Movie of the Week: Man of Steel

    Movie of the Week (4/27/14-5/3/14): Many of you might remember this highly anticipated film from last year, several of my friends liked it a lot... but I didn't. And let me try and tell you all why Man of Steel was the most disappointing film of 2013. Like everybody else, I went into this movie expecting to be swept off of my feet with the best Superman movie ever made. I had such high hopes for this movie that I can't even explain it. I had probably the highest expectations for a movie in years. And  I expected to give this movie very high praise and a 4 Star review, but in the end I was a little let down by Zack Snyder, again. Now, I don't mean that this was a total bust because it wasn't, I still some aspects of the movie, but not near as much as I thought I would, and there were several things that let me down.
    We all pretty much know the story of Superman and his origin, and that is what this film was about, just a re-imagining of it, so I'm not going to go into details on the plot. First, I'm going to tell you what hurt the movie. So, first was the pacing, the movie is told in flashbacks several times, but you're never confused because you can tell which scenes were flashbacks. What hurt the film with the flashbacks was that many of them didn't seem to fit in place during the film when we go back in time, they hurt the pacing. A couple times in the first 45 minutes to an hour I found myself a little bored, hoping it would start to pick up. The flashbacks hurt the film the most and a I think it would have been better if it was told chronologically with maybe a couple flashbacks.
    The next things are how we find out something and how they used Lois Lane, played by Amy Adams. Again, this is an origin story and those can be hard to tell, but some thing's we find out in the first half of the movie didn't seem to make much sense. I found myself asking "how did he get there to find that particular object?" The film was jumpy at times when it came to those aspects. Next, is Lois Lane, I didn't think she was used very well because she just shows up in a helicopter at a location, that I'm not going to tell you, and meets Clark there and then something bad happens. After that she goes on a search to find out more about this man she met, which is just a couple minutes of short cut scenes, not much explanation. Oh, and apparently Lois Lane can walk on the ledge of an icy cliff with no climbing gear or ropes. And Amy Adams overall didn't seem like a very good Lois Lane, and I like Amy Adams, but I never felt she embraced the role as good as she could have.
    However, that being said there were still things that I did enjoy about the film. The first was the acting of Kevin Costner, Diane Lane, Russell Crowe, and Michael Shannon. All of these actors really did a fantastic job, they probably saved the film from being terrible. Kevin Costner and Diane Lane both give us heartwarming performances as Jonathan Kent and Martha Kent respectively, one scene in particular that I did like involved Jonathan saving people from an oncoming tornado, which was very good. Russell Crowe gives us another very good performance as Superman's father, Jor-El, we see him several times throughout the film alive and after the fact. Now he's no Marlon Brando, but I really did enjoy his take as Jor-El. Finally we have Michael Shannon as General Zod, who really stole the screen, I thought he was the best in the film and the best actor the play Zod. A great and frightening performance from Michael Shannon.
    The other thing that helped this film out were the Visual Effects and the fight scenes, which all take place in the last 45 minutes or so, except the opening scene. This is a beautiful film when it comes to the Visual Effects, of course that is what Zack Snyder is known for in his other movies, 300 and Watchmen, although the latter was not a good movie. The first scene takes place on Krypton, which is a new take on it and it is Visually brilliant. Once Zod attacks Earth the effects really come into play and take over the movie, but I believe for the good. Obviously the effects help with the fight scenes, which are also fun and exciting at times, maybe a little much in some parts because one keeps going and going, just tearing up building after building with a lot of camera movement. But overall, good effects and fight scenes.
    In the end this was not quite the Superman movie we wanted to see and I believe with better editing it might have been better, the pacing was the big thing that hurt the film and the character development with Amy Adam's Lois Lane, and Superman. I really wanted this film to join the 4 Star ranks of superhero movies such as the 1978 movie Superman: The Movie, Spiderman 2, The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, if you consider Batman a "Superhero", The Avengers, and the latest superhero movie Captain America: The Winter Soldier, but it failed to do that. I know it was a new origin story and those are hard to tell sometimes, but this really could have been a lot better with a better script, and director. With Snyder coming back for Batman vs. Superman and the newly announced Justice League movie, I'm afraid we will have the same problem with those.
    When I first posted a review of this film last year I gave it three stars, but once I watched it again I realized how much I disliked it. With it's bad writing and storytelling over shadowing everything else, like the great acting from much of the cast, good visuals, and fight scenes this film is a complete letdown. Plus, Zack Snyder's style of directing is just not good for this kind of movie, his one good movie, 300, made him a star and unless he blows me away with his next film, he will continue to disappoint. I almost hate to to say this, but Superman Returns is a much better film than this one. And let's face it, I missed the original Superman theme by John Williams, although Hans Zimmer's was good, just not as good and we needed that uplifting score several times in this movie.                 
2/4 Stars.  

