Saw VI review

This time around I'm going attempt no jokes about the pain characters have inflicted upon themselves to the pain of watching this movie or it's predecessors. No because at this point that feeling is quite well known. This time around I'm just going to flat out say how I feel about "Saw VI" and I feel that it is slightly better then I expected while still being a giant hunk of shit. I find that rather impressive. From the trailers to the lackluster poster campaign this year I kept thinking that this was it, this was the crappiest one of them all (which I'm not yet denying). However I was wrong to think that it would look as cheap as it did in the trailers. While the overall production design isn't too impressive, the look and feel in "Saw VI" looks as if some money did go into it and showed up on screen. I'm not sure how much these films cost to make (I'm aware it's not very expensive though), but it looks like an effort to put forth. Now let's stop the pussy-footing around and get to the real business.

The reason this film flat out sucks is primarily the same reason most of them suck. Because it tries to provide the illusion of an intelligent horror/crime thriller by presenting the thought that throughout everyone of the movies there were clues leading us to the next film, when in fact all it is, is giving characters open ended reasons for doing things and then filling in the blanks in the sequel to provide the facade of plot depth. "Saw VI" is on par with the crappiness of "Saw IV" so yeah it's definitely one of the worst in the series in my eyes and that's because it's so damn boring. This is the sixth film and we know the structure and as it turns out theres enough meat heads out there that are willing to pay money to see the same junk over and over again. Because let's not kid ourselves these movies are all the same with the sole difference being who's in it and how are they going to die.

The traps in this film are as lame as they looks on the advertisements sans maybe two which weren't too bad. The Hoffman as Jigsaw plot working as a "Dexter" type killer cop scenario is still really dumb and finally has some headway although by the end it's not enough to close the file and hopefully end this junk. There are countless flashbacks that seem to last twenty minutes apiece and just for kicks let's discuss the social commentary within the film. Now this part actually shows a degree of intelligence. The main 'victim' here is a health insurance company head who has a formula which let's him decide who should and shouldn't be covered. During one of the flashbacks Tobin Bell's character John Kramer (or Jigsaw) is attempting to convince him to cover his experimental surgery. Things go south and thus you want the scumbag to get his. Very topical for a "Saw" movie to rip into a figure head from the newspaper. Unfortunately it excuses nothing.

This 85 minute shit pile is simply the same 86 minute shit pile from last year just with more flies circling it. For those of you who like wussy horror and I do consider this wussy horror since it can only rely on mediocre gore for scares then this will probably make you as happy as the other "Saw" films did. It's made for it's existing fan basis that thinks this is fun and everybody else simply has to endure it. For me "Saw" isn't campy enough for me to overlook how crappy it all is and how little sense it makes. Jason might be able to pull that off, but I suspect Jigsaw will never be able to do that. It might involve the creators attempting to be different instead of regurgitating the same pretentious film year after year with the goal of making stupid things appear smart and maybe scary.

"Saw VI" * out of ****

A Serious Man review

One wonders exactly where the Coen brothers could go from where they are at. Right now they are two of the most important, most creative and most interesting filmmakers working today. They have one countless accolades and awards and yet they've never fully gone pure Hollywood, the closest they will ever give is a version of it that's filtered through them; so we don't get a Hollywood film but more or less a Hollywood produced film created by Joel and Ethan Coen. However "A Serious Man" is not that film, in fact they haven't done that film since "The Ladykillers". No "A Serious Man" is a dark comedy that's among their very best films. I'm saying like this is perhaps their best dark comedy since "Fargo" (if you consider "Fargo" a comedy that is).

Instead of casting big name stars like last years comedy "Burn After Reading", they aimed for little known or even first time actors and actresses including the film's star Michael Stuhlbarg who plays professor Larry Gopnik. Larry's life is leading to a very rough patch and he's beginning to feel as if he's never going to get out of it. His wife is leaving him for a much older man, who insists on comforting Larry about the whole ordeal. Someone is attempting to sabotage him at the college he works at, his children see him as just another tool of the house and his brother is a magnet for trouble that Larry ends up having to deal with. And all throughout these perils Larry tries to speak with Jewish leaders to get some advice that will fix things in his mind. All this to no or little avail.

