A new post!! Oh my God! Is it really possible?!?

So after a good 3 months (God, has it really been that long?!) without an update, I’m finally getting around to writing a new entry. I do feel kind of bad about going so long without writing anything, but considering that my blog is only one of a long list of things that I’ve fallen behind on because of my move and new job (and further delayed by my purchase of a new computer that I needed to build, install, and then setup with all my programs,data, etc.), I don’t feel too bad about the delay. Of course, I’m looking over the long list of movies I’ve seen since my last review (which sadly is even further back than my last blog entry), and I’m suddenly realizing just what a daunting task I have getting caught up.

My memory being what it is, there’s pretty much no way I’m going to recall all the movies I’ve seen in the last several months. So I went to my favorite site for movie release information, Greg’s Previews at Yahoo Movies. With that list in hand, I guess I’ll just start at the beginning, and work my way through to the present. It’ll probably take me several entries (and some movies, such as Star Wars: Episode III and Sin City, pretty much require their own entries), but I’ll get there. Promise.

As I’m sure you’ll recall (and if not, here’s your reminder), my last actual movie review was waaaaay back on Monday, March 7^th, when I discussed The Pacifier and The Jacket (both of which are already out on DVD, for God’s sake). So let’s just go from there to the next weekend’s movies, which about as polar opposites as you’re likely to find. First we have a fun, family-friendly animated film. Then we have a very dark, intensely violent action thriller. The first movie would of course be Robots, from the animators who gave us Ice Age. While not as good as Pixar’s films (but that pretty much goes without saying – NOBODY makes animated films like Pixar!), and not quite as good as the Shrek movies, it’s still quite the enjoyable movie. There’s plenty of humor to keep the parents amused (without getting vulgar or adult with the humor, as lame supposed kids’ movies like Cat in the Hat stooped to), and plenty of action and fun for the kiddies to laugh at and enjoy. All in all I think I’d give it 4 stars. Definitely a fun time for the whole family. On the flip side of that, we have the Bruce Willis kidnapping thriller Hostage. While one of my buddies will certainly disagree with me (you know who you are), I have to say I much preferred the more straight forward Assault on Precinct 13 remake. While it had its violent moments, it didn’t have the dark quality or the intensity to the violence that Hostage had. Now don’t get me wrong, I very much enjoyed the movie and I'm glad I saw it, and I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys thrillers and doesn’t mind violence, but I don’t know that it’s a movie I’d watch more than once or twice. Assault on Precinct 13, on the other hand, I could watch repeatedly (either version of the movie, as far as that goes). I’d go into more detail on the films, but it’s been long enough since I’ve seen them that I don’t remember more than the broad strokes (guess that’s what I get for ignoring my blog for so damned long!). But I would certainly recommend both movies (to VERY different audiences, however).

Well, while I’m on a roll with this thing, let’s jump right into the next movie weekend, shall we? So back to Greg’s Previews to see what was playing the weekend of March 18^th. Well, what do you know, we once again have two very different movies opening. First we have the Michelle Trachtenberg film Ice Princess, and then we have the sequel to a Japanese horror movie remake, The Ring Two. I have to say, I really like Michelle Trachtenberg. But no, I didn’t actually go and see Ice Princess (I have my pride, after all). Which is not to say I won’t see it eventually. So let’s move on to The Ring Two. While I won’t say it was a complete waste of time, I do have to admit that I was pretty disappointed with it, especially considering that they got the director of the original Japanese Ring series, Hideo Nakata (a true genius of the horror movie genre as far as I’m concerned). It just didn’t have the punch of the original movie. It had its creepy moments, but didn’t really have the frights of the original, and the story sadly could have used a little work. Also, the film was missing Daveigh Chase, who brilliantly played Samara in the original movie (and did the voice of Lilo in Lilo & Stitch, surprisingly enough). So I think if I were to rate it, I’d give it 2 ½, maybe 3 stars.

