New York, I Love You

Trucker

I'm starting to think that I should just start writing about movies that I'm GOING to see, rather than review movies taht I acually HAVE seen. Well... not REALLY, but that seems to be the trend lately. I'll catch up on reviews one of these days. In the meantime, I'll continue to update with what I'm going to see, in hopes that I can just sit back down when I get home and knock out a review.

My choices of (free) screenings tonight were either Law Abiding Citizen or Trucker, and I went with the choice that I knew less about, and one that I would be less disappointed if I wasted my time at a crappy movie. I don't expect this to be a crappy movie though. I like both Michelle Monaghan and Nathan Fillion, so that right there is already more promising than Jamie Foxx. It apparently made the festival tour last year, and is finally hitting a few screens here and there. After the screening is a Q&A, so that's always (well, usually) enjoyable.

From Dusk Till Dawn

 

...work in progress...

 

 

The Damned United

So I adore Michael Sheen. He's been wonderful in EVERYTHING I've seen him in, and I doubt he'll disappoint this time around either. He has a knack for portraying actual people, and I admire him greatly for that, especially because the people he portrays are still living. That seems to be a rather daunting challenge, but Sheen always handles it like a champ. I also love soccer and though I know less about details and backstory of British football than I do of most American sports, but I LOVE watching it and can't wait til I can afford a trip to England to see a game!

This film is about Brian Clough, a famous British football coach. Apparently it's written by the same screenwriter as The Queen and  Frost/Nixon (Peter Morgan), both of which also starred Michael Sheen. Morgan does an excellent job at writing about actual people and events and also wrote the screenplay for The Last King of Scotland (which I LOVED), and also for The Other Boleyn Girl. I'm guessing that this would be of similar sentiment to a film about an American coach of either a Football or Basketball team. Every now and then these types of films and be REALLY British, and while they don't lose me completely, I CAN miss some of the nuances and background behind different aspects or elements of the story and characters. I have high hopes for this film!

An Education

This film has been greating GREAT reviews, especially for female lead, Carey Mulligan. I also LOVE Peter Sarsgaard, but he doesn't always pick the best roles. More to come:

???????

So I'm blindly going into a screening tonight. It's in Pasadena, and all I know is that it's a horror film. There's no title or cast listed. This could mean one of three things:

* This will be a highly anticipated film that they REALLY don't want any info leaking from

* It's SO bad that if they actually tell people what it is, no one will show

* It's too early for it to have a title and they don't want to say who the actors are yet

I was never really into horror films growing up, but mainly because I just wasn't exposed to them. Nowadays, I'm picky about them. I don't really like gnarly gore for the sake of gnarly gore. The first couple Saw movies, though gorey, were done with purpose. I have no problem with that. I just saw Zombieland, and while there were some way gnarly scenes with zombies, it was necessary. I don't care for the "slasher" type of film because they're done mainly for shock value. So we'll see how this goes...

Whip It

 

Confession time: A few years back, a couple of my good friends tried to talk me into joining a roller derby team. I had always been a good roller blader and even played a good deal of street hockey as a kid. I'd also skate around the cul-de-sac as if I were training to be a speed skater in the Olympics. I hadn't actually ROLLER SKATED for YEARS though. With the slightest bit of consideration, I bought myself a pair of skates, looked up all the info, and realized that I needed to have health insurance (which I didn't have, and couldn't afford), so my dreams of roller derby were shot to hell. Now that I have time and motivation to train, and health insurance, I'm afraid it'll be way too trendy now that the movie's out. *sigh*

I'm hoping to like the movie. I'm not the biggest Drew Barrymore fan, so I'm hoping that her directing is better than her acting. I like Ellen Page, Kristen Wiig, Juliette Lewis, Zoë Bell, and Alia Shawkat, so regardless, I'm optimistic.

 

Before I'm able to write a proper review, I have to throw in that the dude who plays Ellen Page's love interest seemed oddly familiar, so when I saw the name "Landon Pigg", I jumped in excitement - eyes welled up and everything! I think he's fantastic and I'm stoked to see him play with A Fine Frenzy next month!

Zombieland

TIME TO NUT UP OR SHUT UP!

Truer words have never been spoken! I'm actually HOPING to see this movie today. If not today, then it'll be tomorrow for sure! The only other film that I've been anticipating THIS much this year was 9, to which I was COMPLETELY let down! There's other movies that I'd been and am super excited about, but not quite in the same realm of "fun". I'm expecting this to be a more plot-driven type of "Shoot Em Up" (which is a total "dude" film, but I actually LOVED it)!

I love the nutjob that Woody Harrelson is. I think Jesse Eisenberg is adorable! Abigail Bresslin is a talented young actress. And the jury's still out on Emma Stone. Maybe this will help me make up my mind on her. Either way, I'm SUPER excited to see this! I don't even know how else to pre-review this thing, so I'll show you the trailer and then some of the brilliant viral ads! My fingers are crossed tightly this for this!!! (I even like the VO in the trailer!)

 

Zombieland Rule #6 - Skillet 

Zombieland Rule #12 - Bounty Paper Towels 

Zombieland Rule #15 - Bowling Ball 

Zombieland Rule #29 - Buddy System 

Zombieland Rule #33 - Swiss Army 

 

A Serious Man

So... yeah... I'm seeing this movie tonight, and I'm not quite sure about it. I'm SUPER hit-or-miss with the Coen Brothers, and am not sure I'm on board with this trailer. It's getting GREAT reviews (as much of their stuff does), but nothing really grips me. As far as a quick run-through of their films and my opinions:

*Raising Arizona (1987) - saw it FOREVER ago - wasn't amused. (I should probably see it again though)

*The Big Lebowski (1998) - only saw it a couple years ago - liked it, but am not signing up for LebowskiFest anytime soon.

*Oh Brother, Where Art Though? (2000) - REALLY liked it! I think part of it was the cast, part was the music, and part was the story being based on Homer's Odyssey.

* No Country For Old Men (2007) - OVERRATED!!! It was watchable, and the acting was GREAT! It was a well made film, but There Will Be Blood should have taken Best Picture FOR SURE!

*Burn After Reading (2008) - meh. I enjoyed some of the quirkiness of the film, and again, GREAT performances, but it just didn't resonate with me. Maybe it needs a second viewing, but I'm not sure I want to waste another 2 hours, just to be let down again.

OK, I know people are gonna say "Why isn't Fargo on that list?" Confession: I STILL haven't seen Fargo! (*runs and hides, while grabbing a baseball glove to catch the tomatoes*) I know, I'm a failure, but that seems to be an ongoing trend, AND one of the main reasons that I started this blog. THEN they made Intolerable Cruelty... REALLY Joel and Ethan? THAT'S the route you go? Romantic comedy? I tend to avoid those at ALL costs! I LOVE me some George Clooney (though I didn't used to back in the day), and I'm fine w/ Catherine Zeta Jones, but the Coens and romantic comedy??? I'm out! I also DO need to see Blood Simple and the Ladykillers, and I DID see their segment of Paris, je t'aime (and liked the film altogetherm but can't recall which was their segment), but overall, the Coen's are WAY more miss than hit for me!

