How to Train Your Dragon review

I decided last night to wait on writing this review simply because... I was hot piss angry about it. Which I shouldn't be given that it's a kids film I went into with low expectations, however it was blending in to the blob of family junk food movies that we're hit with dozens of times a year that are filled with dated pop culture comments, tasteless jokes, overly cartoonish design and worst of all monsters with no spine. But I thought it over really hard and realized I shouldn't take out my frustrations on this single picture and instead need to just focus on it's flaws and successes and nothing else. SO let's do that!

"How to Train Your Dragon" is a tailor made movie for kids in that 7 to 12 year old range that just like seeing movies with jokes and action and damn the rest; and for their parents who either never had too good of cinematic taste to begin with or who have been mentally brought down to the level of their child and think this junk works. Easily this is out of my demographic, but hell I enjoyed "Kung-Fu Panda" and "Monster House" and those were out of my demographic, so really that shouldn't matter too much. The problem here is it's pure old junk food, with nothing added to make it taste better. All the vikings have 'funny' names like Hiccup and Stoick and live in a very viking world of screaming violently and running around trying to kill things. I'm not saying vikings didn't do that, but there pretty much one big, bearded stereotype in the movie. Jay Baruchel voices our dweebish hero Hiccup with his dweebish fucking voice which works well... if he wasn't a main character and thus didn't have to hear him so often. This is something that worked for him in "Tropic Thunder".

Hiccup wants to be a viking, but instead is a loser that disappoints his father (voiced by Gerard Butler) on a regular basis and causes much chaos in the village. OK now let's get good ole' Toothless the 'dragon' with is really just a mixture of a cat and a newt with wings. They attempt to make that dragon as cute... scratch that they attempt to make every dragon as cute as possible while still trying to make things as adventurous as possible. That concept kind of works in the final act which is strangely filled with better looking and moving imagery, but nothing amazing or awe inspiring. A cute winged cat-newt and an ugly six eyed, winged version of Roland Emmerich's Godzilla going head to head in dark clouds; not quite cool, but not lame either. Sadly that's the only sequence I can get behind.

I notice that a lot of people aren't so hard on judging animated kids movies and that right there could be the problem. If creators know that now matter what they do as long as it has a mild story and moral and some action or comedy, then they're looking at mega money and at least decent reviews. And maybe I wouldn't be so feeling so bad after watching this movie if there were more animated movies or just kids movies in general with balls now-a-days. If we could have a family adventure picture come out that could give kids something fresh and interesting to look at and think about. Something that might scare them a bit or confuse them some, but damned if it won't stick with em' so they remember that and want to re-watch it when they're older to see if it still has that effect. Oh wait we did have that last year. One was called "Avatar" and was quickly trumped up into an awards film and hated on to a high level because of that and the other was called "Fantastic Mr. Fox"... show of hands, who saw that last movie? *crickets* I see...

Perhaps crap like "How to Train Your Dragon", "Monsters vs. Aliens" and upcoming crap like "Sherk Forever After" and "Despicable Me" is what parents, kids and I guess everybody else wants to see. On the one hand they get the big bucks and nobody yells out that it's ripped off from something else or it's too long or weird or has a bad message and all that. It appears that audiences don't care as long as they're content with what it is and nothing more. But on the other hand this has got me all depressed for the future of cinema and shit because then most of the impressive stuff goes unseen and mediocrity reigns. But until producers or audiences wake up, some of us will have to await in silence for animated films NOT made for kids (like the Fincher, Eastman, Cameron, Verbinski, Snyder etc collaboration of "Heavy Metal") or just any kids picture that's not dumbed down as far as possible (basically most non-U.S. made kids films that reach our country. Or things from Pixar... sometimes.)

Hot Tub Time Machine review

Is it possible that in a world where we have shit comedies throughout the entire year, that a film with such a ridiculous title and premise could be not only entertaining and funny, but in fact an all around great comedy? I ask this pretending as if I wasn't sold on the movie from the first time I watched the original redband teaser which had Craig Robinson screaming about 'Terminator' with cocaine all over his face. Ok "Hot Tub Time Machine" isn't some masterpiece of cinema and nor was it ever destined for that, but it is a great comedy that's original and relentlessly entertaining.

