Critical Film Condition

I just LOVE watching movies that get bashed by critics and, as a shameful consequence, by audiences, for two reasons: the hype is low AND I hope to understand something nobody else didn’t. “All About Steve” isn’t one of those movies. It isn’t nearly as bad as the media made it out to be, but it isn’t much more than a Sunday afternoon slapstick romedy, but it never aims to be either.

Sandra Bullock is getting bashed for it, but this is just the result of the movie being released the same year as “The Blind Side”, which is supposed to be the best role of her career. Bradley Cooper wouldn’t have bothered about it either, but his recent run of good roles and the impending release of “The A-Team” and the huge success of “The Hangover” made him noticeable enough to be bashed by this as well… People take life way too seriously.

If the story were relevant, it would be about a girl (Bullock) stalking a news camera-man (Cooper) along the road and, well… Girl meets boy, boy doesn’t want girl, girl doesn’t quite get it because she’s a supersmart talking encyclopedia freak. It’s neat and sometimes even unexpected.

Supporting the cast is Thomas Haden Church, who seems to be having loads of fun, which brought me to thinking: it seems that everyone is having fun. Bullock looks incredibly stupid, as does Cooper, and I kept asking myself if both didn’t owe a studio-head a movie in their contracts, and that might still be the case… But nonetheless, I always got the feeling that it was a relaxed shoot where everyone was just going nuts with their characters, and this may be the reason that I didn’t end up hating “All About Steve”… It was just fun for everybody.

Popularity: 1%

Where is this world going to if having fun in a movie theater has become something that’s frowned upon?

I am not talking specifically about “Avatar”… I mean, come on, the movie has more positive reviews than anything released lately and it shattered the box office last weekend, so James Cameron is not losing any sleep over the people complaining about the movie.

But here are the facts: as a screenwriter I must say that from the hype I was expecting some big plot twist, some fantastic revelation or something like that. “Avatar” has a predictable, linear and shallow script, and after sitting through the first five minutes, I realized that it was exactly what I liked most about the movie. YES, I love it when a movie challenges me, makes me question my ethics, but I also agree that the 80’s were the best times to sit in a movie theater, eating loads of popcorn and having FUN… It seems that there’s a growing tendency in world cinema to say that anything that doesn’t have depth is BAAAAD. Come on, people! Movies are entertainment, among other things, and James Cameron has the balls to spend a shitload of money in an experience that will make you cry, laugh and feel excited throughout two and a half hours of the greatest entertainment spectacle of the last decade.

Sure, the script is predictable… And before any script-doctor wanna-bes say something, let me shut you up by saying that it features great character development, very precise payoffs for its plot points, interesting (and deep) characters and a villain that will remain as one of the most bad-ass in recent memory. Jake Sully, the hero, is as complex as it gets, and the quick establishment of his personality is one of the many winning aspects of “Avatar”.

If I really wanted to (but don’t) I could tell you how great the acting is, how amazing the effects are and all that. I am sure you read it from other critics out there… The fact is that “Avatar” is the most fun I remember having in a movie theater recently… Me and my friends cheered, some of them cried, everybody laughed and after 160 minutes, I complained that the movie might have been a little short.

Movie of the year? Probably not… I would call it the coolest movie since “Terminator 2″. In any case, do yourself a favor: watch it (if you haven’t yet), and watch it in 3D. It is the first movie in the format that I truly enjoyed watching.

Popularity: 1%

When the first trailer for “Pandorum” came out, I couldn’t help but think it was one of the many “Event Horizon” wanna-bes that tried to blend horror with Sci-Fi with little budget. It was both its geatest flaw and its greatest triumph from a marketing point of view, because while it sold the movie as horror Sci-Fi with cheap production values and ideas and visual styles stolen from many other movies (aside from “Horizon”, “Dark City”, “Dead Space”), it ended up being much much more than that, with the horror elements just adding to the fun factor of what is otherwise a smart and very complex plot centered movie.

The main reason why I liked “Pandorum” so much is because it surprised me in a sense that it marketed itself as something that had been done a thousand times before and ended up being something else entirely.

The overall development of the plot, the reason for the monsters to be in the ship, the conclusion and more importantly the CLIMAX are astonishingly satisfactory. Screenwriter Travis Milloy has come close to what I consider a holy grail among futuristic horror movies, which is finding a conclusion that doesn’t rely on being overly dramatic by thinking it is cool to kill everyone, but doesn’t go the opposite way trying to please all the kids in the audience. What’s even cooler is that by saying this I am not spoiling anything from the movie.