So tonight, or maybe tomorrow, I'll report back on my thoughts. A Jewish dude and his dismal life just doesn't seem all that gripping, but I could be wrong. I DO like that the trailer doesn't spoil the plot though, and the head-pounding (literally) beat, but I'm not getting my hopes up. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised!

SCREEN CUTS TO BLACK -

CASEY

(confused, quietly to self)

Seriously?! What the hell?! Wow...

(sigh, slight irritated)

Eff you Coen brothers!

I think that's how I leave most Coen brothers films. This one threw me off though because I actually enjoyed it! I can never really tell if I overthink their films, or whether they completely fly over my head. Either way, they always create topics of discussion for me! The lead in A Serious Man, Michael Stuhlbarg, is pretty much an unknown, and is fantastic! Everyone in the film was SO good! So believable! I always enjoy going into movies that I know next to nothing about; movies in which the trailer doesn't give the ENTIRE thing away!

***SPOILERS***
It's been said that this sort of chronicles the story of Job from the Bible, where everything in his life falls apart, but he continues to stay faithful.  I get that. Larry Gopnik (Stuhlbarg) is a man of integrity; just a college professor, up for tenure, who is trying to do right by his unfaithful wife, his selfish daughter, his bullied, soon-to-be-bar mitzvahed son, and his socially awkward gambler brother. He has a Korean student who's trying to buy a grade, and his wife's lover who is tying to be his friend as if nothing's wrong.
(to be completed...)

Anvil! The Story of Anvil

 

Space15Twenty is a little shopping area (rather "anti-mall"ish) in Hollywood that has free movie screenings. Last week I saw Weird Science there because they're doing Tuesdays in September for John Hughes movies (Ferris Bueller's Day Off is tonight). October will be Patrick Swayze month. (SIDENOTE TO ACTORS: if you want a film screening series dedicated to you, all you have to do is die?) Mondays however are often put on by Amoeba Music. I had heard nothing but great things about Anvil, and meant to see it during it's limited LA release, but was broke and lazy at the time (though not much has changed), and missed out. I don't know much about the band, Anvil, other than the fact that they've been around forever! So here's to a love of music and free movies!

 

Ok, so Anvil... dang! Those guys have been around for 30+ years, and have never really "made it". The documentary shows them and their families, and shows their daily lives in Canada. There's 2 original members:  Steve "Lips" Kudlow (guitar/vocals), and Robb Reiner (drums). As high schoolers, they started this band, and it's all they've ever wanted to do! Both are married with families, and their wives just want to see them happy, though Robb's wife seems to think it might be time to hang up the hat. 

The film's director, Sasha Gervasi, met them in London at 15 years old, worked as a roadie for a while, and is still, to this day, and friend and supporter of this band that he so deeply admires for their perseverence and love of their art. Anvil is a band that has just never taken off like a band who is THAT passionate usually would, While showing some older footage mixed in, we see the band where they are at present, still working their day jobs and trying to book tours on their own during their vacation time. They're shown being given an opportunity to play a 10,000 seat arena... and 174 people show up. They book club gigs all over Europe, and money matters aren't resolved til years later! They can't seem to catch a break! As a viewer, part of me feels like they're ridiculous for chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. They talk about their career as musicians as if they're JUST on the cusp of making it... 30+ years in... and at 50+ years old.

***SPOILERS???***

At that point, I was really wondering how this documentary was going to end up! They hired one of their old producers to produce "Thirteen", their thirteenth album, and hand delivered it to labels all over the place in hopes that someone, ANYONE, would be willing to pick them up and work with them. This was all AFTER Lips' older sister, still wnting to believe in the band's dream, lent them money to continue on. It brought on such a real sense of love! She wanted her brother to be happy and continue pursuing his dream, no matter how foolish it may seem to most. They finally got a call from a promoter...from Japan... saying that they wanted to  book them to play a festival. They head to Japan to find that they're playing a 20,000 seat arena... and are FIRST on the bill at 11:35am. I was sitting in a PACKED house and audible groans of pity could be heard from almost EVERYONE! The band was trying SO hard to make it and they were just being dealt the WORST hand EVER! They get ready to go onstage... and walk out to a PACKED HOUSE!!! Everyone where I was started clapping and couldn't be happier to see Anvil get some love and respect from fans! (My note of advice: move to Japan, make some money, and then retire in style!)

The documentary sums up the band's current state by saying they're recruiting the same producer for their FOURTEENTH album, and are hoping for success. It's such a bittersweet film that thoroughly enjoyed. It showed the trials of a struggling band wonderfully.

Overall: Thumbs up!!!

Here's a clip that was from Sundance '08, where the film was originally showcased:

King of California

The main reason for wanting to watch this movie this week is for Evan Rachel Wood to redeem herself! I DO think she's a good actress, but her new role in True Blood is awful!!! Her character as the Vampire Queen, Sophie-Anne, should be a huge presence, and instead she seems like a spoiled prep-student á la Cruel Intentions. She needs to have a Maryanne type presence, but that just isn't how it's been going down. I understand that she's been training and rehearsing for Spider Man on Broadway, but that doesn't mean that she should play her screen role as if she's on the stage. It's not really that she's overacting, but it's the way that she talks and delivers lines. It feels a bit emotionless and almost as though she's performing for a live audience rather than a camera. I hope that changes for next season, but for the time being, I'm giving her a chance to step it up by watching King of California. This movie looks like a charming little indie that's quirky and fun, and right up my alley, so we'll see...

I'm actually really looking forward to seeing Michael Douglas in this role! I don't think I'm used to seeing him play roles like this, but it just might suit him well!

Hey... me actually following up with a review! Fancy that! So... King of California... I REALLY liked it a lot! To sum it up, it's about a high school aged girl named Miranda (Wood), who's had to drop out of high school to work and pay all the bills at home. Her mom had left the family years ago, and her father, Charlie (Douglas), had been taken to a nut house after trying to hang himself a couple years back. Miranda picks Charlie up upon release, and is trying to get accustomed to life living with her father, who lacks all sense of responsibility. He is a bit of a conspiracy theororist, and thinks that there's some sort of burried treasure below the local Costco, and recruits Miranda to help, and his jazz band friend, Pepper to be the lookout man.

***SPOILERS START HERE***
I think there's something that everyone can relate to in this movie no matter what type of family you came from. Miranda has pretty much had to be the adult in her family her entire life, given her absent mother and her irresponsible father. I think that everyone, deep down inside, wants to believe in their parents, no matter how screwed up they are. We want to believe that they'll step up and play the nurturing role that we expect of them. Miranda knows how flawed her father is, but she's willing to go along with his crazy play because she really does love him, and she realizes that regardless of his take on the world, he's happy. Charlie is a total optimist! I related to his character SO much! He may not have everything completely thought out, but he's got a game plan that he believes in and is willing to see it through with a chance that he's right. He loves his daughter and only wants the best for her, even if he isn't really aware what the best thing is. He really means well in all things; there just happens to be a screw loose. It's all about the quest for happiness, and belonging in the world.

