Retro Movie Review, Our Man Flint 7.25/10.

How many of you enjoyed the Austin Powers movie series? This movie is the original Austin Powers type of character. Our Man Flint is movie that was made in 1966 and was made as a parody to the recently popular James Bond series of movies. The movie chronicles the Ultra cool super agent Derek Flint (play by James Coburn) as he takes on a trio of mad utopian scientists that are controlling the world’s weather. This movie is often described by watchers and cheesy or just plain goofy, but really it’s just a whole lot of fun. It is of course very tongue and cheek and very campy, but this is by design not because it was just a bad movie. The strong point of this movie is the performance that James Coburn put in. Many who know this actor would find it hard to believe he would be able to play the suave, ultra chic, ultra-competent sex magnet that the character Derek Flint is supposed to be, however he pulls it off very nicely. James Coburn is very different than Austin Powers or any of the Bonds in his characterization. He is very polite in his rebelliousness, and instead of being condescending to his superiors he is always polite and says sir. Rather than being the suave rebel he is more that annoying person you know that absolutely knows everything about everything and is the best at everything he does and on top of that is also the most polite person you have ever met. He has a boyish smile and disarming manner that makes him both charming and despicable at the same time. This works exceedingly well for the role of Derek Flint, because it distinguishes him from the Bond role very well. I won’t go into a lot of detail because this is not an incredibly thought provoking movie. What it is though is a very fun movie that if you choose to enjoy it and not take to seriously will provide a good two hours of entertainment.

Movie Review District 9 9.5/10

District 9 is one of the most original movie ideas I have ever encountered and I have seen a ton of movies. The idea is relatively simple it is an alien movie that is a comment on the human condition. Think to yourself as you are reading this these questions: What would you do if an alien race came to your city? What would you do if these people were refugees needing sanctuary in your city? What would you do if you discovered they were emaciated and badly in need of food and care? What would you do if it seemed they were not smarter, and perhaps in many ways were not as advanced as we are? These key questions are the pivotal ideas of this movie. We, as humans, do not have a good track record when dealing with people that are different on first contact, and we have an even worse track record of dealing with refugees. I wish to regress a little bit and talk about the production before I continue you into the plot points. It is important to point out that this movie was made on 30 million dollars, which of course by today’s standard is a pittance. Despite the low budget this is an effects heavy movie, and I must say that given the budget the effects look fantastic and the shot of the space ship hovering about J-Berg is fantastic. The main actor has never really been in anything other than this, he is reprising his role from the movie short that this movie was adapted from. It was shot in South Africa and acted by South African’s, which I think is very important, that essentially makes this a foreign film, and this should not be overlooked. Anyway back to the plot at hand. This movie in some ways reminds me of another alien movie, “Signs.” Not because the plot or style is in anyway similar, but because , like “Signs” is an alien movie that isn’t really about the alien part. Yes, this is an alien movie, but despite the fact it’s full of aliens, and DNA shifting and advanced weaponry this is more than any of that a comment on the human condition. And frankly, although riveting, it’s difficult to watch. For example the aliens are referred to always as “prawns” which is what they call shrimp in some other countries. They are called this because they do in fact resemble shrimp in some ways. This is of course a parallel for racial slurs that have been used in South Africa, or as we are in the U.S. some particularly nasty slang that we are all familiar with. In the movie they use the same rationale that people have always used, to paraphrase “well that is what they look like, so it is ok right?” That’s the kind of things people are always saying to rationalize the cruel things that they say. This movie touches on everything that has happens in regards to refugees or to those of the minority race. A termination of rights, thoughts of them being less than human (I mean human in the sense that they are viewed as being below the need for basic rights much the way slave owners used to refer to African Americans) serious exploitation and controlling of monopolies, and every similar theme, such as the common racial epithet “they all look the same.” And of course the usual movie them is there, that everything is always about weapons and money.
As for the actual production of the movie, it was pretty spot on. The actors are talented and perfect for their parts. The movie is shot in a documentary sort of way, it starts out as a documentary on the aliens and on the lead character Wikus, and in the middle it drifts from the documentary footage and starts showing you the actual events in Wikus’ life that lead to his notoriety. The two approaches are very well integrated and it doesn’t seem clumsy at all. This movie is not one that is going to make you feel good. In fact it is going to make you feel like crap more than likely. I realized as I was watching this movie that I totally bought everything they were trying to convey, and I realized at that point that I have very little faith in humanity. However, despite that I think this is the one film this year that I think everybody should see, but be warned it’s depressing and has some fairly gross parts.