"A Serious Man" manages to be crafty within it's humor by giving you this very strange under towing mystery to what's 'really' going on in this man's life. In truth this film is hard to talk about plot wise because so much happens that reflects upon other things so you can never tell too much. Performance wise the film is perfect to a tee. Casting unknowns was the best idea they could've had with this kind of story. Shuhlbarg really makes you feel for him because it's as if he's being punished for something he never did. Sari Lennick (in her first film role) is great as his wife Judith who manages to turn almost everything out of Larry's mouth around on him and make it work for her. Then there's the wide supporting class of characters that will forever belong in the filing cabinet of Coen characters that are so funny and interesting in the most subtle and absurd ways that no mere explanation can really pin it down for people.

In short this is a great film, one of the very best of 2009 and deserves to be seen by the public. For me this belong in the rose gallery of their best films like "Barton Fink", "Fargo"and "No Country for Old Men". And to answer the question that I began with, where do the Coen brothers go from here... well as it turns out... no one knows until they've gone there with them. Seriously see this movie.

"A Serious Man" **** out of ****

The Damon/Greengrass re-teaming has a trailer... finally

It's sad I don't talk up Paul Greengrass enough. To most of American he's the director of "The Bourne Supremacy" and "The Bourne Ultimatum", however in addition to his action credits he has two flooring dramas; one being 2002's "Bloody Sunday" and the second 2006's "United 93", which topped Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center" in emotion and accolades. Greengrass is a brilliant filmmaker who's also the king of the shaky cam which is an art unto itself. Which is why the third 'Bourne' film won an Oscar for it's editing (one of three it won). Now they return together in "Green Zone", inspired by a book by Washington Post journalist Rajiv Chandrasekaran about U.S. soldiers who tracking down Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq and finding... well we know what they ended up finding.

The film wasn't made with cooperation of the United States military, unlike army friendly pics like 'Transformers'. Much as I enjoy those films, I do find it a bit off putting that the military is selling itself to a younger audience in that way. In any case the film does not reflect the politics of the book, but is it does abide by the mindset of 'what is this REALLY all for'. In addition to the greatness of Greengrass and Damon is Oscar winning screenwriter Brian Helgeland, actors Brendan Gleeson ('In Bruges' and '28 Days Later'), Greg Kinnear ('Little Miss Sunshine' and 'As Good As It Gets') and actress Amy Ryan ('Gone Baby Gone' and 'The Office').

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlJy6GDugeA

SIDE NOTE: This weekend I will hopefully be reviewing "A Serious Man", the new comedy by Joel and Ethan Coen.

The Many Faces Behind Watchmen (the film)

Lately Zack Snyder's 'Watchmen' has been on my mind. When I saw it and reviewed it in March of this year I gave it four-stars, but was somewhat unsure if it really deserved it. As time has passed and I've watched a couple different versions of the film I'm now very assured that it does deserve that rating and I find it stronger and better now than before.

Partly because I shed all the pre-viewing conjured up beliefs of what the film 'will' be like and tried blending it with what the film was like. It was thick. It was specularly un-P.C. and against the grain of mainstream comic cinema, but has those draw backs of still trying to be fairly accessible to the '300' crowd. Recently when thinking the whole piece over again I went back through the graphic novel to see how I felt about that. My feelings hadn't changed much. It's a dynamic and intelligent book with things I love and things that rub me the wrong way. The movie has that same quality, but does different things that rub me the wrong way. Parts of the ending fight sequence for example and the uneven soundtrack and score.

On the other hand I feel like the performances and writing hit the satirical note they were going for and there are some perfect, awe inspiring sequences. I also thought about the many film makers who came close to making this. Among the ones I'd still love to see would be Ridley Scott's version. Not just because I like Scott, but because of the timing it would've been made would have been after 'Blade Runner' and 'Legend' so I feel like it would've been part of an unofficial series of his. Also in many ways 'United 93' and 'The Bourne Ultimatum' director Paul Greengrass (who came extremely close to making it in 2003). I think seeing his style in this universe might have been something very unique and never before seen.

