Sunday, June 28, 2009

Moon

http://gothamist.com/attachments/jen/moonmovie.jpg
**** Stars

Sam Rockwell is a fantastic actor, and he does nothing but provide proof to that statement with his outstanding performance in the new independent science fiction film Moon.

Directed by Duncan Jones (David Bowie's son) Moon is a fascinating and imaginative trip that explores the limitless ideas and locations of its theatrical title. Rockwell plays Sam Bell, the sole employee for a company called Lunar Industries. At the end of his three year contract, Sam is ready to go home. But with no direct communication link available between him and Earth, Sam starts to hallucinate. And what makes this movie so unique is that its main character knows he's hallucinating, and uses it to his advantage. All Sam wants to do is go home, but what happens if there are two Sam's? Or three? Or four? What if Sam is not alone?

That's all I will say about this movie. Moon is an absolute mindblower that will stick with you long after you've left the theater. Whether it's Sam's robot friend voiced by Kevin Spacey, or the feeling of complete isolation, you will feel Moon lingering in your head for some time. This could very well be one of the most subconsciously thought-provoking sci-fi films this side of 2001: A Space Odyssey. What's even more impressive? The film's $5 million budget.

Simply enough, see Moon if you want to get rid of Michael Bay from your thoughts.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

http://www.ramasscreen.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/michaelbay_500big.jpg
0 Stars

This movie sucks. I hate this movie. I want to leave. No one should have to sit through this. Why is everyone clapping and enjoying this movie? Who approved this script? I can't believe this movie's climax is set in a robotic heaven or purgatory. Poor Shia Lebeouf. Someone please give this guy decent material to work with. Ouch, his injured hand must really hurt him. I can see his cast! It makes no sense in the movie, but wait, this is Michael Bay we're talking here. Sense to him is rarer than fundamental economical growth, which is ironic for the bastards who invested $200 million into this bombastic piece of crap. The results are clear. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is the following: one of the worst movies of Michael Bay's career (if that means anything), of the year 2009, of the first decade of this millennium, and maybe of all time.

So whose to blame?

I guess I'll take a shot and go with Michael Bay. In this movie theater, where I am seeing the midnight premiere, I am surrounded by people cheering everytime something is blown up. To the person sitting in front of me: Dude, come on, can you please sit down? You don't need to stand up and cheer the first time you see the tanned hamstrings of Megan Fox. I know she's beautiful and all, but how shameful do you have to be to cheer when you see the back of a woman's lower body? Maybe I am outside Michael Bay's intended demographic. Now, that could be a debate within itself. Let's see the top ten possible choices of who this movie is trying to appeal to:

1.) 13 year old boys.

2.) 14 year old dudes.

3.) 15-18 year old guys who have yet to get their driver's license.

4.) Michael Bay's family.

5.) The handful of women who are
shamelessly (or shamefully) attracted to Megan Fox.

6.) Elias from Clerks 2.

7.) The film critic from E! Online.

8.) Not Peter Travers or Roger Ebert.

9.) Grown-up males who still live with their parents, and begged for an advancement on their allowance for $11 dollars in order to attend the midnight premiere.

10.) The $16 million it made on opening night and the burden I must carry for being apart of it.

Go ahead, take your pick. They're all right. I'd probably choose #10 because it consists of both you and I. As I watch this movie, I am reminded that this so-called "successful filmmaker" (and I use that term loosely here) has given us some cheap thrills and historically inaccurate reenactments over the years, but this latest effort is bad even by Michael Bay standards.

In the first Transformers, Michael Bay found a way to embrace his over-the-top childhood antics and throw it into a movie about robots beating the crap out of each other. I didn't love that movie, but I didn't hate it. Shia Lebeouf was a nice fit (and he still is, though he ought to think about taking a step back from the summer blockbuster genre) and a solid cast kept the film afloat for a somewhat memorable time at the multiplex.

