"IP Man"

When I was in high school, I went to see a movie with my brother. We arrived late and had to sit in the front row, as the theater was completely sold out. There were giant subtitles flying right in front of my face. The film was “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” and I could barely keep up. At the time, I had not seen many foreign films and had not experienced many martial arts movies. To say the least, I was blown away.

Today, I watched “IP Man,” a semi-true story of a Chinese Kung Fu master set in 1937. The real life “YIP Man” was the Master of the famous Bruce Lee, and from what I have read about this man, he lived an interesting life. The actions of the movie take place years before he met his most famous student. This film was recommended to me by a friend months ago, and I just got around to watching it. All I have to say about this movie is, HOLY CRAP! It rocks, from the bad ass choreography, to the intense story, to the beautiful sets, and the realistic tone, it makes me want to see a sequel. Mandingo! There is one already, but unfortunately not released in the United States. Now, the original movie is very entertaining, but at times it seems kind of repetitive. They seem to just make up reasons for the Grand Master to fight. JMC watched this movie with me, and remarked “Why are the fighting?” I thought it a fitting question.

Most of this movie you don’t really know why they are fighting, but you really don’t care. The movie looks amazing and the characters are interesting, because you feel for their hardships. I’m not saying that this movie is a “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” which I feel melded together a beautiful story with amazing fight scenes. For me, this is the standard to which I hold all martial arts movies. But what “IP Man” lacks in amazing story-telling, it makes up for in pure unadulterated action.

The Rating System:
Production (Directing, Editing, Music): 3-5
Story (Plot): 3-5
Characters (Likability, Acting): 4-5
Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness): 3-5
Emotions (Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care?): 5-5
Overall score: 18/25

"I am number Four"

Watching this movie, I thought, I am sure this movie is going to tank. When I mean tank, I mean fail. Horribly. Case in point: two rows behind me, a couple was laughing and carrying on the entire film, obviously bored and enjoying making fun of it. I bet you are thinking to yourself, “Yeah, it doesn’t look that good, I won’t go see it.” I say “Nay.” I enjoyed this movie. Hang in there I’ll explain.
“I am Number Four” is a highly flawed film, mixed with unexplained plot points and awful dialogue. The first hour is pretty boring, and has a terrible setup. There are parts that make no sense, seem really out of place, and are never explained. The only redeeming thing that I can think of about these parts is that they go into more depth in the book. I forgot to mention: this based on a book. The story is more or less a Superman rip off. Alien children come to Earth to hide from an evil force, and they all have special abilities that are never explained. They just have them. I understand that you have to leave things out to make a movie, but I feel this story was missing some much needed explanation.
OK, now that I have the bad stuff on the table, here’s the good. I like the characters, and although the dialogue on the whole was bad, there are genuinely parts of good humor and cleverness. It is almost like there were to many scriptwriters for this film. The last 40 minutes are pure action, special-effects-face-melting, awesomeness. Aside from one scene with a dog (to avoid spoilers I won’t go into detail) I enjoyed all of it. I left the theater wanting to see more and I will probably read the book, hoping to get more plot and character development. I do not think this is what they had in mind when they made this movie, but nonetheless, it’s how I feel.
I am sure they will not make a sequel, and people will tear this movie to pieces. But I am going on the record: I liked it. I hope enough people liked it so that they do make a sequel. I would go see it.

The Rating System
Production (Directing, Editing, Music): 2-5
Story (Plot): 3-5
Characters (Likability, Acting): 3-5
Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness): 2-5
Emotions (Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care?): 5-5
Overall Score: 15/25

Charriots of Fire

Sometime around 1990 , I watched “National Lampoons Vacation.” If you are not familiar with the movie, Chevy Chase and family go across the country to get to “Walley World,” the movie shows the perils of a drive across country and the hell that is family vacation of When they finally arrive at their destination and park at Walley World, they stop far away from the amusement park. when asked why his parking so far away, Chevy Chase’s character explains: “When everyone is trying to leave, we will be the first ones out.” They proceed to run to the entrance, in slow motion, to the amazing music of Vangelis’ “Chariots of Fire.” At the time my father laughed, I didn’t understand what I was missing.

Years later, I find out that the they are making fun of another movie that came out just two years earlier: “Chariots of Fire.” I am a self proclaimed movie theme master. Years of watching movies has expanded my knowledge of film score composers and my physical collection of soundtracks. One that stands out among my favorites is Vangelis. I own Vangelis’ Greatest Hits, and “Chariots of Fire”, is one of their best. Until yesterday, I had never seen this movie.

