Drive

It seems that these days, the only way you are going to get an artfully-made movie is if it is an independent one. With directors like Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich, who are just shelling out mindless swill, it’s refreshing (and kind of shocking) to see a movie with so much intensity and thoughtfulness. Such a real world in the film “Drive” is created, that you are actually shocked when people are killed. Crazy, I know.

There are very few movies that make you feel as uncomfortable as the film “Drive” does. The first 40 minutes are very slow moving with an emotional setup. It is a mixture of slow camera movements and lingering shots of intensity. Even the music of the film, while beautiful, is meant to make you feel uncomfortable. You start to forget you are watching a thriller, (and you may start to feel kind of bored) but this is all part of the director’s point. The character Driver (played by Ryan Gosling) stares blankly at everyone that speaks to him, and all the while you wonder what he is really thinking.

These subtle characters, pace and music, make you relax, so that when the violence starts, you are shocked by its graphic nature. When Driver starts to care for his neighbor Irene (played by Carey Mulligan) he gets involved in deeper issues than he was bargaining for. There is no end to what he will do to keep her safe. There seems to be a interesting feel throughout the movie put forth by shots of Ryan Gosling as seen through reflective surfaces, car mirrors, windows and shadows. This is interesting film-making that most movie goers won’t notice. I enjoyed this film for its depth in areas, and simplicity others. All the answers will not be given, leaving you wanting more.

This film has the feel of David Cronenberg’s “A History of Violence”, and “Eastern Promises.” If you like those films with their level of realism, you will enjoy this film. See it!

The Rating System:
Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 5-5 One of the more artfully crafted films I’ve seen, fantastic score.
Story (Plot) 3-5 Felt a little like “ The transporter” at times, but still interesting.
Characters (Likability, Acting) 4-5 I would have liked to known more about the character Driver
Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness) 4-5 Not much dialogue (which was the point), subtle
Emotions (Was it: Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I Care?) 5-5 You will be shocked by this one
Overall score 21-25

Fright Night

(Let’s step into the Back to the Future DeLorean) Set time circuits to 1985: I was two and wasn’t watching any movies, let alone horror movies. When I was 27(time circuits to 2010) I watched the 1985 movie “Fright Night”, because I heard it was kind of a “cult classic”. Now, it is in no way a good movie, but I enjoyed it for what it was: an 80’s campy, vampire movie. The character of Charlie is kind of a whiner, but it could be that I just don’t like the actor William Ragsdale; his voice just hurts me, as in real pain. It has its moments of awesomely bad gore though, that I really enjoyed. Back when they couldn’t CGI the crap out of everything, it was called “practical effects,” people, bring them back!
Set time circuits to 2011: wasn’t that a fun trip? They decide to remake this awesomely horrible horror comedy. Why not, its got vampires in it, and vampires are hot right now. Side note: getting kind of sick of vampires. So I saw the trailer for this flick, and it didn’t look half bad. Colin Farrell plays Jerry, the vampire (true to the original) and that awesome guy from Star Trek plays Charlie (Anton Yelchin) no more bleeding ears! David Tennant plays Peter Vincent, a mockery of the goth vampire hunter/Vegas performer partly true to the original). Hey, and they have MCLOVIN!
So how was the movie you ask? I consider that it was a great script, with believable characters. It was tons of fun, and it satisfied my gore craving. Some of the parts that they changed I enjoyed very much: the poking fun at the Vampire culture myths was fun and interesting, and they even taught us something new, not just rehashing what everyone knows about vampires. “Silver is for Werewolves” was one of my favorite lines. At its heart, however, it was still a campy vampire movie. The plot is almost exactly the same as the 1985 version, except for some little differences, so the writers didn’t put in a lot of effort, so they can focus or the good dialogue I guess. Even though I enjoyed my movie-going experience, I won’t be writing home about it. Just writing a review I guess. See it.

The Rating System:
Production ( Directing, Editing, Music): 3-5 soundtrack was good but no theme to speak of
Story ( Plot ): 2-5 it would get more if it wasn’t the same plot, because I liked it
Characters ( Likability, Acting ): 4-5 great fun here, the characters make the movie
Writing ( Dialogue, Cleverness ): 4-5 great tension is some scenes
Emotions ( Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care? ): 4-5 Laughing one minute, grossed-out the next
Overall Score: 17-25

'Battle: Los Angeles'

Almost all alien invasion movies bother me a little. In Steven Spielberg's ‘War of the Worlds’, you follow a family through their adventure: surviving an alien attack and the emotional turmoil of people getting blown to smithereens all around them. In some scenes, you see the military running to fight the aliens. Yet all I thought was “What are they doing?” and “ I want to see more of their story”. In ‘Independence Day’, you see Will Smith flying around in his fighter, attacking an alien ship. “OK, cool, we are going see some crap!’’ but not really. Instead, we see quick shots of planes getting blown up and cut-backs to the President screaming “ Get them out of there!”, like hes the only one that knows whats going on. So I always asked myself, “Can you have an Alien Invasion movie about just the military fighting the aliens, and stop with the cut-backs to the “civilians” who are emotionally involved? Well, I think this movie is trying to answer just that.