I should also state that this film is made by the same team that brought us "Grosse Point Blank" and my favorite Cusack picture, "High Fidelity", so that too was something that ran through my mind when factoring in what could this be like. Cusack plays the kind of guy that he's great at playing, snarky, alone and somewhat depressed, but never so gone that he would admit to being depressed. Beyond that he's just a fun dude to watch on screen because he lacks that 'I'm a big star' look and feel to his performances, making him seem like anybody. Craig Robinson has stole a many of scenes in a many of shows and movies and finally here he gets some quality screen time. His timing and demeanor makes almost every joke he delivers work to perfection. Rob Corddry gets to play the asshole friend... you know him or her. Robinson and Cusack explain it quite well in the film as 'he's that asshole friend, but he's our asshole'. We've all got somebody in our lives kind of like that. However Corddry is that guy on crack, but as over the top as he gets, it really works out. And lastly Clark Duke who we'll see in "Kick Ass" and I remember for "Sex Drive", a very funny and underrated comedy. Duke is the rational one not from the 80's and thus is trying to get things steady so he actually ends up existing still.

In present times it can be said that all four of these guys lives suck. They are bored, lifeless, existing in their own selves for the most part and slowly going through their paces. That is until Conddry's character Lou attempts to kill himself. The boys then decide to take a trip back to where they had some of the best times of their lives only to find out that for the most part the town is boarded up and the ski lodge they loved so much has pretty much become a wreck. However after a long bout of crap, the hot tub beings working, they begin drinking and an accident launches them back to 1986, the weekend so much happened for them all.

Ok, now to the our concept of time travel via this film. From what it appears I would say we're dealing with "Back to the Future" logic. Meaning if you change too much of the past then you mess you the future. Now how said hot tub time machine got there and what not is never explained or anything like that. All that is known is that after the boys reach 1986, Chevy Chase appears from time to time as a maintenance man trying to fix it and get them back to 2010.

In 1986 however they were all in their prime and loving life for the most part. Partying, hooking up, the whole nine. But they must attempt to stay on that path and what they did back then to ensure their futures... although one would wonder since their futures suck... might they want to try something different. This leads to several funny and well thought out sequences that sometimes don't feel like they're here to tell the story, but just here to tell a joke. And it works well. The soundtrack is another point of notice where they use a lot classic 80's tunes at just the right moment and know just how to make a funny moment funnier. Seriously anyone doubting this movie is an idiot; I'd very much like to see it again and see if it holds well as that was an issue of mine I had with last years "The Hangover". A film that I did very much like, but works best on that first viewing and then again when you haven't watched it for a while and have forgotten some of the gags. "Hot Tub Time Machine" on the other hand has that creative edge that often makes repeat viewings work right away like Edgar Wright films for me.

If you love movies of the 80's you can't pass this up either because it's a concept that would've been down right perfect for that decade. Something so over the top and absurd that could be made absolutely hilarious in the right hands. But it's here now, so don't miss while you've got the chance.

Green Zone review

Oh the joys and follies of telling friend you're going to go see a film like "Green Zone". Follies being when you have friends that would say things like 'it just looks like another 'Bourne' movie' or 'it's just another anti-war movie'. The joys being that you know that they've probably only seen Greengrass's two 'Bourne' films and otherwise don't know shit about what their talking about, because you have seen his other films and know how powerful they are. Of course if "Green Zone" wasn't a good film then perhaps there would be some validity to their statements. By the way it is a good film, a damn good entertaining as hell film, that allows past politics within war to ride shotgun with an enthralling thriller that's nothing like either 'Bourne' film Paul Greengrass has done and is a far more suspenseful and entertaining Iraq picture then most of the dozens we've gotten since 2003.

Matt Damon plays Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller, whose job in Iraq is to track down WMDs. The problem is that time after time his Intel leads he and his team into busy civilian zones and resistance zones where they end up finding nothing. When looking into the matter Miller is constantly turned away, talked down to and told that everything is looked into and that it's not his concern where the information came from. It's not until Miller meets a grizzled CIA man (Brendan Gleeson) and a Wall Street Journal reporter (Amy Ryan) that things start to make some sense and the government created charade starts to crumble. Greg Kinear plays a government official who has the task of making sure the right people get into power and things are set up in place the way we want it for the new Iraq. This would mean keeping the charade going and thus making Miller, but more importantly the mysterious information man known as "Magellan" a huge threat.