Sorry for the long intro, but I wanted you to understand what this movie meant for me.“Chariots of Fire” won Best Picture at the Academy Awards in 1981, and on a lark I looked up what movies it beat , “Raiders of the Lost Ark” lost to it . This made me laugh from what I said in my last post. The movie’s first few minutes is the famed running-on-the-beach-to-the-amazing-music-in-slow-motion, scene. I finally get the joke. “Chariots of Fire” is a fine film and its set to a great score. But years later I’m sure there is a lot of people who have seen “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, and yet not even heard of this movie. It drags in spots and has a predictable story, being based on a true story, its not very exciting.
I am glad to has seen this movie, only to say I’ve seen it, and to expand my movie knowledge. I am afraid it will be lost in the depths of movie achievements. I don’t think I’d care to watch it twice, to much slow motion running. I think this movie will only be watched in film schools, as it is very well made, by lacks a flair that other movies have. Watch it.

the rating system
Production ( directing, editing, Music)5-5
Story ( plot)4-5
Characters ( likability, acting)3-5
Writing ( dialogue, cleverness)4-5
Emotions ( was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, do I care)4-5
Over all score 20-25

When I first heard about this movie I thought “Oh, look, another teen drama, probably crap.” Well, I was half right. Months later, I heard that Emma Stone was nominated for a Golden Globe. Normally, I’m not interested in award shows... most of the time it seems they just pick the most boring performance/movie and give it a bunch of awards, and ignore the movies that will be remembered for years to come. Who really gives a crap about “Shakespeare in Love”? For starters, it beat “Saving Private Ryan” for best picture of 1998. And that’s just only one small example of such epic miss-cues by the Awards.

When I watched “ Easy A,” my preconceived notions of teen drama were wrong. The main character, Olive (played by Emma Stone) makes reference to classic movies from the 80’s, like “Breakfast Club”, “Say Anything”, and “ Can’t buy Me Love”. At first I was overjoyed: “they are talking about movies I’ve seen!”, but wait! those movies came out in the late 80’s. Have any teenagers, who are the target audience of this film, seen any of those movies? I know people who are 25 and not seen these movies. So this movie is made for the 25-and-older crowd. But why? How many thirty-year-old’s are going to see movies about high school kids? But hold on Sally, they aren’t really high school kids, are they? Emma Stone is a hot, vivacious 23 years old and Amanda Bines is an old 26. It’s not unusual to cast older actors to play teenagers. Grease, anyone? If you cast sixteen-year-old’s to play sixteen-year-old’s, would they have been dressed to sexy? Or had such adult themes that it makes one feel creepy even viewing it? These people are supposed to be under aged, yet appear to be fully developed.

I don’t want go off on a rant, because I enjoyed this movie. Wait what? Well, this movie was made for me. And by me, I mean my demographic. I got the 80’s movie references and the semi narration/ webcast by Emma Stone. Those of you that don’t know, will soon know that I love narrations. The movie was clever, witty, and generally a good time, but yet strangely forget-able. I still don’t know why the Golden Globes nominated Emma for her role, maybe to get some younger audiences watching the Globes, or perhaps just to get Emma Stone to show up. Despite her stellar performance, she didn’t win any awards. Frown. Watch it.

Per a request from JMC I am adding a rating system at the end of my reviews. I think rating systems are flawed because seeing a 3 /5 stars for a movie doesn’t tell you whether or not you are going to like the movie. So I came up with a much more detailed way of rating the movies. I will break down each movie into 5 categories and each of them will have a number out of 5 see below.

Easy A:
Production ( directing, editing, music) 4-5
Story (plot) 3-5
Characters (likeability, acting) 4-5
Writing ( dialogue, cleverness) 4-5
Emotions (was it: fun, scary, sad, do I care? etc.) 4-5
Over all score 19-25

Day 5 " The social Network"

When I saw Jesse Eisenberg staring back at me from a movie poster, and the tag read “You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies,” I said, “Jesse Eisenberg is a good looking dude." I mean, “What movie is that?”

My friend, Brosky( alias) said, “that’s the movie about Facebook.” With a puzzled look on my face, I thought: Who cares about a movie about Facebook? And promptly decided that day not to see it. Well, that feeling lasted about 10 minutes.

Brosky informed me that “The Social Network” would be directed by David Fincher; who also directed “Fight Club,” “The Game,” and “Se7en,” which are three of my all time favorite movies. Well, crap, to add insult to injury, the movie was written by one of my favorite writers: Aaron Sorkin. He also wrote: “A few Good Men,” and “Charlie Wilson’s War,” just to name a few. OK, so I’ll see it, jeez.

