy) and sane at the same time. Anne Hathaway plays the White Queen and I think she played the part well. There's a sort of vulnerability that comes across Anne Hathaway and I think that empathy plays off with the White Queen. Helen Bonham Carter plays the Red Queen and I think she was also fantastic. I read in an interview she took inspiration from her toddler for the Red Queen and I can see it. The film is just so well cast and there's no weak player. I think with a movie like this, you can't have weak actors.
Tim Burton directed this, so there's that Tim Burton feel to it. The film has a dark and Gothic feel to it. And I like it because it's a different feel to a story that most people assume to be a happy story. So I like that we have a dark feel to the story. The setting of Underland is joyless for the most part. It's not a place where people are singing and dancing. And considering what's happening with the Red Queen, I found it realistic within the plot.
The film is a visual treat. Underland's setting is beautiful to see. The sets in the human world are well-constructed. Not only the sets, but the animated characters as well. The White Rabbit, the Dormouse, the Caterpillar, the Cheshire cat and the Jabberwocky are so well done.
The film's 3D is very good. What I like is that they don't go completely overboard with it. There are so many films that go overboard with their 3D and this one was just right.
Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is a unique, entertaining, magical. It's just a great movie that I think any movie watcher will enjoy. Some might not like it. But I didn't like it- I loved it.
Rating: 5/5
Review: I really enjoyed this movie. This isn't an entirely faithful adaptation of the novel, so if you're looking for one, don't think of watching this. What I like about the plot is that we see Alice as a grownup, instead of the young girl she was when she first visited Underland. I also like that Alice is the opposite of Victorian women.
The acting is top notch. It's an excellent cast. Mia Wasikowska is great as Alice. I will say even though I found Alice's initial refusal to believe in Underland's existence annoying, it's realistic because she's not a child, but becoming a grown woman. Johnny Depp plays the Mad Hatter. I think he did a fantastic job. His loyalty to the White Queen and his attachment to Alice is fun to watch. What I like about this Mad Hatter is that he's mad (crazy) and sane at the same time. Anne Hathaway plays the White Queen and I think she played the part well. There's a sort of vulnerability that comes across Anne Hathaway and I think that empathy plays off with the White Queen. Helen Bonham Carter plays the Red Queen and I think she was also fantastic. I read in an interview she took inspiration from her toddler for the Red Queen and I can see it. The film is just so well cast and there's no weak player. I think with a movie like this, you can't have weak actors.
Tim Burton directed this, so there's that Tim Burton feel to it. The film has a dark and Gothic feel to it. And I like it because it's a different feel to a story that most people assume to be a happy story. So I like that we have a dark feel to the story. The setting of Underland is joyless for the most part. It's not a place where people are singing and dancing. And considering what's happening with the Red Queen, I found it realistic within the plot.
The film is a visual treat. Underland's setting is beautiful to see. The sets in the human world are well-constructed. Not only the sets, but the animated characters as well. The White Rabbit, the Dormouse, the Caterpillar, the Cheshire cat and the Jabberwocky are so well done.
The film's 3D is very good. What I like is that they don't go completely overboard with it. There are so many films that go overboard with their 3D and this one was just right.
Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is a unique, entertaining, magical. It's just a great movie that I think any movie watcher will enjoy. Some might not like it. But I didn't like it- I loved it.
Rating: 5/5
I Know Who Killed Me (2007)
Plot: A small town is shaken when Aubrey Fleming (Lindsay Lohan), a pianist and aspiring writer, is kidnapped by a sadistic killer. She's found on the side of the road, severally injured. Her distraught parents, Susan (Julia Ormond) and Daniel (Neal McDounough) are relieved she's been found. But everyone is shocked when she wakes up, claiming to be a stripper named Dakota Moss. Everyone is convinced Aubrey is suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. But she continues to insist that she isn't Aubrey. As Dakota tries to prove it, she uncovers shocking secrets that will shake everything up.
Review: I'm going to guess that the great majority of people who read this blog haven't heard of this movie. If you see it and you're thinking of watching it, I don't think you should bother. Unless you want to watch a bad movie, go for it.
When I first heard of this movie, I wanted to see it because of the plot bits I heard. I found the premise to be interesting and unique. But when I actually watched the film, I found that while the plot was slightly interesting, it's unbalanced and just bad.
The film's acting is... I honestly can't find the right word. I don't want to say decent because I honestly think that's too much praise. Just a little too much. But I'll use it anyway because I can't think of anything else. Lindsay Lohan is a good actress. I've seen it in some of her movies. In this one, she's fine but she doesn't shine like she should. But the script is such a mess that I don't blame the actors being decent at best. The only characters that I sympathized with were Dakota/Aubrey and the mother. I didn't like the father from the beginning and I found the cops and doctors to be completely unsympathetic of Aubrey/Dakota. They just figured they were right and that they shouldn't listen to her.
One aspect of the film that I will praise is the use of colors, red and blue. I think that was a clever use and was well done.
This is just a bad movie with a bad plot, decent acting and bad directing.
Rating: 1/5
Review: I'm going to guess that the great majority of people who read this blog haven't heard of this movie. If you see it and you're thinking of watching it, I don't think you should bother. Unless you want to watch a bad movie, go for it.
When I first heard of this movie, I wanted to see it because of the plot bits I heard. I found the premise to be interesting and unique. But when I actually watched the film, I found that while the plot was slightly interesting, it's unbalanced and just bad.
The film's acting is... I honestly can't find the right word. I don't want to say decent because I honestly think that's too much praise. Just a little too much. But I'll use it anyway because I can't think of anything else. Lindsay Lohan is a good actress. I've seen it in some of her movies. In this one, she's fine but she doesn't shine like she should. But the script is such a mess that I don't blame the actors being decent at best. The only characters that I sympathized with were Dakota/Aubrey and the mother. I didn't like the father from the beginning and I found the cops and doctors to be completely unsympathetic of Aubrey/Dakota. They just figured they were right and that they shouldn't listen to her.
One aspect of the film that I will praise is the use of colors, red and blue. I think that was a clever use and was well done.
This is just a bad movie with a bad plot, decent acting and bad directing.
Rating: 1/5
Spy Kids: All the Time in the World (2011)
Plot: Marissa (Jessica Alba) is an OSS agent who successfully captures Tick-Tock (Jeremy Piven) just before she retire so she doesn't put her stepchildren and newborn in danger. Rebecca and Cecil (Rowan Blanchard and Mason Cook) are twins and Marissa's stepchildren. Rebecca has no respect for Marissa and constantly plays pranks on her. When Earth is threatened by an organization run by someone known as the Timekeeper, Marissa is called back to the OSS. Meanwhile, Rebecca and Cecil learn of Marissa being an agent and decide to help. Will they save the day?
Review: I honestly smelled the disaster when I heard of this movie. When I heard that there were scratch and sniff cards being handed out in theaters, it made me laugh. First of all, the plot is very thin and predictable. I predicted almost every aspect of the movie. The film series theme of family is much more clear in this one than the third film, but it still didn't work for me. While the plot is somewhat original, it just fell flat and I found it boring.
The film's humor is horrible. Just horrible. The first three films didn't rely so much on toilet humor, but this film has so much toilet humor that it's ridiculous and not in a good way. I didn't laugh at all. I think they decided to try and find a way to make little kids laugh and they decided fart jokes would work.
As for the new spy kids, I didn't really like them. I didn't sympathize with Rebecca. I sympathized more with Cecil. I just found them slightly annoying. I really found most of the characters in the movie annoying.
The acting is decent at best. Jessica Alba is okay but she's not really great. Joel McHale plays Wilbur, the kids dad and he's okay as well. Rowan Blanchard and Mason Cook play Rebecca and Cecil. I thought they were decent. They didn't really surprise me, acting-wise, like Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara did. They don't really come off as strong actors, even though they're child actors. But Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara came off as good actors, and they are. These kids weren't just as good.
The scratch and sniff card they handed out in theaters was silly. It didn't even work. I think it was just a ploy to get more money. All of those numbers smelled the same. It would last for a few seconds and that's it.
The film's 3D was again fine. It just wasn't that good. After the disaster that the third Spy Kids movie that was released in 3D, I don't know why they decided to make another one in 3D.
The film's highlight for me was the appearance of Carmen (Alexa Vega) and Juni (Daryl Sabara). I'm disappointed that they weren't more involved in the plot and that they had to be saved by the new spy kids. I just didn't buy that. I think if they were more involved I might've liked the film a little more. But not much.
This is just a horrible, horrible movie with a thin plot, decent acting at best and not so good 3D.
Rating: 1/5
Review: I honestly smelled the disaster when I heard of this movie. When I heard that there were scratch and sniff cards being handed out in theaters, it made me laugh. First of all, the plot is very thin and predictable. I predicted almost every aspect of the movie. The film series theme of family is much more clear in this one than the third film, but it still didn't work for me. While the plot is somewhat original, it just fell flat and I found it boring.
The film's humor is horrible. Just horrible. The first three films didn't rely so much on toilet humor, but this film has so much toilet humor that it's ridiculous and not in a good way. I didn't laugh at all. I think they decided to try and find a way to make little kids laugh and they decided fart jokes would work.
As for the new spy kids, I didn't really like them. I didn't sympathize with Rebecca. I sympathized more with Cecil. I just found them slightly annoying. I really found most of the characters in the movie annoying.
The acting is decent at best. Jessica Alba is okay but she's not really great. Joel McHale plays Wilbur, the kids dad and he's okay as well. Rowan Blanchard and Mason Cook play Rebecca and Cecil. I thought they were decent. They didn't really surprise me, acting-wise, like Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara did. They don't really come off as strong actors, even though they're child actors. But Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara came off as good actors, and they are. These kids weren't just as good.
The scratch and sniff card they handed out in theaters was silly. It didn't even work. I think it was just a ploy to get more money. All of those numbers smelled the same. It would last for a few seconds and that's it.
The film's 3D was again fine. It just wasn't that good. After the disaster that the third Spy Kids movie that was released in 3D, I don't know why they decided to make another one in 3D.
The film's highlight for me was the appearance of Carmen (Alexa Vega) and Juni (Daryl Sabara). I'm disappointed that they weren't more involved in the plot and that they had to be saved by the new spy kids. I just didn't buy that. I think if they were more involved I might've liked the film a little more. But not much.
This is just a horrible, horrible movie with a thin plot, decent acting at best and not so good 3D.
Rating: 1/5
Spy Kids 3D: Game Over (2003)
Plot: Juni (Daryl Sabara) has not been working for the OSS. He's been informed that Carmen (Alexa Vega) is missing. He's told that she's been captured by the Toymaker, who was imprisoned in cyberspace by the OSS and created "Game Over", a virtual-based reality. Now, Juni must reach certain levels and accomplish certain tasks in order to save Carmen. Will he succeed?
Review: I honestly wasn't expecting much when I first saw this and I was right. I loved the first two movies, but this one just didn't work for me. First of all, I didn't like the plot. I found the plot to be thin and it wasn't as original compared to the first two. The theme of family, which is the theme in the Spy Kids films, was present in the first two and was clear throughout it. But in this film, the parents are mainly absent as well as Carmen. The Grandpa from the second movie is back, but it doesn't have the family feel like it did with the first two. The plot just fell flat and I really didn't care what happened and it was also repetitive and honestly felt like I was rewinding but I really wasn't.
