The Flick: The Expendables
The Usual Suspects: Sylvester Stallone (who, OMG! also directed), Bruce Willis, Dolph Lundgren, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Eric Roberts, Randy Couture, Steve Austin, Mickey Rourke, and a coupla obligatory females.
The Dealio: A weaps-savvy, trigger-happy band of ex-military, operating out of the tattoo parlor of a former member (Rourke's oh-so-wholesome 'Tool'). They are the go-to elite for trouble spots 'n' sitches throughout the globe. For a price. But, of course you know, deep down inside, that they also want to help the widows and orphans, and hunger for the white picket fence and family routine. And they are ethical mercs, too: they will not take money for an unjust cause. Except for 'Shooter' (has Dolph Lundgren played a good guy recently? Like in the last 10-15 years?), who, high on life and with axes aplenty to grind is out to be- in the words of John McClane- the monkey in the wrench.
The Grading Session: This is gonna leave a mark: for the first time ever, in the history of this blog, I'm gonna hafta deduct pengies. So. Here 'tis: -4.79 pengies out of a possible 5 pengies. I can never get that hour back. Statham was the only character even vaguely interesting, and he was given far too little to do. One of the characters (OK, it was Eric Roberts) listens to someone explaining something and mutters, 'Yeah, yeah, bad Shakespeare...' To that, I have two things to say, Eric-baby (and ostensibly, Stallone et al, who put these words into his mouth):
1) No such thing as bad Shakespeare; and
2) You wish!
Lessons Learned: Do your homework: if you read that Stallone was the producer/director/writer, step away from the ticket office. No good can come of this.
Also-(to paraphrase Vincent LaGuardia Gambini) the laws of physics apparently ceased to exist within the confines of this movie: there is a scene -I swear, no spoiler inbound-where our two main heroes, overflying the bad guys, unleash an arcing stream of aviation fuel all over the place, and, while the stream is still expelling, use gunfire to torch it off. And yet, that line of fire never follows the stream back to the plane. Lucky for our guys. C'mon!
Note to those who write action movies: there is a deal more to action-ing than blowing up people and property and copious amounts of grievous bodily damage. Sometimes, we who love the genre would really like a plot and relatable, sympathetic characters for who we can root. Stuff like that. Promise you'll work on that? Then we cool.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Get Low
The Flick: Get Low
The Actors: Robert Duvall, Bill Murray, Sissy Spacek, Lucas Black, Gerald McRaney, Bill Cobbs
The Dealio: Old, neighborhood scary-dude (Duvall's Felix Bush) decides to throw himself the very best funeral party imaginable. And he wants to be there to enjoy it. He presents his case to the local undertaker (Murray's ever-so-slightly alcoholic undertaker Quinn) and his assistant, the shy, but surprisingly backbone-ful Buddy (Lucas Black). Hard up as they are for clients, Quinn and company take on the assignment. Which turns out to be a labyrinth, chock full of tricks, turns, stunts, betrayals, romance, mysteries, horrors and intrigues. It's like a Shakespearean tragedy without all those 'thee's' and 'thou's'... and tights.
The Grading Session: 4.27 pengies out of 5. Murray is a prize. Black is a surprise and so low profile that I surprised myself by how much I cared about him, and his ultimate success.
Robert Duvall: Bobby, Bobby, Bobby. Love ya like a brother. However. Is it just me, or is he beginning to turn in the standard 'crotchety-old-guy' schtick each and every time. Now, so happens I would turn out at Dog Park to hear him recite the Boy Scout manual of 1922...however. This 'YAAAAA!' 'PSSSSHT! RAAAAAAR!' thing that shows up constantly in his encyclopedia of expressed serious emotion is becoming something of a caricature. Here is a guy who wowed me with his low key consigliare, Tom, in the Godfather and Lonesome Dove's Gus McCrae. Where did that cool guy go? And, can we get him back? Please?
Lessons Learned: Things really were tough in '30's Tennessee, when people were even refusing to die as prolifically as in Chicago. Also- Has Bill Murray ever stubbed his toe in a role? I mean: Zombieland and Get Low, Coffee and Cigarettes, Fantastic Mr. Fox and Lost in Translation? C'mon! Let's show some love for the man.