Movie of the Week: The Passion of the Christ

    Movie of the Week (4/20/14-4/26/14): I usually don't make a movie a Movie of the Week twice, but I think I might start a tradition with this movie on Easter. So, today is Easter and we all know the meaning of this holiday because it has been told to us throughout our lives, have seen it on film, an of course have read it in The Bible. There are many films that have been about or have been centered around this moment in history. But, the one that describes and shows it in the most graphic of detail is The Passion of the Christ from writer and director Mel Gibson. However, this film is not a biography like many other films about Jesus are, it is about the last twelve hours of his life, but it is not told in chronological order.
    From the opening scene we are really hooked into this powerful drama as Jesus is tempted by Satan in a scene titled "Agony in the Garden." In this opening sequence, which spans the first fifteen minutes, Jesus prays, is tempted, betrayed, and then arrested. With this much drama going on in the opening minutes it is really hard not to turn away. From the opening scene on we are taken on a graphic journey of the last hours of Jesus' life including the disturbing, and infamous, Crucifixion scenes.
    The telling of this well known story is done by virtually unknown actors. The only known actors are Jim Caviezel as Jesus and Monica Bellucci who plays Magdalen. The rest of the cast is unknown to most people, but that does not mean that the acting is not good. Caviezel gives a wonderful performance as he was forced to show so much emotion in his role, during the torture scenes, and does it very well. Monica Bellucci also gives us a fine performance as she also expresses an unbelievable amount of sadness. Just because I only mention these two actors does not mean that the rest of the cast did not do a great job because they did. This is a movie full of great performances from many small roles that makes the movie that much more powerful to watch.
    Although this story is well known it did have to be written into a screenplay. Mel Gibson and Benedict Fitzgerald wrote a great screenplay that converses well with all the Gospels. They mix up a few things from each of the Gospels and put it into one movie and it really mixes well together, although some historians criticized it for being inaccurate. Gibson himself also directed this picture and another great job he did.  
    Gibson depicts the crucifixion of Jesus in a very graphic manner, so graphic in fact that many viewers cannot watch the film, although it does have a re-cut version out, but it is still rated R. But he chose to depict it this way to show as much detail as he possibly could, to show the real amount of pain that Jesus went through. Back in that time there were a few different ways of crucifixion and Jesus got the worse kind and it was very common then too. However it does show the nails going through his hands, when they actually went through his wrists. Along with making the film very bloody and graphic, Gibson also chose to shoot the film in Latin and Aramaic dialects with English subtitles, which gives the film more realism I believe. So, you have to read a lot during the movie.
    The score of the film, by John Debney, is also very powerful in many ways and is used very well throughout the film whether it be times when it does need music or times when it does not. It is used wonderfully at the end I might add. Simply put, this film is a great film, although it is number one on the list of the most controversial movies of all time. We see the crucifixion of Jesus in graphic detail with flashbacks of scenes like when Jesus was a young boy, the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus teaching the Twelve Apostles, and the Last Supper. All of which are mixed in well and fit the timing when we see them. This is a very well done, beautifully shot, scored, written, directed, and emotional film with a very powerful ending that well not be forgotten anytime soon.
3.5/4 Stars

Movie of the Week: Phone Booth

   