The rest of March featured a handful of crappy looking comedies, none of which I bothered to go see. So this is probably a good place to stop (so that I can get this thing posted!). Plus, our next movie to be reviewed is the absolute best movie of the year so far (including the summer blockbusters I’ve seen so far), Sin City (which is very much getting its own blog entry)!! I loved this movie so much that with the possible exception of Charlie & The Chocolate Factory, I don’t expect it to get knocked off the top of the list for this year’s movies until Serenity comes out in September (I fully expect Joss Whedon to completely blow away the rest of the competition for the year – God knows he could teach a certain other sci-fi writer/director a few things about putting together a decent story. But I'll go more into that when that particular movie gets its scathing review). So that’s it for now. I will try my best to continue diligently pushing forward with my blog entries, so hopefully you’ll get to see more of my glowing praise for Sin City very soon.

Oh, and in case nobody noticed, to make up for my horrid, inexcusable delay in getting a new post out, I’ve added a new feature to the blog (well, I'll try and remember to do it for every new entry) – I will now be linking all actor/actress names and movie titles to imdb (only the greatest movie information site in the whole world). Later!!

Delays, delays, delays

Weeks go by, and still no update. Of course, now I'm in the process of moving to a new town to start a new job, so it'll probably be a few more weeks before I can sit down and do a real update. I do have to say this, though -- Sin City has to be one of the coolest movies I've seen in I don't know how long!! I'm going to have to see that AT LEAST one more time at the theatre!! Other than that, I need to go back through the release schedule and figure out what else I've actually seen recently that I still need to comment on. More to come eventually! :)

Argh!!!!

I am so overdue to put an update on this page (I've got several new movies I need to review, not to mention more mean, nasty things to say about idiot movie critics). But sadly between March Madness and way too much crap going on at the office, I simply haven't found time to do it. So be patient, my faithful readers; I'll try to get a real post on here some time this week.

Movies, Movies, Movies

So I saw three new movies this weekend -- two at the theatre, and one on the SciFi Channel. At the theatre, I saw Vin Diesel's The Pacifier, and the new thriller The Jacket, starring Adrien Brody and Keira Knightley. Despite all the negative comments from the movie critics (but what the hell do they know), I thought The Pacifier was a pretty cute movie. Obviously it wasn't Oscar material, but then again, it wasn't supposed to be, either. Personally I think the critics are just showing their snobbery again, and are being overly critical of Vin's performance just because he's an "action star" instead of a comic actor. While not as good as some action stars switching to comedy (The Rock, for example -- I'm curious to go see Be Cool just to see his performance as a gay bodyguard), I think he does a passable job in a fun, harmless family comedy. The movie has a couple of surprises (and, as is to be expected, a couple of "twists" that you can see coming a mile away), and all in all does a pretty good job of keeping you entertained for an hour and a half, which is really about all that should be required from this sort of film. And, unlike too many kid/family movies that have come out in recent years, this was actually one you could take the whole family to (unlike films like The Cat in the Hat and its ilk, which in my opinion have a lot of humor in them that have no business being in a kids' movie -- but maybe I'm just old-fashioned).

Then there was The Jacket. Marketed basically as a horror movie, trying to exploit the populariy of such recent films as The Grudge, White Noise, and Boogeyman, it is in reality much more of a sci-fi suspense thriller. There really isn't much horror movie element to it (interestingly enough, imdb's entertainment news for today has an article stating that the director of the film, John Maybury, is furious with the marketing of his movie because it's so off-base with what the movie's actually about -- and considering that it debuted this weekend in 10th place with only $2.7 million, I think he's got reason to be upset). I won't go into too many of the specific plot points (I don't want to spoil anything for people who haven't seen the film), but in essence this is a time travel movie about a man who's trying to learn the details of his own death. And of course, as with any time travel movie, you have to suspend A LOT of disbelief, because of the fact that there's almost no way to do a time travel movie without running into problems of paradox and simple lack of logic and realism. I have to agree with my buddy Cliff, though, in that this movie does a worse job with this than a lot of other movies do, and that a few minor changes to the story could have eliminated quite a few of these incongruities/logic faults.

