Thor

            

            Thor is one of those movies that you expect to be terrible, winds up being pretty good, then you never think about again for the rest of your life.  At least until The Avengers comes out, maybe.

            I thought that Thor looked pretty stupid.  I mean, it’s hard to get excited about a movie that openly admits it is just a required precursor to a hopefully much cooler movie due out in a few years.  The situation wasn’t helped by some very dumb previews, and a main star who’s biggest credit is being “the dad of Captain Kirk in the Star Trek reboot”.

            All that being said, Thor turned out to be pleasantly surprising.  The action was cool, the ice monster things were scary, and Chris Hemsworth’s likability is not to be underestimated.  Really, the best thing about this movie was that it wasn’t afraid to be fun.  I love The Dark Knight, but not every superhero movie needs to mimic its gritty, realistic tone.  Especially superhero movies that feature a “rainbow bridge” and a 25-foot tall magical fire-breathing robot.  This movie would have been laughable had it all been treated seriously, and fortunately Kenneth Branagh and team realized this and decided to have fun with it.

            And, like most fun popcorn summer blockbusters, this one was not perfect.  I found Loki as the villain to be very boring.  It was an interesting attempt to have a comic book villain be multi-faceted and relatable, but the screenwriter and Tom Hiddleston make Loki so watered down, I don’t care what happens to him one way or the other.  Another puzzling casting move was having Natalie Portman play the scientist love interest.  If you’re going to hire one of the best actresses alive today, why not make her character more interesting than a brick wall?  And despite the riotous laughter coming from my theater, I thought Kat Dennings was ingratiating as the comic relief.  But that one might just be me.

            Still, I expected Thor to be completely stupid, and it was only a little stupid. It had fun, and the fun was catching.  That being said, I have no desire to ever see it again.  Although I am completely psyched for The Avengers.  Is it 2012 yet?

3/5

Why a Third Ghostbusters Film Wouldn't Be a Ghostbusters Film

I’m going to talk about Ghostbusters 3.

I grew up on Ghostbusters 1 and 2, and love is not a strong enough word to describe how I feel about those films.  Even now, after the Internet has informed me that the sequel isn’t very good, I still feel nothing but adoration for both of these films.  If you asked me to show you nostalgia, I’d hand you a copy of Ghostbusters.

So when I started hearing whispers of a possible third film in the franchise, I began bubbling with excitement.  I could experience what audiences did in 1984.  I could go to the theaters and see what the Ghostbusters had been up to in their 20 year absence, and experience a brand new story with them.  It would be like visiting old friends.

Only, it wouldn’t.  I’ve been thinking about it recently, and I’ve come to realize something surprising.  I don’t want a third film.  At all.  Even if it were good, even if it were acceptable, it wouldn’t be a Ghostbusters film.

When I watched Indiana Jones 4, I, along with the rest of the world, was heartbroken.  A trilogy we had grown to love had been brought into the modern world, rehashed, spit shined, and crammed through the hard drive of a computer, and came out soulless.  I hated the abundance of CGI, the horrible plot, and the ridiculously cheesy dialogue.  At the time, I didn’t think that Indy’s age was a problem.  I thought that with a better movie, I wouldn’t have noticed the fact that Harrison Ford was now 60.  But now, if you watch all four films in a row, the age difference between 3 and 4 is too jarring to ignore.  It’s depressing.  Indy isn’t supposed to get old.  He’s immortal.  He’s supposed to be fast and too clever for age to catch him.  But here is Harrison Ford, grunting and wheezing his way through another “adventure”.  The true Indy wasn’t even in the fourth film.  And how can you have an Indiana Jones movie without the real Indiana Jones?

The same tragedy is about to happen to Ghostbusters.  I don’t care if the story is hilarious and the dialogue is completely in sync with the original films.  Bill Murray and the rest of the cast are now retirement aged, and there’s nothing anyone can do about that.  Inevitably, a third film would only depress me.  It would only be a grim reminder that no matter what anyone does, you’re going to get old and die.  That’s not exactly what I want the subtext of a comedy film to be.