    Movie of the Week (4/13/14-4/19/14): I missed last week in doing a movie of the week, but I had a few things going on at the beginning of the week and then I just forgot. But, we are back this week with a movie that, I'm willing to bet, most of you have not heard of. I say that because this film is not talked about a lot when Colin Farrell's career is brought up. I don't know why that is because to me it is one of his best acting credentials. Although there is not a ton of plot to the film and it all takes place in pretty much one spot, it will keep you entertained for the short one hour and twenty minute run-time. This is, Phone Booth.
    As I said there is not a lot of plot to this movie but it is fun. We focus on a New York publicist, who likes to talk and lie, a lot, when one day he goes on his regular routine to a phone booth to call his mistress. Once he hangs up the phone rings, he answers it, then his life changes. He is told that if he hangs up he will be shot, he doesn't believe him, then he hears the sound of a bolt-action rifle. He is then put to the test of telling the truth, but he has some obstacles to face, like desperate people needing to use the phone. Attention of the situation soon escalates when the police arrive, as does his wife and mistress.Will he tell the truth about his life or will he avoid it and die saving his own skin?
    What I liked about this movie was the acting from Colin Farrell, who plays Stu Shepard, as I said this is one of his best acting performances considering all he is doing is talking on a phone. But, I was truly convinced that he was scared for his life many times and I really enjoyed his performance. Also, even though you only see him once, Kiefer Sutherland's voice acting was very good, he's the guy on the phone, the relaxation in his voice tells us that he enjoyed the role as a villain that you don't ever see. But, his voice is the villain in this movie and it sometimes gives you chills by how he says things. Forest Whitaker was also very good as a Captain who really has no idea what is going on, like everybody else, and is trying to figure out why this is happening.
    Another thing I enjoyed about this movie is that the villain always has the upper hand, throughout the whole movie he is holding the strings and can decide which ones he wants to cut. Larry Cohen wrote a very good script with some great dialogue that always has a twist on it that gives the villain the upper hand and keeps you guessing on how they will get out of this situation. There is also some fancy editing several times and good cinematography that gives it a very realistic feel to it. Joel Schumacher impressed me too with his good direction that also gives the film an upper hand that it might not have had, but then again I guess anything is a step up from Batman and Robin. Again, there is not much plot here, but we have great dialogue going on from a good script, Colin Farrell at his finest, a haunting voice performance from Kiefer Sutherland, and surprisingly good direction from Joel Schumacher. This is a thriller that will keep you glued to the TV.
3/4 Stars.            

Movie of the Week: The Social Network

   

    Movie of the Week (3/30/14-4/5/14): Many of you clicked on a link from Facebook to see this review, well without the story in our movie of the week this week, we would not have a Facebook. You already know the movie of the week, but without Mark Zuckerberg and his story Facebook would never exist. So, that is what we have here, a story of a young man who appeared to have made enemies out of his friends because he wanted something all to himself in, The Social Network.  
    Social Networking, it's what most people do everyday now, we have Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and the grand daddy of them all, Facebook. Now, Facebook might not have been the first social networking site, but it took it and made it bigger and better. That is what we see in this movie. It all starts in a Harvard dorm room when Zuckerberg gets angry at his ex-girlfriend. He blogs for hours over how he feels about her, gossip, which is what he see a lot today on Facebook. With some inspiration of twins, he takes this and begins building a site for people to get to know each each other on campus. It soon makes its way all the way to California where a man named Sean Parker wants to take it to a whole new level.
    The cast in this movie is very young with barely any veteran actors, but that didn't stop them from doing the best jobs of their lives so far. First, we have Jesse Eisenberg, who plays Mark Zuxkerberg, and he knocks it out of the park with this role. It is really hard to ever see him doing a role as good as this one again, plus he was perfect for it. As great as he was, I think my favorite performance in this film was that of Justin Timberlake, who played Sean Parker. He delivers his several monologue scenes with perfection and so much energy that I couldn't believe it was him in this role. I wish he would do more roles like this one because he was extraordinary. Armie Hammer was great too as he played the Winklevoss twins, along with Andrew Garfield, who had great character development as Eduardo Saverin.
    As great as the young cast was, they probably couldn't have done it without a veteran director in the drama genre, David Fincher. Fincher directed this film with ease and gave it his trademarked dark and eerie feeling in a place where you wouldn't thought had been in a world where Facebook was created. Where he shines is directing this young cast to performances of their lifetimes and makes it feel like a dark place where all this started. But, we couldn't have had that without the wonderful screenplay by another drama veteran, Aaron Sorkin, who put together such a great flowing film with the perfectly timed flashback or forward scenes to make this film complete. Whenever a flashback or forward occurs, it doesn't disrupted the flow of the film, in fact it adds to it. This might be the best screenplay, so far, for Aaron Sorkin.
    Since this is a drama film with a lot of dialogue, it really isn't in much need of a score throughout the majority of the picture. However, when they do use the musical score, it is used perfectly and with the score being a somber type score or a light intense score at times, it gives the film that perfect feel. We can think Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross for that short, but wonderful and breathtaking piano score. One last thing that makes this movie one of the best in 2010 was the cinematography. There are no big beautiful outdoor scenes that make this film look great, but instead it is how they used smaller sets to make it look great and give it that very realistic feel. This is a dark film in a world where you wouldn't think it would be thanks to the extraordinary direction, spot on cast, groundbreaking screenplay, simple but effective score, and beautifully done cinematography. All of those things make it the third best movie of 2010, but still stars across the board.
4/4 Stars

