Frankenweenie [Blu-ray]

I really expected to hate Frankenweenie. Tim Burton?s idea generator is so bankrupt that he?s taken to remaking his own 1984 live action short as a full-length stop motion animated film. It just sounded horrible. It?s not though, it?s pretty sweet and looks great and doesn?t suck. So?nicely done, Tim!

The Movie:

The biggest surprise in Frankenweenie is not that it?s a decent horror homage. I guess you would figure a guy like Tim Burton could get that right and he does. Another surprise is that it?s a very sentimental story about a boy and his best friend. In this case the boy is Victor Frankenstein (voiced by Charlie Tehan), a loner with a gift for science and experiments, and his best friend is Sparky, a dog. When Sparky?s life is brought to an untimely end by a car, Victor just can?t let go. So, after his science teacher (who is dead ringer for Vincent Price but is voiced by Martin Landau) show him that electric jolts can make dead limbs move, Victor decides to dig up Sparky and get cracking.

It?s the relationship between the boy and his dog that keeps the movie interesting. It?s not the weird characters, strange look, or oddball plot that involves other kids reanimating other animals to negative consequences. That all helps with the ?horror homage? vibe, but it?s really that Victor is likeable and the tears in his stop motion eyes are, well, touching. Also, his parents, Ben (Martin Short) and Sarah (Catherine O?Hara) present a caring counterpoint to the rest of the weirdo town.

It?s that weirdo town where the movie sags. Yeah, everyone has skinny legs and although it?s suburbia, there is something sort-of creepy lurking beneath the surface. You should know what I?m talking about, as this is the typical Tim Burton thing. But, it?s old hat and not well-developed, here. Victor?s teacher and classmates get short shrift but play key parts in the plot, so there is a lot of ?why is the fat kid doing that?? and ?why does the kid who looks like Frankenstein?s monster want to win the science fair so badly?? Nothing really clicks with these characters.

The stop motion look is fantastic, so if you?re just up for black and white, kid-friendlybut scary looking, detail rich puppets, then you are in luck. Burton had a crackerjack team making Victor, Sparky, and the rest look amazing and putting the right tone on the monster movie feel. Again, it doesn?t work quite as well as the touching relationship, but it?s good for a few laughs, and if you are a horror movie buff you probably get a lot more out of it then someone who didn?t grow up watching Christopher Lee as Dracula.

It?s not the best stop motion scary movie, and not even the best most recent scary flick?that ParaNorman, which beats this by a wide margin. Still, it?s nice that Burton can get it at least half-right sometimes.

The Disc:

The Blu-ray for Frankenweenie is being released in a few versions, including 3D. Unfortunately, you need a 3D Blu-ray player to watch it and who has that? Not me or you either, probably. Still, the old 2D version looks great, with rich HD picture that brings out the detail. You don?t get the ?here it comes? 3D fun, but it?s the best way to watch a movie that has its overall look as one of the stronger points.

Burton doesn?t provide a commentary, but he does include the original 30-minute Frankenweenie live action short. This is what made his name as a director back in 1984, and while you might not be able to see why, it does make for an interesting companion to the new film. Some shots are directly copied in the new movie and it?s fun to recognize that when it happens. Also, it?s interesting to see what was added to get the movie from 30 to 87 minutes. Most of it is the weirdo classmates , who, as I mentioned prior, are the weakest part of the new movie.

There is also a 30-minute making of featurette called ?Miniatures in Motion.? It?s really great. If you want to know how to make a stop motion film, this segment shows that it?s a buttload of meticulous work. They show it all. Not super in-depth, but it does show how they make the puppets, the sets, everything. It?s really enjoyable to watch as it doesn?t take a film school degree to understand it, but it does give you a sense of the artistry and effort involved.

The beginning of both versions of Frankenweenie show a monster movie that Victor makes with Sparky as the star. It perfectly captures young kid filmmaking in all of its glory, including bad special effects. The Blu-ray includes a 2- minute short called ?Captain Sparky and the Flying Saucers? that is in the same vein. I actually wished there was a whole series of these Captain Sparky movies where you could see Victor?s hand holding the army men figures or the wires for the flying saucers, it?s such good fun.

The final extras are a terrible music video of some song that isn?t actually in the movie and a brief video showing the art of the movie that was taken on tour to promote the theatrical release. Besides the last few, Frankenweenie offers a nice set of extras and fans will like the original live-action movie, if they don?t already have it from earlier Tim Burton DVDs, and the behind-the-scenes featurette. Definitely worth checking out.

Starring: Catherine O'Hara, Martin Short, Martin Landau, Charlie Tahan, Atticus Shaffer, Winona RyderProduced by: Tim Burton, Allison Abbate

View the original article here

The Possession [Blu-ray]

I love my dad. He?s been there for me through thick and thin, and he?s always encouraged my writing career. He?s the best. That said, his taste in movies is awful. Many of the films he told me that he used to watch in the Army and loved are absolutely terrible. Not only that, but he?s an M. Night Shyamalan apologist, constantly telling me how good he is, even though he hasn?t made a decent film since Unbreakable. (My dad even liked The Happening! Can you believe it?). So when he told me that The Possession was a good movie when he saw it in theaters, I rolled my eyes. But he assured me it was actually pretty good. Well, having seen it now, I can admit that it?s a lot better than I thought it would be. Mostly because I thought it would be absolute crap.

The Movie:

I won?t lie. The Possession is generic garbage for about 80 minutes of its 92 minute runtime. But those last 12 minutes, well, they?re not fantastic, but they definitely make up for an otherwise subpar exorcism film. And the main reason for this is because they?re actually creepy and unique. Most exorcism films are based solely in Catholicism, so we?re used to seeing the same Catholic priest archetype like the one in The Exorcist. But The Possession is based off of a Jewish demon, and that little factor alone changes everything. With the rabbi (played by hip-hop/reggae musician, Matisyahu) bobbing as he says religious scripture, it presents a plot I haven?t seen before in these kinds of movies. The act of expelling a demon is similarly different here. I like it.

Having said that, there?s very little to like about the rest of the movie. The plot focuses on a box that contains a Dibbuk--an evil spirit seeking a body. Once the box is open by a young girl named Emily (Natasha Calis), her parents, played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Kyra Sedgwick, must find a way to help her rid of the spirit as it takes over her body. But this story is told in the most predictable way imaginable, especially if you?ve seen a number of crummy horror movies over the past few years.

The parents are of course divorced, and they fight over the very kids that they need to protect. The little girl in question makes scary faces and her eyes roll to the back of her head. And the parents eventually come together to stop the demon inside of their daughter. It?s everything you?ve seen before and nothing more. It?s pure PG-13 crap. Not even 13-year-old girls would scream at this. Most of it isn?t scary at all.

In fact, the legend of the Dibbuk box is much creepier than the movie itself. Maybe it?s because I?ve never heard of it before, which is why it?s such a shame that more care wasn?t put into that part of the story. All of the Jewish history behind the box comes too late, and it?s not emphasized enough until the last few minutes. It?s one of those films that could have been better with a more polished script. And while I?m not saying that the film should have been R-rated (The Ring and Insidious were PG-13), I definitely think the images in this film could have been much more horrific and grounded in darkness. In fact, until the end, most of the film is bathed in light. Why the hell would they do that? I mean, sometimes, that can work if the scenes are unpredictable. But as I said earlier, everything is so cookie-cutter in this film that it just doesn?t work out.

As a whole, The Possession is mostly a pretty bad movie, but the last few minutes are pretty great. I don?t recommend seeing it. But if you?re in a room and people are watching it, then there are much worse modern-day horror movies that you could be stuck watching. Trust me, there?s much worse out there.

The Disc:

There really aren?t too many special features here, but the ones that are here are pretty good. There are two commentaries. Normally, with a mediocre movie like this, I?d bemoan how boring these commentaries are. Here, both of them are actually pretty enjoyable, including the screenwriter one. In the director?s commentary, Nightwatch director, Ole Bornedal whisper talks his way through the the whole thing, and it?s actually pretty interesting. He discusses the film, the legend of the Dibbuk, and the actors, but he doesn?t just talk them up like most directors would. He actually discusses why they were important for the role and how they worked in the scenes. The best part is probably when he says, ?Don?t believe in ghosts,? at the end of the movie. That?s just perfect. He buys into the film, but not into the legend. I love that.

The other commentary is by the writers, who are a married couple, and they discuss the story all the way through, giving insightful comments. It?s a shame that it?s such a lame script, but you can definitely tell that they?re passionate about the legend of the Dibbuk. You really buy into it. And finally, there?s ?The Real History of the Dibbuk Box? featurette. This is definitely the best special feature on the disc. Here, we learn about how this movie is ?based on a true story,? in the first place. And while it?s not as outlandish as the story in this film, it?s actually quite scary. There?s even a warning before the feature that says they?re going to reveal the real box that the story is based on. It creates a sort of Blair Witch Project quality to it. I actually got some chills watching it. The trailer is the last special feature. Overall, the features on this disc are sparse but full of quality. You?ll like them if you like the film.

Starring: Natasha Calis, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Kyra Sedgwick, MatisyahuProduced by: Sam Raimi, Robert Tapert, J.R. YoungWritten by: Juliet Snowden, Stiles White

View the original article here

The Last Stand

After years away from the film industry, '80s and '90s action icon Arnold Schwarzenegger has been easing his back into the genre that made him an A-lister. Growing roles in The Expendables' movies have paved the way to his first headlining vehicle since 2003's Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, and The Last Stand is custom-fit for the now paunchy yet still undeniably intimidating star.

Set in the tiny and quiet town of Sommerton Junction, Arizona, which is nestled right on the American-Mexican border, The Last Stand has Schwarzenegger playing Ray Owens, a long-time sheriff who once worked in narcotics for the Los Angeles Police Department. After one particularly grisly drug bust left him the lone survivor, Owens purposely sought out a little town where he wouldn't have to face such carnage ever again. But the downside to being a small-town sheriff with only four policemen under your employ is that people tend to underestimate your capability in times of crisis, like for instance when a vicious drug lord freshly busted out of bonds is blazing toward your town in a specially rigged race car, gunning for the border.