They break into Costco (and set off alarms), drill through the floor, and find a water-filled tunnel that Charlie decides to explore with scuba gear that Costco has unknowingly provided.  At the end of the film, Charlie ties up Miranda in the employee break room of Costco and tells her that when the cops inevitably catch them, she should say that he forced her into all this. Being a minor would get her off the hook of any charges. It ends up with Miranda not knowing whether he father, who went back down into the tunnel, survived. The cops never caught him, nor found a body. He did, however, leave her with a note that led her to a specific dishwasher (one that she'd been eyeing earlier, which Charlie said was unnecessary). She purchases that specific dishwasher with the credit card Charlie had given her (which SHE thought to be unnecessary), and takes it to the coast to open it with no one around. There's a golden glow that is shown on her face, but we don't see the inside of the dishwasher. I would like to believe that Charlie actually found treasure, but either way, Miranda gets a sense that her father really loves her and has always had her best interest in mind despite his imbalance. He actually payed attention to her when she showed interest in something and that meant so much to her.

I don't know if I properly conveyed my enjoyment of this film, but it really is one of the better ones that I've seen recently. It had a very limited theatrical release, but given the opportunity, I feel like it could have been another Little Miss Sunshine or Juno. It was a little indie gem that I can't recommend enough!

Overall: TOTAL thumbs up!!!

Pandorum

OK, so I love Ben Foster, but he's one of those actors that just doesn't always take the greatest roles, though is usually good in each role despite the crap movies he's in. He's had some great roles though too. If you've seen 3:10 To Yuma (and you SHOULD HAVE), he was fantastic as Charlie Prince! I remember him all the way back in the day from a little show on the Disney channel, and then again from a few episodes of Freaks and Geeks (one of my ALL TIME favorite TV shows). More recently he was in Hostage, Alpha Dog, and X-Men 3. Dennis Quaid is also in Pandorum, and other than... or wait... nope. That guy hasn't made a good film in 5 years(?)... 10 years(???). That doesn't give me much hope for this movie. *sigh*

OK, so I'm reviewing this right away in hopes that I can help you save yourself $10! To sum it up, THANK GOD I SAW THIS FOR FREE!!! It started out odd, but decent enough, and them got progressively more and more odd and off track. There were little bits of plot that seemed to be there for the sake of filling time or just trying to give it an added depth (for which it failed miserably)!

***I GUESS THESE WOULD BE SPOILERS***

The film opens with a scene from inside some giant spacecraft thing and the only character that we really see later is Gallo (Cam Gigandet), but that's not til later in the film. Oh, SIDENOTE COMPLAINT: Gigandet has a amazing body... that they DON'T show off! What's up with that??? Anyway, Peyton (Quaid) and Bower (Foster) are out of these frozen pod things and wondering where they are and how long they've been there. Bower starts to remember a little bit and realizes that he was part of a mission (based on the tattoo barcode-ish type thing on his arm). He decides that he's going to investigate and explore the rest of this seemingly empty huge spacecraft thing. To make a long (lame and drawn out) story short, Peyton is verbally guiding Bower around from the control room. They realize that their families are also on another part of the spacecraft somewhere, so Bower decides to try to find his wife ONLY TO FIND OUT LATER THAT SHE LEFT HIM BEFORE HE WENT ON THE MISSION, WHICH WAS THE REASON HE ENROLLED IN THE FIRST PLACE! He supposedly finds Peyton's wife's capsule, but I think we find out that they're all dead. Either way, it's a dead end plot line that is completely unnecessary! It doesn't lent to the film at all! Bower meets a few other humans along the way (all of which I can't remember their names because I don't recall them being mentioned). They spend the entire film fending off these alien-type creatures that look brainless, but are apparently smart enough to rig up booby-traps all over the place to catch and kill the humans.

In the meantime, back in the control room, Gallo emerges and is poorly acted by Cam Gigandet. I didn't really get his take on the ship's situation. Is he a newer crew member? Older? Well... we find out soon enough that Gallo is actually Peyton and deals with this BS cop-out time space continuum (SIDENOTE: I just spell checked "continuum"... I didn't realize there was another word in the English language that had consecutive "u"s besides vacuum). ENDING SPOILER: Bower makes it back to the control room and the few survivors shoot off in little pods to land in the ocean of some planet that is fairly earth-like to assume that the 1200ish survivors can now rebuild the human population on this new planet... Eff that!

Overall, I give this an enthusiastic thumbs down!!! Like I said, THANK GOD I didn't pay for this 2 hour waste of time! It actualy started with promise, but went to crap FAST!

Weird Science

After taking some time to catch up the current theatrical releases, I'm going to try to get back to some of the old movies that I'm lame to have not seen. Tonight's film came courtest of Space 15Twenty. This month is all John Hughes movies, hence, Weird Science. Next month is all Patrick Swayze films, so if anyone wants to join me on the Tuesday night that they show Point Break, let me know. Also, good to know that if an actor ever needs attention, all they have to do is die. Too soon? (Actually, that was my dorky attempt at an homage to Brand New, whose 4th album, Daisy, came out today. Buy it!) Anyway, I have trouble getting into 80's comedies that I didn't grow up with. They hold a sentimental value when you grow up watching them, but when you're introduced to 80's comedies as an adult, they just don't seem to see that funny. The comedic pacing is so much slower, and I usually just can't get into them. I recently saw Fast Time At Ridgemont High... meh. That's my sentiment. I didn't find it very funny, nor did I see what all the nostalgic hype was about. Someone the other day pointed out to me that Mr. Skin gave Fast Times... the distinction of having the #1 nude scene of all time. Um... Phoebe Cates getting out of a pool topless? That earns the #1 spot? Eff you Mr. Skin! Lame! Though I'd totally be willing to switch boobs with Phoebe Cates anyday!

*sigh* Back to the topic at hand; here's the Weird Science trailer... and as always, I'm a slack and will review in a (regrettably un)timely manner. Check out that floppy disk!

The Baader Meinhof Complex

To the few that are actually reading my ramblings, I'm sure you think I'm failing at my own game. that's cause I am! I think watching and reviewing a movie a day was a bit too ambitious and it's coming around to bite me. I've been doing pretty well at watching, but it's the writing that I just haven't had the patience to do lately. I know I keep saying that I'll catch up in a day or so, but this time I HAVE TO! I think I can do it by Wednesday! For the time being, here's what I saw tonight. More to come...


(This review might actually come sooner rather than later cause the movie was freakin' INTENSE! Just watch the trailer and get a feeling for it! CRAZY!)

The Informant!

Saw it. Don't feel well. Allergies suck. Still trying to catch up!

 

(I personally like this poster other than the fact that it reminds me of What About Bob? for some reason!)