Then, two years later, we get the sequel. And lord have mercy, this thing is painful to watch. Only now do we see the true effects of that frustrating Writer's Strike. The script for Revenge of the Fallen had to be finished before it so the movie could secure a release date for summer 2009, but I didn't think studios could greenlight such horrific material.

Whoa, wait a minute. While sitting in this theater, Optimus prime has died and I just heard someone weep a "Oh no" from one of the rows behind me. Dude, relax. The thing is a machine. It can be rebuilt. You're more empathetic for the damn robot than the poor souls sitting in the theater forced to watch it happen. Well, subconsciously we're laughing at you, so I guess we'll call it even.

Has this level of incoherency and garbage become accepted for what might be one of the biggest movies of all time? I mean, what the hell am I going to think about when sitting in the theater watching the inevitable third installment?

I can't tell you what this movie is about, because to be honest, I have no idea. I couldn't tell you the slightest summary or synopsis of plot, except to tell you that you have a decent cast playing characters that are more machine-like than the machines itself. At least the machines have negative human components like racism and homophobia.

I won't criticize the actors here, because hey, we all need our paychecks in this day and age. But for the sake of audiences around the world, stay away from a third movie, and give us the revenge of the fallen. They never really explain what the "Fallen" is in this movie, so I would like to define it as we the moviegoers. It won't be long until we will fight back against movies like this.

So, in the words of your movie's tagline Mr. Bay, revenge is coming.

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Catching up with Netflix: Doubt

**1/2 Stars

Doubt predictability suffers from its own premise. Doubt is a play, not a movie. And if it wasn't for its outstanding cast, I would doubt the film would have been recognized at the stature it has received (notice how four out of the five film's Oscar nominations were acting ones). While they are all worthy nominations, I find it frustrating that Doubt doesn't come to life as it should. The movie is so obviously based off a play that you might have as well have John Patrick Shanley (the creator of the play) adapt the film too. At least you know what you're going to get.

Again, Doubt is all play and no movie. The performances from Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and especially Viola Davis are all exceptional, yet I wanted more than what I was expecting. Nothing really happens in this 104 minute long feature, we just get lots of showcase moments for the gifted cast in scenes that hardly connect to both the story and the viewer. Did I admire this movie? Sure. Will I ever see it again? Doubt it.

Catching up with Netflix: The Reader

**1/2 Stars

Kate Winslet deservingly won her first Oscar last year, but for the wrong movie. That movie is The Reader, in which Winslet plays Hanna Schmitz, a woman who at the age of thirty-six has an affair with a fifteen year old named Michael Berg (David Kross plays the young Michael). After the affair ends, Michael learns years later that Hanna is on trial for horrific Nazi war crimes. While attending her trial, Michael knows a truth that could prove her innocence, but Hanna is sworn to protect this secret to save her from an overwhelming embarrassment. Ralph Fiennes plays the grown-up Michael who is still torn about the decisions made years before.

Now the premise just reeks of Oscar Gold doesn't it?: Winslet, acting in top form in a Holocaust movie playing someone who has a forbidden affair? It sure does. But does the film itself hold strongly as the premise? I guess. But, I'll be honest, I had gloomy feelings about this film before viewing it because it was unrightfully nominated for Best Picture and it robbed Kate Winslet's real Oscar-turn in Revolutionary Road. And while watching The Reader, that spite really didn't go away. While I'll admit I was intrigued in the film's daring display of the characters lives (the first act of this film is excellent), the film ends with an unsatisfactory conclusion. The Reader doesn't pack the emotional punch as it should. Instead, we get a good film that should be unanimously great.

Friday, June 05, 2009

The Hangover

***1/2 Stars

The Hangover is the funniest film of the year, and it earns this status because it is funny throughout the entire film. That's it. From beginning to end. Even the closing credits are hysterical. Now the premise may feel a bit stale (three guys wake up in Vegas after a bachelor party not remembering the night before and must trace their steps to find the missing groom) but all the elements click in the hands of director Todd Philips (Old School) and its outstanding cast. Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifiankis are a trio of comedic heaven. It's the only film I can think of that actually makes you want to have a hangover.