Christian Alvart directs the movie with enough skill to make bigger flaws unnoticeable, and the cast drives it convincingly. Ben Foster gives a powerful performance, which is duly deserved by the fact that his character Bower (Bauer is Builder in German) is the one that goes through the biggest development journey, from being lost and confused to having the fate of all in his hands. The other characters are interesting as well, but Bower is a winner because, while others play unique roles throughout the movie (with Dennis Quaid’s Payton being really stable, noticeable if you pay attention or watch the movie a second time), Bower transitions through many roles throughout the story until finding his definitive one shortly before the ending. It’s a really well-written character from a screenwriting point of view.

The verdict? “Pandorum” is anything but new in the visual department, but the smartly developed plot and strong acting from the entire cast make it an absolute winner for those intrigued by just what the hell is going on in the ship Elysium. Amazingly, the screenwriter managed to tie up all loose ends and if you doubt the consistency of the plot, it is definitely worth a second viewing.

Dont miss this one.

Popularity: 1%

Bad marketing is a bitch… “State of Play” didn’t interest me at all because of its lackluster trailers and under-informative marketing campaign and after the first two seconds, when I noticed that this was the movie for the Sneak Preview yesterday, I yawned…

I was in for a little treat, though, because “State of Play” is a nice little flick that fails to be more due to some flaws that are a little too big to go by unnoticed. As usual, movies are movies, and I’ve never even seen an episode of the original TV Series, so this review has nothing to do with it.

One of the things that made me leave this one to the side (especially in the beginning of the blockbuster season) was the fact that it looked like just another one of the millions of conspiracy theory movies (one even CALLED “Conspiracy Theory”) that we already have had thrown at us. Russel Crowe plays a journalist in Washington D.C. who researches on two seemingly unconnected deaths, one of them related to a congressman who happens to be a college buddy of his. I know, YAWN… But that is exactly where “State of Play” stands out: instead of giving out the same bullshit of “small man vs. the system” we’ve seen over and over again, this movie centers its attention on the personal relationship between a journalist and a politician, who are often portrayed as greatest enemies. It is in the development of this relationship and the dilemma of ethics and friendship that “State of Play” could have been a really GREAT movie…

But, as I said before, too many a great mistakes remove this movie from a listing of great thrillers, being the first one Ben Affleck. Due to a bumpy road to development, that involved the WGA strike and replacement of the main actors, Affleck was called in late in pre-production and, even leaving aside the age difference that makes the plot point of them being college buddies gullible, him and Crowe have absolutely no chemistry. Crowe is brilliant at Cal McAffrey, playing a charismatic, ambitious reporter, but the thought of pretty-face Affleck as a congressman is just laughable, and he plays it that way. Supporting roles include a convincing, but maybe too immature Rachel McAdams as McAffrey’s assistant and Helen Mirren’s brilliant portrayal of the moody editor with a big heart. Robin Wright-Penn is there too, but like me, you will forget about that five minutes after you leave the theatre.

Acting (or unbalanced acting) aside, it’s in the screenplay that “State of Play” really falls short. I was caught by surprise in the beginning, but after a big development point in the first half-hour, the movie loses all its steam, taking a few chances here and there to set it back on a fast-paced track, but oftentimes just leaving us wishing for more. And to convince us that this movie is about the interpersonal relationship rather than the conspiracy itself, it tries to add too many plot points in the end, making us wish it was over already when it should. It has such a distinct characteristic of lazy, insecure rewriting, that one of the biggest of these plot-points just stays open, and I mean plot-hole… NO, CRATER style. A surprisingly well cut and shot sequence of Crowe writing the final story is a respectful homage to journalism, but even that doesn’t take away the bitter taste of having bullshit being thrown at you for the last twenty minutes, but that’s life.

[starreviewmulti id=1]

Popularity: 8%

Funny as hell!!!

There is a perfect movie for every season. The last ones I watched were: “The Ice Harvest” for Christmas, “Turn your head and cough – Army Physicals Revisited” for Valentine’s Day (just kidding!) and “The Life of Brian” for Easter. This year however, there is another strong contender for the holy holidays: “Religulous”.