The second biggest problem I have besides the age issue, is that of special effects.  It is completely in the Ghostbusters world to have cheesy special effects.  In their world, the ghosts are all stop-motion, or men in masks, or models.  They don’t look realistic, and they’re not supposed to.  That being said, can you imagine a potentially huge blockbuster nowadays being given the go-ahead by the studio to film using completely old school effects?  Of course not.  They’d insist on shining everything up.  CGI ghosts, CGI proton beams, CGI fucking Slimer.  There goes the series that everyone loved.

Currently, the belief is that Bill Murray’s refusal is the only thing stopping the third Ghostbusters film from starting production.  I have never loved Bill Murray more than I did when I heard that.  I don’t know his reasons, but I can pray that  some of them coincide with the issues I’ve mentioned here.  Bill Murray is an intelligent guy.  He doesn’t need to go desecrating a near perfect comedy franchise just because some over eager fans think they want it.

Unstoppable

            

            Unstoppable was a decent action film.  It was greatly helped by the likability of its two stars, Denzel Washington and Chris Pine.  I appreciate it for it’s simple, entertaining plot, which is reminiscent of such 90’s action classics like Speed and Die Hard.  I wouldn’t put it in the same league as those two, but it’s an admirable effort. 

            If you’ve read my reviews, you’ll know I try not to complain too much about obvious popcorn action movies, as long as they achieve what they set out to do: entertain.  This is why I approved of Sucker Punch, and despised Battle: Los Angeles.  Unstoppable achieved its goal of being entertaining, so I tip my hat to it for that.  I do feel it missed some opportunities in the suspense department though.

            This is mostly due to the camera work.  I’ve been reading a ton of stuff about Hitchcock recently, so I’ve noticed myself keeping an eye out for where the camera is placed in certain scenes and why.  Hitchcock talked a lot about the benefits of getting up close and personal in some instances, and why sometimes it’s better to back up and give a wide, unobtrusive view of things.

            This is where I feel Unstoppable stumbled.  There were some moments that could have been extremely tense and exciting for the audience, but due to the camera placement we felt left out.  The biggest example I noticed was when Denzel Washington’s character was jumping from car to car in an attempt to get to the front of a speeding train.  This would be scary as hell… for the person jumping.  For the uninvolved observer watching from 100 feet away, we don’t feel the intensity at all.  By placing the camera in the nearby helicopters and following trucks, we don’t get the full effect of the danger he is in, therein zapping almost all tension out of the scene.  If the camera had been from Denzel’s point of view, we as the audience would have been on the edge of our seats.  As it was, we felt like nothing but an uninvolved viewer watching from the safety of our television sets at home.

            There were many other suspenseful moments in the film, particularly when the camera did get up close and personal.  I was just disappointed the few times I felt an opportunity was missed.  All in all however, Unstoppable was a decent popcorn flick that more or less hit its target.

3/5

The Woman in Black Trailer

This.  Looks.  Creepy.

Get Low

            

            Get Low is a good example of getting exactly what the trailer promises you.  Not sure if you want to see Get Low or not?  Get on Youtube and watch the trailer.  If you like it, you’ll like the movie.

            I liked the trailer.   

            The film tells the supposedly true story of an old hermit named Felix Bush, who decides to host his own funeral while he is still alive so that he can hear what everyone thinks of him.  Robert Duvall is terrific as the cantankerous old man.  He particularly shines in scenes where his vulnerability is shown, such as when he goes to Sissy Spacek’s house in the middle of the night to try to make peace.  I also really enjoyed the “dog dreams” speech he gives to the young funeral parlor assistant, played by Lucas Black.  Bill Cobbs was also very powerful as the Rev. Charlie Jackson.  When he and Duvall were onscreen together, their combined power made me feel very secure, and a little sleepy.  Their voices are so deep and soothing.  If this sounds strange, watch the movie and tell me if you don’t feel the same way.

             One of the biggest draws for me in watching this movie was, of course, Bill Murray.  He does not disappoint as the wily old funeral home director.  He plays Bill Murray, like he always does, and for that I love him.

            The screenplay was fine.  It did a nice job building up the mystery around Bush’s past, and kept you guessing whether or not he was really a good guy or not.

