Do you have a hard time sleeping but don't want the side effects from sleeping pills? Don't worry. Just watch North by Northwest, the ultimate cure for insomnia!
It would be easy to dismiss Would You Rather as another mindless torture porn flick devoid of any artistic value whatsoever. I would even say that watching the film is probably the most unpleasant viewing experience I will have this year. However, the level of on screen violence is surprisingly restrained when compared to, say, the Saw films, and the story has a little more thought put into it than other horror films. While I won't say that Would You Rather is another mindless torture porn flick devoid of any artistic value, it's not revolutionary genre filmmaking either.
My opinion on this film is very mixed. It's a film that I know I would hate with my entire being, but the way it got a reaction out of me is quite admirable. I would be lying if I said I wasn't actively engaged or, perhaps, even entertained. However, the sheer mean-spiritedness that consumes the film should not be ignored. While one can credit the film's attempt to comment on human nature, it also has fun putting the audience in total misery too. In other words, the filmmakers want to have their cake and eat it, and that just doesn't work in this world. This issue is especially apparent in the ending, one that I'm sure the screenwriter created to top off all the ugliness that had already cumulated up to that point.
The ensemble cast is mostly sufficient, with Brittany Snow and Enver Gjokaj being the standouts. Jeffrey Combs, in particular, pulls off a memorable performance, but he was a little too over-the-top at points. The film is also well shot and lit, using implication to convey the violence than actually showing it in full detail, making it all the more effective. However, all of this doesn't result to much considering how utterly mean-spirited it is, which I'm pretty sure was the filmmakers' intent. Overall, Would You Rather, while an interesting viewing, is a nasty, ugly piece of work. 4/10
Every year, there is at least one film where the less you know going into it, the more you'll like it, whether it's last year's The Cabin in the Woods or every film involving J.J. Abrams. Side Effects is that film. Even watching the trailer, you still don't know what the hell the film is about, but for good reason. Suffice it to say what happens is quite good and very engaging. Side Effects is more about the battle of the wits than the battle of the brawn. That is to say that all the "action" and "excitement" in here is mainly conveyed through dialogue rather than action scenes, but it's damn fine dialogue.
The film is written by Scott Z. Burns who previously worked with director Steven Soderbergh in Contagion and The Informant!. He also wrote The Bourne Ultimatum and will pen the upcoming Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. As you can see, he has already proven himself as a (in)credible writer. You also have some terrific actors, including Rooney Mara and Jude Law. Mara is great as always, but it's Jude Law who surprises in the film. He has a really meaty role he can work with, and he pulls it off wonderfully. Catherine Zeta Jones is also excellent being in a complex role for what seems like the first time in quite a while. And I know a lot of people hate Channing Tatum and don't think he's an actor, but I think he's good for the screentime he's given.
Soderbergh stated in an interview that Side Effects will be his last theatrical film. If this is true, it's not a bad film to end a career with. In fact, it would be my favorite film of his from the ones I've seen so far. On the other hand, it would undoubtedly be unfortunate, since we'd be losing a gifted director. After all, can you think of a director who can also edit and shoot his/her own films splendidly? Oh, the use of depth of field and color and the way the shots are framed are just beautiful to look at. Side Effects is a mature thriller, a film that doesn't resort to action to keep the story exciting, which isn't to say that films with action are bad. Instead, it treats the audience with respect and doesn't insult their intelligence. Side Effects comes highly recommended by me. 9/10
Beautiful Creatures undoubtedly has a great cast. You have veteran actors like Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, and Emma Thompson, all of who do their best with the material they're given. Thompson, in particular, plays the villainous role in an over-the-top fashion, but it works because she's goddamn Emma Thompson. You also have the film's lead, Alden Ehrenreich, and I have to say this now: Ehrenreich is absolutely amazing in the film. He's charismatic, he's charming, and he completely sinks into his role with a terrific Southern accent thrown in for good measure. Seriously, he has a bright future ahead of him. On the other hand, there's Alice Englert. She is a capable young actress on her own, but compared to the force of nature that is Ehrenreich, she falls short. The two young actors have decent chemistry together, but it could have been a lot better.
However, what really hurts the film is the story. Beautiful Creatures is pretty much a waiting game. While watching, we're supposed to be thinking, "Will Englert's character turn evil or not?" However, the way the story is told during the second half makes everything feel so long, repetitive, and uninteresting. Characters spend scenes reading books and waiting, slowing the narrative down after the entertaining first hour. The film feels at least 30 minutes too long, and the mythology, while interesting, feels convoluted overall. It's also too melodramatic at times. You can literally feel the cheesiness ooze in some of the scenes. Additionally, you have badly edited dream scenes/flashbacks that end up looking like horrible music videos, making you wonder what the director was thinking. And then there's Emmy Rossum. While she is undeniably great as the sexy and seductive Ridley, she feels like she should be in a completely different film.