However then I think of two other filmmakers who I like, but am very glad they didn't get the job. First is Darren Aronofsky director of 'Pi', 'Requiem for a Dream', 'The Fountain' and 'The Wrestler'. From my understanding he worked hard to change several elements from the story and according to an interview with 'Watchmen' co-creator Dave Gibbons he never really understood the book and it's themes. Something I find interesting given his body of work. However in a way he has a silent and underrated gem of his own creative mind that demands more attention in 'The Fountain'. The other is Terry Gilliam. I've read tons of Gilliam interviews and go through stints of watching just his films. As much as I like the core majority of them I do not think he could've produced a film adaptation of 'Watchmen' that captured much dramatic edge and seriousness. I also find it funny that he's criticized people like Spielberg and Kubrick for not having films that take risks and making movies that give answers nicely packages.

This is funny to me because in all of his films he rarely deals with serious or edgy subject manner and the few times he does, it's performed more like a dance of manic humor around the dark material as if he's too scared to really dig in sans for a brief moment, like in 'The Fisher King'. Along with that I don't believe Gilliam can really do seriousness. He's made subtle attempts, but many times it either falls flat or seems too uneven within the confines of the whole picture. Further more rarely does a Gilliam picture actually ask you a question or to really question much of anything. There's no Earth shattering logic or philosophy in 'Time Bandits' and many of the points 'Brazil' makes are so muddled up with trillions of characters, set pieces and sequences of irreverent lunacy that it at times seems like there was no point to begin with. And I don't consider a film 'edgy' because it has a sad or unfavorable ending either. Again I do like a lot of his films and love a few however I'm a firm believer in not throwing stones when you live in a glass house or at least admitting you are in a glass house as Gilliam is and has been in for decades now.

This brings me to Snyder's version(s) which I think is as close to the book as you can get movie wise. I think it also hinges on how much you like the book. I love it, but don't think it's perfect and I feel that way about the movie. What's there is a lot of character and a lot of depth into the story, events and a lot of the nuances while still having Snyder make it in his style. I'm a firm believer in an artists choice to stylize content the way they deem fit whether the public likes it or not. So while I loathe 'The Boondock Saints', I respect Troy Duffy's choice to edit it the way he did.

This Christmas the ultimate 'Watchmen' DVD gets released which will have all three versions of the film and a slew of extras. I own the two disc and love the behind scenes doc, but left me really wanting more (not unlike the two disc of 'The Dark Knight'). From the looks of it this will fill that void. But in any case this was something on my mind recently and I felt the need to share.

New trailer leaked for James Cameron's Avatar

Okay, that first trailer was a bit underwhelming. That we can probably all agree upon. Personally I dug it, but not in the way or as much as I assumed I would. So apparently next week theatrically there will be a new 3 minute and 18 second trailer.

And as you can figure out from my title, the internet as grabbed it a bit early. How is it? It makes me want that goddamned movie right now. This is somewhat more of what I was looking for in the teaser. It displays what seems to be the main plot and showcases some of the new CG technology Cameron designed for this film. Not only that, but this is the first 3D release film I've been pumped to see since "Beowulf". Granted that was a let down, but as time as passed I like it more. Mainly because I went in expecting greatness and found it a bit dull and because I wasn't impressed with the 3D. Also I love the fact that they really like the new teen audience know who the fuck James Cameron is and why he's important. This man created 'Terminator', 'Aliens', 'Terminator 2', 'True Lies' and yes his mega picture Oscar destroyer 'Titanic' and don't you forget it.

See what I speak of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhkPpcbu-Ts&feature=player_embedded

I hate that I can't place the trailer on my page and I hate that the images are at times too dark due to the shit-cam quality, but I love this trailer and I think FOX and Cameron have finally hit their promotional target.

NOTE: Probably no reviews this week. I refuse to pay actual money to watch a 'Saw' film so if anything I'll watch it online. I may not like them, but I will educate myself on them so I can bitch... bitch while informed. Aside from that possibly I'll get to see "The Hurt Locker", which has been one of the best reviewed films of the year and did great for a low release film in the summer. After that I may do some Halloween horror movie blogging for kicks.