You wouldn't think with his thick Austrian accent and massive bulk that Schwarzenegger would be a believable everyman, but the character of Sheriff Ray Owens is perfectly suited to him. Owens was once a man to be reckoned with, but years away from the deadly urban streets has made him soft. Similarly, this is not the Schwarzenegger from his prime. He's a bit slower, a bit world-weary, but this all adds weight to Owens' character, since after all he is underestimated by everyone, from the local who scoffs at his demand to remove his car from a fire zone, to the FBI agent (Forest Whitaker) leading the recapture effort, to the the menacing Mexican cartel leader, Gabriel Cortez (Eduardo Noriega).

It's almost sad to watch others scoff at Owens, except that we know Schwarzenegger will have his redemption. And he does, through several jaw-dropping action sequences and numerous one-liners that had the audience in I saw it with cheering and applauding. This builds to a climax where Schwarzenegger faces off against Noriega in a mano-a-mano fight that is utterly exhilarating. In fact, I'll say it: it's the kind of burly and brash violence I was hoping to see in the Bane versus Batman fight in The Dark Knight Rises. Frankly, this climactic battle alone is worth the price of admission.

Still, it's far from a flawless film. For one, surrounded by actors as talented as Whitaker, Peter Stormare, Luis Guzman, and Friday Night Lights' Zach Gilford, it's clear Schwarzenegger is not so much an actor as he is a screen presence. He is mesmerizing yes, but with those around him displaying fear, anguish and rage, his performance pales in comparison. But who cares, right? It's still his movie. Except that it's not entirely.

The Last Stand marks the English-language debut of South Korean director Jee-woon Kim, who helmed the mind-blowing revenge thriller I Saw the Devil. And while Kim shows an impressive understanding of American culture?from our lust for impossibly fast cars to our conflicted gun culture?he doesn't seem to know to keep the focus on Arnold. Instead, the thriller bounds between the frantic FBI offices where Whitaker sets up one useless roadblock after another to Cortez's hours-long getaway complete with Fast and the Furious-style stunts, to various pockets of Sommerton, from its cantankerous farmer, to its chipper waitress, clumsy cops, and local gun nut (Johnny Knoxville)?oh, yeah and Arnold.

In the end, the movie is a bit overstuffed, and the pacing suffers because of it. But within its 107 minutes, The Last Stand offers insane action, solidly funny sight gags?courtesy of Knoxville and Guzman?and a welcome amount of Schwarzenegger swagger.

View the original article here

The Words

Sandwiched between a Hangover sequel and the Oscar-worthy Silver Linings Playbook, Bradley Cooper also found time for a somber literary fantasy about creative ownership and the ethereal nature of characters, ideas and crippling writers block. Yes, it?s every bit as ?exciting? as that sounds.

The Movie:

What is The Words really about, anyway?

Is it the story of struggling writer Rory Jansen (Cooper), who?s fed up with his stalled, fragmentary professional life despite the presence of supportive fianc?e Dora (Zoe Saldana) and a patient father with a limited income (J.K. Simmons)? Is it the story of a mysterious old man (Jeremy Irons), who wanders into Rory?s life with a lengthy tale about romance and tragedy during time of war--a story the best-selling author doesn?t want to hear? Or might The Words actually be about successful novelist Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid), who?s book ? titled The Words, of course ? seems to be about Rory, the old man, and a few other devices I?ll leave for you to discover.

The Words doesn?t seamlessly gel is because co-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal can?t calculate how to make all three storylines gracefully merge in a fashion that maintains literary tension or, sadly, the audience?s interest.

They have an excellent hook: Jansen, while on a honeymoon in France, discovers a manuscript in the pocket of a briefcase his new wife purchases. When everyone who reads the novel ? from Dora to his publisher boss ? raves about the magnificent piece, Rory accepts credit for the book (and the spoils that come with literary notoriety) while ignoring that nagging guilt of not actually writing the book in question.

The moral quandary is enough to sustain the drama in The Words, with Irons twisting the metaphorical knife deeper into Cooper?s conscience by showing up and claiming to be the actual author of the published words. And both men muster the proper reverence for the art of storytelling, and the power strung-together words can have over an audience. There?s a great scene in The Words where Irons is telling his life story to Cooper, who hangs on every word, even though this is a man who can ruin him, professionally and financially.

Yet, Klugman and Sternthal construct a bookending device that?s not only unnecessary, it strips the impact away from Cooper?s quandary. By introducing Hammond, and suggesting that Cooper and Irons are merely characters in a separate author?s story, we?re no longer as concerned about their fates, and therefore no longer as concerned about The Words as a whole. The drama is undone by the overly clever narrative structuring. The conceit is deflated by its convoluted nature. There?s a stellar story lurking in The Words, if only some of the superfluous words could have been left out.

The Disc:

Ignoring my argument that The Words needed to be pared down and more focused, CBS Films has put an extended special edition of the film on the DVD release. I chose the theatrical cut when sitting down to review The Words, and had absolutely no desire to revisit a longer take. Maybe there?s a fourth plotline with more characters whose contributions add nothing of significance to the overall story. If you manage to see the extended cut, do let me know if it somehow improves the overall experience.

I did, however, watch ?Unabridged,? which was a conventional behind-the-scenes look at the making of the film. This pairs nicely with ?A Gentleman?s Agreement,? an extended conversation with Cooper about his participation in The Words and his collaborations with the two directors. Neither feature is overly informative. Everyone seemed to have a lot of fun working on The Words. It?s clear they felt the material would play better than it does on screen. Words on a page often do.

Starring: Bradley Cooper, Zoe Saldana, Dennis Quaid, Jeremy IronsDirected by: Brian Klugman, Lee SternthalProduced by: Laura Rister, Cassian ElwesWritten by: Brian Klugman, Lee Sternthal

View the original article here

To Rome With Love [Blu-ray]

Coming off of a year that featured one of Allen?s biggest box office successes ever with Midnight in Paris, a charming and smartly written comedy about the romance of the City of Light, eyes were turned toward To Rome with Love to ascertain whether or not the prolific director was on a bit of a roll. Fans who are using Midnight in Paris as a benchmark might find themselves disappointed with To Rome with Love, but avid Woody Allen fans will likely find it worth a watch.

The Movie:

To Rome with Love is a movie filled with delicate setups often leading into wild hijinks. These include plotlines as over-the-top and varied as a hooker being mistaken for a wife, a man with a lovely opera voice who can only sing in a shower onstage, an Italian man who meets an American woman and gets engaged quickly, and an indecent love triangle. Love, marriage, sex, comical situations?these are all landmarks of Woody Allen films, so why doesn?t To Rome with Love entirely work?

First and foremost, it?s the rickety way the various stories and timeline are spliced together. I found myself over and over again wishing the stories had been set up as entire tales rather than interspersing plotlines. There are technically four vignettes. One is told over the course of a day, several over the course of weeks, and one over the lengthier course of an engagement and opera career. The plots mix Allen?s signature comedy with great characterization, and occasionally scenes and storylines are incredibly engaging. However, I was continually reminded of watching ensemble television programs where some of the plotlines are more intriguing than others in order to fill space over the course of a season. A movie shouldn?t have these difficulties, since it is telling a tale in a much shorter amount of time.

Like each of the plotlines, the performances vary in excitement. To Rome with Love sports an extensive cast including Allen himself, Alec Baldwin, Penelope Cruz, Roberto Benigni, Flavio Parenti, Alison Pill, Ellen Paige, Greta Gerwig, Jesse Eisenberg, Alessandra Mastronardi, and many, many more. Mastronardi has the same coy charm her character in Titanic: Blood & Steel exuded. Roberto Benigni is energetic and pleasant to watch, as usual. But some of the heavy hitters, like Eisenberg, Cruz, and Paige, fail to really stand out. Perhaps To Rome with Love should have been left to the more Italian-heavy storylines.

In the film, a traffic officer is a sort of watchdog over the city, saying he knows Rome and that there will be many stories next time we come. As charming as this thought may have been at the beginning of the film, by the end of To Rome with Love, most viewers will be weary travelers ready to take some time off from the quick dialogue and interposing of multiple tales. To Rome with Love may be worth seeing, but despite its beautiful setting, it?s not the type of film you?ll need to revisit on multiple occasions.

The Disc:

The disc is set up rather nicely, although the obnoxious soundtrack that pops up over and over again is even more annoying on the menu page. Otherwise, the disc is easy to move through and features pictures fluttering onscreen in a postcard format, which is fitting for a film featuring half an American cast on vacation overseas.

?Con Amore: A Passion for Rome? is a sequence explaining the influences Fellini had on Allen throughout his life, and how he has wanted to explore Rome and its architectural beauty. The producers and many of the actors talk about the joy of working with Allen. As good portions of the film are shot in Italian and subtitled, this segment also takes a look at the fact that Allen doesn?t speak a word of Italian. Finally, interviews from the premiere are included in the segment.

Other than this, though, the disc is pretty barren. If you really want to watch the theatrical trailer after indulging in the film, then you may. Additionally, previews are included as extras, which are a big pet peeve of mine, and are kind of weird, since Midnight in Paris has been out for ages and is being advertised, here. If you are buying this set, it should be for the movie alone.

Distributor: Sony Pictures Home EntertainmentStarring: Roberto Benigni, Jesse Eisenberg, Alec BaldwinProduced by: Faruk Alaton, Letty Aronson, Giampaolo Letta, Stephen Tenenbaum

View the original article here

For A Good Time, Call... [Blu-ray]

For A Good Time, Call? first drew notice at Sundance last year as part of the wave of female-fronted R-rated comedies that Bridesmaids had spawned. But while there has been a bunch of forgettable wannabes in that batch, this phone sex-centered comedy is still memorable for being bubbly, wild and daringly original.

The Movie:

Watching For A Good Time, Call? for the first time since it's theatrical release, I was surprised and delighted to see the movie is even better than I remembered. This comedy is so fully realized, smart, and sprightly paced that it's incredible it was made on an indie budget by a first-time director with two untested leading ladies. And yet here it is, sparkling, dirty and downright hilarious.