I saw the film in 3D. Not in theaters, but on my own television. And the 3D was not good. It was just really bad. I can't find the words.
Visually, the film is good. The first three Spy Kids movies are visual feasts. But the first two had good plot and decent twists throughout it, while this one did not.
The acting is decent at best. Daryl Sabara is good as Juni, but I don't think he stood out as well as he did compared to the first two films. Decent is the same word I'd use to describe the film's supporting cast. I did like the appearance of characters featured in the first two. That was probably one of the main and only highlights for me.
Overall, this is a big disappointment to me. It's upsetting to give this film such a low rating considering how much I enjoyed the first two.
Rating: 1.5/5
Review: I honestly wasn't expecting much when I first saw this and I was right. I loved the first two movies, but this one just didn't work for me. First of all, I didn't like the plot. I found the plot to be thin and it wasn't as original compared to the first two. The theme of family, which is the theme in the Spy Kids films, was present in the first two and was clear throughout it. But in this film, the parents are mainly absent as well as Carmen. The Grandpa from the second movie is back, but it doesn't have the family feel like it did with the first two. The plot just fell flat and I really didn't care what happened and it was also repetitive and honestly felt like I was rewinding but I really wasn't.
I saw the film in 3D. Not in theaters, but on my own television. And the 3D was not good. It was just really bad. I can't find the words.
Visually, the film is good. The first three Spy Kids movies are visual feasts. But the first two had good plot and decent twists throughout it, while this one did not.
The acting is decent at best. Daryl Sabara is good as Juni, but I don't think he stood out as well as he did compared to the first two films. Decent is the same word I'd use to describe the film's supporting cast. I did like the appearance of characters featured in the first two. That was probably one of the main and only highlights for me.
Overall, this is a big disappointment to me. It's upsetting to give this film such a low rating considering how much I enjoyed the first two.
Rating: 1.5/5
Spy Kids 2: The Island of Lost Dreams (2002)
Plot: Carmen (Alexa Vega) and Juni (Daryl Sabara) have now become spies for the OSS's child section, but face competition with siblings Gary (Matt O'Leary) and Gerti (Emily Osment), the children of double-dealing agent Donnagon (Mike Judge), who Carmen and Juni helped rescue in the first movie. Donnagon hacks into the computer system and becomes president of the OSS. Gary later frames Juni for the Transmooker, a device that will shut off all electric devices and Juni is fired. Donnogan plans to steal the Transmooker so he can rule the world. Juni and Carmen follow the trail to a mysterious island, where they meet Romero (Steve Buscemi), a scientist who attempted to create genetically-miniaturized animals but the experiment went wrong and the animals became mutated. Will Carmen and Juni be able to stop Donnagon and his side kick, who is revealed later in the film?
Review: This is actually an impressive sequel. Usually with sequels, I get skeptical. But I was wrong about this one. It's very good and lives up to the hype of the first. It's almost just as good. The plot, like the first, felt fresh and original to me. I liked it.
As far as the introduction of Gary and Gerti, I also liked the history acknowledgment from the first film. I also like the rivalry between the spy kids. I predicted that Gary would turn out to be a bad guy and I was right, but it was still fun to see it unfold.
Like the first Spy Kids (2001), the movie is very visual. I liked the gadgets, I thought it was fun. Especially the bug that Juni has. What I found impressive were the mutated animals created by Romero. I think the special effects department did a good job.
The humor is this is good. A good chunk of it is toilet humor, but I didn't seem to mind it as much. It's good humor for the kids and maybe some for adults.
The acting is very good. Antonio Banderas and Carla Gugino are very good as the parents. I think Mike Judge plays a very good villain. Steve Bescemi is very good as the mad scientist Romero. I also like Mike O'Leary and Emily Osment as Gary and Gerti. Holland Taylor and Richardo Montalban play Carmen and Juni's grandparents. I think they make good new additions. Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara are even better as Carmen and Juni. Their acting had improved since the first, even though it had only been a year. I like Carmen's maturity and her growing as a character. The same goes for Juni, who I found greatly changed since the first. I will say that I think his strength and maturity was clear when he quit the OSS because of mistreatment. I like that he has a clear head of what is right and wrong.
This sequel is just as fun, entertaining and unique as the first. Rating wise, I'm giving it the same, only because it surprised me but I don't think it deserves the five-star rating.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is actually an impressive sequel. Usually with sequels, I get skeptical. But I was wrong about this one. It's very good and lives up to the hype of the first. It's almost just as good. The plot, like the first, felt fresh and original to me. I liked it.
As far as the introduction of Gary and Gerti, I also liked the history acknowledgment from the first film. I also like the rivalry between the spy kids. I predicted that Gary would turn out to be a bad guy and I was right, but it was still fun to see it unfold.
Like the first Spy Kids (2001), the movie is very visual. I liked the gadgets, I thought it was fun. Especially the bug that Juni has. What I found impressive were the mutated animals created by Romero. I think the special effects department did a good job.
The humor is this is good. A good chunk of it is toilet humor, but I didn't seem to mind it as much. It's good humor for the kids and maybe some for adults.
The acting is very good. Antonio Banderas and Carla Gugino are very good as the parents. I think Mike Judge plays a very good villain. Steve Bescemi is very good as the mad scientist Romero. I also like Mike O'Leary and Emily Osment as Gary and Gerti. Holland Taylor and Richardo Montalban play Carmen and Juni's grandparents. I think they make good new additions. Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara are even better as Carmen and Juni. Their acting had improved since the first, even though it had only been a year. I like Carmen's maturity and her growing as a character. The same goes for Juni, who I found greatly changed since the first. I will say that I think his strength and maturity was clear when he quit the OSS because of mistreatment. I like that he has a clear head of what is right and wrong.
This sequel is just as fun, entertaining and unique as the first. Rating wise, I'm giving it the same, only because it surprised me but I don't think it deserves the five-star rating.
Rating: 4/5
Spy Kids (2001)
Plot: Carmen (Alexa Vega) and her brother Juni (Daryl Sabara) think their parents, Ingrid (Carla Gugino) and Gregorio (Antonio Banderas) are boring. What they don't know is that their parents are international retired spies of the OSS (Organization of Super Spies). Their parents decide to go on a mission but get kidnapped by Floop (Alan Cumming), the star of a TV show watched by Juni. Carmen and Juni must now save their parents and stop an even bigger evil plot.
Review: This is a great movie. Not just for kids, but older people too. The plot itself is very kid-orientated, which makes sense because the movie is being carried out by Carmen and Juni. What I love about the plot is that it's very original. For a spy movie, you'd expect the same cliche plot. But I found the movie's plot to be original, unique and fun. The gadgets, the villains and everything felt fresh to me.
The film has a good balance of comedy, which kids and adults will find funny. What I like about the humor is that it doesn't feel like they're trying too hard and going over the top, which I like. I find that there are too many movies, especially kids movies, that try too hard with the humor, and this one doesn't.
The acting is very good here. Antonio Banderas and Carla Gugino are very good as Gregorio and Ingrid and I find them to be a believable couple. Alan Cumming is also good as a comedic, misunderstood "villain". The supporting cast that consist of actors such as Teri Hatcher (as Ms. Gradenko), Danny Trejo (as Machete, Gregorio's estranged brother) and Tony Shalhoub (as Minion) are very good. But the real stars of the movie are Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara. This movie is what made them famous. Alexa Vega does a good job of portraying Carmen's frustrations, intelligence, strength and determination and acting as the older sibling that must take charge. Daryl Sabara is also very good as Juni and capturing his insecurities, loneliness and maturity as a strong and intelligent spy. The film is very well-cast and I didn't a major weak actor.
Visually, the film is great. Floop's castle, the Cortez home and all locations are great. It's a very colorful film and it's not one of those movies that I felt went over the top. It seems to be going over the top, but it doesn't. It holds a nice balance.
The theme in the film is family and I like that it recurs throughout the entire film and shows itself in the plot and characters clearly. There are some movies that you have to trench to get the theme, but the theme in Spy Kids for me, was pretty obvious.
This is an entertaining, original, funny and unique film that the entire family will enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is a great movie. Not just for kids, but older people too. The plot itself is very kid-orientated, which makes sense because the movie is being carried out by Carmen and Juni. What I love about the plot is that it's very original. For a spy movie, you'd expect the same cliche plot. But I found the movie's plot to be original, unique and fun. The gadgets, the villains and everything felt fresh to me.
The film has a good balance of comedy, which kids and adults will find funny. What I like about the humor is that it doesn't feel like they're trying too hard and going over the top, which I like. I find that there are too many movies, especially kids movies, that try too hard with the humor, and this one doesn't.
The acting is very good here. Antonio Banderas and Carla Gugino are very good as Gregorio and Ingrid and I find them to be a believable couple. Alan Cumming is also good as a comedic, misunderstood "villain". The supporting cast that consist of actors such as Teri Hatcher (as Ms. Gradenko), Danny Trejo (as Machete, Gregorio's estranged brother) and Tony Shalhoub (as Minion) are very good. But the real stars of the movie are Alexa Vega and Daryl Sabara. This movie is what made them famous. Alexa Vega does a good job of portraying Carmen's frustrations, intelligence, strength and determination and acting as the older sibling that must take charge. Daryl Sabara is also very good as Juni and capturing his insecurities, loneliness and maturity as a strong and intelligent spy. The film is very well-cast and I didn't a major weak actor.
Visually, the film is great. Floop's castle, the Cortez home and all locations are great. It's a very colorful film and it's not one of those movies that I felt went over the top. It seems to be going over the top, but it doesn't. It holds a nice balance.
The theme in the film is family and I like that it recurs throughout the entire film and shows itself in the plot and characters clearly. There are some movies that you have to trench to get the theme, but the theme in Spy Kids for me, was pretty obvious.
This is an entertaining, original, funny and unique film that the entire family will enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Monday 26 December 2011
WALL-E (2008)
Plot: The film is set in 2805. The Earth is completely polluted and has been abandoned by humans, who now live in space. WALL-E robots were created in order to clean up the Earth and restore the ecosystem. Only one WALL-E remains. 700 years now, WALL-E has become sentience, displaying curiosity of human artifacts that he collects. One day, WALL-E discovers a seeding plant among the trash and takes it with him. Later, a spaceship lands and deploys EVE, a robot sent to find signs of vegetation on Earth. WALL-E falls in love with EVE, who is initially cold and distant, but warms up to WALL-E and befriends him. When WALL-E shows her the plant, she automatically stores it and goes in standby mode. The ship comes back to collect her and WALL-E clings onto the ship, following EVE. As he follows her in space, his destiny and the destiny of humanity is changed.