The Actors: Robert Duvall, Bill Murray, Sissy Spacek, Lucas Black, Gerald McRaney, Bill Cobbs
The Dealio: Old, neighborhood scary-dude (Duvall's Felix Bush) decides to throw himself the very best funeral party imaginable. And he wants to be there to enjoy it. He presents his case to the local undertaker (Murray's ever-so-slightly alcoholic undertaker Quinn) and his assistant, the shy, but surprisingly backbone-ful Buddy (Lucas Black). Hard up as they are for clients, Quinn and company take on the assignment. Which turns out to be a labyrinth, chock full of tricks, turns, stunts, betrayals, romance, mysteries, horrors and intrigues. It's like a Shakespearean tragedy without all those 'thee's' and 'thou's'... and tights.
The Grading Session: 4.27 pengies out of 5. Murray is a prize. Black is a surprise and so low profile that I surprised myself by how much I cared about him, and his ultimate success.
Robert Duvall: Bobby, Bobby, Bobby. Love ya like a brother. However. Is it just me, or is he beginning to turn in the standard 'crotchety-old-guy' schtick each and every time. Now, so happens I would turn out at Dog Park to hear him recite the Boy Scout manual of 1922...however. This 'YAAAAA!' 'PSSSSHT! RAAAAAAR!' thing that shows up constantly in his encyclopedia of expressed serious emotion is becoming something of a caricature. Here is a guy who wowed me with his low key consigliare, Tom, in the Godfather and Lonesome Dove's Gus McCrae. Where did that cool guy go? And, can we get him back? Please?
Lessons Learned: Things really were tough in '30's Tennessee, when people were even refusing to die as prolifically as in Chicago. Also- Has Bill Murray ever stubbed his toe in a role? I mean: Zombieland and Get Low, Coffee and Cigarettes, Fantastic Mr. Fox and Lost in Translation? C'mon! Let's show some love for the man.
Eat Pray Love
The Film: Eat Pray Love
The Actors: Richard Jenkins, Javier Bardem, Billy Crudup, Viola Davis, James Franco, and, yeah, OK, Julia Roberts
The Dealio: Travel-writer and all-around emotional wreck, Liz, departs first a marriage (to immature, apparent ADD sufferer, Stephen), then, the arms of method actor, David, making a break for the border. Or, in this case, 'borders': talking Italy, India and Bali. In the book, the last was Indonesia, allowing helpful friends to say, 'If you are all into discovering yourself in places starting with the letter I, why not Indiana, Iowa and Illinois?' Plus, she gets her publishing firm to foot the bill- which is a great gig, if you can get it.
This is a woman who, by her own admission, has never spent more than two weeks unattached to a male. Her profile is that she becomes whoever the partner sees her as being- thereby losing her essential self. This is a plot device with which Julia has some experience (please see The Runaway Bride).
So, off she goes to eat (Italy), pray (India) and love (Bali/Indonesia). And, am I spoiling the denouement if I say that she is pretty successful in all three quests? Um. Sorry.
The Grading Session: 4.81 pengies out of 5. What? You're surprised? Let me justify. First: great soundtrack, which melds pop, old time rock n' rolla and the Brazilian sound (my all-time fave). Next, well, Richard Jenkins. Perhaps you read my review about RJ's back- which outperformed the entire cast of Dear John? If not- shame on you. As 'Richard from Texas', Jenkins steals every scene he is in, merging the aplomb of a guy who hears, 'You look just like James Taylor' pretty much every day, with the pathos and emotion of someone who has scrambled their priorities, lost everything, and yet, re-discovered their soul and happiness. Havin' a moment here, folks.
Javier Bardem is a wonderful mess of contradiction- minus that horrid haircut from No Country For Old Men: jocular, tender, romantic and vulnerable, fatherly and supplicant-sly.
Julia does a nice job on a characterisation which is not naturally very sympathetic (in my humble opinion).
Oh, and after leisurely making her way through the eat and pray portions of the gig, was it just me, or did the love portion seem a bit...rushed?