The story begins with prim prude Lauren (Lauren Miller), who is looking to get into publishing and is heartbroken over being dumped for her boyfriend for being "boring." Kicked out of her ex-beau's apartment, Lauren relies on her best friend Jesse (Justin Long in one of his best comedic performances to date) to help. So, he re-introduces her to the loud-mouthed and always flirtatious Katie (Ari Graynor), who years ago accidentally spilled a cup of urine all over Lauren's new car in a ghastly but funny party foul. The girls seethe at the sight of each other, but Katie needs a roommate lest she lose her late grandmother's gorgeous Manhattan apartment, and Lauren needs a place ASAP. While they initially try to steer clear of each other's lives, the two become entangled once unemployed Lauren realizes her roommate's sideline as a phone sex operator could be big business.

The gimmick of this comedy is phone sex, which makes room for scads of sex jokes that range from saucy to downright shocking. But at its core, this comedy is really all about female friendship. And yet, this is no schmaltzy chick flick. The chemistry between Miller and Graynor is charged whether they are exchanging furious glares, jaunty barbs, or doing the Dirty Dancing samba topped with a girlish boob bump. And the script penned by Miller and Katie Anne Naylon?who has a cameo as the unfortunate passenger in a Kevin Smith-driven cab?is not only flush with raunchy and wild comedy bits, but also constructs the central pair's relationship from wrathful roommates to cautiously optimistic business partners to faux lovers (for the enjoyment of another cameo caller) to deeply bonded friends with a believable and bouncy build.

Through their shared business, these young women recognize that their differences are their strength as partners. And even while they find fulfillment outside this central relationship?Katie with a new romance, Lauren with a new career prospect?the film's focus is always on their friendship. Graynor and Miller pull off every nuance of this blossoming relationship just as masterfully as they do each double entendre and risqu? joke.

By my count the movies that devotedly focus on female friendship and do them justice can be counted on one hand. And For a Good Time, Call? is definitely among them. It's outrageously raunchy, undeniably funny, and has such vivid performances and compelling character arcs that I'm already eager to watch it again. And again. And again. I just can't get enough of these two dirty-talking comediennes.

The Disc:

The picture and audio quality are top-notch. The combo pack comes with the Blu-ray, a DVD copy, a digital copy, and an Ultraviolet copy. So, it basically offers the movie in any format you could possibly want. And in addition to the theatrical version, the disc contains an unrated version that has a smattering of bonus lines and dirty jokes.

As far as special features, there are a handful of deleted scenes (including one where the girls fight using gigantic dildos), a brief behind-the-scenes featurette, and one of the most entertaining commentaries I've ever listened to.

Recorded on the day of the movie's theatrical release, the commentary track features Jamie Travis (director), Ari Graynor (star/exec producer), Lauren Miller (co-writer/star/producer), Katie Anne Naylon (co-writer/producer). The four are giddy over the film's release and amid shout-outs to the cast and crew that got them here, reveal plenty of shocking facts, including that the script was inspired by a phone sex line Naylon ran out of her dorm in college and that the whole film shot in only 16 days! Discovering that the project was so low budget that they expected to get maybe two takes per setup made me appreciate the movie's spot-on execution even more, which is pretty much how I felt with each new detail about this quirky passion project's production. In short, the commentary is informative, quirky, and a total delight.

My only complaint about the disc and its special features is that I wanted more. Just more. When this funny foursome talk about alternative takes, I desperately wish these were included, especially the so-called "Oprah take" of Graynor shouting, "I'm ready to survive date rape!" At least you get an idea of it since she re-enacts it on the commentary.

Distributor: Universal StudiosStarring: Ari Graynor, Lauren Miller, Justin Long, Nia Vardalos, Mark WebberProduced by: Lauren Miller, Katie Anne Naylon, Josh Kesselman, Jen Weinbaum, Jenny HinkeyWritten by: Lauren Miller, Katie Anne Naylon

View the original article here

House At The End Of The Street [Blu-ray]

As a horror-craving adolescent, I regularly watched midnight movies filled with sex and violence on USA's Up All Night with Gilbert Gottfried. The cult classics, B-movies and exploitation films I sneaked there were edited for TV with an eye toward including as much sex and violence as censors would allow, which often meant less salacious things--like plot points--were chopped out. This made the movies senseless, but that was part of the fun. Watching even the unrated version of the PG-13 rated horror thriller House at the End of the Street made me wistful for the low-budget garbage of my youth, because at least those offered me scintillating sex and violence with their nonsensical stories.

The Movie:

With a cast that includes two Oscar-nominated actresses (Elisabeth Shue and Jennifer Lawrence), you might expect House at the End of the Street to be smarter than your average horror movie. But even these rightly celebrated performers cannot save this movie from its total lack of tension, shockingly bad dialogue and tangle of incomprehensible plot points.

Lawrence stars as Elissa, a high school girl who has a strained relationship with her recently divorced mother (Shue) who has just transplanted the family into a seemingly nice and normal small town. Of course, all illusions of a peaceful suburban life are shattered when mother and daughter discover they live next to the home of a young man whose parents were brutally murdered by his mentally unstable sister four years ago. Since then, the killer teen, Carrie Anne, hasn't been spotted, but some assume she drowned after running off into the nearby woods. As Elissa grows closer to Carrie Anne's surviving brother, Ryan (Max Theirot), she begins to uncover the horrible?and absolutely confusing?truth.

Director Mark Tonderai goes for a slow burn style of scares and tension building, but fails miserably. For one thing, the roles are terribly miscast as both Shue and Lawrence seem too smart for the lies their characters readily fall for, and the movie's monsters are too gawky to be scary. Instead of slow burn, House at the End of the Street is just slow and boring, piling up awkward exposition lines that are about as subtle as the hammer Carrie Anne uses to pummel her parents to death in the film's opening.

Worse yet, characters' actions frequently lack motivation beyond the fact that the story needs them to behave the way they do. Plus, the dialogue is so on the nose that you might wonder if Elissa?who blurts out upon meeting Ryan the statement, "Your parents are dead"?has some sort of social interaction disorder. Aside from being an amusing way to link this movie to Lawrence's far more interesting outing in Silver Linings Playbook this behavior has no real payoff. It's just badly written dialogue courtesy of David Loucka, who also penned the deadly boring haunted house flick Dream House.

The script is also littered with plot holes that make the movie incoherent throughout and lead to a finale that steals from more menacing movies (which I won't identify lest I give away spoilers) and is wildly unsatisfying. If there were at least something titillating?be it gruesome gore or thrilling sex appeal?the formerly mentioned faults might be less egregious and maybe even overlooked. Similarly, I might forgive the distractingly bad sound design and wincingly amateurish lighting, but House at the End of the Street so lacks in thrills and entertainment that clocking it's faults became the most fun I had with it. The movie is flat, and lacking in scares, coherence, fun and engaging imagery. In the end, the scariest thing about this horror movie is that it was made at all.

The Disc:

The audio and visual on the Blu-ray is sharp. Plus, this version also comes with a DVD, and a digital copy easily accessible through iTunes. But the bonus feature that might seem most enticing is the Unrated cut of the movie that's proudly pronounced on the box art's cover. Unfortunately, where most unrated versions mean more nudity, gore, raunchy jokes or foul language, this unrated cut offers none of the above. There's a bit of blood but that's about it for carnage.

The Blu-ray also boasts a behind-the-scenes featurette called "Journey Into Terror: Inside House at the End of the Street." This has interviews with the cast and crew, and is most interesting in that it reveals that Tonderai set out to make a Hitchcock-style thriller that would be appropriate for younger audiences. If any younger audience members are reading this, let me assure you: the worst of Hitchcock is still 100 times better than House at the End of the Street.

Besides a theatrical trailer for the film, there's also a set of so-called "Sneak Peeks." These are trailers for other movies. It's fine that they are included, but calling them a special feature is ridiculous.

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Elisabeth Shue, Max ThieriotProduced by: Hal Lieberman, Peter Block, Aaron Ryder

View the original article here

Sleep Tight [Blu-ray]

Beyond me, you?ll be hard-pressed to find a bigger fan of the rapidfire horror [REC], a top-tier entry in both the found-footage and quasi-zombie sub-genres. Its sequel, while rarely matching the intensity of the first, was still one of the more worthy sequels here in horror land. So, I came to director Jaume Balaguer?s latest film, Sleep Tight, with an unhinged form of glee, and found my expectations wildly dashed. Though I didn?t sleep tight after watching it, it definitely wasn?t due to an abundance of heart-pounding excitement.

The Movie:

Watching Sleep Tight for a second time, freed from my early expectations, allowed me to accept the film as it was intended, as a slow boiling creep fest destined to make viewers second-guess the assumed loyalty of anyone with access to their personal life. Conversely, without the motivation to believe that everything I?m seeing is a mystery, than this stripped down alternative take on a different sort of revenge thriller. Sleep Tight is one of those rare films I see where I feel like it?s my fault I didn?t like it more. While it disappointed me, it?s hardly a disappointment in general, and it obviously places far above the plethora of Hollywood?s ?The Something-tion? flicks being churned out, usually involving demonic or ghostly possessions. This is kind of how I feel about most biopic films, actually. And I certainly hope Sleep Tight isn?t based on anyone in particular.

Cesar (Luis Tosar) is an apartment building concierge who is the most disturbing handyman since Schneider from One Day at a Time. His job allows him into the lives of the apartment tenants, and while some of these acquaintanceships are genial, Cesar?s personal distaste for everything and inability to attain personal happiness has created within him an anonymous monster bent on driving those around him insane. His latest ?project? is Clara (Marta Etura), a beautiful, carefree woman who proves a tougher victim than most for Cesar?s miserable ways.

Cesar?s tactics for mentally debilitating Clara are truly dastardly, and those are some of the more harrowing scenes of within the drama. Not to throw out spoilers, but the film?s title gives you a good idea of when these sub-tortures are taking place. As Clara?s smile refuses to fade, Cesar must up the ante, and his uncomfortably wicked actions escalate until the film?s mental gut-punch of an ending. The sudden appearance of Clara?s boyfriend Marcos (Alberto San Juan) adds even more breath-holding tension, and we have what should be a real grinder of a motion picture.