Review: Another brilliant film from Pixar. Firstly, the plot is genius. The reason I say it's genius is because Pixar is showing audiences, particularly the children seeing this film, the possible future consequences if we don't help restore the environment. Although it is slightly far fetched, we can't deny that we need to help out the planet and I like that this film shows to kids we need to do something without scaring them into it. We see so many films about global warming, pollution and the environment and my personal feeling is that those films try to scare us. They work, but I also think it's important to show a film about these subjects in a more sensitive matter and WALL-E achieves that.
There is very little dialogue in the film's beginning. It's more of sounds between WALL-E and EVE. There are words, but very little full on sentences. I will say that Pixar is able to keep us entertained and that's a sign to good writing if you can keep an audience entertained when there's very little initial dialogue.
Although the film approaches serious subjects, the film is also very humorous. WALL-E is simply adorable and his curiosity leads to so many funny situations. Just as the film is funny, it's also very serious and I appreciate that Pixar is taking this kind of film seriously. Because they could have easily just had fun with this, but they took it seriously and we should appreciate that.
This is probably Pixar's most romantic film ever. It's funny to say that because the film centers on two robots but the film is very sweet in those tender moments between WALL-E and EVE. It's the looks they give each other and the tone in the scenes they share.
The film is visually amazing. Not only WALL-E and EVE themselves, but also Earth itself in the future. It is scary to think that it could happen in the future, but we never know. Environmental issues continue to rise and worsen in certain cases. It's the small details that make it that much more incredible.
WALL-E is an amazing, heartwarming, touching and funny film that's one of the more important films for kids to see because they could actually learn something after seeing this.
Rating: 5/5
Review: Another brilliant film from Pixar. Firstly, the plot is genius. The reason I say it's genius is because Pixar is showing audiences, particularly the children seeing this film, the possible future consequences if we don't help restore the environment. Although it is slightly far fetched, we can't deny that we need to help out the planet and I like that this film shows to kids we need to do something without scaring them into it. We see so many films about global warming, pollution and the environment and my personal feeling is that those films try to scare us. They work, but I also think it's important to show a film about these subjects in a more sensitive matter and WALL-E achieves that.
There is very little dialogue in the film's beginning. It's more of sounds between WALL-E and EVE. There are words, but very little full on sentences. I will say that Pixar is able to keep us entertained and that's a sign to good writing if you can keep an audience entertained when there's very little initial dialogue.
Although the film approaches serious subjects, the film is also very humorous. WALL-E is simply adorable and his curiosity leads to so many funny situations. Just as the film is funny, it's also very serious and I appreciate that Pixar is taking this kind of film seriously. Because they could have easily just had fun with this, but they took it seriously and we should appreciate that.
This is probably Pixar's most romantic film ever. It's funny to say that because the film centers on two robots but the film is very sweet in those tender moments between WALL-E and EVE. It's the looks they give each other and the tone in the scenes they share.
The film is visually amazing. Not only WALL-E and EVE themselves, but also Earth itself in the future. It is scary to think that it could happen in the future, but we never know. Environmental issues continue to rise and worsen in certain cases. It's the small details that make it that much more incredible.
WALL-E is an amazing, heartwarming, touching and funny film that's one of the more important films for kids to see because they could actually learn something after seeing this.
Rating: 5/5
The Adventures of Milo and Otis (1986)
Plot: Milo is a kitten who has a habit of getting himself in trouble. He finds a pug puppy named Otis and they become friends. One day, Milo is playing inside a floating box in a river and he accidentally drifts downstream. Otis goes after Milo. Milo goes on many adventures, escaping every one. He encounters no fewer than three bears; escapes from the desolate, raven-infested Deadwood Swamp; steals a muskrat from a vulpine cache; follows a train-track to the home of a female deer, who shelters him; sleeps in an Owl's "dreaming nest"; stays for a while with a sow pig and her piglets; catches a fish, only to have it stolen by a raccoon; is mobbed by seagulls; and evades first the third bear, then a snake, only to fall into a hole. Otis, for his part, follows Milo throughout, usually only an hour behind and less than a mile out of range. Finally, the two catch up with one another while Milo is in the hole. Otis pulls him out by means of a rope. Milo and Otis are reunited, and soon find mates of their own: Joyce, a cat, for Milo; and Sondra, a pug, for Otis. After this, they separate and raise puppies and kittens. They help each other's families to survive the harsh winter and find their way back together through the forest to their barn, living together.
Review: I like this movie. It's very cute. There's really no big plot to follow. You just watch it and enjoy it. The animals in this film don't talk to one another; a narrator narrating the film talks their dialogue. It almost feels as if the narrator is reading a book and we're watching what happens.
The animals in this are very cute and this took several years to finish and the film only runs for approximately 75 minutes or so.
Visually, the film is beautiful. The shots of the country, farm and wilderness and everything is just incredible.
Some people might find this film boring because there's no dialogue between actors. It's just animals doing what they do and someone is narrating them. I think that this is a good movie for the family, it's very cute ad heartwarming and a visual feast for any movie goer.
Rating: 4/5
Review: I like this movie. It's very cute. There's really no big plot to follow. You just watch it and enjoy it. The animals in this film don't talk to one another; a narrator narrating the film talks their dialogue. It almost feels as if the narrator is reading a book and we're watching what happens.
The animals in this are very cute and this took several years to finish and the film only runs for approximately 75 minutes or so.
Visually, the film is beautiful. The shots of the country, farm and wilderness and everything is just incredible.
Some people might find this film boring because there's no dialogue between actors. It's just animals doing what they do and someone is narrating them. I think that this is a good movie for the family, it's very cute ad heartwarming and a visual feast for any movie goer.
Rating: 4/5
Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey (1993)
Plot: Chance is an American bulldog, Shadow is a Golden Retriever and Sassy is a Himalayan cat are the pets of a loving family. The family goes on a trip to San Francisco and leave the pets with a family friend. Feeling that they've been abandoned and with Shadow worrying about the young son Peter, they decide to go find them. The animals go on a wild and sometimes dangerous journey to go back home. Will they succeed?
Review: This is a great family movie. This is a film adaptation of the 1963 novel. What I like about the plot is that it really shows us the perspective of what the animals are feeling, which I like. This is a Disney movie, so of course the animals talk telepathically and the animals don't talk in the book.
The film has a good balance of humor and drama. The humor is appealing to kids but might also appeal to adults.
Some kids might find the movie slightly scary or intense during certain scenes where the pets are in the wilderness. But there's nothing seriously dramatic and I would think that most kids would be fine, but some might not.
This is simply a touching, entertaining and heartwarming story and film for the entire family.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is a great family movie. This is a film adaptation of the 1963 novel. What I like about the plot is that it really shows us the perspective of what the animals are feeling, which I like. This is a Disney movie, so of course the animals talk telepathically and the animals don't talk in the book.
The film has a good balance of humor and drama. The humor is appealing to kids but might also appeal to adults.
Some kids might find the movie slightly scary or intense during certain scenes where the pets are in the wilderness. But there's nothing seriously dramatic and I would think that most kids would be fine, but some might not.
This is simply a touching, entertaining and heartwarming story and film for the entire family.
Rating: 4/5
My Girl (1991)
Plot: Set in 1972, Vada (Anna Chlumsky) is an 11-year-old tomboy and hypochondriac. Her mother died during childbirth, her father Harry (Dan Aykroyd) is an awkward widower who doesn't understand his daughter and ignores her. He's a funeral director and their home is used as a funeral parlor, leading to Vada's obsession with death. She believes she killed her mother because her mother died giving birth to her. Vada is frequently teased because her best friend Thomas J. (Macaulay Culkin) is unpopular and a boy. Her father hires Shelley (Jamie Lee Curtis) to be a makeup artist for the funeral parlor. Throughout the summer, Vada is introduced to the world of adolescence. But things soon start falling apart. Harry and Shelley start dating and become engaged. Mr. Bixler (Griffin Dunne), a teacher that Vada has a big crush on, becomes engaged to someone else. Thomas J. dies from an allergic reaction to a bee sting. Vada's grief and pain eventually mends her relationship with her father and things start looking up again despite the tragedy.
Review: I loved this movie. Firstly, what I like about the plot is that it's direct. This is a coming-of-age film that deals with the issues of adolescence like your first kiss, your first period, death, troubled relationships between parent and child. I like that the film is direct and that they don't sugarcoat it. They deal with it directly and I think that makes it more realistic, which I appreciate.
The acting is great. Dan Aykroyd is very good as Harry, a father who simply doesn't know what to do. He doesn't know what to do with his daughter and his life. Jamie Lee Curtis is also very good as Shelley, who is the voice of reason in the film, especially towards the end (or at least I think so). I also thought Macaulay Culkin to be very convincing as Thomas J. But the real star of the movie is Anna Chlumsky. She's great as the lead. She was only eleven when this film was released and she carries this film on her shoulders and she does a great job. She has good comic timing and is able to play the drama very convincingly, especially when Thomas J. dies. Her grief and outburst at the funeral will make you tear up and pull at your heart.
I honestly believe this is one of the better coming-of-age films I've seen. Coming-of-age films try to sugarcoat certain subjects like those explored in My Girl and this one doesn't. A great plot and great acting make this a film to watch and enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Review: I loved this movie. Firstly, what I like about the plot is that it's direct. This is a coming-of-age film that deals with the issues of adolescence like your first kiss, your first period, death, troubled relationships between parent and child. I like that the film is direct and that they don't sugarcoat it. They deal with it directly and I think that makes it more realistic, which I appreciate.
The acting is great. Dan Aykroyd is very good as Harry, a father who simply doesn't know what to do. He doesn't know what to do with his daughter and his life. Jamie Lee Curtis is also very good as Shelley, who is the voice of reason in the film, especially towards the end (or at least I think so). I also thought Macaulay Culkin to be very convincing as Thomas J. But the real star of the movie is Anna Chlumsky. She's great as the lead. She was only eleven when this film was released and she carries this film on her shoulders and she does a great job. She has good comic timing and is able to play the drama very convincingly, especially when Thomas J. dies. Her grief and outburst at the funeral will make you tear up and pull at your heart.
I honestly believe this is one of the better coming-of-age films I've seen. Coming-of-age films try to sugarcoat certain subjects like those explored in My Girl and this one doesn't. A great plot and great acting make this a film to watch and enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed (2004)
Plot: Coolsville is opening a museum honoring Mystery Inc. and the criminals they've caught. The opening night, a statue comes to life and a Masked Figure threatens Mystery Inc. The monsters that Mystery Inc. once captured have now come to life because of the Masked Figure's scientific machine. Freddie (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby must stop him.
Review: When I heard they made a sequel to Scooby-Doo (2002), I was skeptical because I didn't enjoy the first one as much as I'd hoped to. But I will say that I enjoyed this one a little more than the first. For one, the plot I like because it's a homage to the series and I like the nod to history of the monsters that are used in the movie. Any Scooby-Doo watcher will recognize the monsters that are used in the film.
The film is trying to balance out numerous back stories and villains and I think they do a decent job with it, but it felt a little unbalanced.
Like the other film, the humor is aimed to younger kids. There's a good majority of toilet and physical humor that's made to make younger kids laugh.
Another aspect of the plot that I liked is Shaggy and Scooby's plot and them wondering where they fit in the group and trying their best to be better detectives. I found that to be realistic.