Big Fan

When I think Patton Oswalt, I think comedy. And then I think animated rat comedy. Big Fan, however, isn't gonna be either one of those. It's written and directed by Robert D. Siegel, who was also the screenwriter behind Darren Aronofsky's film The Wrestler, so I'm hoping this captures the real, yet sad sentiment of that film. The Westler was one of those films that I liked better after I was able to digest it for a while, and the same will probably hold true for this one. I think the only films I've seen Oswalt in were his tiny bit parts in Observe and report (which I HATED, by the way), and Zoolander (where'd you'd blink and miss him), so we'll see if he can carry this through. I cheated a little and checked out the score on Rotten Tomatoes, and so far (in it's super tiny release), Big Fan is at an 81% with 47 reviews in  - not too shabby! (I'm seeing this tonight at the Landmark Nuart.)

 

Paris

I was able to go to a screening of Cédric Klapisch's film, Paris last night. I didn't have a chance to track down the trailer before viewing the film, so I DID already see it before watching the trailer. So with that said, here's the trailer, and my spoiler filled review is directly below.

 

***SPOILERS START NOW***

Ok, assuming that you just watched the trailer, this looks like a charming little French film about people falling in love and appreciating those around them. I have to respond to that assumption with a big, enthusiastic, NOPE! I have to give HUGE props to whoever put that trailer together though! It was fabulous! The music in it was used well, the clips picked made it look like a compelling story, and it looked like it was shot really well. Au contraire mon cher ami! I'm beginning to think that I have a problem with French films in general. I'm not all that well versed in them, but the last one that I remember seeing was the Academy Award nominated film, Entre Les Murs (The Class), which I really didn't care for! I get what they were going for, and I can appreciate it, but I just thought it lacked a lot - primarily a plot! (?) 

Back to Paris, the main story, from what I could tell, was about a man named Pierre (Romain Duris), who has a heart condition to which he needs a transplant, and his sister Élise (Juliette Binoche), who is divorced with 3 kids, all of which move in with Pierre to help him and spend as much time as possible with him in case his condition is terminal. Pierre likes to observe people from afar to see people enjoying life, but also feels like most people don't appreciate what they have or live their life to the fullest. There's a few sub-plots in the film, one being about a college professor who ends up having a relationship with a student, who is also in another relationship, and how he just doesn't feel like his life is normal like his brother's (who is married with a baby on the way). The student, Laetitia, is just kind of an "I do what makes me happy" type of person. She's played by Mélanie Laurent, who also played Shoshana Dreyfus is Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds, and was great in both films. 

 

In other sub-plots, there were people from a local outdoor market that were onscreen from time to time. one of the women dies in  motorcycle accident, and while we see that onscreen, it serves no other purpose in the plot. Worse than that, a character named Benoît is trying to make it to France from somewhere else, and his boat of illegal immigrants crashes or capsizes and people go missing. We see him at the end of the film, so obviously he makes it, but he has so little screen time and is not really connected to ANYTHING else in the story, that I wonder what the point of his character is. The performances from most of the cast were great, but I could feel myself sitting there with a confused expression on my face for probably 75% of the film. Maybe French films lose a bit of there charm in English subtitles, but I just don't get them. Paris ended somewhat tied up, but not entirely. At just over 2 hours I found myself wishing that I was wearing a watch to see how much more I had to endure. That's not a good sign.

Overall, thums down! Je suis désolé.

The September Issue

So I'm heading out to see The September Issue in a bit at the Landmark on Pico (which is probably my favorite theater as far as comfort goes). I LOVE Project Runway, LOVE The Devil Wears Prada (the movie AND the band - woot!), and (though you wouldn't know it by my attire) I'm totally intrigued by fashion. I revolves around Anna Wintour, the Editor-in-chief of Vogue magazine, and is another of those sub-cultures that leave people sticking out like a sore thumb if you're not up to speed on all the latest trends and headlines. This movie will definitely fulfill my documentary craving. Bring on the avant garde and ridiculously tall heels!

I went into this knowing that Anna Wintour is the one that Meryl Streep's character in The Devil Wears Prada is based on. I really love learning about different subcultures, and fashion is no different.

***SPOILERS-KINDA***
I'm not sure that you can really have "spoilers" in a documentary like this, but just in case... OK, so I really expected to hate Wintour, but I'm sure that she wouldn't have approved of the documentary if it had portrayed her poorly. She has such a heavy-hand in Vogue that I'm sure she'd make sure to have final say in this documentary. It was interesting to see what she wore to the office in comparison to everyone else. She was often in patterned dresses with her large glasses and a scarf, with her makeup all done up. Others in the office that were the older, higher-ups, were in solid dark colors, and overly acid-peeled faces. They look like people that would have absolutely NO business in the fashion world, yet most have been in it for years, and many even used to be model when they were young. Who knew?

The best part of this documentary was Grace Coddinton, who has also been with Vogue for 20-ish years. Apparently she didn't necessarily want to be a part of the documentary.

TO BE CONTINUED...

Gamer

Having no expectations for this one way or another, I decided to see it simply as a way to kill time between shift since I couldn't hit up Ponyo or Taking Woodstock at a theater that was also playing Sorority Row (so that I could sneak in JUST to see the *NEW* New Moon trailer. I know, for those who know me, I'm SO not one to latch on to cheesy, trendy, girly crap like the Twilight Saga, but I reluctantly got sucked in by the books well before the movie came out. So sue me)! Anyway, the concept reminded me of Death Race (another movie that I NEVER would have paid to see if I didn't have a friend in town that really wanted to see it). That, in and of itself, is not promising, but it could be a fun, brainless way to kill 2 hours. I do love me some Michael C. Hall though, and Gerard Butler has a tendency to be easy on the eyes (minus the talking out of the side of his mouth like Milo Ventimiglia). I, myself, am not a "gamer" in any sense of the word, but thought I'd give it a shot.

 

*review tomorrow*

White On Rice

I got an email about this film from the Laemmle "sneak preview club", which I love because it introduces me to many movies that I would have never heard of otherwise. One of the things that makes me the happiest is seeing people make their dreams come true. I know that sounds SUPER cheesy, but I love seeing people succeed at doing what they love. These tiny films are usually done on next to NO budget, and are often self distributed (like this one). All I knew about this film prior to watching it last night was this little description:

A comedy about Jimmy (Hiroshi Watanabe, LETTERS fROM IWO JIMA), who loves dinosaurs and sleeps on the  top bunk. Unfortunately, Jimmy is 40, and shares the bunk bed with his 10-year-old nephew. Freshly divorced, Jimmy has moved in with his sister and her family while boldly searching for a new wife. His brother in-law thinks he’s a disaster. And although Jimmy may lack social grace, he is convinced the best years of his life are just beginning.

*I am PROMISING reviews on many of these movies by tomorrow! I'm still a bit sick, but am TRYING not to sleep my day away anymore. Hold me to it guys!*

9

(I actually saw 2 new movies in the theater yesterday.)
I'm hoping that my expectations for this movie aren't too high. I saw the animated short that Shane Acker was nominated for an Oscar for and thought it was so clever and inventive. It was done with stop animation by a no-name guy fresh out of film school. I was impressed. This is one of the films that I've been excited about ever since I saw the trailer for the first time playing in front of Waltz With Bashir. It was the perfect use of footage mixed with music. It won me over with the use of Coheed and Cambria's "Welcome Home".