Only these scenes are peppered in between a lot of others that don?t really add anything to the fairly straightforward story. Cesar?s insistence on unraveling Clara?s life is causing his own to fray at the edges, but he obsessively pushes forward, oblivious to consequence, all the while verbally harassing his bed-ridden mother with how miserable he is. These are normal villainous techniques, especially when aided by an equally obsessive approach to routine behavior, but films don?t usually follow the villain for the entire time, so by painting Cesar?s motivations onto a blank canvas in order to create suspense, Balaguer? presents us with a one-note character whose heinousness, while very disturbing, is never bombastic enough to gleefully root against or cheer for. He?s just the rather mundane guy you really, really don?t want fixing your refrigerator.

This is the movie to watch if you?ve ever wanted to vicariously live through Single White Female?s Hedra Carlson, only without expecting her life to be exciting or anything. It?s quality direction from Balaguer?, and classy acting from Tosar and Etura, but Alberto Marini?s screenplay seems to just tell one part of a story I?d really like to watch.

The Disc:

This Blu-ray treatment of Balaguer?s return to non-found footage lacks all amounts of glitz, giving the setting and characters a stark beauty and agelessness that compliments the dark tone perfectly. The sound design, escalating in complexity between spans of silence, is also a top tier effort.

The sound, both the orchestral-turned-electronic score and the actual art are covered in full for the impressively detailed ?Cesar?s World,? which clocks in at 1 hour and 47 minutes--longer than the film itself. So yes, there is a lot of overlapping information in here that could have been left out, but it?s still quite immersive into every single process that went behind making Sleep Tight. I was intrigued to know they actually cut most of the first act out of Marini?s screenplay to get right to the meat of the story, as well as some other story edits before filming began. So, maybe I would like to see that part of the story, and then I can realize how wrong I was. Most of the major scenes are discussed and production footage is played. It encompasses everything, truly.

The only other feature we have here are a handful of deleted scenes, most involving Cesar and other characters. It appears a sub-sub-plotline involving a woman?s locket was excised, but nothing too pivotal shows up here.

There?s no denying this is as definitive a release as a small thriller like this is going to get. It looks great, sounds great, and has a feature-length documentary to go along with it. Fans will rejoice. I, on the other hand, will be going back to that other apartment building and the video cameras.

Starring: Luis Tosar, Marta Etura, Alberto San Juan, Petra Martinez

View the original article here

Trouble With The Curve [Blu-ray]

Trouble with the Curve, Clint Eastwood?s latest outing, is a movie Hollywood can be proud of. Despite its lack of a decent script or a believable plot structure, this predictable baseball flick is still a good time thanks to the endearing romance of Amy Adams and Justin Timberlake. If ever three talented actors were wasted on an insipid film, this would be it.

The Movie:

Who would knowingly make a movie about the superiority of traditional baseball know-how over computer-generated statistics only a year after Moneyball? Clint Eastwood would, apparently, as that?s the general point of Trouble with the Curve. Directed by Eastwood?s former right-hand man Robert Lorenz, the movie is equal parts griping about youngsters ruining the game and father-daughter bonding between Eastwood and Amy Adams. Both parts are perfectly amiable; neither part is particularly interesting.

Gus Lobel (Eastwood) is an aging scout for the Atlanta Braves with a resentful lawyer for a daughter, Mickey (Adams). When the doctor tells Gus he has glaucoma, Mickey doesn?t force him to see a specialist, but instead decides to tag along on his latest scouting trip as an extra set of eyes. Along the way, they catch up with Johnny Flanagan (Justin Timberlake), a former pitcher whose career ended prematurely with a torn rotator cuff, and who is now a half-hearted scout for the Red Socks.

Despite ostensibly focusing on the reconnection of father and daughter, those sections are the least credible aspect of the film. Eastwood and Adams try their best, but there is little they can do when the screenplay is a catalog of stale reflections and bland platitudes. Mickey soon resorts to rehashing her revelations from therapy with Gus, which is as awkward and labored as it sounds. And while realism is hardly requisite for a good movie, it?s hard to ignore that even if the two do reconcile, glaucoma is not curable by a smile from Adams. And while we?re on the subject of believability, am I the only one who thinks it?s odd that an 82-year-old is still working? As Gus? finds continue to fail, the big wigs suggest that Gus go into ?early retirement.? If this is early retirement, when?s late, at his centennial?

Eastwood is as good as ever, although the consistency of his appeal is compromised by a part that doesn?t quite suit his persona. Yes, he?s an old great discounted by uppity newcomers, and yes, he is a curmudgeon with a heart of gold. But playing a grouch is not the same as playing a badass, and Eastwood seems out of place in this relatively mild role. Twenty minutes into the movie, Gus visits his wife?s grave and sings her a song. While sweet, the moment is premature and heavy-handed, as if he were wearing a neon sign over his head reading ?irascible sweetheart.? Eastwood normally plays men of action, but in Trouble with the Curve he plays a man full of grumbled complaints.

The focus, therefore, falls on the romance of Johnny and Mickey, which unlike the rest of the film, is engaging and endearing. The two actors have great chemistry, bantering with ease and deftly selling the slow build of their attraction. Adams plays her part well, but spends so much time scowling and worrying that the lovable girl of Junebug and Enchanted never gets a chance to shine. Believe it or not, Justin Timberlake is the best part of the movie. With unlimited charisma, an impish character, and all the best lines (the other two are too busy quibbling to quip), he steals scenes by just showing up and flashing a mischievous grin.

Trouble with the Curve is like an afternoon of baseball: the game is a little dull, but thanks to your friends and the concession stand, you manage to enjoy yourself anyway. Who knows what any of these three actors saw in this film, but together they keep it from being a complete waste of time.

The Disc:

The Blu-ray and DVD combo pack comes with two featurettes, each running under five minutes, and neither worth watching. In the first, Timberlake and Adams talk about playing an on-screen couple in respectful, professional terms that make it clear that there was no hint of off-screen romance (as well there shouldn?t have been: both actors were happily engaged at the time of shooting).

The second feature is on director Robert Lorenz?s long tenure as part of Eastwood?s production team, first as an assistant director and then a producer, finally making his directorial debut in Trouble with the Curve. Lorentz clearly sees himself as a true filmmaker, maybe even the next big thing, but to borrow from Breaking Bad, just because he shot with Clint Eastwood doesn't make him Clint Eastwood. If this film is any indication, he has a long, long way to go.

Finally, the pack also includes a redemption code for an UltraViolet copy--the site which gives you the ability to access your movie online, as well as link the film to your Flixster account. I can see the appeal of this service for a film you wanted to rewatch or show to friends, but since this flick is probably neither of those things, using UltraViolet would probably be pretty pointless.

Distributor: Warner Home VideoStarring: Clint Eastwood, Amy Adams, Justin TimberlakeProduced by: Clint Eastwood, Robert Lorenz, Michele Weisler

View the original article here

Sleepwalk With Me [Blu-ray]

I don?t know if I?m the best audience for Sleepwalk With Me, mainly because I don?t find comedian, Mike Birbiglia, funny. To be honest, and maybe this makes me sound ignorant, but I?d never even heard of Mike Birbiglia before this film, nor did I know anything about his Off-Broadway show of the same name, which apparently got raves across the board. That said, I really appreciate this movie.

The Movie:

Sleepwalk With Me is not ?hilarious,? as the back of the box says, and Birbiglia?s character (Is it a character?) is sometimes infuriatingly clueless. But the idea of a man who has a sleepwalking disorder so bad that it actually causes him to jump out a window is beyond fascinating. I just wish there were real laughs, here, instead of chuckles to go along with it. That would have allowed me to give the film an extra star.

The film follows Birbiglia as himself during his rise as a professional comedian. Along the way, we see Birbiglia?s relationship with his girlfriend (Lauren Ambrose) deteriorate. We also get to see the highlight of the film, Birbigila?s REM Sleep Behavior Disorder, which gets worse and worse the more anxious he gets about his career and the future of his relationship. It all builds to the aforementioned climax of him hurling himself out of a window while he?s sleepwalking. (And don?t get upset about me spoiling anything. It says he does all that right on the front of the box).

Moreover, the shots of Birbiglia dreaming are fascinating in an almost The Nightmare on Elm Street level. Sometimes, it?s obvious that he?s having a dream, like when he?s running through a wheat field, which is a stark contrast from the scene before it. But other times, like when he?s eating a pizza around his neck while he?s with a girl, you almost wonder, ?Is this a dream, or is this just a really weird date?? It keeps you guessing what weird position Birbiglia is going to wake up in when it?s all over. This kind of plot stuff I love.

But again, the laughs just aren?t there, at least for me. In the beginning of the film, his comedy is woefully unfunny, but that?s on purpose to show that he was really going nowhere in his career. But when his comedy starts taking off as he travels cross-country to different college campuses, I still don?t find him funny. He gets more confident in his delivery, but his punch lines are still terrible. Thankfully, we don?t see much of his stand-up and get more focus on the story. But then, the story isn?t that funny, either. I enjoyed watching Sleepwalk With Me, for the most part, but I didn?t really laugh. Maybe that?s just me. Even if you don?t find this movie funny, it?s at least enjoyable on a certain level. Give it a try if you?re interested in the topic of sleepwalking. And defenestration.

The Disc:

Since I?m not a fan of Birbiglia?s brand of humor, I didn?t find the commentary on the special features funny, either, but there are quite a few of them. The main draw is probably the Q&A with This American Life?s Ira Glass and the almighty Joss Whedon, who acts as a moderator. What bothers me about the Q&A, though, is that nobody really sounds comfortable--not until later on in the Q&A anyway, which is quite long. It?s actually a little uncomfortable to watch in the beginning when you can tell they?re all trying really hard to get laughs, just like the film itself. Maybe it was intentional?

The other draw is the commentary, which features both Birbiglia and Ira Glass. I never really listened to This American Life that much, only in bits and pieces, but from what I?ve heard, this commentary track doesn?t sound that much different from Glass? popular radio show. The commentary is very matter-of-fact and conversational. I think I might like it more than the movie itself.

The rest of the special features are kind of blah. The outtakes aren?t interesting and go on for far too long. The ?Making Of? featurette is everything you would expect from a featurette of that ilk and nothing more. And the behind-the-scenes shorts don?t offer anything tremendously interesting. They just focus on people talking about their roles in the film. That?s it. The trailer is the last special feature, and it?s one of those trailers that ruins all the good jokes in the film. Honestly, if you just want to see the comedic side of this film, watch the trailer and spare yourself the movie. But then, you?d be missing out on a pretty interesting tale. My advice: See the movie, and stay for the special features. They?re worth one watch.