The acting is decent. I thought it was fine. Nothing over the top special. I will say that they have a good cast and I again think that because the script isn't that strong, it doesn't help them as actors altogether.
I did like this a little better than the first. The humor is more endurable and I really like the plot. Younger kids will be entertained for sure and I think it's a good movie for the family.
Rating: 3.5/5
Review: When I heard they made a sequel to Scooby-Doo (2002), I was skeptical because I didn't enjoy the first one as much as I'd hoped to. But I will say that I enjoyed this one a little more than the first. For one, the plot I like because it's a homage to the series and I like the nod to history of the monsters that are used in the movie. Any Scooby-Doo watcher will recognize the monsters that are used in the film.
The film is trying to balance out numerous back stories and villains and I think they do a decent job with it, but it felt a little unbalanced.
Like the other film, the humor is aimed to younger kids. There's a good majority of toilet and physical humor that's made to make younger kids laugh.
Another aspect of the plot that I liked is Shaggy and Scooby's plot and them wondering where they fit in the group and trying their best to be better detectives. I found that to be realistic.
The acting is decent. I thought it was fine. Nothing over the top special. I will say that they have a good cast and I again think that because the script isn't that strong, it doesn't help them as actors altogether.
I did like this a little better than the first. The humor is more endurable and I really like the plot. Younger kids will be entertained for sure and I think it's a good movie for the family.
Rating: 3.5/5
Scooby-Doo (2002)
Plot: Freddie (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby disband as Mystery Inc. Two years later, the group is invited to Spooky Island, a remote amusement park. They're sought out by the owner Emile Mondavarious (Rowan Atinkson). The gang discovers that demons inhabit the island and kidnap tourists and "possess" their bodies. But a bigger conspiracy is revealed. Will the gang be able to save the day?
Review: I loved the Scooby-Doo cartoons when I was younger. So when this first came out in 2002, I was really thrilled to see it. After I saw it for the first time, I remember liking it, but I felt like it didn't live up to my expectations (or my 10-year-old expectations). The film's plot is very much a long Scooby-Doo episode, but I did like the twist that the monsters are real. They've been doing that a lot in recent Scooby-Doo films.
The film's humor is very much oriented for kids because it's mainly fart jokes and toilet humor. There are some jokes for the older crowd, but the film largely consists of toilet humor.
The acting is decent at best. The script isn't that strong so the actors don't have much to go with anyway so I think the acting reflected that.
As for the film's CGI, this was in 2002 and special effects have evolved since. It's alright. I mean, it's not Avatar, it's a kids movie. The demons are creepy looking and I'm sure that younger kids will find them scary looking.
I honestly believe the film would've worked better if the film was animated instead of live-action. When a classic cartoon like that is made into a live-action movie, it's risky and it has to work to live up to fans expectations. And for me, it was decent, but I think the film would've worked better animated.
This is a decent film that might please Scooby-Doo fans and younger kids.
Rating: 3/5
Review: I loved the Scooby-Doo cartoons when I was younger. So when this first came out in 2002, I was really thrilled to see it. After I saw it for the first time, I remember liking it, but I felt like it didn't live up to my expectations (or my 10-year-old expectations). The film's plot is very much a long Scooby-Doo episode, but I did like the twist that the monsters are real. They've been doing that a lot in recent Scooby-Doo films.
The film's humor is very much oriented for kids because it's mainly fart jokes and toilet humor. There are some jokes for the older crowd, but the film largely consists of toilet humor.
The acting is decent at best. The script isn't that strong so the actors don't have much to go with anyway so I think the acting reflected that.
As for the film's CGI, this was in 2002 and special effects have evolved since. It's alright. I mean, it's not Avatar, it's a kids movie. The demons are creepy looking and I'm sure that younger kids will find them scary looking.
I honestly believe the film would've worked better if the film was animated instead of live-action. When a classic cartoon like that is made into a live-action movie, it's risky and it has to work to live up to fans expectations. And for me, it was decent, but I think the film would've worked better animated.
This is a decent film that might please Scooby-Doo fans and younger kids.
Rating: 3/5
Up (2009)
Plot: Carl is an elderly man who admired explorer Charles F. Muntz as a young boy. When he's young, he meets a tomboy named Ellie, who wants to move her "clubhouse" to Paradise Falls. Carl promises to help her. They eventually marry and grow old together. They then start to save money for their trip when they learn they're unable to have children, but life's needs get in the way. As they get older, Carl eventually gets the money for the trip but Ellie sadly becomes ill and dies. Carl still lives in their house, which is surrounded by construction because he refuses to move. When he injures a worker when he damages his mailbox, he's ordered by the court to move into a retirement home. On the day he's suppose to leave his house, he makes his house into an aircraft by having a thousand balloons attached to his house. Midflight, he realizes a young Wilderness Explorer named Russell, who has been trying to help Carl to get a badge, is on his porch. They reach South America, where chaos ensues.
Review: I honestly believe that Pixar can do no wrong. The plot is very Pixar-like. What I really like about the plot is that it isn't someone who is magical or super, it's just a normal person. This is a movie about life and what becomes of our lives later in life. We have the balance of young and old with Carl and Russell and it gives us a great vibe.
The plot and the film itself are much more dramatic compared to other Pixar films that I've seen. Most Pixar films have their dramatic moments, but approximately the first hour of the film is very sad and I'm sure that younger kids will not like it. But the film is also comical and has good funny moments that will appeal to both adults and kids. That's what I like about Pixar films- that their humor is able to appeal to both kids and adults.
I've heard some people say that this is Pixar's most boring film. I can understand where they're coming from. Pixar films I've seen are funny and there's always something going on. In this, for the greater majority, they're in a floating house. But to able to make that work shows how creative and smart Pixar is.
This might not be Pixar's most exciting film compared to films like Monsters Inc. (2001) and Finding Nemo (2003), but it's still a heartfelt, touching, heartwarming and funny film that's without a doubt one of Pixar's best.
Rating: 4.5/5
Review: I honestly believe that Pixar can do no wrong. The plot is very Pixar-like. What I really like about the plot is that it isn't someone who is magical or super, it's just a normal person. This is a movie about life and what becomes of our lives later in life. We have the balance of young and old with Carl and Russell and it gives us a great vibe.
The plot and the film itself are much more dramatic compared to other Pixar films that I've seen. Most Pixar films have their dramatic moments, but approximately the first hour of the film is very sad and I'm sure that younger kids will not like it. But the film is also comical and has good funny moments that will appeal to both adults and kids. That's what I like about Pixar films- that their humor is able to appeal to both kids and adults.
I've heard some people say that this is Pixar's most boring film. I can understand where they're coming from. Pixar films I've seen are funny and there's always something going on. In this, for the greater majority, they're in a floating house. But to able to make that work shows how creative and smart Pixar is.
This might not be Pixar's most exciting film compared to films like Monsters Inc. (2001) and Finding Nemo (2003), but it's still a heartfelt, touching, heartwarming and funny film that's without a doubt one of Pixar's best.
Rating: 4.5/5
Tuesday 13 December 2011
The Social Network (2010)
Plot: This film portrays the founding of the social networking website Facebook. The film focuses on two lawsuits filed against Mark Zuckerbeg (Jesse Eisenberg) and Facebook. One is filed by twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss (Armie Hammer), who claim Mark stole their idea. The other is filed by Eduardo (Andrew Garfield), who claims that his shares of Facebook were diluted when the company was incoporated. Told through numerous flashbacks and going back and forth between flashbacks and the two separate lawsuits, we learn about the creation of Facebook, which changed the entire world.
Review: I liked this movie. I did. First of all, what I love about the film's plot is that we learn that how Facebook was founded. The details are actually pretty sordid. It's interesting to see how Facebook came to be and the damage that it did to some people involved.
Mark Zuckerberg, who co-created Facebook and is chief executive and president of the company, didn't like the film. He says a lot of it is fictional. And I can understand why he'd say that. Because he isn't sympathetic at all in the film. In fact, I hated him in the film. It's very unusual to say that you hate a character who's being sued and that you prefer the characters that are suing him. I didn't find him sympathetic. Mark Zuckerberg's a genius there's no denying that. He changed the world. But the great majority of the characters in the film I didn't find sympathetic. I found most of them very cocky, arrogant and self-absorbed. The only character I sympathized with is Eduardo, who was screwed over in my opinion. I did have some sympathy for the twins Tyler and Cameron, but not that much.
The acting is top notch. There's no weak link in the cast. Jesse Eisenberg is very good as Mark. I didn't like Mark, I found him unsympathetic but Jesse did an amazing job. Andrew Garfield is also great as Eduardo. Armie Hammer is fantastic as the twins. You honestly wouldn't guess that only one actor is playing both parts so convincingly. Justin Timberlake has a supporting role as the founding president of Facebook and he's also very good.
David Fincher directed this and he did a great job. The entire technical of the film is very well done and the screenplay, adapted from a novel, was also well written.
When I first heard about The Social Network I was looking forward to seeing it. When I heard all the great things about it, I was really looking forward to it. But when I saw it, I felt a little let down. Like it didn't live up to the hype I was expecting. It was a good movie and well done, but it didn't blow me away like I'd expected.
This was one of the most nominated films at the Oscars in 2011 and I was honestly surprised. I felt there were some awards that they shouldn't have been nominated in. I also feel that Armie Hammer should have been nominated for an Oscar for his performance because he was outstanding.
Overall, this is an interesting and fascinating film about the social networking site that changed the world. If the change was for the better or the worse, we've yet to see.
Rating: 4/5
Review: I liked this movie. I did. First of all, what I love about the film's plot is that we learn that how Facebook was founded. The details are actually pretty sordid. It's interesting to see how Facebook came to be and the damage that it did to some people involved.
Mark Zuckerberg, who co-created Facebook and is chief executive and president of the company, didn't like the film. He says a lot of it is fictional. And I can understand why he'd say that. Because he isn't sympathetic at all in the film. In fact, I hated him in the film. It's very unusual to say that you hate a character who's being sued and that you prefer the characters that are suing him. I didn't find him sympathetic. Mark Zuckerberg's a genius there's no denying that. He changed the world. But the great majority of the characters in the film I didn't find sympathetic. I found most of them very cocky, arrogant and self-absorbed. The only character I sympathized with is Eduardo, who was screwed over in my opinion. I did have some sympathy for the twins Tyler and Cameron, but not that much.
The acting is top notch. There's no weak link in the cast. Jesse Eisenberg is very good as Mark. I didn't like Mark, I found him unsympathetic but Jesse did an amazing job. Andrew Garfield is also great as Eduardo. Armie Hammer is fantastic as the twins. You honestly wouldn't guess that only one actor is playing both parts so convincingly. Justin Timberlake has a supporting role as the founding president of Facebook and he's also very good.
David Fincher directed this and he did a great job. The entire technical of the film is very well done and the screenplay, adapted from a novel, was also well written.
When I first heard about The Social Network I was looking forward to seeing it. When I heard all the great things about it, I was really looking forward to it. But when I saw it, I felt a little let down. Like it didn't live up to the hype I was expecting. It was a good movie and well done, but it didn't blow me away like I'd expected.