*review coming*

Here's the original Oscar nominated animated short that the feature film is based on:

Step Brothers

I want to like this, but seeing as it's from the Talladega Nights guys, I'm not too encouraged. It's written by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay, the guys behind FunnyOrDie.com who also wrote Anchorman (one of my FAVORITES), so it's a total coin toss. The concept could work, but I fear it's gonna walk a fine line between funny and ridiculous!

As I suspected, it DID walk a fine line between funny and ridiculous, and I'm not quite sure which won out. To be quite honest, I expected to HATE this movie!

***SPOILERS - If that's possible with a movie like this***
To split my mixed feelings, on one hand, guys who are 40 years old acting THAT childish is WAY far fetched! They don't necessarily act "slow", but they seem entire incapable of doing ANYTHING on their own, yet by the time the film wraps up, they've just kind of gotten over the extreme childish tendencies. On the other hand, it really was a GREAT cast, with some super funny lines that had me laughing out loud to myself. I love Kathryn Hahn! She often plays a super inappropriate character, that is just awkward enough to work well. She's always a supporting cast member who always end up being a scene stealer! Will Ferrell can be a bit whiny for my taste and pushed that a bit much in this, but he still brought the funny. I know SO many people that hated this movie, so maybe I had low enough expectations to find it humorous, but I laughed nonetheless.

It really IS a dumb film though, and most won't find it funny. I laughed, but that doesn't make it good. Despite all that, I think I'd still have to give the movie a thumbs down.

Mister Foe

I like the quirky indies, but often don't like the quirky indies. What a hypocrite I am, right??? I usually love how they're made and shot, and often have outstanding acting and soundtracks, but I don't always connect with the stories. That doesn't make it a bad film, but just not necessarily one that I'd rush out to recommend. The trailer for Mister Foe doesn't give much away, and I appreciate that. I think I'm really going to like the randomness of Hallam Foe's (Jamie Bell) character.

Yay! It's about time that there's a quirky indie film that I can stand by! Now  this may not be the best film ever, but compared to some of the movies I've sat through lately, this was very refreshing. Thumbs up to Jamie Bell and Sophia Myles. I STILL haven't seen Billy Elliott (starring Jamie Bell) - FAIL, I know, but I saw him in Defiance and was very impressed. (Sidenote: Defiance got mixed reviews, but it really was one of my favorites last year - opened Dec.31.) The only other thing I've seen Sophia Myles in was Art School Confidential (which I was ok with, but would have appreciated more if I were an eccentric art school kid). I thought she was strong in the role of Hallum's quasi love interest.

***SPOILERS START HERE***
17 turning 18 years old, Hallum Foe (Jamie Bell) is trying to get to the bottom of his mother's death, and suspects his father's new wife (Claire Forlani). In going to confront her, he ends up sleeping with her before fleeing his home at his father's to try to live on his own. Hallum is a bit of an introverted, socially awkward, peeping tom that kind of lives vicariously through others. He becomes infatuated with Kate (Myles) who (resembles his mother, and) is currently having an affair with a married man. Hallum and Kate have an odd and somewhat childish attraction to each other, but I think Hallum grows up a lot and is able to work through the events that led to his mother's death. I liked the way it was shot, and liked the soundtrack.

I wouldn't necessarily say "rush out to rent this now", but it was a twisted and enjoyable story that I would say "thumbs up" to.

Gigantic

I remember wanting to see this right when it hit the Laemmle Sunset 5 in LA for about a week, but was a slacker and totally missed out! I didn't realize that this was even out on DVD yet til I saw the line-up of movies at the Telluride Film Festival and saw that there was a film called Gigante, and though it's not the same film, it made me think of this one and track it down on Netflix. I adore Zooey Deschenel and also thought Paul Dano was brilliant in both Little Miss Sunshine and There Will Be Blood (where I would have like to see him nominated), so I was stoked that this film was out on DVD already.

I'm starting to think that I'm just really tough to please lately when it comes to movies. I'm seeing a lot of movies that I don't necessarily consider to be time-wasters, but movies that I wouldn't see again, and may or may not even recommend. I kind of hate to say that I didn't like this movie, but I didn't.

***SPOILERS START HERE***
Brian (Paul Dano) works at a crappy job as a mattress salesman, who sells an expensive bed to a pissy man with back problems (played by John Goodman). The mattress is later paid for by his daughter, Happy (Zooey Deschenel). Brian and Happy end up in an odd relationship where Happy freaks out when she learns that Brian is in the process of adopting a baby. She has no real direction in life and pretty much just runs from anything that might intimidate her. Meanwhile, throughout the film, a random homeless(?) dude (Zach Galifianakis) is chasing Brian around and beating him up with no explanation or resolution. I was so thrown off and confused by this element of the film that I went searching message boards for answers. Apparently, from people's responses to the director's (Matt Aselton) Q & A sessions, he didn't have a lot of answers as to why her put certain elements in it. It seemed as though he did things to be intentionally quirky without any rhyme or reason, and called the film "Gigantic" because he liked the way the word sounded. That's total BS and a complete cop-out! There's way better words to use to name a film, unless the intention was to use "gigantic" to help viewers describe exactly the piece of crap that this film was. Maybe there was some other thought-provoking point that I missed, but it doesn't sound like it.

Verdict: A very (regretful,) enthusiastic thumbs DOWN!

The Secret Life of Bees

I'm almost caught up on watching movies, and will be working on reviewing... I promise! I've been super sick for the last couple of days. It SHOULD have been the perfect movie watching and reviewing time, but while I wasn't at work, I was sleeping. I picked this movie mainly because I like Dakota Fanning as a young actor, and partly because it came up on one of the movie channels and I taped it. I forget to send in my Netflix, so I don't have new movies other than the "watch instantly" online ones. The internet tends to be skiddish, so I don't always trust it.

I remember seeing the trailer for this film and being torn on whether I wanted to see it or not. It was one of those that I was curious about, but didn't want to spend money on. Many of these type of sentimental based-on-best-sellin-novel type movies don't really do it for me, but I'm wiling to give this a shot tonight.

I really like Dakota Fanning as a young actor, and she tends to make good decisions as far as the roles she takes (with the exception of the film Hound Dog, which I hear was HORRID), and so I expected her to be good in this as well. For the most part, she was. I had an eye-roll reaction to all of the "singers-turned-actors" being in the movie. I'm ok with Queen Latifa being in movies because she's done a number of them and has proved herself to be pretty legit following Chicago. Alicia Keys could be good down the road as well, as could Jennifer Hudson (though I STILL think that her Oscar for Dreamgirls was undeserved), but to throw them ALL in the same film was annoying to me. Yet again, it's a movie based on a book, and is probably better as a book.