Lessons Learned: If he makes a mixed tape for you...that means he is serious about the relationship. Also- some people never grow up: I am pointing at Stephen and David, but it seems to me that Liz, herself, could use a few shots of human growth hormone, too. Lastly- editing rules...and a really smart soundtrack covers a lot of flaws. Kinda like the primer and foundation of the entire deal--not to have a Sephora moment over here.
The Actors: Richard Jenkins, Javier Bardem, Billy Crudup, Viola Davis, James Franco, and, yeah, OK, Julia Roberts
The Dealio: Travel-writer and all-around emotional wreck, Liz, departs first a marriage (to immature, apparent ADD sufferer, Stephen), then, the arms of method actor, David, making a break for the border. Or, in this case, 'borders': talking Italy, India and Bali. In the book, the last was Indonesia, allowing helpful friends to say, 'If you are all into discovering yourself in places starting with the letter I, why not Indiana, Iowa and Illinois?' Plus, she gets her publishing firm to foot the bill- which is a great gig, if you can get it.
This is a woman who, by her own admission, has never spent more than two weeks unattached to a male. Her profile is that she becomes whoever the partner sees her as being- thereby losing her essential self. This is a plot device with which Julia has some experience (please see The Runaway Bride).
So, off she goes to eat (Italy), pray (India) and love (Bali/Indonesia). And, am I spoiling the denouement if I say that she is pretty successful in all three quests? Um. Sorry.
The Grading Session: 4.81 pengies out of 5. What? You're surprised? Let me justify. First: great soundtrack, which melds pop, old time rock n' rolla and the Brazilian sound (my all-time fave). Next, well, Richard Jenkins. Perhaps you read my review about RJ's back- which outperformed the entire cast of Dear John? If not- shame on you. As 'Richard from Texas', Jenkins steals every scene he is in, merging the aplomb of a guy who hears, 'You look just like James Taylor' pretty much every day, with the pathos and emotion of someone who has scrambled their priorities, lost everything, and yet, re-discovered their soul and happiness. Havin' a moment here, folks.
Javier Bardem is a wonderful mess of contradiction- minus that horrid haircut from No Country For Old Men: jocular, tender, romantic and vulnerable, fatherly and supplicant-sly.
Julia does a nice job on a characterisation which is not naturally very sympathetic (in my humble opinion).
Oh, and after leisurely making her way through the eat and pray portions of the gig, was it just me, or did the love portion seem a bit...rushed?
Lessons Learned: If he makes a mixed tape for you...that means he is serious about the relationship. Also- some people never grow up: I am pointing at Stephen and David, but it seems to me that Liz, herself, could use a few shots of human growth hormone, too. Lastly- editing rules...and a really smart soundtrack covers a lot of flaws. Kinda like the primer and foundation of the entire deal--not to have a Sephora moment over here.
Sayonara, At The Movies
For 28 years, members of the Corporation P+10 watched on Saturday afternoon to get the latest word on the latest flicks from a couple of Big City critics. But, sadly, At The Movies is no more. And I am sad for that.
Over almost three decades, we tuned in to hear about, contest, debate, nod along, and generally get a feel for what was out there in the dark: movies, films, flicks, roll'ems, dogs and delights. Each Saturday, they paraded past us like hope-filled beauty queens. Some were audacious and arrogant in their assumption of our approval, some, shy as violets in a thunder storm- hoping for survival, but unwilling to beg for what was needed to achieve it. Whether we agreed with the 'thumbs up' and 'thumbs down' verdicts the critics assigned to the candidates out to get our votes- and bucks- we were never bored, always entertained, treated like adults whose opinions mattered, too. And we kept coming back for more.
But that is now at an end, as today, the last ATM aired, then drew the curtain.
You will be missed.
