Starring: Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph, Rose Byrne, Melissa McCarthy
Currently in Theaters
There's been an odd trend in movies so far in 2011. The filmmakers don't seem to understand how to market their own films. Bridesmaids is a prime example of this. From the trailers and posters, this movie looks like, at best, a female version of The Hangover or, at worst, a cookie cutter chick flick with no positive qualities whatsoever. The problem is that these assumptions are completely wrong. Bridesmaids is that rare romantic comedy that guys will want their girlfriends to love just so they get the chance to watch it again.
Bridesmaids is drawing superficial comparisons to The Hangover because of its character structure. The film is about a bride-to-be (Maya Rudolph) and her bridesmaids during the months leading up to her marriage. They also go to Las Vegas (well, not really), but this is where the comparisons stop. Kristen Wiig plays Annie, the maid of honor whose fumbling choices and depressing life turn most of the bachelorette events into disasters. Annie's troubles are further agitated by Helen (Rose Byrne), a bridesmaid who tries to take control from Annie during every event. Annie's love interests are played by Chris O'Dowd and Jon Hamm, who fit the roles of "nice, considerate boyfriend" and "sexist douche", respectively.
The real star of the film, though, is Melissa McCarthy, who plays Megan, the sister of the groom. Although she only plays a supporting role in the movie, she steals every scene she's in and elevating them from just funny scenes into hilarious and memorable ones. Her character's charisma shines through every time she speaks and Megan actually felt like a real person, as opposed to the caricatures that made up the other bridesmaids. I sincerely hope to see more from McCarthy in some other big screen comedies.
And Bridesmaids is first and foremost a comedy, which is where the film shines the brightest. There are many memorable scenes in the film and I've found myself quoting it quite a few times. The scene on the airplane is by far my favorite. Each of the women add something hilarious to the scene and even the minor airplane characters are funny. Another great scene was the dress fitting. I'm not a big fan of toilet humor, but for some reason the joke worked perfectly there. And my most quoted line from a movie so far this year probably has to be "bear sandwich".
All this isn't to say that Bridesmaids is flawless. The pacing is a bit weird in the first half of the film; there's this one scene where Annie bakes a cupcake that kind of comes out of nowhere and seems tacked on. The movie also gets a little too chick flicky for my tastes at points, although I guess that comes with the territory. My biggest problem, though, was the ending. Everything is wrapped up perfectly and everybody gets what they wanted the whole time. This isn't always a bad thing, but here it didn't feel earned at all. Also, the Wilson Phillips lip syncing scene was just terrible.
Don't let that last paragraph leave a bad taste in your mouth. Bridesmaids is a hilarious movie and to point out three bad scenes from a movie that's over two hours long is nitpicking. I know at least ten people who have seen the movie so far and every single one of them loved it, including three guys. In fact, I've already seen it twice. Bridesmaids is cute, different, and, most importantly, hilarious, and you should definitely check it out.
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Tom Hiddleston
Currently In Theaters
I guess Thor was a worthy film to officially open the 2011 blockbuster season with. The stereotypical blockbuster has a reputation of being lacking in the story department in favor of steroidal action sequences (and actors). While Thor is definitely smarter, better, and more entertaining than most blockbusters, it falls back on many of those cliches.
Thor's first 30 minutes or so are easily the best chunk of the movie. The film opens in Asgard, Thor's home world, as Thor (Hemsworth), his brother Loki (Hiddleston), and a group of friends decide to retaliate against the Frost Giants of Jotunheim (an icy world) for attacking Asgard. What follows is a fantastic (and fantastical) battle sequence where Thor and friends obliterate dozens of Frost Giants. This was the most exciting part of the entire film to me. The battle had a mythic quality about it that made perfect sense given the mythical qualities of Thor that the comics build off of, and I wish there were more sequences like this in the film.