            While the trailer for Get Low gives you a good idea of the film itself, the film does make some unexpected choices.   The film tended to downplay moments that you were lead to believe were going to be big, such as the announcement of Bush’s odd funeral plans, or even his “get low” speech.  This was especially evident in the climax of the movie.  The funeral party had been built up so much that I was left a little disappointed by it’s abruptness.  I suppose I can understand the filmmaker’s reasons for downplaying the funeral, so that the focus was not on the party but on Bush himself, but still.  I wanted to see a party.

            All in all, the film was enjoyable.  The music was terrific, with the notable exception of the final song, which I felt was too modern and didn’t jive with the rest of the soundtrack.  If you liked the trailer, you’ll like the film, minor quibbles aside.  I promise.

4/5

Sucker Punch

I enjoyed Sucker Punch.  It’s hard to hate a movie that was so proud of it’s own ridiculousness.

Sucker Punch reveled in it’s own stupidity.  The entire movie was an experiment to see how much awesomeness the filmmakers could fit into one movie.  The answer, as it turns out, is a lot, provided you don’t worry about it making sense or anything.

The movie was about a team of hot chicks fighting their way out of an insane asylum, using their imaginations.  That means that in these girls’ minds they aren’t fighting guards and security personnel.  They’re fighting dragons, and ten feet tall samurais, and a trainful of robots.  And they’re doing it all with nothing but an armory full of assault rifles and the skimpiest clothes they can find.

Now you see what I mean.  This movie knew exactly what it wanted to be, and it had a blast getting there.  And for that I respect it.

Their wasn’t a whole lot of acting going on here, but I did enjoy Oscar Isaac’s suitably despicable performance as the man in charge of the asylum.  I did notice the movies obvious attempts to “un-Disneyfi” Vanessa Hudgens by giving her the worst swear words and having her do the most sexual moves.  These moments felt awkward and forced.

Sucker Punch did wear out it’s welcome by the third act.  The final dream action sequence on the train felt tired and repetitive.   After the movie returned to reality, it made the mistake of trying to be clever and explain everything that had happened.  This was not the Sucker Punch that I had come to know and love.

Overall, it was a fun ride.  Unlike Battle Los Angeles, another recent mindless action film, Sucker Punch realized that it was mindless action and pushed that to the limit in an original and undeniably cool way.

And if you’re wondering, the Scene Where I Decided I Liked the Movie was definitely the mayor’s entrance.  You’ll know why when you see it.

3/5

Paul

Paul was a funny, if uneven, road trip alien buddy comedy.  It had several laugh out loud moments, and a great cast of comedic actors.  It seemed to drag at some parts, and some of the jokes fizzled, but overall it was one of the more enjoyable comedies to come to theaters lately.

Paul starred Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, but unfortunately, it was not the third entry in the “blood and ice cream” trilogy, as it did not have the ingenious Edgar Wright as director.  Instead, Gregg Mottola, of Superbad fame, was behind the camera.  

My favorite part of Paul was the insane amount of sci-fi movie references it packed into every moment.  It was interesting listening to different parts of the audience laugh at different lines, depending on which reference they got and which they didn’t.  Every scene was chock full of lines and images from various sci-fi classics, ranging from E.T. to Star Wars.  I believe that the more you know your sci-fi movies, the more you will enjoy Paul.

For those people out there who’ve never seen a sci-fi film, you still may like Paul for it’s many physical gags and one-liners.  Seth Rogen is very funny as Paul the alien, although sometimes it is noticeable that he wasn’t actually on location reading lines with the rest of the crew.  This is rare, but it took me out of the spontaneous, chemistry built comedy world the cast had built up.

The numerous cameos and guest spots are very funny, and do their part to keep you engaged.  I won’t spoil any of these, as they are funnier when they are surprises.

Despite the laugh out loud moments and loving references, Paul never quite finds it’s footing.  The pace seems uneven, and some of the buildup for scenes plays out into nothing.  Paul never quite reaches the heights of the brilliant Shaun of the Dead, but it is an admirable salute to nerd driven pop culture junkies everywhere.

3/5