This was one of the most nominated films at the Oscars in 2011 and I was honestly surprised. I felt there were some awards that they shouldn't have been nominated in. I also feel that Armie Hammer should have been nominated for an Oscar for his performance because he was outstanding.
Overall, this is an interesting and fascinating film about the social networking site that changed the world. If the change was for the better or the worse, we've yet to see.
Rating: 4/5
Monday 12 December 2011
Shrek the Halls (2007)
Plot: Shrek tries to make Christmas for Fiona and the triplets. But not knowing what Christmas is all about, Shrek buys a book to help him. But Shrek's plans for a quiet Christmas are ruined when Donkey brings the entire "family" to the swamp. As things go off his plan, will Shrek be able to have his perfect Christmas?
Review: This is a twenty-minute special that airs during Christmas season. I like it. It's funny and entertaining. I like the idea that Shrek having no idea what Christmas is and trying to make it perfect, according to plan. The tellings of the The Night Before Christmas from various characters make good entertainment. I especially liked Shrek's version towards the end.
Like all the other Shrek movies, the voice actors are very good and funny in their roles.
There are also some good heartfelt family moments occurring with the characters about the meaning of Christmas, family and more.
This is a twenty-minute special so I don't know how much more I can elaborate on it. But it's simply funny and touching Christmas entertainment for the family that can be added to a list of Christmas specials they have to see during Christmas season.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is a twenty-minute special that airs during Christmas season. I like it. It's funny and entertaining. I like the idea that Shrek having no idea what Christmas is and trying to make it perfect, according to plan. The tellings of the The Night Before Christmas from various characters make good entertainment. I especially liked Shrek's version towards the end.
Like all the other Shrek movies, the voice actors are very good and funny in their roles.
There are also some good heartfelt family moments occurring with the characters about the meaning of Christmas, family and more.
This is a twenty-minute special so I don't know how much more I can elaborate on it. But it's simply funny and touching Christmas entertainment for the family that can be added to a list of Christmas specials they have to see during Christmas season.
Rating: 4/5
The Santa Clause (1994)
Plot: Scott (Tim Allen) is a divorced father and works for a toy company. On Christmas Eve, Scott's son, Charlie (Eric Lloyd) comes to spend the night before going back to his mom and stepfather's for Christmas. Scott tries to convince Charlie in Santa's existence, despite not believing in him himself. That same night, they're woken up by a clattering on the roof. Scott goes outside to investigate and sees someone on the roof. He yells and the person loses their balance and falls off. It appears to be Santa Claus. Santa disappears, but the suit is still there. Scott and Charlie find a business card saying if something happens to him to put on the suit and that the reindeer will know what to do. They see eight reindeer and a sleigh on the roof. Scott puts on the suit to please Charlie and they deliver the presents. They get to the North Pole, where the head elf Bernard (David Krumholtz) reveals to Scott that once he put on the suit, he accepted all the responsibilities of being Santa and he has until Thanksgiving before he becomes Santa full time. Scott soon begins turning into Santa Claus, which concerns his ex-wife and her new husband about Charlie's safety. While delivering gifts, Scott is arrested and accused of kidnapping Charlie. Elves help Scott escape from jail. In the end, Scott must go to the North Pole, but Charlie is given a snow globe that allows him to visit his dad anytime.
Review: This is a great Christmas movie. It's just great. I really like the premise of the plot and how there isn't just one Santa Claus and that you become Santa by putting on the suit. It's a different take and I like it. I also like that we have a different view of the North Pole instead of what we would expect. It has a unique and different look to it that makes it more modern.
The acting is very good. I like Tim Allen and I think he's very good in this. He has good comedic timing. Eric Lloyd is good as Charlie, the son. David Krumholtz is very funny as the head elf Bernard. Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson play Neil and Laura, Charlie's stepfather and mother respectively and I liked them and I thought they did a fine job. They play the typical cliche role of the parents who don't believe whatever the kid says but I still liked them.
The film is actually really funny, which surprises me whenever I watch it. When you're older, there a lot of jokes that you wouldn't get when you're a kid. You realize that with a lot of family movies that you watch when you're older. There's a good blend of humor and drama and they mesh very well.
This is a funny, touching and entertaining movie for the entire family during the holiday seasons.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is a great Christmas movie. It's just great. I really like the premise of the plot and how there isn't just one Santa Claus and that you become Santa by putting on the suit. It's a different take and I like it. I also like that we have a different view of the North Pole instead of what we would expect. It has a unique and different look to it that makes it more modern.
The acting is very good. I like Tim Allen and I think he's very good in this. He has good comedic timing. Eric Lloyd is good as Charlie, the son. David Krumholtz is very funny as the head elf Bernard. Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson play Neil and Laura, Charlie's stepfather and mother respectively and I liked them and I thought they did a fine job. They play the typical cliche role of the parents who don't believe whatever the kid says but I still liked them.
The film is actually really funny, which surprises me whenever I watch it. When you're older, there a lot of jokes that you wouldn't get when you're a kid. You realize that with a lot of family movies that you watch when you're older. There's a good blend of humor and drama and they mesh very well.
This is a funny, touching and entertaining movie for the entire family during the holiday seasons.
Rating: 4/5
A Miracle on 34th Street (1994)
Plot: A man (Richard Attenborough) is hired to be the new Santa at Cole's after the old one is fired. He claims his name to be Kris Kringle. He then becomes very popular amongst children, who believe he's the real Santa Claus. Except for six-year-old Susan (Mara Wilson), the daughter of Dorey (Elizabeth Perkins), a Cole's employee. Bryan (Dylan McDermott), Dorey's boyfriend, tries to get Susan to believe. Susan tells Kris if she got her Christmas wish, she would believe in Santa. Kris is later arrested and sanctioned for assaulting a man. With the help of her boyfriend, Dorey takes Kris' case to court. Bryan realizes in order to free Kris, he must prove Santa Claus is real. Will he be able to succeed? And will Susan get her Christmas wish?
Review: This is one of my favorite Christmas movies. This is a remake of the 1947 film, which I have yet to see. So I cannot compare the original and the remake. I'm viewing this as an entirely separate film. What I love about the plot is that it brings us to whether or not we have the right to believe in Santa Claus, no matter how old are. There is a slight connection between believing in God and believing in Santa Claus, which I know some people might find offensive. I also know that some might not want their younger kids to watch this because it will tell them that Santa doesn't exist. But what I think this film does is that it gives children assurance that they have the right to believe in Santa and they have the right to not believe. So it can work both ways. Either way, I don't think you should deprive children of movies that will give them the idea that Santa doesn't exist.
The acting is very good. Richard Attenborough is fantastic as Kris Kringle. Elizabeth Perkins and Dylan McDermott are also very good. Mara Wilson is very cute in this film and holds herself very well with her adult co-stars.
This is an entertaining, heartwarming and touching movie that the entire family will enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is one of my favorite Christmas movies. This is a remake of the 1947 film, which I have yet to see. So I cannot compare the original and the remake. I'm viewing this as an entirely separate film. What I love about the plot is that it brings us to whether or not we have the right to believe in Santa Claus, no matter how old are. There is a slight connection between believing in God and believing in Santa Claus, which I know some people might find offensive. I also know that some might not want their younger kids to watch this because it will tell them that Santa doesn't exist. But what I think this film does is that it gives children assurance that they have the right to believe in Santa and they have the right to not believe. So it can work both ways. Either way, I don't think you should deprive children of movies that will give them the idea that Santa doesn't exist.
The acting is very good. Richard Attenborough is fantastic as Kris Kringle. Elizabeth Perkins and Dylan McDermott are also very good. Mara Wilson is very cute in this film and holds herself very well with her adult co-stars.
This is an entertaining, heartwarming and touching movie that the entire family will enjoy.
Rating: 4/5
Elf (2004)
Plot: Buddy (Will Ferrell) was raised by elves. Buddy doesn't know that he's human until he's a grown adult compared to the small elves. Santa informs Buddy his father doesn't know of his existence and that he lives in New York and is on the naughty list. Nonetheless, Buddy goes to New York to find his father. He meets his father, Walter (James Caan) at the Empire State Building. When he goes into a toy store and mistaken for an employee, he meets Jovie (Zooey Deschanel), a lovely but unenthusiastic woman. Walter is proven to be Buddy's father. Buddy meets his stepmother Emily (Mary Steenburgen) and his half-brother Michael (Daniel Tay). As Buddy tries to adapt in human society, he tries to get everyone into the spirit of Christmas.
Review: This is a good Christmas movie. The plot is very unique and funny. It feels like one of those stories where a kid is raised in the wild and tries to adapt in normal society. Like a feral child. The movie has a good share of funny gags and jokes. It does go a little over the top with some jokes, but they work well.
The acting is also very good. Will Ferrell is hilarious and charming in this role. James Caan, Mary Steenburgen, Daniel Tay and Zooey Deschanel are all very funny and seem to fit very well into their roles.
This is a good Christmas movie. It's not my favorite, but a good, funny one to watch with the family.
Rating: 3.5/5
Review: This is a good Christmas movie. The plot is very unique and funny. It feels like one of those stories where a kid is raised in the wild and tries to adapt in normal society. Like a feral child. The movie has a good share of funny gags and jokes. It does go a little over the top with some jokes, but they work well.
The acting is also very good. Will Ferrell is hilarious and charming in this role. James Caan, Mary Steenburgen, Daniel Tay and Zooey Deschanel are all very funny and seem to fit very well into their roles.
This is a good Christmas movie. It's not my favorite, but a good, funny one to watch with the family.
Rating: 3.5/5
Saturday 10 December 2011
Monster (2003)
Plot: Aileen Wuornos (Charlize Theron) is a prostitute and comes from a broken home. She meets Selby (Christina Ricci) in a gay bar. Aileen's initially hostile but the two eventually become lovers. Aileen is later raped by a client and kills him. She then quits prostitution and tries to get a job, but her lack of education doesn't give her many options. Unable to find work, she returns to prostitution and continues to murder her clients. She spares one man out of mercy but kills one man who tries to help her. Aileen uses the money she stole from her clients after killing them support her and Selby. Selby reads in the newspaper of the murders and begins to suspect Aileen. They have a falling out and Selby leaves. Aileen is eventually arrested in a biker bar. Selby reveals incriminating information on the phone and hands it over to the police. To protect Selby, Aileen admits she committed the murders herself alone. Selby testifies against her and Aileen is sentenced to death.
Review: Aileen Wuornos was America's first female serial killer. She was convicted and sentenced to death for six of the murders. She was executed in 2002. Aileen Wuornos came from a broken home and she never had the chance of integrating in what we consider to be normal society. But with Patty Jenkins writing and direction, we feel sympathy for Aileen. We ask ourselves the question how do we feel compassion for a serial killer?
Firstly, in the plot, we're shown time and time again judgmental people who are unwilling to give her a chance. When Aileen goes on numerous job interviews is a perfect example. When she tries to explain herself, she's cut off or judged. The only person who gives her a chance is Selby.