“Religulous” is a documentary written by and starring Bill Maher, a well-known American stand-up comedian, television host and author, famous for his political satire and sociopolitical commentary. Currently he is the host of HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher”.

“Religulous” is directed by Larry Charles (formerly known for “Borat”, “Entourage” and “Curb your enthusiasm”). If you have ever made the second-hand acquaintance of either one, be it on TV or on the big screen, you should pretty much know what to expect. Maher stated he used a fake title for the film to obtain interviews: “We never, ever, used my name. We never told anybody it was me who was going to do the interviews. We even had a fake title for the film. We called it ‘A Spiritual Journey.’ It didn’t work everywhere. We went to Salt Lake City, but no one would let us film there at all”.

“Religulous” (religion/ridiculous) examines and satirizes organized religion and religious belief. And religion is probably the touchiest subject on the market right now and you have to give Maher and Charles credit for tackling it at all. Maher says: “Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don’t have all the answers to think that they do. Most people would think it’s wonderful when someone says, ‘I’m willing Lord, I’ll do whatever you want me to do.’ Except that since there are no gods actually talking to us, that void is filled in by people with their own corruptions and limitations and agendas”. To me this makes sense, simply because the number of crimes committed in the name of God is ridiculously gigantic and human defense mechanisms are designed to trick you like that, but to a large number of this planet’s population, it is more of a war cry (sorry to drag Freud into this).

Bill Maher, who has a Jewish-Catholic background, goes on a worldwide quest (to such exotic locations as Jerusalem, the Vatican and Salt Lake City) to prove that faith is irrational by definition, religion is pretty ridiculous and may be due to a neurotic disorder.

And since the number of non-believers or rationalists, as he refers to them, is increasing in North America and is therefore grossly underrepresented, he sets out asking probing questions about faith. And here lies the problem, because faith and probing questions just don’t mix, because religion is fear-based (and fear is the greatest motivator of all, not love or money). I was able to watch this movie appreciating the satire without fearing that one or all four of the riders of the apocalypse will suddenly come crashing through the screen.

Watching Maher I always have to remind myself that he waltzes a very fine line between commentary and entertainment (kinda like Jack Nicholson in “One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest”), with varying results. I have to remind myself that he is info-taining. And though this movie in very entertaining and thought-provoking (thank you!), I have a problem with it when it gets preachy. I agree with a lot of the things he says, but punchlines are just band-aids. It becomes very evident in the clever but bordering on cocky editing.

Maher visits a garden variety of people, interviewing believers from a variety of backgrounds and groups, including Muslims, former Mormons and Hasidic Jews, scientists, gays and atheists. He travels to Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park, London and preaches Scientology beliefs. He interviews a former Satanist at the “Truckers Chapel” in Raleigh, North Carolina. He talks to Steve Burg, a former missionary with Jews for Jesus, on personal miracles, though he has trouble recalling any of them. Mark Pryor, a Democratic US Senator from Arkansas with THE quote: “You don’t have to pass an IQ test to be in the Senate”. He comes across various tourists and employees, including an actor who plays Jesus, at the Holy Land Experience in Orlando, Florida and the proprietors of “Habibi Ana”, a Muslim gay bar. And saves a man from burning his hair at the Cannabis Ministry. And the list goes on and on. It certainly left me with more questions that before and I am a very, very confused person when it comes to religion. I think it does not have a monopoly on truth or beauty and certainly not morals and I know I am lucky to be able to feely choose not to believe.

“Religulous” is the highest grossing documentary of 2008, but wasn’t nominated for an Oscar, which Bill Maher mentioned during presenting the Oscar for “Best Documentary”.

Overall I totally agree with Film critic Roger Ebert who said: “You may very well hate it, but at least you’ve been informed. Perhaps you could enjoy the material about other religions, and tune out when yours is being discussed. That’s only human nature.”

If Maher is going to hell, everyone this amused is going with him. See you there!

[starreviewmulti id=1]

Popularity: 10%

Since we went to see Kevin James at the Brandenburg Gate, we feel the need to follow up on this. We were glad to hear that Kevin James made it out of Berlin alive. His press tour was a big hit and everyone loved him here.

We’ll leave it to Kevin James himself to tell you all about the movie. Also, there is some funny behind the scenes stuff we thought you might enjoy. This one is surprisingly funny, another light-hearted comedy from the folks at Happy Madison (no plot, no problem!). They make us, well, happy.