I think I kind of summed that up nicely, although it's still a pretty damn complex series of moves in the picture. Screenwriter Brian Helgaland (one of my top three favorite screenwriters) worked hard to craft an interesting thriller set during the most controversial time of this controversial war and director Paul Greengrass once again displays his attention to characters, storytelling and craftsmanship in the use of gritty well done shaky-cam with the films few action sequences. One of which being a twenty minute chase sequence which is as tense and gritty and exciting to watch unfold. The night photography grain gives it an almost news reel look and feel and every edit is seamless. Few working directors can handle an intense look as well as Greengrass and even fewer can have it all make sense even when geographically it's hard to tell where you are.

The politics of "Green Zone" are something that's sure to arise controversy as did the book it's inspired by. What it boils down to is the same thing is boils down to with this war itself. Why do you believe we went to war? I've met plenty who buy into the official story and think it was to liberate a country and do some good in the world. I've met plenty that believe it was for oil and cooking up stories of nukes and all that was a good way to get our foot in the door without people asking too many questions. I don't judge people who believe either, I think both are very, very possible. But at the end of the day it's somewhat the rule of Chinatown, which is that helping one group can also be severely hurting another group and that sometimes the best policing is to do nothing, but keep an alert eye. It's harsh, but often it's the best way to keep your hands clean. There are ideas brought up in "Green Zone" that now probably would've made things go easier over there (for example NOT disbanding the Iraqi army and attempting to use those not loyal to Saadam to help us), but that's all in the past now and time can only tell how things will end up.

This is Greengrass's third docu-drama, but the first one that A: didn't make you want to cry in the end and B: was blended with the entertainment factor he controlled with the second and third 'Bourne' films. I extremely urge people to watch "Bloody Sunday" and "United 93" and you'll see a heavy side of what "Green Zone" is like. He goes back more to that style of film making and just dashes in a bit of that action sense that he's developed. The man's got one more docu-drama coming along and that's the long awaited "They Marched into Sunlight" which is sure to be tragic and heartbreaking as his other pieces of work. But for now he's just trying to deliver a fun as hell thriller with some brains and he has definitely accomplished that.

Post-Oscar Night thoughts

It's been a while since I've been so torn about my feelings of the Oscar outcome. On the one hand we've got winners like Christophe Waltz for Best Supporting Actor in "Inglourious Basterds", Jeff Bridges' Best Actor, Mo'Nique's Best Supporting Actress and of course Queen Kathryn Bigelow for Best Director. But on the other hand my distaste for "Up" winning Best Animated feature and Best Score is still there as well as "The Hurt Locker" managing wins in Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture. Granted the latter was one that everyone figured would happen, but part of me kept hoping for a non-safe Oscar movie to win.

Don't get me wrong "The Hurt Locker" is a very good and suspenseful war story on first watch. After that it becomes simply a good soldier's story, but loses the suspense and tension. It wasn't made as an Oscar movie and in some ways it's cool that an action picture took it, but at the same time I can't help but feel that "District 9", "A Serious Man" and "Inglourious Basterds" all endure and sometimes even strengthen with repeated viewing. I really dug "Avatar" was well, but it was, is and will always been just a really good sci-fi adventure picture and in my opinion was never posed to be the big Oscar movie the media tried to trump it up to be. Something that was done more so out of Cameron and Bigelow's former relationship than out of the quality of work. And the fact that people are playing into it makes them dim witted and blind to what they've been trying to do since December.

As for the Oscar tellacast itself, Steve Martin and Alex Baldwin were weirdly unfunny, the set design was wonderful, the tellacast directing and crowd camera work was awful, getting shots of James Cameron completely in the dark and cutting to people who didn't seem the slightest bit interested in whatever was going on. Ben Stiller's "Avatar" joke worked really well, although the other thirty of so "Avatar" jokes got old and I actually enjoyed some of the presenters humility realism when knowing their written jokes weren't too good (Elizabeth Banks, Tyler Perry) while some of the other ones that worked like Tina Fey and Robert Downey Jr.'s were perfect. If only Fey could make a movie that was equally that witty and funny. Waltz, Bullock and the screenwriter of "Precious" had some strong speeches that seemed pretty damn earnest. And I'm still flip flopping on the break dancing thing for the best scores. I still think Zimmer's "Sherlock Holmes" score was the best and most surprising.