Starring: Mike Birbiglia, Lauren Ambrose, Carol Kane, Kevin BarnettProduced by: Ira Glass, Jacob JaffkeWritten by: Mike Birbiglia, Ira Glass, Joe Birbiglia, Seth Barrish

View the original article here

Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry [Blu-ray]

On April 3rd of 2011, the world famous Chinese artist and political "hooligan" Ai Weiwei disappeared following a "routine" interrogation. It had been the fate of so many protesters before him (including his own father) to eventually answer to the State. An answer that often left one imprisoned or dead. For 81 days the friends, family and millions of followers of Weiwei on Twitter were left in the dark as to his condition.

The Movie:

Weiwei became world famous (or at least well known to the Western world) during the 2008 Beijing Olympics. He had been commissioned by the Chinese government to create the centerpiece of the Olympic stadium, the "Bird's Nest" which easily dominated the associated imagery. During this process, Weiwei began to become much more aware of the many lies told by the Chinese government, particularly regarding the Sichuan earthquake, a natural disaster that resulted in the death of hundreds of young children through human incompetence and greed.

After the disaster, the debris of many Chinese elementary schools revealed their cheap and shoddy construction. Weiwei began a campaign to list the number and names of the dead children, since the Chinese flat out refused to acknowledge their existence. The Chinese government retaliated by putting surveillance cameras all over his home studio, having him followed day and night and eventually physically assaulting him. Weiwei retaliated by posting day and night on Twitter.

Weiwei describes the Chinese government as basically being a "bunch of hooligans" with a very immature, childish sense of right and wrong and one-upmanship. So how does one fight a hooligan? By being a hooligan himself. His famous photograph of Tiananmen Square depicts his middle finger blurred in the foreground--a finger pointed right at the heart of the Chinese government as an open declaration of civil disobedience.

Filmmaker Alison Klayman had the raw material for an intense political drama or thriller fueled by moral outrage, but just not the lead character for one. Ai Weiwei is such a laid back, calm and yet mischievous spirit that the film takes on a whole different, almost joyous tone. The film she ended up with is one of the most warm and inspiring documentaries I have ever seen.

Klayman was given what seems to be total, unrestricted access to Weiwei's entire life. His friends, family, colleagues all help to paint a complex portrait of a man who seems at heart to actually be quite simple. Weiwei appears to be a humble man with a remarkable sense of sincerity and a keen eye for how art can be both beautiful and meaningfully defiant at the same time. For Weiwei, there is only truth. The greatest injustice comes from those who try to hide it. The film ends with the words, "Never Retreat, Re-Tweet".

The Disc:

For a documentary, one always has to make excuses for the visuals and sound quality. Most are shot on the run, without preparation, and the point is to get something audiences can see and hear on record. From a tech standpoint, documentaries are usually graded on a curve.

That said, much care has been taken with Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry to present the best-looking image and sound as possible. This is a fine looking disc, with very good audio to boot. The DTS-HD 5.1 audio mix is fantastic. The voices are never lost in the mix and audio picked up through many different mics and in many different interior and exterior locations are all well-mixed to sound as clear as possible. The images are all well lit with nice dark blacks amid the detail. We can even see a moment in the film when the light is being fussed with for an interview and Weiwei nodding in agreement that the image looks much better. For a film about a visual artist this level of concern seems appropriate.

Along with the disc's technical qualities we get an excellent filmmaker's commentary from director Alison Klayman, editor Jennifer Fineran and co-producer Colin Jones. These people equal Weiwei's passion and it's their intense love for the man that comes through most. They wanted people to know this amazing artist and the commentary focuses on how much work it took in the editing room to get that across in the clearest manner.

Finally, we get some deleted scenes which really present variations on or more of the same things we saw in the movie. All are entertaining on their own but really add nothing to the feature film. The same thing happens with the extra interviews. We get more information but not new information. The trailer is also included.

Otherwise, Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry is a fantastic film and the Blu-ray release equals it.

Produced by: Alison Klayman, Adam Schlesinger

View the original article here

The Bourne Legacy [Blu-ray]

It?s hard to comprehend a movie called The Bourne Legacy that doesn?t actually feature the character Jason Bourne. Not a sequel, it?s an attempt to expand the Bourne universe and continue to make piles of Bourne money without actually having to pay Matt Damon most of it. It sorta works.

The Movie:

You need a few things for a Bourne movie. The name Bourne needs to be in the title, even if the character of Bourne doesn?t actually appear, like, say, in The Bourne Legacy. You need a specially trained agent who is no longer following the rules and needs to be killed by a government agency. In Legacy, you get Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), taking over for Matt Damon?s Jason Bourne. You also need a sleek hunter in a tech heavy war room barking out lines like, ?Come on people, we need to find this guy, where is he?? In this case, it?s Byer (Edward Norton), taking over for Chris Cooper, Joan Allen, and David Strathairn. You need a fat guy who is egging on the sleek guy to kill Bourne or the Bourne equivalent. In this case it?s Turso (Stacy Keach), taking over for Brian Cox and Albert Finney. You need a secret government killing-type of program and if you?ve used the names Treadstone and Blackbriar, then try Outcome. Sounds kinda ominous, right? Also, you need Tony Gilroy to write the script like he has for all the Bourne movies, as well as exotic locales, awesome fights and chases, and a convoluted plot that no one really understands.

The Bourne Legacy has all the parts but doesn?t quite pull them together in a unique or interesting way. It?s a decent action/thriller but doesn?t have the energy, intelligence, or intensity of the earlier films. It?s B-rated Bourne, setting things up for a future franchise that might improve. It?s not so much on Renner, who does a good job as the medically enhanced (not in that way) asset who needs to be killed. The problem is the exposition as the writers set up a world running parallel to the events in The Bourne Ultimatum. People talk and talk and talk about Outcome, medical enhancements, relationships between characters from the other Bourne movies and this movie, and on and on. It?s the curse of the first movie in a series, it has to set everything up and that?s just not all that interesting to watch.

We?ve also seen a lot of this before. Norton?s Byer, unbelievably, chases Cross and a doctor who is also targeted to be killed (Rachel Weisz) by setting up a room with computer screens and monitors. It exactly mirrors scenes in the other movies. It?s like Gilroy, who is also the director on this film in addition to co-writer, can?t fathom an antagonist unless he?s in a war room. How about getting Norton out in the field after Cross? How about not writing yet another secret operation group run by people who seem to be carbon copies of the people in the first movies? How about making a movie about a secret agent and calling it Secret Agent Man, rather than trying to cash in on the Bourne name, since this really feels like that. The stunts are good, Renner is good, Norton is as good as Cooper or Strathairn, so the movie does have some pulse pounding fun, but it doesn?t knock your socks off. Pull out Identity or Ultimatum if you want that.

The Disc:

The Bourne Legacy is a nice set. While the movie doesn?t dazzle, Universal does toss in a good selection of extras to go along with stellar picture and sound quality, plus a DVD and electronic copy. The disc also contains the required three elements to a good home entertainment release: a commentary, making-of extras, and deleted scenes.

Everyone and their brother, literally, are invited to participate in the commentary. Director/writer Tony Gilroy, writer Dan Gilroy, and editor John Gilroy all take part, in addition to the Gilroy family?s 12 nieces and nephews. Not really, instead cinematographer Robert Elswit, production designer Kevin Thompson, and second unit director Dan Bradley also take part. If that sounds like too many people, it is. There?s lots of good info here, but it?s sometimes lost when you don?t know who is talking.

What would be considered the making-of featurette is broken into bite-sized chunks of five to eight minutes each, totaling about 40 minutes. It includes the decisions that went into moving the series away from Jason Bourne but still using the previous films as a jumping off point, like the character of Aaron Cross, the location shooting, and most interestingly, the climactic motorcycle chase. This is the type of behind-the-scenes stuff that a fan of the movie wants to see. The ?how did they do it? of the big action piece. The other extras are also pretty good, but sections like ?Re-Bourne? and ?Enter Aaron Cross,? which focus on character and story rather than action, don?t offer much insight. These are for people who haven?t actually seen the movie, rather than for those who have and want inside info. There is a two minute test footage on the fight between Cross and the wolf that is pretty (unintentionally) hilarious. Make sure to check it out.

The deleted scenes only last seven minutes but do add some information that is interesting. A scene between Aaron and a highway patrolman is pretty tense. Another quick scene explains why Aaron was trying to extra meds when he got to the cabin at the beginning of the movie. Nothing critical, but the scenes are nice to see.

The Bourne Legacy is an OK movie with a nice Blu-ray release. You wouldn?t go wrong just letting The Bourne Ultimatum wrap up your Bourne movie experience and skipping Legacy altogether, but as a generic thriller, it gets the job done.

Distributor: Universal Studios Home EntertainmentStarring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Stacy Keach, Oscar Isaac, Joan Allen, Albert FinneyProduced by: Frank Marshall, Patrick Crowley, Ben Smith, Jeffrey WeinerWritten by: Tony Gilroy, Dan Gilroy

View the original article here

Hitchcock

As one of the few genuine auteurs of the classic Hollywood era, Alfred Hitchcock is a director who you can really understand best in his movies. All you need to know about the man who made both To Catch A Thief and Vertigo is right there on the screen, with the innovative camera movement, the obsessions with blondes and deceit, the dark humor and occasional self-indulgence.

But because he's an iconic figure, and because Hollywood never tires of revisiting its own history, we have Hitchcock, a light-hearted biopic that's ostensibly about the making of one of Hitchcock's darkest films (Psycho) but mostly digs into the marriage between Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins in mighty prosthetics) and Alma Reville (Helen Mirren in an unflattering wig). The relationship between the Hitchcocks was undeniably crucial to the work he made, and Alma's skill as an editor and storyteller is celebrated intermittently throughout Hitchcock. But just as Hitchcock himself didn't seem to care much for traditional love stories in his films, the lingering spark between Hitch and Alma is by far the least interesting one this movie could have told-- and it's the one we're stuck with for this dull, surface-level biopic.