‘Battle: Los Angeles’, promises action and excitement. In reality, the majority of the movie was spent following characters who were whining in buildings, talking about their feelings.The movie starts out strong, and I love the “Tarentino” thing they did in the beginning: i.e. “lets show some awesome battle stuff, then flashback 24 hours.” Its a great way to get your audience excited for things to come, then show some character development.

As the movie started to introduce the characters, I felt more and more cheated. “Lets focus on too many characters, so you don’t care whether they die or not,” great plan. When the action finally starts again, you are happy, but when you realize it’s going to be a bunch of shaky camera shots, and can’t really make out whats going on, your brain stops caring. At least if this movie had some good action to fall back on, it would make up for the simple-minded character development and the absence of plot.

I do want to talk about some plot points that I thought were interesting, so SPOILERS for the rest of this paragraph. There is a scene where the military captures one of the aliens and they try to figure out how to kill it (they had been having trouble with that before). Well, they proceed to cut it up and torture the crap out of it . I know it’s not a real creature, and it’s “war,” but I felt like this scene was unnecessary.

MORE SPOILERS: One of the plot points is that a giant alien ship controls the other small ships. Hmm, wait, that sounds familiar. This made me very mad; it’s too easy! Why? They needed some epic thing for them to destroy at the end. Everything that involved this “control ship” bored me, which is most of the last 40 minutes. Why would an alien race make such an easy target? It doesn’t make sense. Lets make one ship that if you destroy it takes out all our ships. great plan guys. END SPOILERS

So what does this movie have to show for its self? Interesting characters? Nope. Good action? No. Original plot? Not really. I couldn’t even tell if the special effects were good because of all the shaky camera stuff. I know they are trying to be intense, and it works when its done right, but when the characters get blown up at the end, and you don’t really care, what’s the point? I think you will feel the same way I did at the end: you just want it to be over. So do you have to make a movie about the civilians for the benefit of the audience? Can I empathize with military troops? I feel like this movie had a good idea, and I was excited to see it, but it falls flat.

The Rating System

Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 2-5

Story (Plot) 2-5

Characters (Likability, Acting) 3-5 (for acting only)

Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness) 2-5

Emotions (Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care)1-5

Overall score 10-25

'The Adjustment Bureau'

Who is in charge of our fate? What is point? Where are we going? When will they make a movie explaining this? Why am I writing this review!? These questions have plagued me for years. Do we have a fate? Is it all random and we make the decisions? I have gotten into many arguments with people that think its both. For the longest time I believed it was either one or the other. Some all knowing “thing” has a plan for all of us, well that’s nice. The flip side there is no one looking out for us, we make our own way. While the ladder is more bleak, people could see that one as more empowering. “I decided what happens to me”. People like to think both apply, they want the best of both worlds. To be honest not knowing one or the other kind of frustrated me. I would just like to know either way.

‘The Adjustment Bureau’ dives right into all these questions. I was worried going into this movie, I have obvious feelings on the subject. I am please to say the questions and answers in this movie are done very well. They talk about all the thoughts I’ve had on the subject of fate and destiny. First off, Matt Damon and Emily Blunt are really good in this movie. They probably won’t be winning any awards, but I found them likeable and believable. I found myself hoping they would succeed and surprised by the characters depths. Some of my favorite scenes in the movie are just Matt and Emily’s characters having conversations that have nothing to do with the movie’s plot.
Now ‘The Adjustment Bureau’ didn’t answer any questions for me, about my own fate, but when I left the theater I felt hopeful and satisfied (although, parts of the movie felt a little heavy handed.) Any time they mention the “chairman” I rolled my eyes. But for the most part the idea of someone watching over you was done very well. It could have easily felt too religious or preachy, but it surprised me how subtle they made it. I hope you will enjoy this movie as much as I did.

The Rating System
Production ( Directing, Editing, Music) 3-5
Story ( Plot)4-5
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

"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