So I’m sitting in the theater , the music starts, the credits roll, and I see music by Trent Reznor ( Of Nine Inch Nails fame) as well as “Atticus” and “Book of Eli.” Now, I have to love this movie, you sneaky punks. At that very moment, I knew that I would enjoy this movie. Well I did, but not without the movie getting in the way. I hated all the characters, especially the main character of Mark Zuckerberg. For me I enjoy seeing good fight evil, for someone to overcome adversity, for the characters to grow and learn. This movie is a money-grubbing mess, filled with characters scheming and back0stabbing. Now that’s more or less how it happened.

Mark Zuckerberg, the real one, did an interview after the movie came out. All he really had to say, was that he didn’t invent Facebook, because a girl that broke up with him. Really? that’s the only thing you have a problem with? The guy has billions of dollars, and if he wanted to, could sue the crap out of these guys for defacement of character and anything else he really wanted to. So, is it a romanticized tale? Probably. Is it not “based on true events, and the names changed to protect the innocent?” most likely.

Do I like this movie? Yes, but only because they stacked the deck. If all these aforementioned guys were not involved, would I have enjoyed this movie? We will never know. It’s kind of like “Star Wars,” but without George Lucas, and plus Jar Jar Binks. Would the movie have been good? Sorry, George, but the best two movies are ones you DIDN’T direct. Watch it.

Day 4 "Delirious"

When you are ten year’s old, your taste in movies is terrible. And with that statement, I just made all the ten-year-olds’ hit lists. Do ten-year-old’s have hit lists? Never mind that. I watched a movie from my childhood, one that I enjoyed back then. It was straight up entertaining and really funny... but now, something is... different. So I look at all these kids’ movies nowadays, and think to myself: Some child loves this movie now and is going to watch it again in 20 years. They are going to think to him or herself 20 years later “What was I thinking? This movie is awful!”

You certainly have guessed it by now: I am talking about “Delirious.” Yes, THE Delirious. A lesser known John Candy movie for the uninitiated. For me, this movie ranked up there with “Uncle Buck” and “Who’s Harry Crumb?,” which are a few of my favorite movies from my childhood. Now I am questioning everything. Are they good movies!? What is the half-life of strontium? Why didn’t the tooth fairy come when I got my wisdom teeth YANKED? I digress. I say this, because “ Delirious” is, in one word, bad. I used to think that John Candy hitting his head and going into this “Soap Opera Dream World”, where he is a writer, and were he can control the world through his typewriter, was awesome. It isn’t, as it turns out, because of the ultra cheesy moments, and therefore quintessentially “80s.”

I also thought to myself: Well, Self, they make really bad movies in the 80s, so maybe it’s just that. I don’t think things have changed that much though. They still make really awful, cheesy movies today too. Certainly, there are a bunch of ten-year-old’s now that love the new “Clash of the Titans.” Well, Little Virginia, in 2031, when you put this on your Virtua-Netlfix Nuclear 3D and you watch it, I am sorry, but your childhood was a lie. :) Caveat videtor! Viewer be warned!

Day 3 " The Girl that Played with Fire"

“Have you read the book? Its great!”

“I love that book, I can’t wait to see the movie!”

I am sure you all have heard this before. There are a crap-ton of movies that started out as books; from the Watchmen, to Hunt for Red October, to just about any Grimms Brother story turned Disney movie. Now, I just have one question . Are any of them good? Well, I ‘m sure you are thinking to yourself, “Lord of the Rings is a good one!” Yet, I know people who read “Lord of the Rings,” who say “Nay”. Directors always have to leave stuff from the book out, and most of the time that takes away from the movie. The movie, lacking that extra detail. Now, they can’t make six hour movies either, so what do we do?

Recently, I watched “The Girl that Played with Fire.” If you don’t know what that is, it’s a Swedish film based on a book by Stieg Larsson. This is the second movie/book in a trilogy. The first one was “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,” which Details showed me months ago. Details has a thing for crazy, random movies. I enjoyed the first movie very much. So I thought to myself, “might as well see what crazy adventures the characters get into this time.” I have to say, I thought this film was good, but nowhere near a good as the first. Maybe the story was not as interesting, or the film was not paced as well, but it just lacked the intrigue of the first. Now I can hear someone chime in, “they left so much out, you should read the book!” Well, then why the heck do they even make the movies, if they are leaving the good stuff out!
My next thought is, do I really want to read the books? I have already seen the movies, I can’t un-see them. I feel like these movie are good, but it’s what I call “a one-time watcher.” The subject matter is very graphic, and was hard to even watch that. I can, however, recognize the quality of the story and production. Just thinking about reading the books, where things are literally spelled out and gone into more detail, makes me want to hurt myself. I will be watching the third movie, “The Girl that Kicked the Hornet’s Nest,” as it was added to Netflix recently. Gotta know how it all ends! The subject matter is graphic, and if that doesn’t bother you, watch it!