So after I did some totaling last night I discovered that I got 12 correct.
Best Picture
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Animated Feature
Best Documentary
Best Original Song
Best Film Editing
Best Director
Best Art Direction
Best Visual Effects
Best Sound Editing

Which is decent for the ones I did pick (I think I skipped the shorts category, but my picks are posted in the February section of my blog). So now it all re-sets and this time next year we'll see if things get a little less predictable. A lot of big names have movies this year (Fincher, Aronofsky, Coen's, Herzog etc) could they get their due? Time will tell.

Alice in Wonderland review

Here's a list of everything I thought while watching Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland".
1. I wish I could get them to replay that amazing "Tron Legacy" trailer.
2. I've got a feeling I know where this film is going...
3. Is it too late to get into "Avatar"?
4. I wonder how would this have been if Terry Gilliam or Sam Raimi or Guillermo Del Toro or Alex Proyas made this instead?
5. Why is Johnny Depp dressed up like a gay Ronald McDonald with a Scottish accent?
6. I'm digging the voice combo of Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman and Stephen Fry. I wish every movie had those three in it together.
7. Wow, forty damn minutes before Anne Hathaway is on screen... lame.
8. This is some lackluster 3D.
9. I really want something to eat. I should've taken care of that at home while watching "Cold Case Files".
10. I really want to see that "Tron" trailer again.
11. The is an awful screenplay...
12-29. (General white noise while trying to like the movie)
30. Wow... this is perhaps as bad as "Corpse Bride".

That's really all of it in a nutshell. "Alice in Wonderland" is boring, drab, long, poorly written, disappointingly directed by Burton and with that 3D price tag slapped on, a rip off. And it's sad because of all the fantasy filmmakers out there Burton would be at the top of anyones list for something involving this story, but with his vision clouded with tons of cartoonish CGI, a story that straight outta Narnia and creatures that look like they were designed for Crash Banidcoot games in the late 90's... well... his vision sucks.

I'll begin with our Alice, young Mia Wasikowska who moves about wonderland... or underland I think some call it, as if she was moving through a video game the whole time. Her mono toned voice through the film and fairly dull characterization leaves much to be desired in ever caring about what happens to her. Johnny Depp's Mad Hatter is simply annoying and stupid. He's an eyesore. He's Shaun White in pancake makeup serving tea instead of selling shitty video games with his name on them. Helena Bonham Carter's Red Queen is actually... well... pretty good. As much as I hated the giant head deal, I think she did a fine job playing her and made her lamest lines work really well. Also some of the CGi animation looks pretty nice in the finished product, but the 3D is has pronounced as it was in "Bolt".

The journey through Wonderland also concludes in a very Super Nintendo like way, where the main character finally fights something huge and ridiculous, it's defeated by a series of simple, yet effective moves and you are treated for a fucking stupid song and dance finale with the Mad Hatter. Speaking of which... did we really did an action sequence with the lighting of "The Lord of the Rings", but the action of "Journey to the Center of the Earth"? If Burton and company's plan was to make me want to go back and watch better fantasy films like "Pan's Labyrinth" or "The Imaginaruim of Dr. Parnassus" then mission accomplished.

And this isn't coming from some I hate Tim Burton thing. I think he's ok. He's made many films I don't like ("Corpse Bride", "The Nightmare Before Christmas", "Edward Scissorhands"), he's made films I love ("Ed Wood", "Sleepy Hollow", "Sweeny Todd") and many in the middle ("Mars Attacks!", "Planet of the Apes", "Batman"). However I do not think he's some unbeatable, champion filmmaker. This being a good example of why I feel he's not that. I think he needs to swing back into his old roots and try making something with less CGI crap and do things old school. Then it seemed like his work looked and moved better, you know. You had characters that were interesting and not just wild eyed crazies throwing things about. Rumor has it he's going to make "Return of Sleeping Beauty" or something of that nature. I'm not sure what to think, but perhaps he should stay away from kiddie flicks for a while. At least long enough that he can remember what telling a story means and making visually interesting films, not candy coated needles for the eyes.

Cop Out review

And for Kevin Smith's first non-written, only directed film, he attempts to recreate the buddy cop films we got in the 80's. In fact that's one of the running jokes in the film is that all the scored music sounds like it was rejected from "Beverly Hills Cop". What's worse however is just that almost nothing in the film is funny. I'd say about 8% of the jokes work... possibly a few more, but not much. The question is why. I'm no grand lover of Kevin Smith, but I did love his last two films "Clerks II" and "Zack and Miri Make A Porno" and think that both are among his very best both in writing and in directing. Of his prior work I only like "Clerks" (along with half the world) and "Chasing Amy". I loathe "Dogma", can't take "Mallrats", "Jersey Girl" or "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back".