Best Scene: When Wikus’ has his hand bandage removed by the Doctor.

Best Line: “there you go, souvenir from your first abortion. “

Drag Me To Hell Movie Review 9/10

Sam Raimi do us all a favor and unentangle yourself from that Spider-Man franchise and get back to making the movies you were meant to make. For the last few years I have seen just about every horror movie that has come out. That means I have seen a lot of bad horror movies. In fact, I can't recall the last time I saw an American horror movie that was worth the price of cereal price. (well grindhouse was good, but almost more of a comedy than a horror movie) There have been a few foreign films of quality, but on the whole the American genre has gone to just remaking Japanese and Korean Horror/Thrillers, well, horribly. Finally there is horror movie that I was glad I went to the theatre and watched. This movie is a perfect combination of campy and funny (something Raimi does very well, Army of Darkness anyone?) and extremely scary. This is an awesome and hard to obtain combination. Alison Lohman is good as the main protagonist, although she does have the body of a ten year old boy. Justin Long is equally good, and the product placement around him is hilarious. If you don't recognize him by name, you will recognize him when you see him, as he is known not only for acting, but for starring in a certain products commercials. The supporting cast is good as well, although don't be looking for any A listers in this film. If you like horror movies do yourself a favor and go out and see this one, its a rockin good time and worth the trip to the theatre. Prepare to laugh, be scared, and be grossed out all at the same time.

Terminator Salvation 6/10

I am different from most people. I go and see a movie then I check Rottentomatoes to see how it is doing. After watching it tonight I expected to log onto Rotten Tomatoes and see it with at least a decent rating. I was very surprised to see how poorly it was doing. I really liked this movie, which is odd, because I really, really dislike all of the Terminator movies. This one however, got my attention. Maybe it was just because of the nice flashy special effects, and see a huge robot on the screen. Or maybe it was the fact that it had the kid who played Chekov from Star Trek and Charley Bartlett in it. The weakness of the movie is its storyline, and a few of the acting performances. Moon Bloodgood won't be winning any awards she was in it because she is hot (although oddly I think Bryce Dallas Howard is way hotter) and neither will Michael Ironside. The plot is a bit thin, and the storytelling a bit wooden, but honestly, I don't think most people are watching this movie for the screenplay. Christian Bale is good as usual, but it was a bit annoying that he dropped into his Batman voice from time to time, he really needs to avoid that. Sam Worthington put in a surprisingly good performance, and is a bit of a scene stealer, he is definitely a less is more type of actor though. The kid, Anton Yelchin, is really good and he is without a doubt a rising young talent. It must have been a hell of a month for him with both this movie and Star Trek coming out. Its good to be him, must be a tough life for a 20 year old. He has come along way since Hearts of Atlantis. All in all a good film, great special effects, some decent acting, its a popcorn flick, but hey that doesn't mean it isn't enjoyable.

In Bruges Movie Review 9/10!

Movie Review In Bruges 9/10
This is a beautifully acted, directed, and filmed movie, but the real strength of this film is the excellent script. Movies this well written don't come along that often. Normally I am not that bit a fan of Colin Farrell, in fact I really think that he has tossed up some stinking piles of dung in his acting career, but here he is masterful playing of Brendan Gleeson's calmer character wonderfully. For some reason, Farrell just seemed so much more natural and comfortable in this role, and I think honestly its because he gets to be an Irish guy, essentially getting to act with his native accent. Its funny how as American's most of the time we praise American actors when they pick up a foreign dialect, but we hardly ever appreciate when a foreign actor flawlessly pulls of an American accent. Back to the subject at hand, the story is masterful, making you feel a wide range of emotion, while connecting with the characters in a personal manner, and sometimes in very odd ways considering they are in fact hit men. Ralph Fiennes is both disturbing and scary in his role as Harry, and its a performance worth watching. If you haven't seen it and enjoy dark comedy and compelling stories go out and rent it tonight.