This is James’ first stand-alone starring role and he definitely stays in his comfort zone and does what he does best. He reminded me a little of John Candy. Like in his popular sit-com “The King of Queens”, this character is slightly cheesy, but good-hearted and very likeable. Obviously sporting a great sense of humor, however missing some stamina.

And speaking of sport, Kevin James did all of his own stunts. And there is some serious physical stuff in this. So, respect! James’ brother Gary Valentine (who also starred in “The King of Queens”) has a great cameo as a Karaoke Singer. Favorite quote: When are you gonna give up, Blart? – I’ll meet you on the corner of “NE” and “VER”!

Release dates (may be subject to change):

USA 16 January 2009

UK 20 March 2009

Germany 26 March 2009

[starreviewmulti id=1]

Popularity: 8%

This is an easy movie to review, mainly because in all it’s promise of complexity, “Duplicity” is just a funny romantic comedy with some twists along the way, but nothing that will leave the audience flabergasted (did I spell that right?).

Julia Roberts and Clive Owen play retired secret agents who plot to use their skills to steal a secret product from a cosmetics company to sell the patent and make millions. One works for one company, owned by Tom Wilkinson’s character, and the other one works for Paul Giamatti.

Acting-wise, it excells, not due to its main stars, but because Giamatti and Wilkinson are a joy to watch. Roberts looks amazingly hot in her forties, and convincingly out-stages Clive Owen, who just does a decent job as the man who holds the remote at home, but gets the wife to chose the channel. But Paul Giamatti, who takes serious roles into sky-high acting nirvana, got a laugh from the whole audience when he was on screen. And Tom Wilkinson, who I am a personal fan, is the silent assassin with very limited screen time.

But the problem with “Duplicity” is that it is just fun. With a premise such as this, there was much more ground to explore than the simple, often-times predictable twists revealed through cheap flash-backs every single fucking time. I have what I have come to call a screenwriting curse: for a long time, no movie except “Watchmen” had a plot-twist that got me jumping from my seat, screaming hurray to the screenwriter. But in “Duplicity”, the whole audience was waiting for that moment, and it never came. The twist at the end might be surprising to some, but it still left me unhappy with how the plot developed.

And this doesn’t mean that “Duplicity” is a bad movie. It’s just that while pretending to be a “Romantic Spy Comedy”, it forgets the spy part and becomes something that Nancy Myers could have done with the same acting tallent. It is fun to see Roberts’ character take the wheel and make Owen’s feel like a dog on a leash (especially if you’re American and love the parallel between CIA and MI6), but, probably from the fear of overly confusing the audience, it stays at that.

[starreviewmulti id=1]

Release dates: USA & UK: March 20th, Germany: April 30th

Kristie’s take:

I like movies that have a sense of humor about themselves. And that is clearly what sold it to me – aside from the cast and the acting. The ubiquitous Tom Wilkinson and the unerring Paul Giamatti are a pleasure to watch and the chemistry between Clive Owen and the simply stunning-looking Julia Roberts works well. Writer/director Tony Gilroy has the whole “Balance of Power” thing down and though it does translate well into romance, though the rest of the story falls a little flat. But this is mainly a romance and a spy movie only by force of circumstance. And sometimes you just have to prioritize: Jason Bourne’s love interest just gets killed to he can brood and avenge – end of love story, start of major kick-ass retribution. In “Duplicity” two agents meet, sparks fly and then everyone plays everyone. And I like the fact that we are dealing with industrial espionage, hence the crappy sunglasses and bad accents. And my guess is that no self-respecting agent would wobble on cobblestone in wedges like that. (Guddy, how could you not notice those shoes!) And that is what makes it fun. It is a fortunate turn of events that Clive Owen gets to horse around playing offbeat James Bond agent characters (like in “The International” and “The Pink Panther”, etc.). It becomes him. And Julia Roberts is just a wonder: beautiful, smart and sexy.
Perfect date movie.

Popularity: 4%

This movie is what I generally like to refer to as Good Clean American Family Values Fun. Don’t get me wrong: I think that the US is the most magnificent country in the world. But I feel the need to (however gratuitously) add the disclaimer that this is an American movie, which shows due and proper regard for decency and standards promoting family values and protecting our children.