After the battle, Thor is punished by his father, Odin (Hopkins), for disobeying his command (he told them not to fight the Frost Giants). His punishment is that he lose all of his superhuman powers and be banished to Earth. This is probably the biggest flaw of the film for me. I understand that the film has to take place on Earth for it to actually matter to moviegoers, and that by stripping Thor of his power, he becomes essentially human, but he's supposed to be Thor, not just some guy walking around. It was probably made worse by following so closely behind that awesome large-scale battle; pretty much anything would seem boring in comparison. Also, most of the human characters are unimportant and extremely flat. The government agency characters play literally no role other than "guys Thor can beat up", and even important characters, like Dr. Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard), a scientist who helps Thor elude the government and get back his hammer, sometimes don't have much development other than what is needed to help out Thor.
This is not to say that the entire Earth section of Thor is bad. On the contrary, much of this part of the film was fun. Kat Dennings's character, Darcy Lewis, provides a lot of comic relief. She kept me laughing with nearly all of her dialogue. There is also an awesome scene with The Destroyer, this all metal, human-shaped being that becomes controlled by Loki and sent to Earth to kill Thor. The scene was very exciting, though extremely loud (every time The Destroyer used one of its powers, I thought my ear was going to start bleeding). Jane Foster's (Portman) role in the film was also, for the most part, a good thing, although her love interest with Thor at the end felt extremely cheap and tacked on. Thor is a being that can basically live forever, and in the span of a couple days he falls completely in love with this woman? Come on.
Thor is a decent movie and a good blockbuster. It doesn't break any new ground, but it at least makes a good attempt to elevate itself above an average film. It definitely succeeds in the extraterrestrial section of the film, though the Earth scenes could have definitely been better. I'd say that Thor is definitely worth checking out as long as you keep your expectations in check. Oh, and if you see it in theaters, please don't pay extra for 3D. That was probably the biggest waste of 5 dollars I've paid this year.
Like I previously said, this is just a repost of my first review from this blog. Just in case people start reading this, it'll be easier to find this way.
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan, Vera Farmiga, Jeffrey Wright
On Blu-Ray + DVD: July 26, 2011
I'll get straight to the point: Source Code is one of the best science fiction films I've seen in the past five years. And I'm including last year's mindbender Inception when I say this, too. I know. That's a bold statement, especially when the trailers looked mediocre and the posters were terrible. Just hear me out.
Colter Stevens (played by Jake Gyllenhaal), a US helicopter pilot stationed in Afghanistan, awakens in Chicago on a train in the body of another man. He is eventually informed that he has been selected for a government program called the Source Code, which allows the person in question to re-live the last eight minutes of someone's life. For the film's purposes, Stevens is continuously re-living the last eight minutes of a man who was killed in a terrorist attack on a train in Chicago. His job is to find the bomb and the culprit's name so as to stop a future attack from the same person.
The "repeating day" plot has been used in many films over the years includingGroundhog Day, Deja Vu, and even 50 First Dates. What elevates Source Code above all of these is the execution by director Duncan Jones. Rather than focusing heavily on the train exploding or the love story or even the philosophical questions he brings up, he focuses on Colter Stevens. These things all happen around him, but the viewer is able to believe, understand, and sympathize with what he goes through because Jones is not afraid to just let Gyllenhaal do his thing.
Speaking of the love story, it is one of the most believable ones in any recent sci-fi flick. Similar films like Inception and The Adjustment Bureau don't really create any chemistry between the two lovers, instead relying on a suspension of belief by the viewer. While this is okay, it's also cheap. Somehow, Source Code ends up being the most believable of the three, even though we know that he's in love with a dead woman and she doesn't even remember any of it because it just resets. This may be because of the focus on Stevens, as mentioned earlier. It may just be because Gyllenhaal and Michelle Monaghan (who plays the love interest) exhibit so much chemistry that it doesn't even look like they are acting.
If there is any downside to the film, it's Jeffrey Wright. He plays Dr. Rutledge, a pointlessly crippled man in charge of the Source Code. His entire character seemed completely out of place in the film. His only function seems to be to annoy Stevens (and the viewer). He is the only character in the film that seems inherently bad, and Source Code didn't even need a bad guy to succeed.
It's very early in the year, but I doubt you're going to find a better sci-fi film in 2011. Source Code is a smart, entertaining film that will have you leaving the theater pondering your own existence. Do yourself a favor and go check it out on the big screen.