My biggest beef with those films is just that not only are they not that funny, but they're filled with self-indulgent characters that always think they're better than everyone else or owed something for nothing. "Cop Out" doesn't manage to annoy, just bore the shit out of me. Bruce Willis does manage to get a couple of decent laughs here and there and as much as I love Tracy Morgan for his semi-retarded roles on "Saturday Night Live" and "30 Rock", here only a few things work and the rest is just him jumping around yelling and doing really overly dumb things throughout the movie. Worst yet something could have been saved if there was some better work done on the few action scenes. Instead it's all played pretty dry and dulled... like the jokes.

The chemistry is oddly enough there for the most part, it's just everything these guys do is lame as hell. The plot is somewhat convoluted and jumbled up with them trying to get back a stolen baseball card, a stolen car, keep a drug lord's mistress safe and pay for Willis' daughter's wedding while Morgan thinks his wife is cheating on him... OH and Sean William Scott as an over the top idiot thief with the maturity of a 4th grader. In fact... just about everyone has that level of maturity in "Cop Out" and it gets older my the joke.

I'm hoping this was simply a small bump for Smith's new found directorial talent and not something where we'll get three shitty films from the guy. Smith is a smart and funny person as we all know from twitter and his concert videos, so really why did he think this was going to work? Damn... you know I'm sorry to anyone reading this, because it's less a review and more of just me being really confused on how he could think this film works in any way shape or form. To be brutally honest, it was one more shitty joke away from becoming as lame as "The Whole Ten Yards"... that's right... the last horrid excuse for a Bruce Willis comedy.

The Crazies review

George A. Romero's 1970's "The Crazies" is not a classic. Never let anyone tell you otherwise. What it is however is a good solid horror flick that's a bit differed from his 'Dead' series and one of the few non-franchise Romero pictures that is pretty good. The strength of the film was in its ability to shock and give away some cool, schlocky images. So the idea of someone remaking that movie works in my book because it's an adaptable story to any time period where paranoia and savage violence can run a muck. 2010's remake of "The Crazies" works for me. And it works because it's a basic, clear cut genre picture that we've seen, but it's style and attention to never becoming a CGI heavy, full blown zombie picture is admirable.

This is and isn't a zombie picture. They look like zombies... some of them... and they kill, but do not eat people, they're just crazy and homicidal. Our small band of townsfolk lead my Timothy Olyphant ('Deadwood' and 'Hitman') and Radha Mitchell ('Phone Booth' and 'Silent Hill') is attempting to get out the hellish town and make it to the city to let people know what's going on. However in their way is the crazed townies, a virus that may have infected all of them and the U.S. military who has a plan to contain the virus by killing everything in the town. Again nothing Earth shatteringly new about this plot or it's set ups and yet I can get into it. I think it's just because it plays out like an old school horror picture with a few new tricks.

We don't get a bunch of CGI hordes of crazies running around town, we get a much more enclosed, up close and personal kind of horror picture. It's photographic grain and lighting gives it a more independent feel (like the original) and there is still a great deal of light and dark humor to counteract the violence and tense sequences. Joe Anderson who plays the deputy and who may have been infected from minutes one (not a spoiler by the way, it's very much known from about twenty minutes in) steals a number of scenes by playing the crazed, somewhat funny and dangerous redneck. Olyphant hit a moment within the final act for me where I imagined him playing John Conner for a 'Terminator' film and thought it'd be fucking perfect, as he's got that leading man stride, but hasn't hit the real road yet. And Radha Mitchell gets quite into her scenes as the town doctor who's pregnant and still wanting to cling onto the life she wanted to. However in truth she isn't given a whole hell of a lot to do in the film, which is a shame.

Zombie movies are fully back with a vengeance and now that they are... I kind of want them dead again. "The Crazies" is close to being one, but not quite and in many ways I wish they would've continued with movie without them even really changing too much physically and just being crazy ass, nut jobs that cause violence. The shocking imagery interestingly enough still works really well in the film despite it all being stuff we've seen, but I think it really just has to do with the way things are done and the look and feel of the picture. "The Crazies" is a solid B-horror picture that's a fun watch, but nothing more.