Sure, there are great old Hollywood details lurking around the edges, from Michael Stuhlbarg's performance as powerhouse agent Lew Wasserman to Hitchcock's meetings with the censorship board, trying to convince them to let him get away with Psycho's infamous shower scene. Scarlett Johansson and Jessica Biel are just fine as starlets Janet Leigh and Vera Miles, respectively, and James D'arcy perfectly embodies Anthony Perkins's twitchy discomfort, though screenwriter John J. McLaughlin draws what feels like an unfair parallel between Perkins and Psycho's Norman Bates. None of the scenes that take place on the Psycho set are especially insightful, but they at least get into the work that made Hitchcock famous, and allow you live inside what even Hitchcock director Sacha Gervasi would probably call the better movie.

It's a serious credit to Helen Mirren that Alma feels like an important character at all, and it's the quiet moments of discord and contempt between the Hitchcocks that give the marriage weight, not the shouting matches that will make up would-be Oscar clip reels. But when we follow Alma through her screenwriting partnership with Whitfield Cook (Danny Huston), or on a truly inexplicable trip to buy a bathing suit, it feels like an unwanted digression. Private moments with Hitch himself are rarely much better; Hopkins does well with the mimicry but seems overly attached to the larger-than-life version of Hitchcock who always existed in the media, and the script's attempts to dig into his psyche-- like imagined conversations with the killer who inspired Psycho-- stumble badly.

Between this film and HBO's The Girl, we've now got two movies in a row that attempt and fail to dig deeply into the master filmmaker who so successfully got under our skin. Maybe it's time to admit that, as always, Hitchcock is still one step ahead of us.

View the original article here

The Guilt Trip

Have you ever dreamed of watching Barbara Streisand gobble down four and a half pounds of red meat before a cheering crowd? Or wished for a comedy as anxiety inducing as an argument with your own overbearing but well-meaning mom? Do you find bland business pitches hilarious and deeply believe Seth Rogen can do no wrong? If so, my friend, then I've got just the movie for you: The Guilt Trip, playing in a theater near you!

Now for a limited time only, you can see Rogen as Andy Brewster, an organic chemist/aspiring entrepreneur on the verge of pitching his brand new all-natural cleaner to major outlets like Kmart and the Home Shopping Network. All that lies between him and success is an eight-day long cross-country journey peppered with sales meetings?well, that and his mom. Streisand co-stars as Joyce, his silly and smothering mother who collects frog figurines, wears clip-on earrings (an actual plot point) and spit-cleans her son at embarrassing moments. All Joyce wants for her beloved boy is for him to find love and thrive at work, so she lovingly but relentlessly offers advice?like adding some panache to his pitch?which he smugly and resolutely ignores. But wait, there's more!

While Andy is visiting his mom in New Jersey before heading West, Joyce confesses her concerns that she's to blame for his failed love life. So, she opens up about her short-lived romance with her first flame, who is not Andy's deceased father but is his namesake. While most men would feel awkward and try to forget this conversation, Andy inexplicably opts to track the guy down (via the search engine Bing) and surprise his mother with a poorly planned reunion in California. After a fretful, unfunny and one-sided conversation, Joyce has agreed to join Andy on his road trip, and they are on their way. By this point in the movie, you may experience irritability and boredom. You do not need to consult a doctor. These are common side effects of The Guilt Trip.

As mother and son traverse the country, they aimlessly bound from one set piece to the next, stacking up plot holes and setups with no payoffs. Watching this movie, you might ask yourself why Andy would bring his mother with him into the corporate offices where she can fluster and distract him? Or why he felt the need to trick his mom into reconnecting with her old beau to begin with? Or what is the point of introducing Andy's high school sweetheart, Joyce's love of frogs, or the repeated references to hot flashes? The answers won't come and can most easily be chalked up to bad screenwriting at the hands of Dan Fogelman. But at least there are plenty of laughs along the way, right? Wrong!

There are a handful of entertaining gags, including a stripper car mechanic called Moonlight (Analeis Lorig), but much of The Guilt Trip is made up of what feels like rough draft jokes, as if they were placeholders that were meant to be punched up later. Beyond that, Streisand and Rogen lack chemistry. They are pleasant enough onscreen together, but never really click comically. Instead Streisand's shrill nagging mom shtick gets irksome by the ten-minute mark, but because she is nothing but supportive of Andy, his non-stop condescension and eye rolling toward her makes them both revolting.

Not interested in the pairing of Streisand and Rogen? Then perhaps you'll be enticed by The Guilt Trip's supporting cast which boasts such spectacular comedic performers as Colin Hanks, Adam Scott, Casey Wilson, Dale Dickey and Ari Graynor. Regrettably, each is given little more than a cameo appearance, which is a waste of such a promising ensemble. While this flaccid comedy has plenty of frustrating aspects, from its illogical plot to its misfiring leads and lazy punch lines, the waste of these performers is definitely the most offending. All these road bumps wind up making The Guilt Trip a ride without momentum, direction, or a worthwhile destination.

View the original article here

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey arrives in theaters under a brutal weight of expectations, coming not only after the magnificent Lord of the Rings trilogy, but with the knowledge that there are two more films to come in this adaptation of a very slim novel. It's hard to see the maps of Middle Earth and hear Howard Shore's score and not brace yourself for the sweeping emotions and battles of Lord of the Rings, but anyone who has read The Hobbit knows to expect a lighter, smaller story, one more about amiable dwarves and a grouchy hobbit than stirring calls to heroism.

And though The Hobbit feels in its first half very much like a brief story stretched far too thin, it eventually settles into its own enjoyable rhythm, a comic adventure that's a good enough excuse to make a return visit to Middle Earth. As Bilbo Baggins, the comfortable hobbit unwillingly dragged onto this journey with a band of 13 dwarves, Martin Freeman is a nicely flustered and quick-witted presence; it takes a while for Bilbo to embrace his call to adventure, but by the time he does, he feels like a guy worth following for two more movies. Add in returning characters like Ian McKellen's Gandalf and (however briefly) Andy Serkis' Gollum, plus the handful of dwarves who manage to distinguish themselves from that rowdy bunch, and An Unexpected Journey becomes a comfortable little adventure-- and an even better one if you can convince yourself to stop comparing it to Lord of the Rings.

Not that the movie actually encourages that-- the film begins on the exact same day as Fellowship of the Ring, with an older Bilbo (Ian Holm reprising his role) preparing for his birthday party and sending his nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood in a fun cameo) off to meet Gandalf. Between this frame device and a recreation of the battle with Smaug the dragon that lost the dwarves their pile of gold in the mountains, it takes a while to get around to the unexpected dinner party Bilbo hosts for the 13 dwarves, and even longer to get the group of them on the road toward reclaiming the dwarves' ancestral home (there are two songs sung during that party. Two!)?Bilbo is a far less willing adventurer than the wide-eyed Frodo, and for the film's first hour he's a grouchy and bumbling presence, clashing immediately with the solemn dwarf leader Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) and wishing frequently he was back home in his hobbit hole. You might wish the same.

Then the group stumbles upon a mean group of hungry mountain trolls and Bilbo and the movie alike finally find a purpose, digging into the awkward group dynamics and setting up Bilbo's redemption in Thorin's eyes. The giant battle scene against Smaug the dragon is being saved for the next film, but we at least get an impressive cavern full of goblins to run away from, not to mention the return of Gollum, whose "riddles in the dark" scene is riveting, and Andy Serkis' performance as remarkably nuanced as ever. Some story elements are added from the book to give more of a sense of epic continuity, like a flashback to Smaug's takeover of the dwarves' mountain and a scene with Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) and Elrond (Hugo Weaving) warning of Sauron's potential rise; the movie can't quite find a natural ending point, but the hints at a larger story bode well for the coming sequels.

I saw An Unexpected Journey in the much-touted 48 frames per second and in 3D, an experience I recommend, but maybe only on second viewing. I never adjusted to the look, which makes everything feel more real and closer to you, an effect that's utterly bizarre when seeing giant trolls or goblins or even a band of tiny dwarves. The technological experimentation may have helped Peter Jackson get excited about a smaller-scale return to Middle Earth, but its effect on the movie is harder to gauge; it's fascinating seeing familiar characters like Gollum move with an unbelievable realness, but also nearly impossible to feel as swept away by this journey to an imaginary world.

When Jackson took on The Hobbit after Guillermo del Toro dropped it in 2010, it seemed like an obligation more than the passion that drove him to make the original trilogy. But for its occasional moments of excess and unhurried pace, An Unexpected Journey is proof that Jackson still has a knack for stories in this world, and that he may have more surprises in store as the rest of this new, unexpected trilogy unfolds.

View the original article here

Jack Reacher

Tom Cruise is a giant movie star, and will be forever. It's set in his DNA now, in that sharp profile and tense posture; like any good star Cruise is an idea more than a man, an icon of odd American maleness that can outlast Rock of Ages or PR disasters. Last year's Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, once intended as a last hurrah of Cruise's action stardom, only served to double down on his on fame. Ushered to the door, Tom Cruise roundhouse kicked the guards and rushed back into the fray.

So here comes Jack Reacher, based on the Lee Child novel One Shot, the first film based on Child's series of Jack Reacher books that are probably actually more popular than Cruise is. The book's fans were apoplectic when the compact Cruise was cast as the large and intimidating Reacher, but the film fits well around him, with Cruise stepping up serviceably to play the ex-military cop who arrives in Pittsburgh to help solve what looks like a random sniper attack that killed five. Reacher doesn't have a passport, doesn't fly, buys his clothes at Goodwill and is exceedingly paranoid; Cruise seems much more confident playing this skilled oddball than he ever has playing an everyman.

Jack Reacher allows Cruise to go through all the stations of the star vehicle, with a little bit of hand-to-hand combat, a little bit of flirtation with a local lady lawyer (Rosamund Pike), a little bit of macho rivalry with the strait-laced homicide detective (David Oyelowo), a car chase, a murder mystery, and of course a shootout. Reacher's a little less funny that he is in the books, but Cruise's coming timing is spot-on when it's called for, including a slapsticky attack scene and the late-in-the-film verbal sparring with Robert Duvall, playing a rifle range owner with the key to cracking the whole case.

