Moneyball review

I like to use the term “football movie” to describe a film that is just supposed to be fun. An actual “football movie” is just that; it’s a sports film with not a lot of substance to it, just good, clean movie fun. These in no way have to be sports films, but that’s why I gave them the name. Most sports films are this way: not much depth, with actors playing sports stars, battling against the odds. The underdog story is huge in these “football films. “We can beat the bad guys!” (i.e. the other team.) This is what I was hoping for when I rented Moneyball.

I think Moneyball is a case of skewed expectations. I thought it was going to be an inspirational, fun “ football movie” without much depth. Let’s say it did not meet those expectations. Moneyball is not really inspirational, nor fun, with too much depth. Is this really what we want from out sports films? I feel conflicted; I wanted awesome fun, and instead I got real life sports intrigue. This film is very well made and has good actors in it, but besides the occasional bit of cleverness, it’s pretty boring for the most part.

When I saw that this movie was nominated for Best Picture, all I could think of was “why?” Does being a boring film about sports make you Oscar worthy? The actors are for the most part good, but they really don’t have the blow-away performance that I would expect form a movie nominated for Best Picture. Their performances seem flat and you never really feel for the characters. It is a good film, but no way deserves the Best Picture nod. You never get too deep into the characters’ motivations, or spend to much time getting to them. I think they spend too much time getting to the point. It’s based on a true story, so maybe they just did they best they could with the material they have.
I could be coming at this all wrong - I was looking for fun and got interesting. the concepts they bring up are interesting. But not enough to get me to watch it again, or think it’s worth a recommendation. This film brings to mind Oliver Stone’s Any Given Sunday. That film was awful, and is in no way comparable to this film, except one. A sports film that is serious, and real, is not as exciting as actually watching baseball.

The Rating System
Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 3-5
Story (Plot) 3-5
Characters (Likability, Acting) 4-5
Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness) 4-5
Emotions (Was it: Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care) 2-5
Overall Score 16-25

Midnight In paris

I can’t that say I “LIKE” any Woody Allen movie. They all seem to be kind of “meh” movies for me. The guy has been making movies for years, and none of them really jump out at me or are memorable. I had to IMDB him to remind myself of what movies he had made, especially the ones that he himself acted in. They all seem to have a similar scene; what I like to call the “whiny-rambling-on-and-on scene”. It seems that he takes any opportunity he can in his films to gripe publicly. He himself does this constantly, but he can’t help but make his actors do these scenes also. Maybe I can’t enjoy his movies, because I am waiting for the inevitable annoyance that will take me right out of the movie.

This, however, was not the case with Midnight in Paris. I can say today, I am a Woody Allen fan. I forget who told me this movie was good, but I rented it on a whim. I was pleasantly surprised by this one. It takes place in Paris, obviously, and Owen Wilson plays Gil, an aspiring writer, traveling with his pain in the ass fiance, played by Rachel McAdams. I really enjoyed disliking her in this movie. Rachel McAdams is one of the more like-able people in film, and for her to be so unlikeable in this movie, I thought she was fantastic. Honestly, Owen Wilson was replaceable in this role, . It is an Interesting character study though; Owen Wilson feels like he belongs in the past, wishing he was in Paris in the 1920’s. WISH GRANTED!

He begins these misadventures every midnight, traveling back in time. He meets Ernest Hemingway, Zelda and F. Scott Fitzgerald, on his first night back. Corey Stall plays Ernest Hemingway, which was the most hilarious person in this film. His lines were delivered perfectly, and always got a chuckle out of me. His utter intensity was glorious. Such exchanges as, Gil: I would like you to read my novel and get your opinion. Hemingway: I hate it. Gil: You haven't even read it yet. Hemingway: If it's bad, I'll hate it. If it's good, then I'll be envious and hate it even more. You don't want the opinion of another writer. and Ernest Hemingway: Yes. It was a good book because it was an honest book, and that's what war does to men. And there's nothing fine and noble about dying in the mud unless you die gracefully. And then it's not only noble but brave.

This movie seems to be the least “Woody-Allen” Woody Allen movie. Maybe that’s why I enjoyed it so much. the moral of the movie seems to be “enjoy the time your in, and stop living in the past, or wishing you were somewhere else.” Which played to my optimistic manner. It really got me hopeful about life and perspectives. Just good, clean, feel-good film making. You could really tell that everyone enjoyed making this movie and it translated to their performances. Woody Allen really loves Paris; the way he can show the romance of it. It’s one of the few cities in the world that has it’s own Identity, which was full of spender and wonderment. Man this review is getting me all pumped!

The Rating System
Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 4-5
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 19-25

"Attack the Block"

So all the Blockbusters are dieing. They are being killed off by a giant red food dispenser filled with DVDs. Who thought this would change how people rented movies? turns out people are getting lazier and lazier. “ I don’t have to talk to anyone and a machine spits movies at me, awesome”. No overhead, you don’t need to pay any employees to ignore your costumers, so you can charge $1.20 per movie. Brilliant, So I used one of these devices to rent “Attack the Block”

So I knew very little about this movie, before I rented. I knew it had Nick frost in it, ( Shawn of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) and I knew it had something to do with aliens. Is that enough for you to get a movie a chance? Well it was for me. I was surprised that Red Box had this movie, seeing that Red Box only carries the new popular releases.
So this movie takes place in London, in the slums, centering around a group of teenage criminals. I say Criminals, because the opening scene starts out with them robbing a woman at Knife point. I the middle of all this commotion, an alien falls from the sky and the crazy-ness begins. No this I am sure sounds silly. The way the aliens are portrayed is in no way silly or not believable. From here, you start to get to know the Characters, through pithy dialogue, that can be sometimes hard to follow, being English slang. This is really where this movie shines. It is very few, “Monster movies” that make you care about the characters, and are disappointed, when they die or get hurt. Spoiler alert!, sorry, duh it’s a monster movie some one is going to die.
Attack the block is in many ways like Cloverfield, or Super 8, focusing more on the people responding to the crazy, IE the monster, the aliens, then “ hey look what we can do with Special effects!” The characters actually change, and have an arc. Which movies like this are not known for. Probably one of the more fun movies I have seen in years. I enjoyed this movie very much, and kept it an extra day to show my Roommate. thank you Red Box you get $2.40 out of me
The Rating System
Production ( Directing, Editing, Music) 4-5
Story ( Plot)3-5
Characters ( Likability, Acting)4-5
Writing ( Dialogue, Cleverness)4-5
Emotions ( Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care)5-5
Over all score 20-25