Beautiful Creatures starts off good, but once it gets to the meat of the story, it goes downhill from there. It's a shame because there are some terrific actors in here, including newcomer Alden Ehrenreich, who I cannot rave enough. I really wanted to like Beautiful Creatures, but I can't recommend it. For a superior Valentine feature, go watch Warm Bodies instead. 4/10
Before the trailer was released, everyone thought Warm Bodies was going to be "Twilight with zombies," although some would argue that Twilight was already filled with zombies. However, I'm happy to put this issue to rest: Warm Bodies is nothing like Twilight. They're not even in the same family tree. In fact, Warm Bodies is a clever take on the Romeo and Juliet story, spinning the zombie genre on its head. The way the film subverts and even breaks the rules of your typical zombie movie gave the film some freedom to play with the material that no other zombie movies have done before.
Now this may anger die-hard zombie fans, like how Twilight angered vampire fans. After all, zombies can't talk. That's just pure blasphemy! In this world, they do. Pure and simple. If it takes a film to break the rules in order to breathe in new life to a certain genre (i.e. The Cabin in the Woods, Scream) and to tell more refreshing stories, I want more filmmakers to start breaking the rules. Warm Bodies is unlike any zombie flick OR romantic-comedy you've ever seen before. It's original. It's unique. It's invigorating. It's just plain exciting to watch unfold onscreen.
The film has its funny moments and its horror moments, but what really sells the film is its genuine heart. Its plea for hope, compassion, and empathy is something rarely seen in films, and it works without feeling like it's hitting us over in the head with it. There are moments where you get to know the characters - and I mean really get to know them - that are so poignant and unexpected that it hits you right in the heart. And I cried. Oh, yes, I did. Several times, in fact. It also helps that the film's leads, Nicholas Hoult and Teresa Palmer, are terrific and have great chemistry as well. Rob Corddry is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors, and he has some great moments in the film. Additionally, Dave Franco is pretty damn good, especially if you consider the unconventional way the filmmakers develop his character.
To say the least, Warm Bodies blew me away. It's an extremely well made film with an even greater story to support it. However, coming from 50/50 director Jonathan Levine, it also shouldn't be that surprising. Warm Bodies is already a contender to be one of the best films of 2013. 9/10
If there is one thing Upside Down has going for it, it's the visuals. Good God, the film is gorgeous to look at. We've seen hints of a similar visual style in the Total Recall remake and Inception, but the filmmakers milk the unique look in Upside Down in as many frames as possible. At times, the visual puns can be a bit too obnoxious to the point it becomes stupid, but overall, they portray the "dual gravity" idea really creatively. Of course, with fantasy films like this that operate within its own set of rules, you usually have to ignore the implausibilities and just go along for the ride.
However, the story is a whole different matter. As the film opens to explain the world's rules through voice over rather than showing it on screen, I knew I was in for trouble. Within the first five minutes, exposition after exposition is thrown to the audience at such a quick pace it's almost impossible to keep up. It also doesn't help that the dialogue is downright embarrassing. With the film's over-reliance on narration, Upside Down leaves little time for its characters to develop which consequently makes the story as a whole feel contrived.
For example, the love interest that grows between the film's two main characters comes out of nowhere. Unfortunately, actors Jim Sturgess and Kirsten Dunst don't have the chemistry to sell their newfound romance authentically as well. Every story development feels fake and mechanical where it should feel natural. Furthermore, the film lacks any real climax, so the last 20 minutes where everything should build up to a resounding resolution, instead, just fizzles out to an anti-climatic, deus-ex-machina-like ending as if the story didn't know how else to end.
Upside Down has a great idea that should have been a lot better than it ended up being. However, it's obvious the filmmakers were more interested in focusing on the visuals than actually telling a good story. Upside Down proves that as awesome as visuals can be, it can't overshadow incompetent storytelling and a weak plot. 3/10
Concept of the anthology: 26 letters in the alphabet, 26 shorts, and all must have at least one death and open and close with the color red. To say the anthology is a mixed bag is obvious. You have some good films here mixed with a lot of bad ones mixed with a whole lot of forgettable ones. The ABCs of Death just proves how incredibly hard it is to make a good short film, and I'm sad to say the bad far outweighs the good.
The first decent short does not come all the way until the letter L, which is almost halfway through the alphabet. It's not until you get to the second half of the letters where you finally begin to see some good shorts, my favorite being Q, directed by Adam Wingard. Other notable filmmakers involved include Ti West (M) and Nacho Vigalondo (A). Unfortunately, West's segment feels incredibly lazy and shot in five minutes while Vigalondo's segment rehashes the same apocalypse premise we've seen many times before. T is a notable segment because it was for a competition, and it's one of the best ones here. X is the most violent (and is also very good), which isn't surprising coming from French filmmaker Xavier Gens (Frontier(s)).