Starring: Johnny Depp, Abigail Breslin, Isla Fisher, Alfred Molina
On Blu-Ray + DVD: July 15, 2011
I had very low expectations when I went to see Rango. Gore Verbinski's last film (Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End) didn't exactly blow me away, but the main reason for my low expectations was that Rango was an animated film that wasn't made by Disney or Pixar. In my experience, if an animated film isn't made by those two companies, it's probably not going to be very good.
This is just a long-winded way of saying that Rango absolutely blew me out of the water. To put it simply, Rango is, halfway through 2011, the best film I've seen this year, the best animated film I've seen since WALL-E, and one of my favorite animated films of all time. Yes, I said it.
Rango follows the story of a pet chameleon named Rango (Depp). After falling out of his owner's car in the middle of the desert, Rango journeys to Dirt, a small western town inhabited by a variety of desert creatures. By telling a few white lies about his past, he is elected sheriff of the town and is tasked with defending it against the many villainous creatures outside of Dirt. It boils down to a standard western story. What elevates the plot above other similar westerns is that it is animated. Being an animated film allows Rango to explore concepts and imagery that a traditional western literally cannot do, like rattlesnakes with machine gun rattlers and roaming cacti. These elements do not seem out of place in Rango's world and they add a bit of fantasy to the plot that would not make sense in a normal western.
The animation itself, by the way, is gorgeous; it may be the most beautifully animated film I've ever seen. The characters are ruggedly detailed; even minor characters are given personalized touches to make them naturally fit in with the environment around them. And that environment is amazing. One of the most integral parts of a western (especially classic westerns) is, in my opinion, the cinematography. It doesn't get much better than that iconic western panorama of blue sky against an unexplored, unspoiled desert or prairie, and Rango captures this feeling perfectly. My one problem with the animation was the character Beans (voiced by Isla Fisher). I wasn't exactly sure what animal she was supposed to be when I watched it, and her animation just seemed a little too smooth when compared with everyone else in the film. This is a small problem, though, and I probably wouldn't even bring it up if the film hadn't been nearly flawless in its animations otherwise.
Having said all of this, my favorite part of Rango is its overall sense of maturity, both in themes and comedy. Most of the people at the theater when I saw this film were children, and during large portions of the film they seemed honestly confused because the humor simply wasn't written for them to understand. For example, I can distinctly remember jokes about tampons and frontal lobes. Frontal lobe humor is extremely specific and even a large number of adults won't get it, and I can respect Rango's audacity in aiming for such maturity in its jokes. Another aspect of the film that children just won't get is all of its references to other films. There were the obvious ones, like the Fear and Loathing reference near the beginning and the Clint Eastwood reference near the end, but interspersed throughout were little nudges to a wide variety of films that undoubtedly influenced Rango. For example, there's a scene that takes place in the middle of a white, monotonous desert, strongly reminiscent of Verbinski's and Depp's previous film, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End. There's little touches like that throughout the film, and because they work so well, they elevate Rango that much more.
I don't mean to suggest that Rango is a perfect film. It's not. But it does approach the definition, and it may be as close to perfection as I'll see in the year 2011. With its wonderful blend of mature humor, western themes, and stunning animations, I literally can't think of a reason that anyone should miss this movie. Go see Rango. Trust me.
Like I said in my previous post, I'm going to try to keep up with reviewing all the films I see this year. To do that, though, I have to play catch up (like I did for my Film of the Month entries). I'll post them in order of when I saw them, from earliest to most recent. I'll also repost my Source Code review for continuity's sake. Let's get started.
Starring: Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, Anthony Mackie, John Slattery
On Blu-Ray + DVD: June 21, 2011
The worst thing I can say about The Adjustment Bureau is that it doesn't do nearly enough with the great concept that the writers came up with. Bureau is about a man (Matt Damon) who discovers an organization whose job is to make sure people stay on the path that they are supposed to be on. Basically, they make sure that people follow their fate.
It's a great concept, and, to an extent, the filmmakers allow that concept to shape what happens on screen. Damon's character desperately wants to start a relationship with a woman (Emily Blunt) who the Bureau says he is not meant to be with, and his attempts to defy his fate have a romantic appeal that I could relate to. The special powers of the Bureau were also interesting, and the door portals were one of the better parts of the film.