But the real reason we feel sympathy for Aileen is Charlize Theron. Her performance is probably one of the best I've ever seen in film. First of all, her physical transformation is unbelievable. Charlize Theron is a beautiful woman and I've seen her in plenty of work. But nothing I ever saw gave me a slightest clue she'd be able to pull off a performance as a mentally ill and damaged woman who tries to do what she thinks is right. I saw a documentary of Aileen Wuornos and the similarities between Charlize Theron and the real Aileen are so close that it's almost scary. She completely divulges herself into this role. Charlize Theron won an Oscar for Best Actress for her performance and she rightfully earned it. Probably one of the most deserving Oscars.
Christina Ricci plays Selby in this. I'm a fan of Christina Ricci and she shines in this. She's great. Even though Charlize Theron is beyond amazing, Christina Ricci is just as great. I'm disappointed that she didn't get more recognition for her performance. Even though Charlize Theron deserved every award she got, I feel that Christina Ricci was equally deserving. She barely got any awards, while I do find shocking. In her Oscar speech, Charlize Theron called Ricci the "unsung hero" of the film. It's great that Charlize Theron realizes Christina's contribution to this. I do think that Christina Ricci should have been nominated for an Oscar. I don't know if she would've won, but I do think she should've have been recognized with a nomination at least.
Props also go to Patty Jenkins for her writing and directing. Being able to have an audience feel compassion for a serial killer is something we don't hear about too often. Normally with serial killers, we're expected to be disgusted and scared. But here, we just feel sympathy for someone who was never given a fair chance at life.
This is an incredible movie and dare I say it's probably one of the most unappreciated films out there.
Rating: 5/5
Review: Aileen Wuornos was America's first female serial killer. She was convicted and sentenced to death for six of the murders. She was executed in 2002. Aileen Wuornos came from a broken home and she never had the chance of integrating in what we consider to be normal society. But with Patty Jenkins writing and direction, we feel sympathy for Aileen. We ask ourselves the question how do we feel compassion for a serial killer?
Firstly, in the plot, we're shown time and time again judgmental people who are unwilling to give her a chance. When Aileen goes on numerous job interviews is a perfect example. When she tries to explain herself, she's cut off or judged. The only person who gives her a chance is Selby.
But the real reason we feel sympathy for Aileen is Charlize Theron. Her performance is probably one of the best I've ever seen in film. First of all, her physical transformation is unbelievable. Charlize Theron is a beautiful woman and I've seen her in plenty of work. But nothing I ever saw gave me a slightest clue she'd be able to pull off a performance as a mentally ill and damaged woman who tries to do what she thinks is right. I saw a documentary of Aileen Wuornos and the similarities between Charlize Theron and the real Aileen are so close that it's almost scary. She completely divulges herself into this role. Charlize Theron won an Oscar for Best Actress for her performance and she rightfully earned it. Probably one of the most deserving Oscars.
Christina Ricci plays Selby in this. I'm a fan of Christina Ricci and she shines in this. She's great. Even though Charlize Theron is beyond amazing, Christina Ricci is just as great. I'm disappointed that she didn't get more recognition for her performance. Even though Charlize Theron deserved every award she got, I feel that Christina Ricci was equally deserving. She barely got any awards, while I do find shocking. In her Oscar speech, Charlize Theron called Ricci the "unsung hero" of the film. It's great that Charlize Theron realizes Christina's contribution to this. I do think that Christina Ricci should have been nominated for an Oscar. I don't know if she would've won, but I do think she should've have been recognized with a nomination at least.
Props also go to Patty Jenkins for her writing and directing. Being able to have an audience feel compassion for a serial killer is something we don't hear about too often. Normally with serial killers, we're expected to be disgusted and scared. But here, we just feel sympathy for someone who was never given a fair chance at life.
This is an incredible movie and dare I say it's probably one of the most unappreciated films out there.
Rating: 5/5
Dark Water (2005)
Plot: Dahlia (Jennifer Connelley) is in a bitter custody battle with her ex-husband Kyle (Dougray Scott) over their daughter, Cecilia (Ariel Gade). Soon, Dahlia and Cecilia move into an apartment complex. But the ceiling then begins leaking dark water. Dahlia enters the apartment above hers to find it flooded. Dahlia then begins having strange dreams where she sees a girl that looks like Cecilia but her appearance changes into the picture of a girl she found in the flooded apartment. Dahlia continues to be haunted by strange dreams and Cecilia is interacting with an imaginary friend named Natasha, all leading to one shocking discovery.
Review: This is one of many Japanese horror film remakes. Is it one the better ones? No. Is it the worst? No. It's an in-between. The plot structure is very similar to other Japanese remakes, particularly The Ring. So there were some parts of the film I saw coming, but the ending I didn't see coming. I didn't necessarily like the ending, but I guess it avoided the cliche so I can give it props for that.
The acting is good. Jennifer Connelly is very good as the lead role. Ariel Gade is adorable as Cecilia and also portrays her childlike innocence and being scared very good. John C. Reilly and Pete Postlehwaite play supporting roles as building workers and they're pretty good too.
The scares for this film are more psychological than jump-in-your-seat scares. Again, because this isn't any different than other Japanese remakes, you can see some things coming. But there are a few times that you might be taken by surprise. And the film has a good suspenseful and eerie feel to it that adds to the scare.
My feelings on Dark Water might be mixed mainly because there's really nothing new. But it's a decent, entertaining and sometime suspenseful and scary remake that if you're into the Japanese remakes, you should check it out.
Rating: 3.5/5
Review: This is one of many Japanese horror film remakes. Is it one the better ones? No. Is it the worst? No. It's an in-between. The plot structure is very similar to other Japanese remakes, particularly The Ring. So there were some parts of the film I saw coming, but the ending I didn't see coming. I didn't necessarily like the ending, but I guess it avoided the cliche so I can give it props for that.
The acting is good. Jennifer Connelly is very good as the lead role. Ariel Gade is adorable as Cecilia and also portrays her childlike innocence and being scared very good. John C. Reilly and Pete Postlehwaite play supporting roles as building workers and they're pretty good too.
The scares for this film are more psychological than jump-in-your-seat scares. Again, because this isn't any different than other Japanese remakes, you can see some things coming. But there are a few times that you might be taken by surprise. And the film has a good suspenseful and eerie feel to it that adds to the scare.
My feelings on Dark Water might be mixed mainly because there's really nothing new. But it's a decent, entertaining and sometime suspenseful and scary remake that if you're into the Japanese remakes, you should check it out.
Rating: 3.5/5
A Simple Wish (1997)
Plot: Murray (Martin Short) is a male fairy godmother taking an exam. The story then passes a few months later. Murray comes to 8-year-old Annabel (Mara Wilson), who wishes her father, Oliver (Robert Pastorelli) to get the lead in a Broadway musical. When Murray forgets his wand and it breaks, Annabel tries to fix it, but is caught by her teacher. Murray appears and a spell backfires and the two end up in Nebraska and mishaps soon follow. Meanwhile, Claudia (Kathleen Turner), a former fairy godmother who's turned into an evil witch and her sidekick Boots (Amanda Plummer), a dog she turned into a human, plan to steal all the fairy godmother wands. She gets all of them, except for Murray's. Then Claudia captures Murray, Annabel and Annabel's brother Charlie (Francis Capra) will they escape? Who will win?
Review: I liked this one when I was younger. The film has an okay balance of going between back and forth with Murray and Annabel's story and Claudia's scheme to get all the wands. I do like that they managed to connect the stories together in a unique kind of way. There are numerous theatrical references and gags that younger kids might not get. I certainly didn't get them when I was younger, but I do now that I'm older.
The acting is decent. Martin Short is funny as accident-prone male fairy godmother Murray. Mara Wilson is very good as the protagonist. I don't think she was as good compared to her other movies like Matilda, but the script isn't as strong like Matilda's. Amanda Plummer is actually pretty funny as Boots. Robert Pastorelli and Francis Capra are decent as Annabel's father and brother respectively. But what really stood out for me acting wise is Kathleen Turner. She's very good at playing a clever villain and she plays the role convincingly.
This is a kid's movie that I'm sure some kids will like and some won't. But it's still a fairly entertaining and decent movie that you don't hear about that much now.
Rating: 3/5
Review: I liked this one when I was younger. The film has an okay balance of going between back and forth with Murray and Annabel's story and Claudia's scheme to get all the wands. I do like that they managed to connect the stories together in a unique kind of way. There are numerous theatrical references and gags that younger kids might not get. I certainly didn't get them when I was younger, but I do now that I'm older.
The acting is decent. Martin Short is funny as accident-prone male fairy godmother Murray. Mara Wilson is very good as the protagonist. I don't think she was as good compared to her other movies like Matilda, but the script isn't as strong like Matilda's. Amanda Plummer is actually pretty funny as Boots. Robert Pastorelli and Francis Capra are decent as Annabel's father and brother respectively. But what really stood out for me acting wise is Kathleen Turner. She's very good at playing a clever villain and she plays the role convincingly.
This is a kid's movie that I'm sure some kids will like and some won't. But it's still a fairly entertaining and decent movie that you don't hear about that much now.
Rating: 3/5
Thursday 8 December 2011
Finding Nemo (2003)
Plot: Marlin is a clownfish who is overprotective of his son, Nemo. A barracuda ate Marlin's wife and their eggs. Nemo was the only surviving egg. He has a smaller fin, due to an injury to his egg from the attack. This makes Marlin doubt Nemo's abilities to swim and his abilities in general. During a field trip, Nemo disobeys his father and swims off the reef and to a boat. Nemo is captured by a scuba diver. While searching for Nemo, Marlin meets Dory, a good-hearted and optimistic but slightly naive Regal tang with short-term memory loss. While searching for Nemo, they encounter vegetarian sharks, turtles, seagulls, whales, jellyfish and so much more. Meanwhile, Nemo is now in the tank at a dentist's office. He encounters a variety of captured sea animals, desperate to escape. It turns out Nemo is the birthday gift for the dentist's niece, who killed her birthday fish last year by shaking the bag too much. Will Marlin and Dory find Nemo before it's too late?
Review: Pixar can honestly do no wrong. Pixar I think is one of few studios whose films get better and better. And this is no exception. It's probably one of Pixar's bests.
The plot is pretty general, but what I love is that it is relatable to an extent. Having overprotective parents and wanting to be your own person but you're being held back. The film also has a great blend of humor and drama. There is a lot of kids humor, but a good amount for older kids and adults too.
Dory, who's voiced by Ellen DeGeneres, is for me the highlight of the movie. She's so naive but good at heart and that makes the character even more likable. Some might disagree but I found Marlin to be very unsympathetic, even when Nemo was taken. I found him to be too much and the way he treats his son, even though I understand the circumstances why he does it, I just didn't like. But I did like him as the film progressed. There are also a great variety of supporting and minor characters, like the vegetarian sharks, the turtles and the Tank Gang make the film worthwhile because they're so engaging and funny.
The animation is flawless. The undersea world of Australia is beautiful and colorful. Sydney itself is very well done.
This is a funny, charming, entertaining and touching film that the entirely family will enjoy for years to come.