Looming literally in the shadows, with just two scenes in the whole film, is documentarian Werner Herzog as the villain Zec, a survivor of a Siberian gulag who chewed off his own fingers when they were dying of frostbite. Zec is exactly the bad guy you want Herzog to play, with delicious lines ("Did I have a knife in Siberia?") and enough menace in his one functioning to chill your blood. It's criminal that Zec is such a small part of the film, but that might be the price paid by a star vehicle-- if Herzog were around too much more, Cruise would definitely no longer be the main attraction.

Director Christopher McQuarrie, the screenwriter of The Usual Suspects and the underrated Valkyrie, sets up the case in a masterful, silent opening scene, and does well by the car chase and fight scenes, operating with a no-frills efficiency that suits the title character. Where he gets off track is with occasional flourishes, from clunky lines of dialogue ("It was such a great crime scene, no one stopped to think it might be too great") to a florid flashback showing us all the five sniper victims while they lived, milking sympathies we already felt. The conspiracy theory behind the sniper attack is more elaborate and satisfying to unravel in the One Shot book, but McQuarrie keeps a remarkable amount of the plot intact, allowing movie audiences to marvel at Reacher's skills as much as the book's many fans have for years.

There are plenty more Jack Reacher books to choose from should this turn into the much-desired franchise, and some of them are more loose and imaginative than this story, which might make a sequel a little more welcome. Jack Reacher errs on the side of taking itself too seriously, and in simplifying the story becomes more of a standard-issue action thriller-- while most of us know that Reacher, and Cruise himself, are capable of something more. Maybe next time.

View the original article here

Playing For Keeps

Playing For Keeps should have been a really aggressive and sleazy R-rated comedy about a womanizing former soccer player who barrels into town, tries to break-up his ex-wife?s engagement, takes over as coach of his kid?s team, beds several of the players? mothers and gets into shady business deals with a rich buddy. There should have been gambling, alcohol and maybe even a well-placed vomit joke. If not, Playing For Keeps could have been an honest, touching and muted commentary on a lonely, well-intentioned former athlete trying to atone for his years of absentee fathering and long history of late night carousing. Unfortunately, Playing For Keeps is neither of those movies.

It?s a melodramatic, manipulative, disorganized and dishonest mess. It?s not self-aware enough to realize how its characters are coming off, and it?s not intelligent enough to realize how foolish, juvenile and immature its visions of love and sex are. Major plot points are dropped for extended periods of time, and a strong case could be made that almost all of its primary adult characters are flat-out unlikeable, especially its lead George Dryer (Gerard Butler). It?s unclear if director Gabriele Muccino thought audience members would inherently sympathize with George because he?s presented as the main character of Playing For Keeps, but no real reasons are ever provided as to why his ex-wife Stacie (Jessica Biel) would be better off with him than her new, deeply kind fianc?e Matt (James Tupper). More importantly, no reasons are ever given as to why every woman in a hundred foot radius acts like an immature, sexually possessed sixteen-year-old girl without any sense of responsibility or duty when he saunters onto the scene.

Regardless, that?s what we?re supposed to believe. Following a career-ending injury, George decides to try and make things right by moving to the same town as his ex-wife and son Lewis. For obvious reasons, he gets roped into coaching the local soccer team and for less obvious reasons, begins wishy-washy, complicated and weird relationships with his ex-wife, a married former sportscaster (Catherine Zeta-Jones), a divorced mother (Judy Greer) and the wife (Uma Thurman) of a rich and sketchy fellow father (Dennis Quaid) he quickly befriends. Some of these relationships are consummated, and some of them are not. Sadly, not a single one is particularly original, meaningful or affecting. They all just sort of exist kind of like all the soccer games we?re taken to.

At the beginning of Playing For Keeps, the local soccer team is godawful. All the little kids kick with their toes, and they get pummeled every game. Behind George?s leadership they slowly improve, begin kicking properly and start winning some games. Most films would funnel all of the momentum of this side story into a big game near the climax of the movie. This film sort of does that, but since we?re never told who the opponent is or even what the kids are playing for, there aren?t any real consequences. Calling something ?the big game? doesn?t automatically make it a big game. The audience has to be given a reason to care about the stakes or even a measly one hundred words on why the outcome matters in some way, and neither of those things happen.

From beginning to end, this movie does not work, and given all of the talented people involved in the production, it?s a real shame. Butler, Thurman, Biel, Zeta-Jones, Greer and Quaid all turn in passable acting performances, but the script doesn?t give them anything interesting to say or any genuine emotion to convey. They have no real chemistry with each other, and they produce a grand total of zero memorable moments. Muccino, who helmed the far superior Pursuit Of Happyness, does his best with the pacing and to balance the drama and comedy, but there seems to be a real disconnect between how he thinks the behavior of his characters will come off and how the behavior of his characters actually comes off. He seems to think it?s valiant for George to repeatedly ask his ex-wife out when she?s repeatedly told him to please let her move on, but the emotion that evokes is actually the exact opposite. It makes him look like a selfish asshole who thinks his feelings are more important than hers.

Playing For Keeps might imply permanence with its name, but thanks to its execution, it?s destined for only temporary relevance.

View the original article here

The Collection

Like its predecessor, 2009's The Collector, The Collection is a brutal, indulgent bloodbath. Rather than developing its characters or slowly building tension, it slashes forward at a depraved rate, killing off both familiar faces and random people with video game-like aggression. It?s entirely possible the film?s body count actually reaches three digits by the end, all in an effort to up the previous installment in every way possible.

For the most part, this bigger is better philosophy actually works. The Collection offers more characters actually capable of fighting back against the antagonist. It offers more bizarre and grandiose booby traps and a new heightened sense of tension from the general public who are aware of and want the villain caught. These positive changes strike the right balance between continuity and original intrigue for the sequel. Unfortunately, the new location does not. In fact, it?s the singular reason why round one works and round two only sort of works.

The original Collector is set inside a house. It offers a small number of characters including Arkin O?Brien (Josh Stewart) and lets them play a cat and mouse game with a sick, merciless serial killer. By the end of the film, viewers really get a chance to know the house and all of the little secrets it hides. It?s like Clue in that way. The newest installment, however, takes place inside a once abandoned hotel so massive, dark and mysterious it gives HH Holmes? World?s Fair business and Sarah Winchester?s mansion runs for their money.

Our old friend Arkin is back alongside a team of highly trained mercenaries paid by the rich father (Christopher McDonald) of a girl (Emma Fitzpatrick) our antagonist kidnapped, but because of the rapid increase in booby trapped space, it?s impossible to predict what might happen next or even have opinions on what actions the characters should take. It?s roughly the equivalent of being a little kid and told you can wander through the candy store versus being told you can roam throughout the entire mall. More freedom might sound better in theory, but in practicality, it really isn?t.

Fortunately, co-writer/ director Marcus Dunstan really does know what he?s doing when it comes to conceiving and subsequently delivering on scary premises. Several of the larger scenes including numerous extras are smartly choreographed to seem frenzied without disorienting the audience. The basic concept of a man slaughtering a number of people and saving one to add to his collection is just as horrifying now as it was during the first installment, and proper care is put into including plenty of weird, macabre shit like body part rooms, bear traps and loose spiders.

With good acting from the lead characters, a good concept and some edge of your seat, cover your eyes moments, The Collection has enough to please hardcore horror fans and casual moviegoers looking for a fright. Given the mistake it made with the location, however, it still has to be looked at as a bit of a missed opportunity. Sometimes savage chaos is better when it?s carefully ordered.

View the original article here

Les Miserables

The first hour of Les Miserables might have the power to revive movie musicals for years. Filmed with Tom Hooper's unflinchingly intimate camera, with the likes of Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman and even Russell Crowe singing their hearts out, Les Miserables begins with a sweep of skill and emotion that sends chills, whether you're a die-hard musical theater fan or a skeptic waiting to be convinced. Anne Hathaway's performance as the doomed Fantine singing "I Dreamed A Dream" is the justly celebrated highlight, but everything in that first hour moves with energy and a sense of revival; you really never have seen a classic musical like this, and it's exhilarating.

The rest of Les Miserables loses that early power, bit by bit, as the story expands to include characters it doesn't quite have room for, and a few personal sagas are meant to stand in for the longing of the French people to be free. But the performances remain strong, the songs stirring and emotional, the cinematography impeccable and the cast attractive-- there may not be as much to stand up and cheer for, but there's little not to like either. Fans of the musical-- and there are millions-- ought to delight in Hooper taking their beloved show so seriously, while newcomers curious to see Wolverine sing might catch a few tears in their eyes. There's something for everyone here, so long as audiences are willing to open up to the singing and find it.

As the story belongs to his Jean Valjean, Les Miserables belongs to Jackman, who we first see emaciated and filthy as a prisoner released from hard labor after 19 years, with the watchful Javert (Crowe) to monitor his parole. The audience is bound to cry the first time Jackman does, singing "What Have I Done" in a nearly unbroken take, contemplating his turn from crime to a life of virtue-- which also involves breaking his parole. Valjean eventually winds up hiring and accidentally firing Hathaway's Fantine, who's then forced to turn to prostitution, but makes a promise on her deathbed to care for her daughter Cosette (Isabelle Allen), who lives with a pair of vile innkeepers (Sacha Baron Cohen and Helen Bonham Carter).

About a decade later Valjean and Cosette (now Amanda Seyfried) live in Paris, where the poor are just as wretched but a group of idealistic students (led by Aaron Tveit and Eddie Redmyane) plan a revolution. In the way of big splashy musicals (and epic novels like Victor Hugo's original) all the major characters get involved in one way or another, though if you've heard the musical's big numbers like "Do Your Hear The People Sing?" and "One Day More" as often as I have, you might be surprised by how small a role the battle actually plays. As Hooper rightly recognizes with his close-up camera, Les Miserables is an intimate but sprawling story, a series of different love stories with enough tragic notes to make them really hit. But that smallness feels out of place as the characters sing of epic battles and the rising of a people "who will not be slaves again;" when Les Miserables strains for impact beyond one individual's love for another, it feels more hollow than it might when the entire cast is there bellowing in the theater with you.