***SPOILERS START HERE***
So at the beginning of the film, Fanning's character, Lily, accidentally shoots and kills her mom at the age of 4... possible, but not probable. She runs away from her abusive father as a teenager to live with the Boatwright sisters, whom her mother had lived with for a while when she left her husband. The story deals with civil rights, growing up, and finding a place to belong. There's been so many movies lately that take me a while to get into, and this was no exception. Fanning's acting is great, and I like the fact that her character was the one who defied the race lines. The pacing of the movie was a bit off - super slow in some parts, and I lost interest from time to time. Although Lily's father (played by Paul Bettany) wasn't in it much, I always enjoy Bettany as an actor and find him rather underrated. (Sidenote: I recently saw the trailer for Legion... it could be REALLY good, or REALLY crappy! Time will tell!) Lily's quasi-relationship/attraction with Zach (Tristan Wilds) is really sweet as well.

Overall, I REALLY fence-sit on this one. I didn't really care for it, but it wasn't a bad film. If I'm going strictly on my opinion of whether or not the film was enjoyable, I'm more of a no than yes, which I guess would be a thumbs down. I'm glad I didn't pay to see it in the theater, but it wasn't a complete waste of time either.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

So many people have been telling me that this is such a cute, feel-good movie, and that I'd appreciate it because I'm a "music person". I like Kat Dennings as an actress, and find the awkwardness of Michael Cera endearing, but this seems almost too chick-flicky for my taste. I actually DID plan to see this in  the theater, but wasn't all too bummed to have missed it when it came and went. The soundtrack is good; not stellar. I'm really hoping that this doesn't go the way of Juno. I really DID like Juno, but thought that the dialogue tried a little too hard to be hipstery. THAT soundtrack outshines this one, in my opinion, but if this deals closely with music like it seems to, it could be a winner for me afterall. Also, it's produced by the Weitz brothers, and I STILL haven't seen About A Boy OR the Golden Compass, but loved the tongue-in-cheek satire of American Dreamz, and mm REALLY looking forward to Cirque Du Freak!

OK... I REALLY wanted to like this movie given the music content, but I felt like it was just a bit all over the place. I wasn't opposed to Dennings or Cera - I felt that they played their parts well, but I thought the plot was actually ridiculous!

***SPOILERS START HERE***
OK, first off, the awkward, dorky kid that is Michael Cera, wouldn't have the "hot, popular" Triss as a girlfriend, NOR would she go out of her way to win him back. Also, Norah (Dennings) takes Nick (Cera) to her dad's famous recording studio to have super awkward sex? Unlikely! The plot revolves around a bunch of quasi-indie-hipsters trying to find a secret show that a band called "Who's Fluffy" is playing. It get's to be close to 5am or something by the time the band finally plays, and by that time, Nick and Norah are SO into each other that they end up ditching the show to go hang out... Um... from someone who's SUPER into music, if MY favorite band, who RARELY plays shows, was playing a show, AND a dude that I just met felt the SAME WAY about said band, there's NO WAY we'd ditch that thing after a night of BS shenanigans: trying to locate drunk friend, fix crashed car, deal with stalkerish ex... I know this thing was based on a book (which I didn't read), and books tend to be way better, but I just wasn't on board at all. It was just too pretentious for me. Cera had some great one-liners, but that also seems to be all he's good for most of the time. Dennings can do better.

Overall, I'd go thumbs down. It's not a bad film, but I just didn't care for it!

Before Night Falls

I've owned this movie FOREVER and just never watched it. I've seen Javier Bardem in numerous roles since this movie came out, but never went back to watch this one, in which he plays Cuban poet/novelist Reinaldo Arenes. Also, until watching the trailer, I totally thought it was subtitled. Umm... I guess not! It's directed by Academy Award nominated director Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly), and apparently his wife and 5 children all appear in the film, including his daughter Stella, who used to date John Fusciante (of the Red Hot Chili Peppers). Johnny Depp is also in the film (and is always great), and plays 2 roles, one of which appears to be a woman. Sean Penn and Diego Luno (Milk co-stars) are in it as well. I was trying to find a trailer without all the award information scrolling through it, but I failed at the task. Here's the trailer:

I'm not sure exactly what I was expecting with this film, but it actually took me a while to get into it. The Depp and Penn roles were very small, but good, as always. The movie was well made. The cinematography was beautiful! That's something that I noticed right off the bat. It was well written, well acted, well made, but just didn't feel all that "new". I almost feel like that's a terrible thing to say about the story of someone's life, but that's how I felt. I knew nothing of Arenes prior to watching this. What a failure of a reviewer I am right now! This movie is more than a "meh" to me, but not a "rush out to see this NOW" reaction either.

Final verdict: thumbs up, but no need to bump this to the top of your Netflix queue.

The Birdcage

This is one of those movies that I've been meaning to to see for... well... um... since 1996. Robyn Williams and Nathan Lane are always great in comedies, and this movie came out during a time when both of those actors were still making good movies. This was also just before Gene Hackman started showing up in every other movie that came out in Hollywood. "Came out" seems to be a good phase to begin the viewing with. (I don't know why the trailer's stretched out all funy, but it's the only one I could find)

Senator Kevin Keeley (Gene Hackman) - "Louise, people in this country aren't interested in details. They don't even TRUST details. The only thing they trust is headlines."

How true are those words in THIS society?! First off, can I just mention how thin Nathan Lane was!? Anyway, the Birdcage is based on French Jean Poiret's stage play "La Cage Aux Folles", and he had a hand in the screenplay as well. In looking at director Mike Nichols' filmography, I haven't seen anything of his besides The Birdcage, so I had no other work to compare it to. It was a very well written script! I don't know why I didn't expect much out of it, but I was pleasantly surprised - Great cast, witty script, awkward humor, fantastic!

This movie felt like the original Meet the Parents. I mean, I'm sure there were prior movies with awkward "engaged couple's families meet each other" plotlines, but this is the first one that I recall, and the character having gay parents put an additional non-conformist spin on it that, looking back, would have probably been more controversial then, than now. I'm not quite sure what else to say, seeing as I have no complaints, other than the fact that Hank Azaria is brilliant, as always!

The fial verdict? Thumbs up fir sure!

Who the #$&% is Jackson Pollock?

BEST line in forever: "Everyone knows that a fairytale starts out, 'once upon a time'. Well a truck driver's fairytale starts out, 'you ain't gonna believe THIS shit!'" - Teri Horton, one classy old broad.


I wasn't sure what to watch today, and my free time is limited since I work BOTH my jobs on Thursday and Fridays, so I picked a short one that's been towards the top of my documentary list for a while now. I like art, but I'm really tough to please - not because I know a lot about it (though I'm pretty familiar with the work of the "big names", I just know not a lot about the artist or the history of the work), but because a lot of "famous paintings" don't look all that skilled to me. I don't really understand the appeal of Jackson Pollock's work, so I figured this would be interesting. (Next art doc? My Kid Could Paint That.)

Since it looks like the trailer doesn't want to load, go here:

Who the #$&% is Jackson Pollock? trailer

In brief, this documentary shows the 10+ year journey that truck driver Teri Horton went on to prove whether or not a painting that she bought for $5 at a thrift store was a Jackson Pollock original.I found this VERY fascinating! It was interesting to see how "proof" meant different things to the art world vs. the forensics world. It really reiterated the existence of sub-cultures in society.