Sadly, though, this is about as far as The Adjustment Bureau allowed its philosophical side to go. It's a shame, because the film hints at deeper levels of thought: Damon's character asks Bureau members the questions we all wonder about (the encompassing "why?" being at the top), only to be given broad non-answers, if any at all; and the Bureau gives the viewer glimpses into some of their powers that don't involve opening doors, but these glimpses are few and far between. These concepts are left largely untouched in favor of the love story between the two main characters, which is the weakest part of the film. The characters meet a total of one time before fate intervenes, and Damon's character is supposed to be madly in love with her? I guess they were going for a "love at first sight" idea, but it doesn't really make sense when that first sight is the only sight for three years.
Then again, it almost works. Damon and Blunt do their best to make that shoddy writing believable, and their chemistry can be felt from their first scene together. The scene where their characters meet is probably the best scene in the entire film. I could feel a real connection between them and it almost carried over enough to make their "love at first sight" idea plausible. If the rest of their romantic scenes worked as well as that first one, The Adjustment Bureau would have turned out so much better.
Overall, I thought The Adjustment Bureau was an interesting but throwaway film. The love story is weak, but the Bureau is an interesting concept, and those fedora hats are damn sexy. I'll probably never come back to it on my own, but if someone wanted to watch it, I wouldn't have a problem seeing it again.
Haven't updated for a couple weeks, so I thought I'd give my three viewers a heads-up on what's coming soon. Along with my best of June list I'll be doing when June's over (obviously), I'm going to try to write some actual reviews of the movies from 2011 that I've seen already and then keep updating with reviews periodically. Oh, and I'm gonna start this "30 day movie challenge" thing once I'm finished writing the term paper for my summer class. Wondering what the topics will be? Good question!
Day 01- The best movie you saw during the last year
Day 02 – The most underrated movie
Day 03 – A movie that makes you really happy
Day 04 – A movie that makes you sad
Day 05 – Favorite love story in a movie
Day 06 – Favorite made for TV movie
Day 07 – The most surprising plot twist or ending
Day 08 – A movie that you’ve seen countless times
Day 09 – A movie with the best soundtrack
Day 10 – Favorite classic movie
Day 11 – A movie that changed your opinion about something
Day 12 – A movie that you hate
Day 13 – A movie that is a guilty pleasure
Day 14 – A movie that no one would expect you to love
Day 15 – A character who you can relate to the most
Day 16 – The first movie you saw in theaters
Day 17 – The last movie you saw in theaters
Day 18 – A movie that you wish more people would’ve seen
Day 19 – Favorite movie based on a book/comic/etc.
Day 20 – Favorite movie from your favorite actor/actress
Day 21 – Favorite action movie
Day 22 – Favorite documentary
Day 23 – Favorite animation
Day 24 – That one awesome movie idea that still hasn’t been done yet
Day 25 – The most hilarious movie you’ve ever seen
Day 26 – A movie that you love but everyone else hates
Day 27 – A movie that you wish you had seen in theaters
Day 28 – Favorite movie from your favorite director
Day 29 – A movie from your childhood
Day 30 – Your favorite movie of all time
Welp, that's it. I'll update with real content soon enough.
And now we're caught up! As June begins, I reflect on my film watching during the month of May. I saw a lot of great movies this month. I'm actually tempted to expand my long reviews to include more of these. I just may. Then again, I might get lazy. We'll see. Actually, you know what? I think I'll list all nine of those great movies and just say screw the crappiest film. There definitely were a couple of terrible ones this month, but they suck, so why waste time on them?
I'm not really sure what happened this month, but May was full of great romance and romantic comedy movies. In fact, eight of the nine films on this list (including honorable mentions) could be described as such. Weird.
Oh, and one last thing: I've decided to try out video embeds this month to spice up the blog a bit. Anyways, let's get on with it.