Shorts F, J, and Z are all Japanese, which you think might be a good thing, but they are huge stinkers in the bunch, especially F is for Fart. It's pretty much self-explanatory. Another one that I hated is W, appropriately titled WTF! O is the most visually breathtaking with uses of slow-mo and sound effects, but it's pretty much style over substance. But hey, compared to most of the shorts you see, it's a welcome change. G seems to be the most pointless one where all you see is a guy surfing. Seriously, I'm not joking. That's all there is.
I guess I was a bit pissed off watching this because, as an aspiring filmmaker, if someone were to give me $5000 to make a short, I would work very hard in creating something good. Seeing all the wasted effort from most of the filmmakers here just angered me. Overall, The ABCs of Death, while a neat idea, is mostly just a collection of forgettable to incredibly bad shorts sprinkled with very few good ones. 3/10
The Good: L, N, P, Q, T, U, X The Bad: E, F, G, H, J, M, W, Z The Best: Q The Worst: W The Forgettable: All others not listed.
The Road starts off very strong. The first segment scared the hell out of me, something that almost rarely happens to me. Sure, the film doesn't have a high budget, and it probably would have benefited if they could manage to pull off the effects they were trying to achieve, but the small budget is sufficient enough. However, after the first segment, the film gets noticeably less exciting as we're given more backstory and information to solve the whole mystery surrounding the story. It would have helped if they tighten up the pace a bit, keep things going rather than slow everything down. Still, there is a satisfying payoff by the end as everything falls into place as well as unexpected emotional pathos rarely seen in horror films. Overall, the film reminds me of a Tarantino horror film. It's ambitious and may be a bit too convoluted for its own good, but it's above-average horror. 6.5/10
There isn't much to be said about PA4 other than the reality that the series is losing its touch. The scares are noticeably more lazy, lame, predictable, and less creative. The story doesn't make a lick of sense, but then again, did the story ever matter in these films? The audience is also given the short end of the stick regarding the climax as it is surprisingly short and unfulfilling compared to the previous films. I will admit there were a few moments of dark, if not mean-spirited, scenes as the younger protagonists are put into danger. Additionally, a few nods to classic horror films, such as Poltergeist, The Shining, and The Omen, can never hurt. But PA4 is overall a disappointing and wholly forgettable experience, caught in the law of diminishing returns that most horror films fall into. 4/10
Was I the only person who caught the Midnight Meat Train joke or was it just me? Otherwise, a terrific film showcasing amazing performances from Jennifer Lawrence and especially Bradley Cooper.
I liked TCM the first time I saw it. It scared and disturbed me. On a rewatch, however, I noticed a lot of flaws pertaining to this B-movie slasher flick that cannot be ignored. But before I get to all that, there is a lot to admire about the film: the foreboding atmosphere, Leatherface's first appearance which is shocking and memorable, the Grandpa character, and it's competently made by a filmmaker who knows what he's doing.
However, there are some downright frustrating things about the film, the main one being the characters. Unfortunately, the most sympathetic/least annoying characters are
killed off first.
And then there's Frankie. Oh, Frankie, Frankie, Frankie. I don't know how I could stand him the first time around, but he is such an annoying character, despite him being in a wheelchair. The scene with him refusing to give his sister Sally the flashlight makes me want to punch a kitten in the face, but that's just one of many occasions where I wanted him to die,
and, fortunately, he does
. Next, there's Sally. She makes the second half of the film almost unbearable to watch. Her constant screaming is an assault to the senses. It may very well rival Michael Bay's action scenes in any of the Transformers films in giving you a headache. Seriously, apart from flailing around uselessly, that's all she does in the entire film. As opposed to Laurie in Halloween, she makes one hell of an incompetent heroine.
Furthermore, there isn't much of a plot here. It's pretty uneventful when compared to the 2003 remake. The film doesn't give any chances for the victims to fight back, and they die too easily which I guess is the point to show Leatherface as a big, unstoppable monster or whatever. Where's the fun in that when there's no even playing field though? But maybe this isn't supposed to be a fun, entertaining film. If the filmmakers' job was to scare people, TCM only does so on occasion. Again, having actress Marilyn Burns screaming is more aggravating than scary, and you have villains (the father and brother) who are just as annoying. Overall, TCM has a lot of potential in being a great horror film, but falls short mainly due to its characters. 5/10
Glossy, slick, bloody, violent, dumb, crowd-pleasing, and undeniably entertaining. Filled with every gangster genre cliche rolled into one, Gangster Squad ain't high art, nor is it aiming to be. It seemed as if director Fleischer was trying to tell this story in the most fun possible way, and he succeeds with flying colors. The film is at its best when its loud and dumb but falters when it tries to be anything more than that.