Working in radio, and having numerous musician friends, I understand the inner-workings of touring bands; business deals, venues taking cuts, pre-selling tickets, opening in larger venues for nationally touring bands as opposed to local touring bands, etc. I have also seen a bit of the film side from being a Broadcasting major in college and having film student friend; shooting permits (or not), working for "copy, credit, food" instead of pay, roles of crew, etc. I also have a friend that rides motocross. That is it's OWN world, and one that I have no understanding of! All little subcultures are so incestuous! The art world is much the same. One person speaking up for the authenticity of a piece can automatically negate the doubt of any industry naysayer! If I were to walk into an art gallery and try to talk to people who are well versed in the world of art, I would stick out like a SORE THUMB! Much in the same way, if you had a person that listens to 102.7 KIIS FM (Top 40) walk into a hardcore/metal show, even if they dressed the part, there would be no way that they would be able to blend in once conversation started with said poser and a kid who's part of that (sub)culture.



***SPOILERS START HERE***

First off, this TOTALLY feed into my pre-conceived stereotype that the art crowd are all stubborn, snooty elitists. Their "proof" is someone who has a big hand or share in the art world to agree that the painting is authentic. I was SHOCKED to see a forensics analyst step into the picture, match a couple fingerprints (one from the back of Teri's "Pollock", and one from a paint can in Pollock's studio) and STILL, that wasn't enough for the art snobs! It'd be good enough to put someone away for life in a MURDER TRIAL, but not good enough to proved that some alcoholic painted some HUGE piece of whatever the surface was?!?! C'mon bro!!!

At one point Teri was offered $2 million, no questions asked, and she turned down the offer. She felt like it was a legit painting, and on principle, wouldn't sell it for less that she thought it was worth. Al the beginning of the documentary she had no idea who Jackson Pollock was, so I saw it strictly as her stubbornness (though not greed) that was preventing her from taking the offer. It's kind of like Deal Or no Deal - you hold out for a higher sum PRAYING that you've got the golden ticket (that may or may not be there).To be quite honest though, I probably would have passed on the $2 million too, while crossing all my fingers and all my toes! I WOULDN'T, however, be too stubborn to take the $9 MILLION that she was said to have been offered at the end of the film! Apparently there was an ADDITIONAL matching fingerprint found ON a proven Jackson Pollock painting! Teri did not. She still felt like it was worth more. *sigh* Stubborn old woman!

Overall, I give this a very enthusiastic thumbs up (minus the TERRIBLE song that some dude sings in a bar about Teri and her painting at the end of the film. THAT is 3 minutes of my life that I will NEVER get back)!

Fast Times At Ridgemont High

Yeah, yeah, yeah... I know I'm a bit of a failure at times, and the proof lies within this post. Ladies and gentlemen, I HAVE NEVER SEEN FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH! I know this is supposed to be one of the old classic comedies that EVERYONE'S seen, but if it's not something that I was allowed to watch growing up, chances are I STILL haven't caught up on it! The ONLY things I know about it is that Sean Penn plays a surfer/stoner dude named Spicoli, and that Cameron Crowe wrote it when he was in his mid-twenties. Now THAT makes me feel like more of a failure than not having seen the film. I should have written a screenplay that's in production by now! *sigh*

The trailer hints at NOTHING in the plot. I always watch these "classic" films and hope that they're actually funny and hold up. We'll see. I'm actually thinking that I won't be all that impressed for whatever reason. I'm tough to please when it comes to comedies, and ESPECIALLY older ones.

I come into this review with head to toe body armor on, though I offer no apologies. I guess in short, my reaction to Fast Times would be "...and...?" I wouldn't necessarily say that it was 90 minutes of my life that I'll never get back, but it is, like I suspected, a film that hasn't aged well over time. One of the only 15+ year old movies that people STILL talk about that I hadn't seen til recently and STILL holds up is T2. My whole life, everyone talked about Goonies. I finally saw it at 20 years old and it held no weight. I think it's because I didn't grow up with it. Movies that I watched as a kid that just don't have that special spark to those that didn't grow up with them would have to be (in shortlist form) Newsies, The Labyrinth, The Muppet Movie, Drop Dead Fred, Real Genius, Flight of the Navigator. Others that DO hold up would have to be (in my opinion) The Sandlot, Field of Dreams, Groudhog Day, Grease, The Breakfast Club.

I guess I just expected more of a (dare I say) plot (?). I mean, yeah, it chronicled high school kids, but I didn't feel like there was a typical set up, problem, resolution like in most films, but it wasn't "different" or "edgy" enough to veer from the standard patteren of that. Crowe's film Almost Famous could get away with straying from the cookie cutter a bit for some reason, but Fast Times was less successful. I'm almost starting to think (that being from the so-called MTV generation,) people around my age almost NEED either the quick cuts or twisted plot lines in order to keep us even remotely interested! I say this with a great generalization, but I think it holds a bit of truth regardless. We can look back at special effects and laugh at how prehistoric the technology was. The ADR in Fast Times is atrocious - that's probably a completely unnecessary side note though.

It WAS interesting in seeing so many current stars pop up on screen here and there though. I almost had to double-take when I saw Nicolas Cage (who was then Nicolas Coppola) in the crowd at the football game. Crazy, right? I guess I understand the nostalgia of it, but unless there was NOTHING else on and I was simply channel surfing, I probably wouldn't take the time to watch Fast Times again.

In short, I personally, would have to say thumbs down, though I DO understand how others like it. I will stand firm by Bio Dome til the day I die even though I know how terrible others think it is!

Bottle Shock

This one was brought to my attention by my boss. He's a total wine guy who talks about wine ALL THE TIME! I know next to nothing about it other than that I prefer white to red, and 2-buck-chuck hits me a lot quicker than I might imagine. I saw Sideways, and while the performances were good, I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I were a wino too. It was almost like I didn't have the full appeciation necessary. I saw Last Chance Harvey this year, and felt like I was about 30 years too young to get anything out of it. That's how I feel about wine movies. It's almost like the fact that I'm not a big drinker hinders me from connecting with the content of the film. I'm too young for Last Chance Harvey, and too sober (or maybe just too uninformed) for movies that center around wine. I know there's more to it than that, but I couldn't see past it in Sideways. Maybe it requires a second viewing.

Bottle Shock is co-written and directed by Randall Miller, who also co-wrote and directed Nobel Son - both starring Alan Rickman (whom I love). I didn't care for Nobel Son much (aside from the performances), so despite the good reviews, my hopes are't too high for Bottle Shock. Oh, and Chris Pine's wig is gnarly! (Possible redeeming factor: Miller directed Nickelodeon's Salute Your Shorts! Now THAT'S OG street cred right there!)

Jim Barrett (Bill Pullman) - "Why don't I like you??"
Steven Spurrier (Alan Rickman) - "Because you think I'm an asshole... and I'm not really - I'm just British, and well... you're not."