When it's all said and done, though, if you can accept these incongruities and just kind of go with what the director/screenwriter are trying to do with the movie, I think it's a pretty enjoyable suspense thriller (if you're one of those sci-fi geeks who's really picky about the science and the logic of your movies, and has a problem with movies that are blatantly not logical at points or obviously scientifically invalid, then some of the things that happen in this movie are really, really going to bug you). There are certainly better suspense movies out there, but tihs one's not bad. The solid cast (who are all great in their roles) really helps. And, of course, as a heterosexual male, the brief Keira Knightley nude scenes go a long way to adding to the movie's overall enjoyment factor. :-)

And so from the theatre we head to one of my favorite TV stations, the SciFi Channel. Of course, when you're dealing with a "SciFi Original" movie, you know going in you've got a 50/50 chance of getting a fairly good movie, or getting complete dreck. When the title of the movie is Skeleton Man, those odds drop to about 70/30 that you're going to get dreck (but generally even the bad SciFi movies can be fun to watch, for their B-movie campiness if nothing else, so even with a title this bad, it's usually worth checking out). But in this case we get a movie so horribly, horribly bad, so completely without redeeming values as to be downright painful to watch. As I'm watching Michael Rooker deliver his painfully bad lines (and he's a good enough actor you know they've got to be as painful for him to say as they are for us to watch), I can't help but think back to one of Chris Rock's jokes from the Oscars, and the big thought going through my mind is, "Damn, I need to send Michael Rooker a check for $80!" (if you saw the intro to the Oscars, you'll know what I'm talking about).

So here's the basic plotline for this horrible trainwreck of a film: an Indian warrior killed his entire tribe years and years ago, and his spirit is cursed to forever haunt the area where their bodies are. Enter a group of special forces operatives on a mission to kill/destroy him (I was only about halfway watching the movie as I did other things, so I can't tell you exactly WHY they're sent to destroy him). So let's start with the first and most glaring thing wrong with this movie -- when we first see our "Indian spirit" do we get anything even remotely resembling a Native Americna? No, of course we don't! What we get instead is a Grim Reaper wannabe -- a skeleton wrapped in a black cape and big black hood (a reviewer on imdb very accurately compared it to Skeletor from Masters of the Universe). And what kind of weapons is our Indian spirit carrying -- why, a sword and an axe, of course; exactly what you'd expect him to be carrying (NOT!). And to make matters worse, it's not a tomahawk he's carrying, it's not even a European battle axe to match the sword; no, he's wielding a damned wood axe that the props guy picked up at some hardware store! I understand having a small budget, but that's just sad. Eventually he does end up with a spear and a bow and arrows that actually look Native American, but at this point I've so lost it with the horrid props and costume for this character that I just can't bring myself to care.

But it doesn't stop there! Oh no, it wouldn't be enough to completely screw up the lame waste of a villain. Because in comes the "special forces" team sent in to destroy him. Firstly (as seems to happen all too often in these low-budget military type movies), our team is half women. Now I appreciate political correctness and all that, but the bottom line truth of the matter is, you don't find women in elite combat units! You just don't!! But let's not forget that having women on the team isn't really about being politically correct and equal opportunity and all that; no, it's really all about the sex-appeal factor.What's a B-movie without sexy women, right? Which means that the women in question look a lot more like Sports Illustrated swimsuit models than they do combat soldiers. I mean, with characters like Vasquez in Aliens, or Michelle Rodriguez's characters in Resident Evil and S.W.A.T., you can at least say that these are women that can absolutely kick ass, and you have no problems believing they can hold their own against the guys in a combat situation. But with these pretty girl model types, about the only combat you'd ever imagine them being in would be fighting each other over a skirt at The Gap. And being a made-for-TV movie, you don't even get to see them naked, so what's the point of putting them in the damned movie?