Rating: 5/5
Review: Pixar can honestly do no wrong. Pixar I think is one of few studios whose films get better and better. And this is no exception. It's probably one of Pixar's bests.
The plot is pretty general, but what I love is that it is relatable to an extent. Having overprotective parents and wanting to be your own person but you're being held back. The film also has a great blend of humor and drama. There is a lot of kids humor, but a good amount for older kids and adults too.
Dory, who's voiced by Ellen DeGeneres, is for me the highlight of the movie. She's so naive but good at heart and that makes the character even more likable. Some might disagree but I found Marlin to be very unsympathetic, even when Nemo was taken. I found him to be too much and the way he treats his son, even though I understand the circumstances why he does it, I just didn't like. But I did like him as the film progressed. There are also a great variety of supporting and minor characters, like the vegetarian sharks, the turtles and the Tank Gang make the film worthwhile because they're so engaging and funny.
The animation is flawless. The undersea world of Australia is beautiful and colorful. Sydney itself is very well done.
This is a funny, charming, entertaining and touching film that the entirely family will enjoy for years to come.
Rating: 5/5
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Plot: 12-year-old Dorothy (Judy Garland) is in trouble after her dog, Toto, bites Ms. Gulch (Margaret Hamilton). After Ms. Gulch says she can legally take away Toto, Dorothy takes Toto and they run away. Whilst running away, she encounters a traveling fortune teller, Professor Marvel (Frank Morgan), who tells her that her Aunt Em (Clara Blandick) is ill. She goes back home, but a tornado has come. The Gales and the farm workers take shelter in a storm cellar, unable to find Dorothy. Dorothy takes shelter in the house and is knocked unconscious by a window frame blown in the storm. She then wakes up to find the home being carried up by the tornado. When the house falls back on the ground, she finds herself in a strange world. Glinda, the Good Witch of the North (Billie Burke) comes in a floating bubble telling Dorothy that her house fell on the Wicked Witch of the East and killed her. The Munchkins come out and celebrate the witch's death. The celebration is interrupted by the Wicked Witch of the West (Margaret Hamilton) who wants to claim the ruby slippers, which are now on Dorothy's feet. Glinda tells Dorothy the only way she can go home is to see the Wizard of Oz. On her journey, she meets a Scarecrow (Ray Bolger), who wants a brain; a Tin Man (Jack Haley) who wants a heart and a Cowardly Lion (Bert Lahr), who wants courage. Will they be able to get to the Wizard and get all that they desire or will the Wicked Witch stop them?
Review: This is considered one of the greatest and most famous movies ever made and a classic in every sense of the word. And it is. This is one of many adaptations from L. Frank Baum's 1900 children's novel. In this film's plot, it's been said that there are 44 noticeable differences between the novel and this film version. So if you're looking for a faithful adaptation of the famed novel, you might want to try and look elsewhere. But if you're looking to be entertained and be touched by a great movie, look no further.
I always loved the premise of the plot. That you're able to go away to another world to get away from your problems. But the truth of the matter is that you can never avoid problems. That's the premise for several fantasy films and novels, but it's still a realistic approach. When you want to get away from your world and when you finally do, all you want to do is go back home.
The acting is great. There are four actors from the main cast that play multiple roles. I'm sure this was to save money because they had a budget a little over two million it's been said. Judy Garland is great at portraying Dorothy's initial vulnerability and her naivety and her eventual growth from her experience. Margaret Hamilton is frightening as Miss Gulch and the Wicked Witch of the West. The Witch's distinct and frightening voice sticks with you after you watch it. Ray Bolger is very good as the Scarecrow, the character who doubts himself because he doesn't have a brain. But it's quite obvious he's the most intelligent of the gang. Jack Haley is very good as the Tin Man. Bert Lahr is so entertaining as the Cowardly Lion. His comedic timing is perfect.
This is a musical. Of course, everyone knows the famous Over the Rainbow, which is very well done. The singing and dancing is just fun to watch because really when you look at it, the dancing that's done in this isn't that extreme. I'd say the most extreme dancing done is during the scene where the Munchkins celebrate the witch's death. Other than that, the rest of the dancing is fairly simple.
Visually the film is stunning. From gray to technicolor in just moments is very nice to see. I will say that when the film initially goes into color, I found it a little too bright. It's a silly complaint, but I did think it was too bright and happy they toned it done. The set design for Munchkindland is very good and you know just by looking at it you're in another world and that it's not a world inhabited by humans. I liked the set of Oz as a utopia. It's not a bad thing, but that's what I felt when I saw it. The witch's castle is very well constructed and has that eerie feel to it.
This is a classic that has been treasured for decades and will continued to be treasured for decades to come.
Rating: 5/5
Review: This is considered one of the greatest and most famous movies ever made and a classic in every sense of the word. And it is. This is one of many adaptations from L. Frank Baum's 1900 children's novel. In this film's plot, it's been said that there are 44 noticeable differences between the novel and this film version. So if you're looking for a faithful adaptation of the famed novel, you might want to try and look elsewhere. But if you're looking to be entertained and be touched by a great movie, look no further.
I always loved the premise of the plot. That you're able to go away to another world to get away from your problems. But the truth of the matter is that you can never avoid problems. That's the premise for several fantasy films and novels, but it's still a realistic approach. When you want to get away from your world and when you finally do, all you want to do is go back home.
The acting is great. There are four actors from the main cast that play multiple roles. I'm sure this was to save money because they had a budget a little over two million it's been said. Judy Garland is great at portraying Dorothy's initial vulnerability and her naivety and her eventual growth from her experience. Margaret Hamilton is frightening as Miss Gulch and the Wicked Witch of the West. The Witch's distinct and frightening voice sticks with you after you watch it. Ray Bolger is very good as the Scarecrow, the character who doubts himself because he doesn't have a brain. But it's quite obvious he's the most intelligent of the gang. Jack Haley is very good as the Tin Man. Bert Lahr is so entertaining as the Cowardly Lion. His comedic timing is perfect.
This is a musical. Of course, everyone knows the famous Over the Rainbow, which is very well done. The singing and dancing is just fun to watch because really when you look at it, the dancing that's done in this isn't that extreme. I'd say the most extreme dancing done is during the scene where the Munchkins celebrate the witch's death. Other than that, the rest of the dancing is fairly simple.
Visually the film is stunning. From gray to technicolor in just moments is very nice to see. I will say that when the film initially goes into color, I found it a little too bright. It's a silly complaint, but I did think it was too bright and happy they toned it done. The set design for Munchkindland is very good and you know just by looking at it you're in another world and that it's not a world inhabited by humans. I liked the set of Oz as a utopia. It's not a bad thing, but that's what I felt when I saw it. The witch's castle is very well constructed and has that eerie feel to it.
This is a classic that has been treasured for decades and will continued to be treasured for decades to come.
Rating: 5/5
Matilda (1996)
Plot: Matilda (Mara Wilson) is an extremely gifted child. But her gifts are unappreciated by her family, especially her parents, Harry and Zinnia (Danny DeVito and Rhea Pearlman). After her father refuses to buy her a book, she walks to the library. After two years, she reads every book and becomes knowledgeable in various subjects. After begging, Matilda is eventually sent to school, where she meets a kind and caring teacher, Miss Honey (Embeth Davidtz), who recognizes Matilda's exceptional gifts. The school is run by a cruel principal, Miss Trunchbull (Pam Ferris), who has a connection to Miss Honey. Terrorized and unappreciated by everyone in her life, Matilda develops telekinetic abilities as a result of her unused brain ability. As Matilda learns of Miss Honey and Miss Trunchbull's connection, she tries to give back Miss Honey important treasures of her life. She successfully does so, but when she's possibly caught, what will come of her? And will Matilda get her happy ending?
Review: This is a very good movie. This is based from the book by Roald Dahl, who is considered to be one of the greatest writers of children's literature. Roald Dahl was from Europe. This adaptation is a modernized and Americanized version of the British writer's work. I've read the book and there are several details that are either removed or added for this film version. But it doesn't make the film cost.
This film is dark. Darker than you would expect for a children's film. There are only a handful of characters that you sympathize with. The great majority of these characters are unlikable. In fact, you might even question their morality. But this is one aspect that I appreciated from the film. The fact that not everyone in this world is likable. And it's also sad to say that there are some parents that may act like this towards their children. It's exaggerated I'll admit, but it's still true that children aren't always appreciated and that there are some people that don't deserve to be parents. This is made obvious that Matilda's parents don't deserve to be parents.
The acting is fantastic. Danny DeVito, who also directed this, is great, as is his real-life wife, Rhea Pearlman, who plays his on-screen wife. Pam Ferris is very good as Principal Trunchbull. She does a good job of portraying a mad and quite frankly, insane character. Embeth Davidtz is also very good as the compassionate and loving Miss Honey. You root for her. But the real star is Mara Wilson, who was probably one of the better known child stars of the 90s. She carried this film on her shoulders and she deserves to be praised for that. Her ability to portray Matilda's intelligence and vulnerability at times is just fun to watch. I also read that Mara Wilson's mother had sadly passed away during filming, but she remained strong and continued to film. The film was dedicated in honor of Mara's mother. I appreciate that the film crew realized Mara's dedication and honoring her mother's memory is just so touching.
Some kids might find this movie a little scary, especially with scenes with Miss Trunchbull. I do think it's aimed at a certain age group, like 9 and older. There are certainly some kids that can handle it and I know some that won't be able to at a certain age.
This is simply a great and entertaining movie that never gets old.
Rating: 4.5/5
Review: This is a very good movie. This is based from the book by Roald Dahl, who is considered to be one of the greatest writers of children's literature. Roald Dahl was from Europe. This adaptation is a modernized and Americanized version of the British writer's work. I've read the book and there are several details that are either removed or added for this film version. But it doesn't make the film cost.
This film is dark. Darker than you would expect for a children's film. There are only a handful of characters that you sympathize with. The great majority of these characters are unlikable. In fact, you might even question their morality. But this is one aspect that I appreciated from the film. The fact that not everyone in this world is likable. And it's also sad to say that there are some parents that may act like this towards their children. It's exaggerated I'll admit, but it's still true that children aren't always appreciated and that there are some people that don't deserve to be parents. This is made obvious that Matilda's parents don't deserve to be parents.
The acting is fantastic. Danny DeVito, who also directed this, is great, as is his real-life wife, Rhea Pearlman, who plays his on-screen wife. Pam Ferris is very good as Principal Trunchbull. She does a good job of portraying a mad and quite frankly, insane character. Embeth Davidtz is also very good as the compassionate and loving Miss Honey. You root for her. But the real star is Mara Wilson, who was probably one of the better known child stars of the 90s. She carried this film on her shoulders and she deserves to be praised for that. Her ability to portray Matilda's intelligence and vulnerability at times is just fun to watch. I also read that Mara Wilson's mother had sadly passed away during filming, but she remained strong and continued to film. The film was dedicated in honor of Mara's mother. I appreciate that the film crew realized Mara's dedication and honoring her mother's memory is just so touching.