I'm not sure why I found those line so amusing, but I did. Ya know, there's some times that I'm thankful that I didn't know much about a particular film.

***SPOILERS BEGIN HERE***
Until the film ended, I had no idea Bottle Shock was based on a true story. I just thought it was based on some book. I find that a lot more intriguing in this case. I expected it to focus on Rickman's character rather that Bill Pullman's and Chris Pine's (as Jim Barrett's son, Bo). While the central plot dealt with wine and the vineyard, it wasn't the sole focus, and managed not to lose a wine novice, such as myself, in the shuffle. I liked seeing the father/son relationship throughout, and the resolution of it in the end. Whenever I think of Bill Pullman I automatically think of him as the prez of the good ol' U.S. of A. in Independence Day, or as "our man Denton", the reporter, in Newsies. I don't think I'd seen him age until this. It was kind of like when I saw Carrie Fisher in Fanboys. She still looked pretty good in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, and then aged about 20 years in that timespan. Morrissey is sadly going that same route.

Back to the film at hand, the entire emotional tone of the film was very different from the other Miller film I'd seen. Nobel Son was rather dark and twisted, while Bottle Shock ended up as a feel-good underdog story. The sub-plot with Freddie Rodriguez's character, Bo's friend Gustavo Brambila added to the film, while Rachael Taylor's character, Sam, felt rather unnecessary. I'm not sure how true the quasi-love triangle was to the real-life story, but it seemed thrown in to appeal to a broader audience. I think the film would have still held up just fine without it.

In keeping up with the current "thumbs up vs. thumbs down" final verdict, I'd give Bottle Shock a thumbs up! Now who wants to buy me a bottle of 1973 Chateau Montelena Chardonnay?

Autism: The Musical

Since this one's a documentary, I didn't feel the need to post about the trailer prior to watching the film. I've had this one saved in my DVR since last September! Dang! Every now and then I go on a documentary kick, and Autism: The Musical was one of the casualties when I moved out of that phase. I usually fall asleep to a movie that I've already seen at night, but seeing as it was still pretty early, I decided to give this first-run a shot.

Am I heartless if I say that I didn't like it? *ducks and covers* Maybe I SHOULD have discussed the trailer first. It seemed like it was going to deal with autistic kids in a musical. While that's partially accurate, it dealt a lot with the families and relationships between the parents, and the parents vs. teachers, etc. There WAS a musical involved in it, but it wasn't at the forefront of topics that the film dealt with. That's not necessarily bad, but it wasn't what was expected. I wanted to see more interactions with the kids I guess.

If I were to give it a quick thumbs up or thumbs down, I'd regretfully have to give it a thumbs down. Better luck next time HBO.

30 Days of Night

I'm starting off this with David Slade's 30 Days of Night. It came up on one of the movie channels that I get for free for 3 months since DirecTV moved my dish to my new place, so I decided to DVR it. I LOVED Hard Candy (one of the few standout films for me in the last 5 years or so), and am curious to see how Slade goes from a tiny little film that takes place in, and was shot in the same location, to a graphic novel-based horror type film. Josh Hartnett's easy on the eyes (minus the Bert and Ernie eyebrows), and I've always loved Ben Foster!

TRAILER:
It looks well made, and hits hard from the very beginning. It seems to have the right amount of creep factor and gore. There's a fine line to walk when making a film that incorporates the supernatural into a modern, believable civilization. *fingers crossed for this one*

I must say, overall, well done! The style of this film fits in perfectly with previous works of his, yet Slade takes it to the next step as a director. He had been known before mainly as a music video director, having worked with such musical outfits as Stone Temple Pilots, Muse, System of a Down, Aphex Twin, Stereophonics, etc., so I was curious to see how he would bring a $30M movie to the big screen.

***THIS IS WHERE THE SPOILERS START***
First off, FALSE ADVERTISING throwing Ben Foster in the trailer! He's in maybe less than 20%. *sigh* He was great, as always, but still... Also noteworthy, Danny Huston plays a creepy guy like no one else's business! Josh Hartnett and Melissa George both work well as the male and female leads, respectively. As for a film overall, I liked it! As odd as it sounds, I'm a sucker for the not-quite-so-happily-ever-after endings. I'm not necessarily saying that I enjoy or thrive on misery (but if that were the case, won't you join me?), but I feel like cookie-cutter is so unrealistic and misleading.
The pacing of the film felt right on for the most part, with only a scene or two that could have been a tad shorter. The characters and plot (for what it was) were all totally believable and well played. Now, correct me if I missed something, but the vampires and the humans only had interaction because the vamps were caught feeding, right? Huston's character, Marlow (though no vampire names are ever mentioned outside of the end credits), stated that the vampires had lived however long while keeping up as only a nightmare in the eyes of humans, but since they'd been spotted, all humans have to die to keep their actual existence a secret, right? I'm not quite sure of Ben Foster's character in that sense then.

Slade puts a distinct feel to all of his work (that I've seen thus far), and it lends itself well to the darker themed pieces. Back to Hard Candy, while I really liked it the first time, it was the second time that I was able to take myself out of the plot and appreciate the artistry behind it. If you haven't seen it, watch it. If you have, watch it again and notice the color and lighting changes when Hayley's (Ellen Page) mood changes.  I think Slade surrounds himself with very talented people from makeup to lighting to DP, and has been able to fully show his visions because of it. Even his short film, Do Geese See God? with Blair Underwood had the similar feel. He has a way of making things splendidly creeptastic! It'll be interesting to see how he takes on Eclipse, the 3rd film in the Twilight Saga (June 2010) given his generally darker approach, and older fanbase. Hopefully he gives it the added edge that it needs to reach a broader audience.

I haven't yet decided if, or how, I'm going to actually rate films, but for the time being, if I were to just give 30 Days of Night a thumbs up or a thumbs down, I'd definitely give it a thumbs up.

For more Slade:
Hard Candy trailer (2005)
Do Geese See God? (2004)
Stone Temple Pilots - Sour Girl

So it begins...

All things must start somewhere, right? (That was rhetorical.)

I've always enjoyed music and movies and have wanted to share my opinions with fellow aficionados, but often don't. Why? Laziness? I have no idea, but it just doesn't happen. If something cool comes out of this blog, great! If not, at least it's a way to get out my thoughts and opinion of all the things that I watch, and sometimes things that I listen to.

It's also been brought to my attention how many "classic" movies that I've failed to see. This is mainly because I suck. I'm a failure. I get it! No, but really, if it's not something that came out when I was in the target demographic, chances are that I just haven't caught up on older films. I'm attempting to fix that. I have a lot of free time that I skillfully waste, so I figure that I can watch a film a day, do a little write-up, and hopefully cut back on the insane amounts of crap TV that I watch. (As of this week I can officially cross VH1's Megan Wants a Millionaire off my list.)

The game plan? Pick a film (with no rhyme or reason as of yet), watch the trailer and comment, watch the film and comment, wait for people to tear my opinions to shreds. Bring it on fools!

So in chichéd fashion: Here goes nothin'!

PS - I don't yet know how to make this thing all pretty, so it's a work in progress...