Over almost three decades, we tuned in to hear about, contest, debate, nod along, and generally get a feel for what was out there in the dark: movies, films, flicks, roll'ems, dogs and delights. Each Saturday, they paraded past us like hope-filled beauty queens. Some were audacious and arrogant in their assumption of our approval, some, shy as violets in a thunder storm- hoping for survival, but unwilling to beg for what was needed to achieve it. Whether we agreed with the 'thumbs up' and 'thumbs down' verdicts the critics assigned to the candidates out to get our votes- and bucks- we were never bored, always entertained, treated like adults whose opinions mattered, too. And we kept coming back for more.
But that is now at an end, as today, the last ATM aired, then drew the curtain.
You will be missed.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
The Kids Are Alright
The Film: The Kids Are Alright
The Actors: Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Mia Wasikowski, etc, etc.
The Dealio: Jules and Nic are a longtime suburban couple in an upper-middle class California neighborhood. Nic is an OB/GYN and Jules drifts from almost interest to almost interest with the avid clinginess of someone desperately trying to justify having been a stay-at-home mom for more years than she is entirely comfortable with. Nic, too, is becoming short-tempered about what she sees as Jules' flightiness - especially with regard to the myriad opportunities in which they have both invested time and talent..not to mention moolah. None of which have prospered. Their two children- via a sperm donor (Ruffalo's restauranteur/organic farmer/general sleeparound chap, Paul)- are getting to an age- mid to late teens- where they are curious about the person who is their biological father. And decide that they want to, at the very least, meet him. Predictably, 'the moms' are aghast at the possibility that this person who so conveniently dropped in and out of their lives twice, and to good, if impersonal effect so long, long ago, might actually become an important part of their children's lives. What would this mean to them? How would this affect their family? And, in the end, how would each cope with the inevitable changes this meeting would bring?
The Grading Session: 4.19 pengies out of 5. Although 95% of this tale was dead-on accurate, it was a bit irksome to me that it was felt to be necessary to have one of the moms be sexually attracted to Paul. (Oh, come on. I am not plot-spoiling: they showed some sequences about this in the trailer). No doubt this was felt to be a valid plot line, given that, in many marriages, there is an outside force that bursts upon the scene, first tempting, and then threatening. But it struck me as the one 'off' note in the otherwise entirely engaging and well-wrought film.
Lessons Learned: Well, natch this one: Laser is a boy's name. Who knew? Next up? Would never go to Bening's Nic. For an OB/GYN- who must be on-call virtually 100% of the time- she drinks entirely too much to be able to answer a page and go in to work. Lastly: in every relationship where much is invested, the work required in order to keep the relationship afloat requires a daily recommitment and max effort. Everything else about the relationship is simply detail.
The Actors: Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Mia Wasikowski, etc, etc.
The Dealio: Jules and Nic are a longtime suburban couple in an upper-middle class California neighborhood. Nic is an OB/GYN and Jules drifts from almost interest to almost interest with the avid clinginess of someone desperately trying to justify having been a stay-at-home mom for more years than she is entirely comfortable with. Nic, too, is becoming short-tempered about what she sees as Jules' flightiness - especially with regard to the myriad opportunities in which they have both invested time and talent..not to mention moolah. None of which have prospered. Their two children- via a sperm donor (Ruffalo's restauranteur/organic farmer/general sleeparound chap, Paul)- are getting to an age- mid to late teens- where they are curious about the person who is their biological father. And decide that they want to, at the very least, meet him. Predictably, 'the moms' are aghast at the possibility that this person who so conveniently dropped in and out of their lives twice, and to good, if impersonal effect so long, long ago, might actually become an important part of their children's lives. What would this mean to them? How would this affect their family? And, in the end, how would each cope with the inevitable changes this meeting would bring?
The Grading Session: 4.19 pengies out of 5. Although 95% of this tale was dead-on accurate, it was a bit irksome to me that it was felt to be necessary to have one of the moms be sexually attracted to Paul. (Oh, come on. I am not plot-spoiling: they showed some sequences about this in the trailer). No doubt this was felt to be a valid plot line, given that, in many marriages, there is an outside force that bursts upon the scene, first tempting, and then threatening. But it struck me as the one 'off' note in the otherwise entirely engaging and well-wrought film.