The cast seems like they're having fun, especially Sean Penn who has a field day with his role as the villain Mickey Cohen. The lines he's given are pure gold. Josh Brolin does a great job as the lead and Ryan Gosling is charming and charismatic as usual. However, Emma Stone is underused with a thankless role, but it's nice that she's in the film anyway. Overall, Gangster Squad is fun entertainment. No judgments, little pretense. 7/10
In which Kim throws grenades off rooftops and Bryan's incredible orientation skills will make you think "Dafuq just happened?!" You will just have to see the film to witness how utterly ridiculous it all is. However, Taken 2 may very well be one of the most entertaining bad films I've ever seen. A colossal of miscalculations must surely have been done intentionally, right?!
As much as the film sucked, the plot twist got me. I did not see it coming at all and made me think "That's pretty clever." One of the better twists I've seen in quite awhile. Apart from that, it's not a well made film which is a shame because the story is really interesting. I'm sure in the right hands, HATES could have been good.
Yeah, I cried. I felt empathy for the characters because they felt like genuine people. I felt like I was there with them through their tremendous struggle. As it is the case with sappy films like this, I'm sure some people won't buy into the film's melodrama. But I did. The film is incredibly well made and directed and the actors simply wonderful that everything felt true and genuine, not fake and manipulative. And that's the difference. The Impossible proves that Juan Antonio Bayona is a director to look out for. Additionally, hats off to Tom Holland. He's terrific in the film. 9/10
It's endearing, Ellen Page gives a phenomenal performance as the title character, the script is insanely fantastic, and it's overall an amazing film. I don't see how anyone can not like it.
THE SOCIAL NETWORK is not about Facebook. It's about Mark Zuckerberg and the people associated with him and the consequences that arise with the evolution of Facebook. In an even broader sense, it's about friends being driven apart due to money and betrayal. Because of this, it's no surprise that many have already compared this to CITIZEN KANE. And it's not just the similarities in themes that are astounding, it's the quality as well.
What makes THE SOCIAL NETWORK so good is the masterfully written script by Aaron Sorkin. The film is filled with impeccable dialog that just sucks you in. It would be no surprise if the film won an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay. Director David Fincher also does a great job keeping the audience captivated through and through with a consistently fast pace. Really, you'll probably be drawn to the film's opening argument between two characters than any other scene this year. All right, I'm exaggerating, but you get the point. It's not Fincher's best work, but it's in the top 3.
Jesse Eisenberg and co-star Andrew Garfield are the driving force behind this film. Eisenberg does a terrific job delivering the lines as he did while Garfield brings in an emotional aspect to the film. Although both are quite excellent, Garfield's performance is Oscar worthy. Rooney Mara is quickly getting up the ladder after having last seen her in the remake of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET in the beginning of the year. She's just in a few scenes, but she's great in them. I would have like to see her more in the film, though. Apparently, Armie Hammer played two characters as twins in the film, which really blew me away when I found out because I thought they were two different actors. He really distinguished the characters really well. Oh, and if you're worried about Justin Timberlake, don't be. He's really good in here. I also loved Rashida Jones in the few scenes she was in.
With terrific performances from the cast all around, a brilliant script, some fine directing by Fincher, and an engaging score by Trent Reznor, it should be no surprise that THE SOCIAL NETWORK succeeded the way it did. Although it's a 2-hour dialog driven film, it absolutely engrossing to watch. If anything, this is probably the closest modern version of CITIZEN KANE that we will ever get in a long time. THE SOCIAL NETWORK is easily one of the best films of the year. 10/10
Comments 1 - 25 of 40
Movie comment on North by Northwest
moviewizguy
Do you have a hard time sleeping but don't want the side effects from sleeping pills? Don't worry. Just watch North by Northwest, the ultimate cure for insomnia!Movie comment on Would You Rather
moviewizguy
It would be easy to dismiss Would You Rather as another mindless torture porn flick devoid of any artistic value whatsoever. I would even say that watching the film is probably the most unpleasant viewing experience I will have this year. However, the level of on screen violence is surprisingly restrained when compared to, say, the Saw films, and the story has a little more thought put into it than other horror films. While I won't say that Would You Rather is another mindless torture porn flick devoid of any artistic value, it's not revolutionary genre filmmaking either.My opinion on this film is very mixed. It's a film that I know I would hate with my entire being, but the way it got a reaction out of me is quite admirable. I would be lying if I said I wasn't actively engaged or, perhaps, even entertained. However, the sheer mean-spiritedness that consumes the film should not be ignored. While one can credit the film's attempt to comment on human nature, it also has fun putting the audience in total misery too. In other words, the filmmakers want to have their cake and eat it, and that just doesn't work in this world. This issue is especially apparent in the ending, one that I'm sure the screenwriter created to top off all the ugliness that had already cumulated up to that point.