When I told a friend about how great I thought Blue Valentine was, he started complaining about how movies shouldn't revolve around such mundane storylines. Real people live these lives, so it's boring to watch. That was his point, and, to an extent, I can understand it. In fact, one of my least favorite films of the month (Somewhere) suffers from this exact problem: absolutely nothing happens and I was completely bored the entire time. However, Blue Valentine is not one of those movies. Sure, almost everyone has lived through a relationship gone awry, but to suggest that simply being able to relate to the story makes it mundane is ridiculous. Blue Valentine may not have monster trucks exploding on mountaintops or gunfights on top of the Eiffel Tower, but it still has some very intense, dramatic moments. The film was originally given an NC-17 rating, for that matter. BV displays the anatomy of a wilting relationship in an extremely creative and effective way: by contrasting it with how the relationship began. My favorite film of 2009, 500 Days of Summer, used a similar contrast (with very different intentions, though). Scenes of this couple's broken home are interlaced with scenes of them falling in love. This is an excellent way to tell a story and immediately connected with me emotionally on multiple levels. I also must quickly mention the acting in this film. Williams was amazing in her role and deservedly received an Oscar nomination for it. To me, though, the real star of the film was Ryan Gosling. Ever since seeing 127 Hours, I have proclaimed Franco's performance to be the best of the year. No more: Gosling was by far the best actor of the year. If you have any interest in this film genre at all, please check out Blue Valentine.
Before Sunrise is, honestly, just as good as Blue Valentine, and I almost made it the film of the month. Hawke and Delpy work so naturally together in this movie that it doesn't even look like they are acting. Also, being a Linklater film, it's got a lot of philosophical ideas interwoven in the romance. A very unique movie with one of the best sequels of all time, too.
Starring Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph, Melissa McCarthy, and Rose Byrne.
Going into Bridesmaids with very low expectations, I wasn't sure just how much I actually liked it after it was over. Was it really that great, or was it just better than expectations? When I found myself convincing my entire family to go see it instead of The Hangover Part II and laughing even harder the second time, I knew the answer. Disregard the title: this movie is hilarious for women and men.
I actually saw District 9 in theaters. I had been out for drinks before I saw it though, and maybe that's why I left underwhelmed and disappointed. Whatever the reason, I re-watched D-9 last month and thought it was really great. It works not just as a political statement but, more importantly, as a sci-fi film. And with all these effects, it only cost $30 million to make? That's impressive.
Starring Don Ameche, Gene Tierney, and Charles Coburn.
Not to be confused with Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait, this film is about a man trying to convince Satan to let him into hell by telling him his life story. It's actually a love story, and the fantastical parts of the movie are pretty silly, but the overall movie is cute and interesting. Also, kudos to the filmmakers for portraying Satan as a nice guy all the way back in the 40s.
Directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger.
Starring Moira Shearer, Anton Walbrook, and Marius Goring.
You can tell that Darren Aronofsky watched The Red Shoes before he made Black Swan. Tonally and structurally the films are very different, but Aronofsky borrowed a good amount of his camera technique and choreographic ideas from The Red Shoes. Check the clip I've attached for an example. That's not a bad thing, though. Just like Black Swan, The Red Shoes managed to make a movie about ballet exciting.
Starring Gael Garcia Bernal, Charlotte Gainsbourg, and Alain Chabat.
Michel Gondry's films always leave me with, if nothing else, some very unique visuals. The Science of Sleep is probably the best example of this. In a world where the main character can't tell the difference between dreams and reality, you'd better have some fantastical imagery. Gondry doesn't disappoint, and the blurring of the dream/reality line extends to the viewer, as well, leaving you wondering what actually happened. In a good way.
I actually like Tangled better than Disney's last film, The Princess and the Frog (other than that awesome Keith David scene). It's got a lot of the usual cheesy Disney stuff, but it's also got some pretty fun humor for all ages. The highlights of the film were definitely the horse and the chameleon, who didn't even need to speak to bring across their goofy personalities. If this is the trend Disney plans to follow with their animated films, I can support that.
I'm not really sure how I went this long in life without ever seeing When Harry Met Sally, but I'm sure glad I finally checked it out. Although very similar to Annie Hall (probably the best romantic comedy of all time), WHMS stands apart for creating a lengthy, decades-long romance between these two characters. I know a lot of guys (like me) haven't checked out this movie, probably because a lot of women say it's great and that usually signifies that it's a chick flick. Just try it out, guys. It's really great.