That being said, “17 again” is a generation-jumping comedy and essentially a fairy tale in the tradition of “Peggy Sue got married”, “Monkey Business”, “Big”, “13 going on 30”, “Freaky Friday”, etc. The question if you went back in time armed with the knowledge that you have now, what decisions would you alter and what would the outcome be, is one often deliberated – with varying creativity and preponderance.

The ever-present morale of „there is no place like home“ is referenced again and again ever since Toto tried to jump that cat in the Emerald Palace. Likewise “be careful what you wish for” and “be grateful for what you have”. Americans just love movies with a positive message that serve as cautionary tale and punch-line. Sadly Toto never left Kansas.

Mike O’Donnell (Zac Efron) has it all: he is a popular high school senior, headed for a basketball scholarship and is about to take the court for the big game when his beautiful girlfriend Scarlett tells him that she is pregnant. He makes a pivotal decision and gives it all up to settle down with her.

Twenty years later Mike (old Mike: Matthew Perry) is in a rut. His life did not turn out the way he expected. His is on the brink of a divorce from his wife (Leslie Mann), his kids loathe him and his career is at a dead end. He crashes with his best buddy nerd-turned-billionaire Ned (Thomas Lennon) who owns an unparalleled collection of sci-fi memorabilia.

Mike starts to wonder whether he made the right choices in life and how much better things could be if he had chosen a different path. He visits his old High School and reminisces over his past glory wishing he could do it all over again. Enter the mysterious janitor. With some movie magic, he is sucked into a time warp thingy (like in Austin Powers) and finds himself 17 again (as young Mike: Zac Ephron).

Pubescent Mike now tries to convince Ned that he is still old Mike in young Mike’s rippling body. This is resolved during a fierce Lightsaber Showdown. Seriously, I love it!

Ned gathers all the appropriate psychic, plejadian and paranormal literature and they cleverly deduce that Mike’s spirit guide, the Janitor, must have a serious learning experience planned: Mike obviously has to re-live his senior year to get the chance he thought he never had.

So far, so deep.

The faux teen enrolls back in the old High School. Mike is cool once again, preachy, but oh so dreamy. But when he meets his own children Maggie (Michelle Trachtenberg) and Alex (Sterling Knight), Mike realizes, this may not be all about him eventually.

Has Mike been taking his life for granted? Can he transform himself back and rescue his family? And can he advocate abstinence without getting his ass kicked?

Director Burr Steers and writer Jason Filardi are not trying to re-invent comedy. And that is oddly refreshing. There are a number of heavy glitches though. Matthew Perry is about 10 feet taller than Zac Ephron. And if some kid, who looked exactly like my husband suddenly showed up at my doorstep, I wouldn’t calmly touch his face in bewilderment – maybe only to snap a DNA hair sample in the process. But since this movie has some sense of humor about itself, that is forgivable. Overall this looks like it was made with affection & care. It is solid, light-hearted entertainment, no matter how illogical.

Thomas Lennon as Mike’s nerdy friend is an absolute scene-stealer. Fantastic. And when he starts to put the moves on Principal Jane Masterson (played by Melora Hardin) the sparks just fly (and not just from the Lightsabers!).

Some might not be familiar with Zac Ephron, the phenomenon. He starred in the High School Musical trilogy (which I am boycotting, yes, the Vatican isn’t the only one who can boycott movies!) and as the loveable Link Larkin in Hairspray (2007). Or maybe as that guy dancing next to Beyonce and Wolverine at the Oscars. He will irrevocably launch his movie career with this and God knows where in the stratosphere it will take him. He is acting a little too overzealous for my taste, but who can blame him after all those musicals, really. It will be interesting to see which road he is headed for: Leo DiCaprio, Ricky Martin or Danny Bonaduce.

Also, I know that Basketball isn’t the first sport that comes to mind when you see this guy. But the way that Ephron twirls those basketballs is utterly impressive. And I respectfully mean that as a compliment. Impressive.

I noticed that the 6pack shot of Zac Ephron’s upper body from the trailer was missing in the movie. Maybe the producers were afraid to poison the children with so much suggestion of sex. Sad!

Shake the shackles, little Zac and fly! The sky is the limit.

The movie is coming out April 10^th in the UK, April 17^th in the States and May 14^th in Germany.

[starreviewmulti id=1]

Popularity: 10%