The ensemble cast is mostly sufficient, with Brittany Snow and Enver Gjokaj being the standouts. Jeffrey Combs, in particular, pulls off a memorable performance, but he was a little too over-the-top at points. The film is also well shot and lit, using implication to convey the violence than actually showing it in full detail, making it all the more effective. However, all of this doesn't result to much considering how utterly mean-spirited it is, which I'm pretty sure was the filmmakers' intent. Overall, Would You Rather, while an interesting viewing, is a nasty, ugly piece of work. 4/10
Movie comment on Side Effects
moviewizguy
Every year, there is at least one film where the less you know going into it, the more you'll like it, whether it's last year's The Cabin in the Woods or every film involving J.J. Abrams. Side Effects is that film. Even watching the trailer, you still don't know what the hell the film is about, but for good reason. Suffice it to say what happens is quite good and very engaging. Side Effects is more about the battle of the wits than the battle of the brawn. That is to say that all the "action" and "excitement" in here is mainly conveyed through dialogue rather than action scenes, but it's damn fine dialogue.The film is written by Scott Z. Burns who previously worked with director Steven Soderbergh in Contagion and The Informant!. He also wrote The Bourne Ultimatum and will pen the upcoming Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. As you can see, he has already proven himself as a (in)credible writer. You also have some terrific actors, including Rooney Mara and Jude Law. Mara is great as always, but it's Jude Law who surprises in the film. He has a really meaty role he can work with, and he pulls it off wonderfully. Catherine Zeta Jones is also excellent being in a complex role for what seems like the first time in quite a while. And I know a lot of people hate Channing Tatum and don't think he's an actor, but I think he's good for the screentime he's given.
Soderbergh stated in an interview that Side Effects will be his last theatrical film. If this is true, it's not a bad film to end a career with. In fact, it would be my favorite film of his from the ones I've seen so far. On the other hand, it would undoubtedly be unfortunate, since we'd be losing a gifted director. After all, can you think of a director who can also edit and shoot his/her own films splendidly? Oh, the use of depth of field and color and the way the shots are framed are just beautiful to look at. Side Effects is a mature thriller, a film that doesn't resort to action to keep the story exciting, which isn't to say that films with action are bad. Instead, it treats the audience with respect and doesn't insult their intelligence. Side Effects comes highly recommended by me. 9/10
Movie comment on Beautiful Creatures
moviewizguy
Beautiful Creatures undoubtedly has a great cast. You have veteran actors like Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, and Emma Thompson, all of who do their best with the material they're given. Thompson, in particular, plays the villainous role in an over-the-top fashion, but it works because she's goddamn Emma Thompson. You also have the film's lead, Alden Ehrenreich, and I have to say this now: Ehrenreich is absolutely amazing in the film. He's charismatic, he's charming, and he completely sinks into his role with a terrific Southern accent thrown in for good measure. Seriously, he has a bright future ahead of him. On the other hand, there's Alice Englert. She is a capable young actress on her own, but compared to the force of nature that is Ehrenreich, she falls short. The two young actors have decent chemistry together, but it could have been a lot better.However, what really hurts the film is the story. Beautiful Creatures is pretty much a waiting game. While watching, we're supposed to be thinking, "Will Englert's character turn evil or not?" However, the way the story is told during the second half makes everything feel so long, repetitive, and uninteresting. Characters spend scenes reading books and waiting, slowing the narrative down after the entertaining first hour. The film feels at least 30 minutes too long, and the mythology, while interesting, feels convoluted overall. It's also too melodramatic at times. You can literally feel the cheesiness ooze in some of the scenes. Additionally, you have badly edited dream scenes/flashbacks that end up looking like horrible music videos, making you wonder what the director was thinking. And then there's Emmy Rossum. While she is undeniably great as the sexy and seductive Ridley, she feels like she should be in a completely different film.