Lessons Learned: Well, natch this one: Laser is a boy's name. Who knew? Next up? Would never go to Bening's Nic. For an OB/GYN- who must be on-call virtually 100% of the time- she drinks entirely too much to be able to answer a page and go in to work. Lastly: in every relationship where much is invested, the work required in order to keep the relationship afloat requires a daily recommitment and max effort. Everything else about the relationship is simply detail.
Inception
The Flick: Inception
The Contributors: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Leavitt, Cillian Murphy (or, as I prefer-'casting alert: weird character ahead'), Michael Caine (yep, that Michael Caine), Marion Cotillard, Ken Watanabe, Ellen Page, Lukas Haas, Pete Postlethwaite, etc.
The Dealio: In the very near future, it will be possible to obtain what is described in this movie as 'a very unique type of security'. This is one in which the unconscious mind- i.e., one's sleep state- is held for ransom, or even bartered for biz bennies. Leo's Dom Cobb is touted as one of the best in the world at this type of op, and is given the assignment (by competitor Watanabe's Saito) of entering into the dreams of Murphy's young heir and plant the idea of his deconstructing the energy firm his father built. See, doing things this way makes the victim of the theft think the idea to do what his competitors want is his, and his alone.
Of course, with a Christopher Nolan film, nothing is ever as simple as this. There are all sorts of red herrings, double-backs and redoing of sequences...out of sequence.
This is not a film which allows you much time to sit back and let the action/plot wash over you like art. Nope. Here, your are expected to take a vigorous interest, roll up your sleeves and get involved. And if you think there is a powder-room parade in your future, well...dream on.
The Grading Session: 4.71 pengies out of 5 (What soundtrack? Myself? J'adore Piaf more than wartime Brits adored jam, and especially Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien. Still...) And what's the deal with that fly? Having been schooled by movies like The Sixth Sense, I am now spring-loaded to be suspicious when I see a repetitious element. And that damned fly kept showing up. Now, granted, I did not stay for the outtakes and the gag reel, that's true, but there was no resolution on the fly. I kept thinking, 'Does the presence of the fly mean 'dream time' or 'real time'? This is very disruptive to a mind like mine. I thrashed around with this throughout the entire movie, until it began to be a point of especial focus in every. last. scene. And, yet...well, in the end, it apparently meant nothing. Nada. Zip-squaterooch. Chris,honey. Darling. Listen up: 5 yard penalty for the freakin' fly.
Lessons Learned: Dreaming is not necessarily restful or even survivable. Also, if your spouse/partner is gas-lighting you- even in the name of science- well, karma is gonna exact a weighty payback sooner or later. Too, I must ask myself: what is it about Leo's characters that so angers his spouses? This has happened before and I smell a trend. Let's work on that, peeps. Lastly: what. is. with. this. damned. fly?! Discuss amongst yourselves.
The Contributors: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Leavitt, Cillian Murphy (or, as I prefer-'casting alert: weird character ahead'), Michael Caine (yep, that Michael Caine), Marion Cotillard, Ken Watanabe, Ellen Page, Lukas Haas, Pete Postlethwaite, etc.
The Dealio: In the very near future, it will be possible to obtain what is described in this movie as 'a very unique type of security'. This is one in which the unconscious mind- i.e., one's sleep state- is held for ransom, or even bartered for biz bennies. Leo's Dom Cobb is touted as one of the best in the world at this type of op, and is given the assignment (by competitor Watanabe's Saito) of entering into the dreams of Murphy's young heir and plant the idea of his deconstructing the energy firm his father built. See, doing things this way makes the victim of the theft think the idea to do what his competitors want is his, and his alone.
Of course, with a Christopher Nolan film, nothing is ever as simple as this. There are all sorts of red herrings, double-backs and redoing of sequences...out of sequence.
This is not a film which allows you much time to sit back and let the action/plot wash over you like art. Nope. Here, your are expected to take a vigorous interest, roll up your sleeves and get involved. And if you think there is a powder-room parade in your future, well...dream on.