Some kids might find this movie a little scary, especially with scenes with Miss Trunchbull. I do think it's aimed at a certain age group, like 9 and older. There are certainly some kids that can handle it and I know some that won't be able to at a certain age.
This is simply a great and entertaining movie that never gets old.
Rating: 4.5/5
The Muppets (2011)
Plot: Walter (performed by Peter Linz) is the Muppets number one fan. His brother, Gary (Jason Segel) is taking his girlfriend, Mary (Amy Adams) to Los Angeles to celebrate their ten year anniversary. Gary invites Walter to come with them so he can see the Muppet Theater. When they go there, the theater is in ruins. During a tour, Walter sneaks into Kermit's old office. He then discovers Statler and Waldorf selling the theater to Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) and his associates Bobo the Bear and Uncle Deadly. It turns out if the Muppets can raise 10 million dollars, they get the theater back. But Tex intends to destroy the theater and drill underneath for oil. Walter, Gary and Mary track down Kermit. Kermit realizes the only way they'll be able to save the mansion is to put on another show, which they haven't done in years. They track down the Muppet gang, who have since moved on but manage to get them all back together. But will they be able to raise 10 million dollars in time?
Review: I loved this film. For so many reasons. I usually don't get this excited for movies, especially a movie that you would think is a kiddie movie likes the Muppets. But I was and not afraid to admit it.
This brought me back to my childhood because I would watch the Muppets a lot when I was younger.
I really like the plot. And the reason I like the plot is because it's realistic. Let me explain. The last theatrical release of the Muppets was in 1999. They made a few television films since 1999 and the greater majority of them weren't good. And the television movies they made didn't have the feel of what the Muppets really are. I like that time has passed for the Muppets and they're in new stages of life when Kermit approaches them to do another show. So I like that the Muppets are all at different stages in their lives and most of them are eager to go back to their old roots.
The film is hilarious. Like really hilarious. I laughed out loud so many times, which I didn't expect at all. First of all, they break the fourth constantly. They know they're in a movie. Here are a few examples. In one scene, Kermit says it might be difficult to get the whole gang back together and then Mary says "this is going to be a short movie". When they go pick up the Muppets, I think Fozzi says "it'll go a lot faster if we do a montage". Gonzo blows up his business and then Fozzie says "that was expensive looking explosion. I can't believe we had that in the budget". When they try to get to Paris to get Miss Piggy, they say "let's travel by map because it'll go faster" and then they emerge out of the ocean onto a beach in Paris. The film has a good blend of humor that will make both kids and adults laugh. Especially with some of the cameos, adults will catch on. I like it when films, especially kid-orientated films, put in humor for an older audience to appreciate.
There are several celebrity cameos. Some of the cameos include Alan Arkin as a tour guide, Neil Patrick Harris, Whoopi Goldberg, Emily Blunt, Jim Parsons, Sarah Silverman and Selena Gomez. A great portion of the celebrity cameos only have a few lines. But they're great. For example, Selena Gomez tells Kermit "I don't know who you guys are. My agent told me to come here." Neil Patrick says while taking calls "I don't know why they didn't get me to host". It's these one-liner that connect very realistically to the actors that it makes it even more funny. They aren't playing fictionalized versions of themselves. Also, some of those lines, like Neil Patrick Harris' will be caught on by the older audience members. Jack Black has a supporting role in the film as himself. He is absolutely hilarious in this. I enjoyed him throughout it. His role in the movie, which is much bigger compared to the numerous celebrity cameos, made sense and I enjoyed his scenes very much.
The ending is also very sweet. I will say that I was surprised about how the film ended, but the credits are so funny and fix everything.
The credit scenes with the Mahna Mahna song being done with several of the celebrity cameos is fantastic. It's probably one of my favorite parts of the movie. It's strange to say that the credits might be your favorite part. But I'm so happy that they put in those Muppets because if they didn't, I would've been disappointed because it's probably the most well-known Muppets skit ever. So I greatly appreciated that as a fan of the Muppets.
When you watch it, it feels as if though you're re-watching The Muppets Show because they do the homages to the famous skits in almost every scene. You can catch on to some of their references to the show.
This is a entertaining, funny, heartwarming and enjoyable film that will be appreciated by Muppet fans and those who aren't. This is a treat and a film that will be treasured for a long time. I have that feeling. But if it isn't treated by everyone, I'll treasure it for a long time because it's a callback to my childhood.
Rating: 5/5
Review: I loved this film. For so many reasons. I usually don't get this excited for movies, especially a movie that you would think is a kiddie movie likes the Muppets. But I was and not afraid to admit it.
This brought me back to my childhood because I would watch the Muppets a lot when I was younger.
I really like the plot. And the reason I like the plot is because it's realistic. Let me explain. The last theatrical release of the Muppets was in 1999. They made a few television films since 1999 and the greater majority of them weren't good. And the television movies they made didn't have the feel of what the Muppets really are. I like that time has passed for the Muppets and they're in new stages of life when Kermit approaches them to do another show. So I like that the Muppets are all at different stages in their lives and most of them are eager to go back to their old roots.
The film is hilarious. Like really hilarious. I laughed out loud so many times, which I didn't expect at all. First of all, they break the fourth constantly. They know they're in a movie. Here are a few examples. In one scene, Kermit says it might be difficult to get the whole gang back together and then Mary says "this is going to be a short movie". When they go pick up the Muppets, I think Fozzi says "it'll go a lot faster if we do a montage". Gonzo blows up his business and then Fozzie says "that was expensive looking explosion. I can't believe we had that in the budget". When they try to get to Paris to get Miss Piggy, they say "let's travel by map because it'll go faster" and then they emerge out of the ocean onto a beach in Paris. The film has a good blend of humor that will make both kids and adults laugh. Especially with some of the cameos, adults will catch on. I like it when films, especially kid-orientated films, put in humor for an older audience to appreciate.
There are several celebrity cameos. Some of the cameos include Alan Arkin as a tour guide, Neil Patrick Harris, Whoopi Goldberg, Emily Blunt, Jim Parsons, Sarah Silverman and Selena Gomez. A great portion of the celebrity cameos only have a few lines. But they're great. For example, Selena Gomez tells Kermit "I don't know who you guys are. My agent told me to come here." Neil Patrick says while taking calls "I don't know why they didn't get me to host". It's these one-liner that connect very realistically to the actors that it makes it even more funny. They aren't playing fictionalized versions of themselves. Also, some of those lines, like Neil Patrick Harris' will be caught on by the older audience members. Jack Black has a supporting role in the film as himself. He is absolutely hilarious in this. I enjoyed him throughout it. His role in the movie, which is much bigger compared to the numerous celebrity cameos, made sense and I enjoyed his scenes very much.
The ending is also very sweet. I will say that I was surprised about how the film ended, but the credits are so funny and fix everything.
The credit scenes with the Mahna Mahna song being done with several of the celebrity cameos is fantastic. It's probably one of my favorite parts of the movie. It's strange to say that the credits might be your favorite part. But I'm so happy that they put in those Muppets because if they didn't, I would've been disappointed because it's probably the most well-known Muppets skit ever. So I greatly appreciated that as a fan of the Muppets.
When you watch it, it feels as if though you're re-watching The Muppets Show because they do the homages to the famous skits in almost every scene. You can catch on to some of their references to the show.
This is a entertaining, funny, heartwarming and enjoyable film that will be appreciated by Muppet fans and those who aren't. This is a treat and a film that will be treasured for a long time. I have that feeling. But if it isn't treated by everyone, I'll treasure it for a long time because it's a callback to my childhood.
Rating: 5/5
Thursday 1 December 2011
Misery (1990)
Plot: Paul (James Caan) is a writer who's famous for his successful series of novels featuring a character named Misery. Wanting to branch out, he writes a new manuscript. While leaving a cottage in a snow storm, his car goes off the road. He's rescued by a nurse, Annie (Kathy Bates), who brings him to her remote home. Annie claims to be his number one fan. He allows her to read his new novel, but she is upset by the swearing content in the novel. She later shows unusual behavior, including a scene where she goes in a complete rage when she says Paul killed Misery. She makes him burn his manuscript and forces him to write a new novel, Misery's Return, where the famed character comes back to life. Meanwhile, a local sheriff (Richard Farnsworth) looks into Paul's disappearance. But will Paul be rescued?
Review: This is one of many adaptations of Stephen King's novels. I like Stephen King and I've seen many of his adaptations but this is one of my personal favorites and without a doubt in the top 5 of the best adaptations.
What I really like about the plot is that it works well with creating the psychological horror. We have moments of suspense and horror that build up the tension. There are so many horror films that use blood and gore, hoping to make the film scary. This film is scary throughout and uses psychological scares so well. Another aspect of the film's plot that I enjoy is that it has a good balance of humor and horror. There's one scene that will scare you and just moments later you'll be laughing. Some of the humor is absurd, like a scene with a pig named Misery (after the character). But this absurd humor works well for this kind of movie.
The acting is very good. James Caan is very good as Paul, our suffering hero. What I like about Paul and James' portrayal is that he doesn't play dumb. He knows something isn't right in the situation and he does what he can to help himself, even though Annie remains one step ahead of him for the most part. He's resourceful and even though it comes back to haunt him when Annie finds out, it still works. But the true star of the movie is Kathy Bates. I cannot emphasize how great she is in this movie. Her ability to go from a nice lady to a complete psychotic in just seconds is fantastic to watch. Her ability to show vulnerability in such a crazy character and I actually do feel bad for her for some parts of the movie. Kathy Bates provides some good laughs and some good scares in her performance. She won the Oscar for Best Actress for her performance and it was well deserved.
This is a scary, entertaining and suspenseful horror film which is one of my favorite Stephen King adaptations.
Rating: 4/5
Review: This is one of many adaptations of Stephen King's novels. I like Stephen King and I've seen many of his adaptations but this is one of my personal favorites and without a doubt in the top 5 of the best adaptations.
What I really like about the plot is that it works well with creating the psychological horror. We have moments of suspense and horror that build up the tension. There are so many horror films that use blood and gore, hoping to make the film scary. This film is scary throughout and uses psychological scares so well. Another aspect of the film's plot that I enjoy is that it has a good balance of humor and horror. There's one scene that will scare you and just moments later you'll be laughing. Some of the humor is absurd, like a scene with a pig named Misery (after the character). But this absurd humor works well for this kind of movie.
The acting is very good. James Caan is very good as Paul, our suffering hero. What I like about Paul and James' portrayal is that he doesn't play dumb. He knows something isn't right in the situation and he does what he can to help himself, even though Annie remains one step ahead of him for the most part. He's resourceful and even though it comes back to haunt him when Annie finds out, it still works. But the true star of the movie is Kathy Bates. I cannot emphasize how great she is in this movie. Her ability to go from a nice lady to a complete psychotic in just seconds is fantastic to watch. Her ability to show vulnerability in such a crazy character and I actually do feel bad for her for some parts of the movie. Kathy Bates provides some good laughs and some good scares in her performance. She won the Oscar for Best Actress for her performance and it was well deserved.
This is a scary, entertaining and suspenseful horror film which is one of my favorite Stephen King adaptations.
Rating: 4/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)