Beautiful Creatures starts off good, but once it gets to the meat of the story, it goes downhill from there. It's a shame because there are some terrific actors in here, including newcomer Alden Ehrenreich, who I cannot rave enough. I really wanted to like Beautiful Creatures, but I can't recommend it. For a superior Valentine feature, go watch Warm Bodies instead. 4/10
Movie comment on Warm Bodies
moviewizguy
Before the trailer was released, everyone thought Warm Bodies was going to be "Twilight with zombies," although some would argue that Twilight was already filled with zombies. However, I'm happy to put this issue to rest: Warm Bodies is nothing like Twilight. They're not even in the same family tree. In fact, Warm Bodies is a clever take on the Romeo and Juliet story, spinning the zombie genre on its head. The way the film subverts and even breaks the rules of your typical zombie movie gave the film some freedom to play with the material that no other zombie movies have done before.Now this may anger die-hard zombie fans, like how Twilight angered vampire fans. After all, zombies can't talk. That's just pure blasphemy! In this world, they do. Pure and simple. If it takes a film to break the rules in order to breathe in new life to a certain genre (i.e. The Cabin in the Woods, Scream) and to tell more refreshing stories, I want more filmmakers to start breaking the rules. Warm Bodies is unlike any zombie flick OR romantic-comedy you've ever seen before. It's original. It's unique. It's invigorating. It's just plain exciting to watch unfold onscreen.
The film has its funny moments and its horror moments, but what really sells the film is its genuine heart. Its plea for hope, compassion, and empathy is something rarely seen in films, and it works without feeling like it's hitting us over in the head with it. There are moments where you get to know the characters - and I mean really get to know them - that are so poignant and unexpected that it hits you right in the heart. And I cried. Oh, yes, I did. Several times, in fact. It also helps that the film's leads, Nicholas Hoult and Teresa Palmer, are terrific and have great chemistry as well. Rob Corddry is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors, and he has some great moments in the film. Additionally, Dave Franco is pretty damn good, especially if you consider the unconventional way the filmmakers develop his character.
To say the least, Warm Bodies blew me away. It's an extremely well made film with an even greater story to support it. However, coming from 50/50 director Jonathan Levine, it also shouldn't be that surprising. Warm Bodies is already a contender to be one of the best films of 2013. 9/10
Movie comment on Upside Down
moviewizguy
If there is one thing Upside Down has going for it, it's the visuals. Good God, the film is gorgeous to look at. We've seen hints of a similar visual style in the Total Recall remake and Inception, but the filmmakers milk the unique look in Upside Down in as many frames as possible. At times, the visual puns can be a bit too obnoxious to the point it becomes stupid, but overall, they portray the "dual gravity" idea really creatively. Of course, with fantasy films like this that operate within its own set of rules, you usually have to ignore the implausibilities and just go along for the ride.However, the story is a whole different matter. As the film opens to explain the world's rules through voice over rather than showing it on screen, I knew I was in for trouble. Within the first five minutes, exposition after exposition is thrown to the audience at such a quick pace it's almost impossible to keep up. It also doesn't help that the dialogue is downright embarrassing. With the film's over-reliance on narration, Upside Down leaves little time for its characters to develop which consequently makes the story as a whole feel contrived.
For example, the love interest that grows between the film's two main characters comes out of nowhere. Unfortunately, actors Jim Sturgess and Kirsten Dunst don't have the chemistry to sell their newfound romance authentically as well. Every story development feels fake and mechanical where it should feel natural. Furthermore, the film lacks any real climax, so the last 20 minutes where everything should build up to a resounding resolution, instead, just fizzles out to an anti-climatic, deus-ex-machina-like ending as if the story didn't know how else to end.
Upside Down has a great idea that should have been a lot better than it ended up being. However, it's obvious the filmmakers were more interested in focusing on the visuals than actually telling a good story. Upside Down proves that as awesome as visuals can be, it can't overshadow incompetent storytelling and a weak plot. 3/10
Movie comment on Bear
moviewizguy
If you enjoyed the first film, you'll enjoy the sequel. Great short! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKeooK0zfeUMovie comment on The ABCs of Death
moviewizguy
Concept of the anthology: 26 letters in the alphabet, 26 shorts, and all must have at least one death and open and close with the color red. To say the anthology is a mixed bag is obvious. You have some good films here mixed with a lot of bad ones mixed with a whole lot of forgettable ones. The ABCs of Death just proves how incredibly hard it is to make a good short film, and I'm sad to say the bad far outweighs the good.The first decent short does not come all the way until the letter L, which is almost halfway through the alphabet. It's not until you get to the second half of the letters where you finally begin to see some good shorts, my favorite being Q, directed by Adam Wingard. Other notable filmmakers involved include Ti West (M) and Nacho Vigalondo (A). Unfortunately, West's segment feels incredibly lazy and shot in five minutes while Vigalondo's segment rehashes the same apocalypse premise we've seen many times before. T is a notable segment because it was for a competition, and it's one of the best ones here. X is the most violent (and is also very good), which isn't surprising coming from French filmmaker Xavier Gens (Frontier(s)).