Long as it is, the movie gives short shrift to a few of those stories, especially poor Eponine (Samantha Barks), whose "On My Own" is a musical theater classic but who isn't around long enough to let us feel her longing for Redmayne's Marius. And while the love-at-first-sight between Marius and Cosette gives way to some beautiful singing ("A Heart Full of Love" is gorgeous), it doesn't quite gel with the realism in the rest of the film. When the focus returns to Valjean at the end, you realize how much the center of the story had missed him; the entire cast is obviously fiercely committed to their roles, but Jackman's world-weariness and talent are the core the movie's soul.

As a faithful adaptation of a smash hit musical, Les Miserables may not seem like a risk, but it's the first musical drama to aim for mainstream Hollywood success in what feels like forever, and its acceptance could mean a revival for the unjustly ignored genre-- and its rejection another decade moldering in the cupboard. The movie isn't perfect, and not even as well-executed as Hooper's The King's Speech, but in its strongest moments-- and in that flawless first hour-- it really comes close. If this is the beginning of the future of musicals on screen, we're off to a good start.

View the original article here

Total Recall Extended Director's Cut [Blu-ray]

I would consider the original Total Recall as one of my top five favorite films of all time. I gave the movie five stars. You can even read about it, if you have the time. So, you already know the original film is very close to my heart. And, as with most films that are close to my heart, it was of course redone into a super glossy, vapid remake.

The Movie:

Just how super glossy and vapid is it? Well, pretty much as super glossy and as vapid as you could get. Where the original was the thinking man?s sci-fi film (yes, even with Arnold Schwarzenegger), this is science fiction for dummies. It stinks, and worse, it?s a colossal waste of time. The original is just so much better--dated special effects and all.

The biggest problem with this film is that it?s all action and no thought, and the action isn?t even that enjoyable. When this remake came out earlier this year, a lot of people noted that it was like a video game. But you know what? I love video games, and many of the video games of today can be very thoughtful and introspective (just play Journey if you don?t believe me). In reality, this movie is actually an insult to modern-day gaming. If anything, it?s like video games from the early 90s, which feature a lot of bang bang and who gives a shit? Whereas the original film was ambiguous and made audiences really question whether scenes were reality or recall, this movie isn?t smart enough to be ambiguous, making pretty obvious which is which. I?m not going to spoil the film for you, but by the end of the movie, you just might find yourself shaking your head. It?s all so contrived that it makes me sick.

But I digress. For those who haven?t seen the original, the story in this one is about a factory worker named Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) who isn?t pleased with life, even with a smoking hot wife (Kate Beckinsale). So he visits Rekall, a company where your dreams can become reality through implanted memories. But something goes terribly wrong, and Quaid becomes hunted because of something unlocked in his brain during the procedure. Plotwise, it?s very similar to the original.

Despite the similarities, this movie takes place on Earth instead of Mars. But it doesn?t really make any difference, since Earth is such a fantasy world in this film that it might as well take place on Mars. I mean, really, what was the point of keeping the film on Earth? The only reason I could think of that the filmmaker made the decision is because he wanted to separate this film from the original. But there are so many homages to the original that you kind of wonder if director Len Wiseman got confused along the way. It doesn?t make any sense. Is this a remake or a reimagining? Either way it sucks.

The biggest offense, though, is that there?s no charm to this film whatsoever. There are no cheesy (but endearing) one-liners. None of the characters have any personality, not even the wonderful, Bryan Cranston. And the chemistry between Farrell and Jessica Biel's characters is as about as plastic as the box this disc comes in. The whole production is just blah, and I really can't recommend this film to anybody.

The Disc:

Ok, so as you can tell, I hated the film. But I?ll try to be as objective as possible on these special features, since there are quite a bit of them. First, let?s look at the extended director?s cut of the film. It?s weak. All the added stuff is so miniscule that you won?t even notice it unless you?re listening to the audio commentary. It?s useless. And speaking of useless, the commentary is terrible, too. The director, Len Wiseman, seriously doesn?t think much of his audience, as he constantly talks about whether the audience will be confused by the plot. He seriously thinks we?re dumbasses. Hello, most of us saw the original. If we understood that one, we?ll understand this one. Stop belittling us.

?Total Recall with Insight? is your typical, behind-the-scenes look at how key scenes were shot. It features everything from discussions on action scenes and shots of the orchestra playing the score, all while the movie is playing. It?s?just whatever. ?Science Fiction vs. Science Fact? features a guy who goes on a tangent about nonsense, and it?s all drawn-out and ridiculous. He sounds like I used to sound when I?d bullshit in my college papers. It?s laughable.

You know what?s not funny, though? The gag reel. It?s boring. ?Designing the Fall? features a discussion on the creation of the CG heavy world in this movie, and it?s uninteresting, to say the least. ?Total Action? features actors and the production team talking about the lackluster fight scenes. And ?Stepping into Recall-Pre-Visualization sequence? shows key action scenes in their early phase when they were still just pre-rendered models. It practically put me to sleep.

In fact, the only moderately good special feature on here is the early demo of the upcoming Playstation 3 game, God of War: Ascension. It?s pretty much just a playable version of the trailer we gamers have already seen. It?s fine and all, but it?s also unimpressive. I mean, it?s God of War, which is getting tired, just like this Blu-Ray itself.

Distributor: Columbia PicturesStarring: Colin Farrell, Kate Beckinsale, Jessica Biel, Bryan Cranston, John Cho, Bill NighyProduced by: Neal H. Moritz, Toby JaffeWritten by: Ronald Shusett, Dan O?Bannon, Jon Povill, Kurt Wimmer

View the original article here

Finding Nemo [Blu-ray]

In 2003 Pixar invited audiences to go on an epic journey with two of the most obnoxious fish in the sea. The studio?s risky choice of lead characters resonated with audiences and Finding Nemo became a beloved film on par with their previous mainstays Toy Story and Monsters Inc. Nearly ten years later, the film has been re-released in 3D for a theatrical run as well as a Blu-ray/DVD package challenging the audience to sink or swim with these characters, once again.

The Movie:

Taking a cue from Disney?s Bambi, this story of parent and child does not shy away from the dark side of nature. The film begins with a scene in which a barracuda attacks a family of clown fish leaving only two survivors. The traumatized father, Marlin (Albert Brooks), and his son, Nemo, are all that remains of this loving family and it is immediately clear that their relationship is greatly defined by the fact that they only have each other. Marlin is affected by this trauma making him over protective of the same ocean he once saw so much future in and Nemo, merely a little red glob of caviar at the time of the attack, only sees a great world of wonder beyond the reef but is not so defiant as to balk against his father?s wishes. This all changes when a combination of peer pressure, angsty defiance, and a classic case of scuba diver fish collecting ends with Nemo netted in a bag and taken away from his father.

This is where the title comes in and Marlin has to find Nemo. On the way, he teams up with a short-term memory addled blue tang by the name of Dory, voiced by Ellen DeGeneres, and a whole school of fishfolk--turtles, birds, and whales--along the way. While they?re in the sea, Nemo is transported to a dentist?s aquarium where he meets a rag tag bunch of misfits calling to mind the favorite personalities of any nonviolent mental ward, although Nemo surprisingly doesn?t seem too upset about it.

Finding Nemo is the product of expert storytellers working in unison with the most skilled animators in the field. The numerous technical achievements within this film are the result of the animators needing to advance the artistry in order to tell this story as best they could, as opposed to using the project as an excuse to simply try out new techniques. It?s been nearly a decade since this film premiered, but the passion that the film?s team put into every moving strand of translucent anemone is still palpable. Thematically, the film takes an interesting line on parenthood and navigates the waters between over and under protective attitudes in a way that leaves the final opinion up to the audience without a heavy-handed message clumsily dropped right before the credits.

Parenting aside, Finding Nemo also looks at the perception of heroics. As the story advances, members of the sea society hear about Marlin and Dory?s adventure and start to tell and retell these tales to other fish and the like. The viewer thereby experiences these stories again and again through this lens of exciting gossip. Somehow hearing about a run in with the massive toothy shark is much more exciting than when we actually saw the beast in the first place. Personally, I think it?s a great commentary on how we all think our lives are mundane until we?re told about it from a third party. Only then do we have the perspective to realize that we often take for granted the inherently exciting nature of our lives. Either that or it?s a clever device to deliver information from the ocean to Nemo, who lives in a fishbowl.

Unfortunately, this acceptance of the fantastic also comes into play when father and son eventually reunite in a scene that is emotionally anticlimactic so that the film can quickly move on to a more conveniently action-packed sequence. The viewers are left--like Dory--to wonder if they somehow forgot what just happened.

The triumphs of this film outweigh the lows and that?s thanks to the collaborative efforts and care of the film?s major players, including directors Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich, writers Bob Peterson and David Reynolds, and producer Graham Walters, as well as so many others who achieved something remarkable with this film. While it is not my personal favorite, it is worth seeing if you haven?t already, and should be a solid own if you have children or roommates who would appreciate getting lost in the sea for a little bit of adventure.

The Disc:

Exploring this set gives the viewer a sense of being at Pixar throughout the making of Finding Nemo. There is a wide variety of bonuses ranging from the well- produced ?Making of Nemo? to a goofy studio tour from the point of view of the young actor who voiced the titular fish. Straying away from the expected are bonuses featuring the famous French explorer Jean-Michelle Cousteau and even an in-depth look at how Disneyland transformed the legendary Submarine Voyage attraction into a Finding Nemo-themed adventure.

Aided by a recently filmed roundtable of the filmmakers, as well as background cameos by Pixar heavies like Up director Pete Docter (wearing a sombrero), this set takes you behind the scenes like a welcome visitor. Instead of merely featuring a commentary track, Finding Nemo has ?CineExplore,? a poorly titled but extremely well-crafted feature length discussion supplemented by concept art, CG Tests, and a slew of other visual elements that complement the topics of any particular scene.

Topping off this set is the curious addition of several ?Aquariums? which are essentially screensavers of the film?s pretty locals backed by an ocean soundtrack. Other than the minor convenience grievance of a missing ?Play All? option in the submenus this 3-disc Blu-ray/DVD combo set is a welcome addition to a filmmaker?s tackle box.

Distributor: Walt Disney StudiosStarring: Albert Brooks, Ellen DeGeneres, Alexander Gould, Willem Dafoe, Geoffrey Rush, Vicki Lewis, Eric BanaDirected by: Andrew Stanton, Lee UnkrichWritten by: Andrew Stanton, Bob Peterson, David Reynolds

View the original article here