It's not bad enough, though, to just have women on the team who obviously don't belong there. No, we've managed to put together the most incompentent group of "special forces" soldiers that have ever been committed to film! Let's start with the guy armed with the sniper rifle who, instead of shooting the spirit from a distance like any halfway competent marksman would do, feels the need to run right up to him -- close enough so that the spirit can stab him in the forehead with his spear! I still can't figure out how that would have been a fatal wound, seeing as how the guy obviously had no brains in his head of any sort whatsoever! I admit, being former military myself, and having a love of realistically done military/combat movies, I am really, really picky about how soldiers are presented in film. So little things that most people wouldn't notice (like the fact that these clueless losers are wearing TENNIS SHOES instead of combat boots) really bug the hell out of me. But even someone who's not a purist about these sorts of things has to just be stunned when the final two soldiers (Michael Rooker and one of the women) lose their bearings, and you actually hear the woman make the statement, "Moss grows on the north side of trees. We can use that to re-orient ourselves." It's called a compass, for Christ's sake! What the hell sort of soldier goes on a field mission without a damned compass!!

The list of things wrong with this movie just goes on and on (wow, looking back I can't believe how long my rant on this mess has gotten already). Repeatedly, I found myself thinking, "Who the hell thought THAT was a good idea?!" and "Someone actually agreed to spend money to film THAT?" Truly, truly a trainwreck of a movie. And like a trainwreck, you can't help but watch. I actually put a DVD on about a third of the way through this movie, but I kept putting off starting it to watch "just a few more minutes" of this, just out of morbid curiosity I guess to see what they'd do next. And once there was only 20 minutes or so left, I felt I had to see it through to the end just to see how the hell they were going to actually destroy this seemingly indestructable demon (who, of course, by this point has killed off all but two of the main characters, along with a couple of dozen bystanders). The creature ends up attacking a science lab/power plant type place of some sort (since I was on my computer at the same time and was only kind of watching the movie, I missed what exactly the place was, and how they lured the spirit into the place). They manage to get him locked in the "power core" room or whatever the hell it was, and zap him with huge amounts of electricity and blow him up (yeah, THERE'S an original concept!). And we all know that no lame B-movie like this would be complete without a brief shot during the end credits of the black-cloaked spirit riding off into the woods on his horse, completely whole again.

Generally I consider myself to be about as forgiving and easy-going a movie reviewer as you're likely to find, but I have to give this movie an absolute F, zero stars. If it wasn't for the fact that I was actually doing other things while I watched it, that would have been two hours of my life that I would have wanted back!! Whew! I feel better now! :-)

So that's it for today. In the coming weeks we've got Hostage, Robots, and The Ring Two (all of which look pretty good), so expect more reviews soon. And I may yet get down to the theatre to see Be Cool; we'll see what happens.

Ned Kelly

Well, I was starting to wonder if I'd ever see the day (well, not including his brief appearance in Black Hawk Down, anyways), but I actually watched a movie the other night that featured Orlando Bloom in a role where he WASN'T wielding either a sword or a bow and arrows. The movie in question would be Ned Kelly, starring Heath Ledger as the title character, with Orlando Bloom starring as his best friend. Ned Kelly is basically an Australian western, and tells the story of a real Australian outlaw - pretty much Australia's equivalent to Jesse James. Like Jesse James, he robbed banks and fought the police because of the corrupt nature of the government at that time (among other things, his mother was jailed in his place for a shooting that he didn't even commit).

All in all it was a pretty good movie. Heath Ledger does a great job, and Orlando is really good as a charming womanizer who's seducing every woman he encounters (not too surprising a role considering his appeal with the ladies). There's a great scene in the movie where he seduces a bank manager's wife while the gang is robbing the bank, while the bank manager sits in the other room wondering what his wife is doing. It's pretty funny.

The best scene, though, is the big gunfight finale of the movie. The police have this pub surrounded, and inside are Ned Kelly and the three other members of his gang (along with a bunch of innocent bystanders). The gang goes outside to meet the cops, wearing thick, heavy steel armor! They've even got simple helmets that they've hammered together. The cops, naturally, are more than a little shocked as they empty their guns into the four men, only to see them still standing there. The gang then start blasting away at the cops. And interestingly enough, this wasn't some Hollywood idea, but an event that actually happened. In the special features of the DVD is a featurette about the real Ned Kelly, and I guess this gunfight did really take place, and the armor Ned Kelly wore (basically just steal plates on his chest and back, and a crude helmet) is on display at a museum in Australia.

So if you're a fan of Jesse James type movies, or just Westerns in general, then I highly recommend Ned Kelly.