Shorts F, J, and Z are all Japanese, which you think might be a good thing, but they are huge stinkers in the bunch, especially F is for Fart. It's pretty much self-explanatory. Another one that I hated is W, appropriately titled WTF! O is the most visually breathtaking with uses of slow-mo and sound effects, but it's pretty much style over substance. But hey, compared to most of the shorts you see, it's a welcome change. G seems to be the most pointless one where all you see is a guy surfing. Seriously, I'm not joking. That's all there is.
I guess I was a bit pissed off watching this because, as an aspiring filmmaker, if someone were to give me $5000 to make a short, I would work very hard in creating something good. Seeing all the wasted effort from most of the filmmakers here just angered me. Overall, The ABCs of Death, while a neat idea, is mostly just a collection of forgettable to incredibly bad shorts sprinkled with very few good ones. 3/10
The Good: L, N, P, Q, T, U, X
The Bad: E, F, G, H, J, M, W, Z
The Best: Q
The Worst: W
The Forgettable: All others not listed.
Movie comment on La cabina
moviewizguy
A short film where a guy is stuck in a phone booth and builds up to a disturbing, but inevitable, conclusion.Movie comment on The Innkeepers
moviewizguy
Satisfying payoff: Ti West's worst enemy.Movie comment on The Road
moviewizguy
The Road starts off very strong. The first segment scared the hell out of me, something that almost rarely happens to me. Sure, the film doesn't have a high budget, and it probably would have benefited if they could manage to pull off the effects they were trying to achieve, but the small budget is sufficient enough. However, after the first segment, the film gets noticeably less exciting as we're given more backstory and information to solve the whole mystery surrounding the story. It would have helped if they tighten up the pace a bit, keep things going rather than slow everything down. Still, there is a satisfying payoff by the end as everything falls into place as well as unexpected emotional pathos rarely seen in horror films. Overall, the film reminds me of a Tarantino horror film. It's ambitious and may be a bit too convoluted for its own good, but it's above-average horror. 6.5/10Movie comment on Paranormal Activity 4
moviewizguy
There isn't much to be said about PA4 other than the reality that the series is losing its touch. The scares are noticeably more lazy, lame, predictable, and less creative. The story doesn't make a lick of sense, but then again, did the story ever matter in these films? The audience is also given the short end of the stick regarding the climax as it is surprisingly short and unfulfilling compared to the previous films. I will admit there were a few moments of dark, if not mean-spirited, scenes as the younger protagonists are put into danger. Additionally, a few nods to classic horror films, such as Poltergeist, The Shining, and The Omen, can never hurt. But PA4 is overall a disappointing and wholly forgettable experience, caught in the law of diminishing returns that most horror films fall into. 4/10Movie comment on Silver Linings Playbook
moviewizguy
Was I the only person who caught the Midnight Meat Train joke or was it just me? Otherwise, a terrific film showcasing amazing performances from Jennifer Lawrence and especially Bradley Cooper.Movie comment on The Texas Chain Saw Massacre
moviewizguy
I liked TCM the first time I saw it. It scared and disturbed me. On a rewatch, however, I noticed a lot of flaws pertaining to this B-movie slasher flick that cannot be ignored. But before I get to all that, there is a lot to admire about the film: the foreboding atmosphere, Leatherface's first appearance which is shocking and memorable, the Grandpa character, and it's competently made by a filmmaker who knows what he's doing.However, there are some downright frustrating things about the film, the main one being the characters. Unfortunately, the most sympathetic/least annoying characters are
Furthermore, there isn't much of a plot here. It's pretty uneventful when compared to the 2003 remake. The film doesn't give any chances for the victims to fight back, and they die too easily which I guess is the point to show Leatherface as a big, unstoppable monster or whatever. Where's the fun in that when there's no even playing field though? But maybe this isn't supposed to be a fun, entertaining film. If the filmmakers' job was to scare people, TCM only does so on occasion. Again, having actress Marilyn Burns screaming is more aggravating than scary, and you have villains (the father and brother) who are just as annoying. Overall, TCM has a lot of potential in being a great horror film, but falls short mainly due to its characters. 5/10
Movie comment on Jaws
moviewizguy
I always considered the first half to be much better than the second. The second half is so uninteresting to me. I don't like Quint at all.Movie comment on Mientras duermes
moviewizguy
A first-rate thriller. "Messed up" doesn't even begin to describe the film.Movie comment on Gangster Squad
moviewizguy
Glossy, slick, bloody, violent, dumb, crowd-pleasing, and undeniably entertaining. Filled with every gangster genre cliche rolled into one, Gangster Squad ain't high art, nor is it aiming to be. It seemed as if director Fleischer was trying to tell this story in the most fun possible way, and he succeeds with flying colors. The film is at its best when its loud and dumb but falters when it tries to be anything more than that.The cast seems like they're having fun, especially Sean Penn who has a field day with his role as the villain Mickey Cohen. The lines he's given are pure gold. Josh Brolin does a great job as the lead and Ryan Gosling is charming and charismatic as usual. However, Emma Stone is underused with a thankless role, but it's nice that she's in the film anyway. Overall, Gangster Squad is fun entertainment. No judgments, little pretense. 7/10