Paranormal Activity review

Billions of dollars are spent every year to make horror films that's key job is to scare and I find it so funny that here's one that took fifteen thousand to make and it's far more entertaining, thrilling and scary then 98% of those. I tip my hat to writer, director Oren Peli because "Paranormal Activity" is almost has much fun I've had at the movies since "Inglourious Basterds".

The story goes pretty much as the trailer tells it. A couple think they're being haunted, the boyfriend Micah sets up a camera after things start to get worse and as the movie unfolds we learn what is really after them. Both he and his girlfriend Katie are extremely likable and suspect are a lot like the characters created thus their acting seems very natural. Then when things get tense their reactions are the more realistic. Often in haunting flicks we go through the stereotypical motions and such, here some of those motions make perfect sense and make you ask yourself... what would I do. I can't say there's too much difference between what was done and what I'd probably do.

I refuse to spoil any of the movie's reveals because they're too impressive to me. They're slight, the whole movie in fact is slight. There's no lead up music, no gore, just pure suspense and mystery which is most times far scarier than gore or anything like that. On the line of single camera horror pictures I would say this isn't quite as good as "The Blair Witch Project", but it's on it's coattails. It's not a movie filled with jumps, but it'll creep you the hell out numerous times and it's not afraid to make you laugh... mostly due to Micah's often cavalier attitude towards the haunting and the couple's interactions.

"Paranormal Activity" is riding into wide release on a lot of hype, but hype comprised more from viewers then from insiders and critics which makes a difference. I warn heavily that it's not a big scare movie, but one that'll get under your skin while watching it and then even more while you're trying to go to sleep. It's a great time at the movies that reminded me of the first time I saw a lot of the horror pictures I still love today. I'm not calling it an instant classic (although it could warrant that), but I am calling it one of my top favorite films of this year and definitely one of the most effective and entertaining horror films to come out in this decade.

"Paranormal Activity" **** out of ****

Law Abiding Citizen review

"Law Abiding Citizen" attempts something that's hard to do. It attempts to juggle several genres and place them in the right order to make a film that's smart and entertaining on more than one level. Mission accomplished. The film is being sold fairly well actually because it's complicated... very complicated. Gerard Butler's family has been killed, one of the two attackers turns states evidence and his lawyer Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) wants to take the deal that's been set instead of attempting a loss which could both set both men free and lower his 96% conviction rate. We're not sure which is more important to him at that time. Butler understandably hates the idea of going with a deal and knows as well as Rice that his testimony isn't much good since he blacked out.

Fast forward ten years and the intruder who's in prison his getting the lethal injection... however something goes wrong and it seems someone tampered with the chemicals making a painless death into one that appears quite unpleasant. This set up a chain reaction that leads us to the revenge movie in reverse where the killer kills more after his capture; that's also a very good social commentary on the judicial system. There's shock and surprise and it's not afraid to get a little bit bloody. In the beginning it seems like "Saw" with a brain and if Jigsaw's plot actually made even the slightest bit of sense and by the end it's gone through the book of modern warfare tactics. And yet at the same time it's an intelligent legal drama that makes you care about every last character. Kurt Wimmer who's known more for his science fiction writing has made his second impressive crime film and director F. Gary Gray (someone who needs to make more films) delivers his best film since "The Negotiator".

Gerard Butler gives his best performance to date. He comes off has the best kind of crazy. The crazy that's disarming and mildly amusing. Then when you least except it... well... there's a great scene I refuse to ruin to illustrate this point, but rest assured it's a good performance. Foxx also reminds us why he's an Oscar winner and why he's an A-lister. He goes through the story gaining speed and transforming from up incoming lawyer to criminal stomping lawyer willing to stop Butler's continuing blood shed from behind bars. I should also mention the fucking perfect casting of Bruce McGill and Viola Davis who kill every time they are on screen. Not for one moment are they unbelievable or come off as just walking costumes.

I will say that the final act does get a bit over the top and part of the mystery is kind of movie sensible, but it's grand finale is fitting and well crafted. Gray and Wimmer have made a taut thriller that deserves praise and definitely viewers. Rarely do we get impressive movie-like thrillers like this so take it in while you can.

"Law Abiding Citizen" *** 1/2 out of ****