The Grading Session: 4.71 pengies out of 5 (What soundtrack? Myself? J'adore Piaf more than wartime Brits adored jam, and especially Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien. Still...) And what's the deal with that fly? Having been schooled by movies like The Sixth Sense, I am now spring-loaded to be suspicious when I see a repetitious element. And that damned fly kept showing up. Now, granted, I did not stay for the outtakes and the gag reel, that's true, but there was no resolution on the fly. I kept thinking, 'Does the presence of the fly mean 'dream time' or 'real time'? This is very disruptive to a mind like mine. I thrashed around with this throughout the entire movie, until it began to be a point of especial focus in every. last. scene. And, yet...well, in the end, it apparently meant nothing. Nada. Zip-squaterooch. Chris,honey. Darling. Listen up: 5 yard penalty for the freakin' fly.
Lessons Learned: Dreaming is not necessarily restful or even survivable. Also, if your spouse/partner is gas-lighting you- even in the name of science- well, karma is gonna exact a weighty payback sooner or later. Too, I must ask myself: what is it about Leo's characters that so angers his spouses? This has happened before and I smell a trend. Let's work on that, peeps. Lastly: what. is. with. this. damned. fly?! Discuss amongst yourselves.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
On Being Stuck in a Biblio-Blah-Ble
Just flushed the third book in a row out of my Kindle.
Also ejected an audiobook from my car and reverted to Shout Out Louds and Flaming Lips.
Have three unfinished book-books sitting at my bedside- and one, the ever-popular 'purse-book'- languishing in place.
What the aitch is going on here?
The last time I was at this pass, I was coming off a hot biblio streak (The Help, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Water For Elephants and The Girls). I remember that I had to do what a fellow patron of my highly informal (think post-it notes on covers/cases, left in a drawer with a sign-out notepad) worksite book-club- calls 'cleansing the palate'.
I simply could not find a single book worth sticking with for more than 52 pages. No matter how much time and dedication I lavished on them.
I was forced to stop the books- in any/all formats- completely and move over into pure music (oh, yeah, and mags). This lasted me about 8 weeks which slipped by with nary a notice until temptation, in the form of City of Thieves and First, They Killed My Father, popped up in my path.
This rift between books and me is, based on recent history, temporary. Thank God. But what makes it happen? Within the past three weeks, I have tossed aside The Faculty Club, A Visit From The Goon Squad, American Music (and I loved this author's I Was Amelia Earhart) and One Day. The characters did not engage. Or the premise was too scattered. Or the plot was underdeveloped. Whatever, each of those books seduced, but was soon abandoned.
Here's my question: why does this happen- to even the most devoted bibliophiliac? More importantly, what can I do to bring it to an end? And, post haste!
Who's with me on this? Anyone? Anyone? Hellll-oooh-oooh...[cue crickets]
Also ejected an audiobook from my car and reverted to Shout Out Louds and Flaming Lips.
Have three unfinished book-books sitting at my bedside- and one, the ever-popular 'purse-book'- languishing in place.
What the aitch is going on here?
The last time I was at this pass, I was coming off a hot biblio streak (The Help, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, Water For Elephants and The Girls). I remember that I had to do what a fellow patron of my highly informal (think post-it notes on covers/cases, left in a drawer with a sign-out notepad) worksite book-club- calls 'cleansing the palate'.
I simply could not find a single book worth sticking with for more than 52 pages. No matter how much time and dedication I lavished on them.
I was forced to stop the books- in any/all formats- completely and move over into pure music (oh, yeah, and mags). This lasted me about 8 weeks which slipped by with nary a notice until temptation, in the form of City of Thieves and First, They Killed My Father, popped up in my path.
This rift between books and me is, based on recent history, temporary. Thank God. But what makes it happen? Within the past three weeks, I have tossed aside The Faculty Club, A Visit From The Goon Squad, American Music (and I loved this author's I Was Amelia Earhart) and One Day. The characters did not engage. Or the premise was too scattered. Or the plot was underdeveloped. Whatever, each of those books seduced, but was soon abandoned.
Here's my question: why does this happen- to even the most devoted bibliophiliac? More importantly, what can I do to bring it to an end? And, post haste!
Who's with me on this? Anyone? Anyone? Hellll-oooh-oooh...[cue crickets]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)