Movie comment on Taken 2
moviewizguy
In which Kim throws grenades off rooftops and Bryan's incredible orientation skills will make you think "Dafuq just happened?!" You will just have to see the film to witness how utterly ridiculous it all is. However, Taken 2 may very well be one of the most entertaining bad films I've ever seen. A colossal of miscalculations must surely have been done intentionally, right?!Movie comment on House at the End of the Street
moviewizguy
As much as the film sucked, the plot twist got me. I did not see it coming at all and made me think "That's pretty clever." One of the better twists I've seen in quite awhile. Apart from that, it's not a well made film which is a shame because the story is really interesting. I'm sure in the right hands, HATES could have been good.Movie comment on The Cold Light of Day
moviewizguy
I may or may not have seen this just for Henry Cavill. As bad as the film was, it was kinda worth--ok, ok. It was totally worth it.Movie comment on Lo imposible
moviewizguy
Just a few weeks ago, I complained about how emotionally manipulative Les Misérables (2012) was. Yes, every film is manipulative in a way to elicit a certain reaction from the audience, whether it is to be scared during a horror film or laughter during a comedy. If a film is constructed badly, you see the tricks the filmmakers use on and off camera, making everything feel fake and contrived, which is the case with something like Les Misérables. However, if done well, you get something magnificent like The Impossible.Yeah, I cried. I felt empathy for the characters because they felt like genuine people. I felt like I was there with them through their tremendous struggle. As it is the case with sappy films like this, I'm sure some people won't buy into the film's melodrama. But I did. The film is incredibly well made and directed and the actors simply wonderful that everything felt true and genuine, not fake and manipulative. And that's the difference. The Impossible proves that Juan Antonio Bayona is a director to look out for. Additionally, hats off to Tom Holland. He's terrific in the film. 9/10
Movie comment on Juno
moviewizguy
It's endearing, Ellen Page gives a phenomenal performance as the title character, the script is insanely fantastic, and it's overall an amazing film. I don't see how anyone can not like it.Movie comment on The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans
moviewizguy
Werner Herzog + Nicolas Cage = wonderful entertainment you can't get anywhere else.Movie comment on Children of Men
moviewizguy
Dem long takes.Movie comment on The Social Network
moviewizguy
Written on 2 October 2010THE SOCIAL NETWORK is not about Facebook. It's about Mark Zuckerberg and the people associated with him and the consequences that arise with the evolution of Facebook. In an even broader sense, it's about friends being driven apart due to money and betrayal. Because of this, it's no surprise that many have already compared this to CITIZEN KANE. And it's not just the similarities in themes that are astounding, it's the quality as well.
What makes THE SOCIAL NETWORK so good is the masterfully written script by Aaron Sorkin. The film is filled with impeccable dialog that just sucks you in. It would be no surprise if the film won an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay. Director David Fincher also does a great job keeping the audience captivated through and through with a consistently fast pace. Really, you'll probably be drawn to the film's opening argument between two characters than any other scene this year. All right, I'm exaggerating, but you get the point. It's not Fincher's best work, but it's in the top 3.
Jesse Eisenberg and co-star Andrew Garfield are the driving force behind this film. Eisenberg does a terrific job delivering the lines as he did while Garfield brings in an emotional aspect to the film. Although both are quite excellent, Garfield's performance is Oscar worthy. Rooney Mara is quickly getting up the ladder after having last seen her in the remake of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET in the beginning of the year. She's just in a few scenes, but she's great in them. I would have like to see her more in the film, though. Apparently, Armie Hammer played two characters as twins in the film, which really blew me away when I found out because I thought they were two different actors. He really distinguished the characters really well. Oh, and if you're worried about Justin Timberlake, don't be. He's really good in here. I also loved Rashida Jones in the few scenes she was in.
With terrific performances from the cast all around, a brilliant script, some fine directing by Fincher, and an engaging score by Trent Reznor, it should be no surprise that THE SOCIAL NETWORK succeeded the way it did. Although it's a 2-hour dialog driven film, it absolutely engrossing to watch. If anything, this is probably the closest modern version of CITIZEN KANE that we will ever get in a long time. THE SOCIAL NETWORK is easily one of the best films of the year. 10/10
Showing items 1 – 25 of 40