Star Trek Review 8/10

I really liked this movie, and I don't even like Star Trek. It had a great feel to it, and some good action sequences. Chris Pine is great as a young James Tiberius Kirk and how can a movie with Simon Pegg in it not be good? It is a great homage to the television show, and creates a feel that truly gives the impression that they are boldly going where no man has gone before. Oh yea and Karl Urban is great as Bones. Not bad for a Rider or Rohan.

Angels and Demons Rant!

First of all I have to give warning that this review will contain spoilers. I have always been the type of person that is never to put out by the adaptations of books to the silver screen. I have always said that they should be viewed as two separate entities and as long as the spirit of the story and characters were intact. Dan Brown is not a great writer, I enjoyed his books marginally, but I understand both as a folklorist and historian (yea I know they seem at odds) that there are major points of inaccuracy in his books. However, he deserves better than this. I have never said this about an adaptation before, but this is a PERVERSION of his work, and this, keep in mind is not a work that I am overly passionate about. This movie was an abomination, I wanted to get up and leave for the first time ever in my rather ridiculously long list of movies that I have seen in the theatre. Those that know me understand what this means, I like all movies, and generally can enjoy just about anything. Now lets start this long critique of this horrible movie.

First of all the assassin is absolutely horrible. In the book this character although not deep was fleshed out enough to be a terribly frightening villain. In this movie he is bland and faceless. In fact bland and faceless might be giving him to much credit. Also he is mostly neutral, when given the chance to kill Langdon and Vittoria he doesn't, instead he just walks off. It could have been terribly scary, instead he was a total zero.

The Camerlengo first of all is a horrible character in the movie. For some reason they changed his name to Patrick for no good reason what so ever. He is supposed to be an impressive figure, able to control any room he is in by the shear force of his personality. His is portrayed in the movie as almost simpering and about as charasmatic as Keanu Reeves on a downer.

The character of Leonardo Vetra is not present which is amazing as he is a key central character. He is shown once in the movie at the beginning but his name is changed and he is not branded, he is murdered and his eye taken out but that is it. He and his duality of priest and scientist was key to the plot, as well as the fact he was Vittoria's father. It was ridiculous that he was not in the movie and his key parts of the plot missing.

Maximilian Kohler is not present in the movie and he to is integral to the plot, and he is somewhat replaced by Commander Rictor, he is a major character in the movie, but was not present at all in the novel.

The key fact that is missing from the movie and is the absolute cornerstone of the novel's plot is the fact that the Camerlengo is the biological son of the late pope. This was the whole reason for the book in the first place, THIS WAS THE PLOT. It was the why this book was written it was the most key part of the plot and it was just gone. There was no explanation in the movie for why he did what he did, no explanation at all. He just ends himself by fire with no explanation what so ever. It was horrible, it essentially meant that the movie had no point, no explanation for why the events took place. It also means that along with Vittoria's father not being mentioned, that the most interesting parts of the characters were left out. It was ridiculous, I can't put it into words really, its like having a Harry Potter movie with Voldemort not being there. It was just silly.

Also the fourth cardinal was killed in the book, but saved in the movie, in a very dramatic scene that shouldn't have been there. He then became pope and the man who became pope in the book became a very old camerlengo. And more on that man, in the movie he was supposed to be a liberal progressive priest who was wise, open, and a very good character. In the movie he was portrayed as an arrogant old man stuck in his ways except for the last 2 minutes of the movie where he makes a sudden and a 180 of a character shift.

This movie was horrible, and if you liked the book at all avoid this at all costs. It barely has any resemblance. It seems they were trying to make a buck on the name but didn't want to give the book true representation. Oh yea, and they made it seem in the movie that this happened after the Davinchi Code, which is false and unneeded and just plain stupid. This is the first movie ever that I wish I had never seen, and the number of movies I have seen requires a number with 4 digits in it.