Movie of the Week: Pure Country

   

    Movie of the Week (3/23/14-3/29/14): I'm not sure if many of you all knew this, but back in 1992 the King of Country released himself a movie about country music. That's right George Strait filmed a movie, now as great as a musician that he is, we definitely knew that the movie would have a great soundtrack. As for King George himself, well we'll get to that in a few. This movie that he made was what you would call a "feel good" movie because it was about his character trying to find his true country roots again. And we get to watch him go to some very nice classic country places to do it in, Pure Country.
    Dusty Chandler is a huge country star with shows that will blow you away...and that's the problem. Somewhere along the line of his career Dusty lost sight of his country roots and the classic country concert. He ends up feeling lost in himself and then one day decides to up and leave to find it. He walks down the highway to his old stomping grounds, where everything started for him. He goes back to his grandmothers house where his first guitar is still hanging on her wall, to an old dance hall, and to a ranch where he ends up finding love and his true country roots.
    Pretty much the only person most people will know is George Strait, who plays Dusty Chandler, although a young Kyle Chandler, who plays Buddy Jackson, best known for his role in the T.V. show Friday Night Lights is also in this film. And that being said he is probably the best actor in this film. Yes, even better than George Strait, and don't get me wrong, George is one of my favorite country singers and he is probably the best all time, but the man just isn't a very good actor. His monotone voice is what hurts him the most and his lack of emotion in many scenes hurts the film. His best emotion, shockingly, comes when he is singing his songs. There is also Isabel Glasser, who plays the love interest, and she is very good in some of the scenes, particularly the end scene.
    Now, this film doesn't have a lot going for it, although it does have some well shot concert scenes and some well put together emotional scenes when Dusty is going down memory lane. The director, Christopher Cain, just didn't have what it took to make this a better looking movie than it is or how it was shot at times. I understand that he was probably trying to keep a classic feel to the film, and it worked, but at times I felt that he could have done more with some scenes to give them an extra push. The only scenes that seemed to have that extra push were the concert scenes, although even the climax scene could have had a little more emotion with the way it was shot.
    Now, I'm not saying this is a bad movie because it certainly is not, there are plenty other worse movies out there. This is a good movie because it is a good story and is a "feel good" movie that will make you smile in the end. Also, this movie has one of the best soundtracks ever for a film, with songs like "Heartland," "When Did You Stop Loving Me," "Baby Your Baby," "Overnight Male," Last in Love," and of course "I Cross My Heart," this is a movie that could be told straight from the songs that were written just for the movie. So, with a good moving story, mediocre direction, a mediocre performance from George Strait, and an awesome soundtrack to help move the film along, this will leave you tapping your feet throughout and smiling at the end, but being happy that George Strait just sticks to singing those classics.
2.5/4 Stars

Movie of the Week: Hoosiers

    

    Movie of the Week (3/16/13-3/22/14): Well, there is no doubt about it that I am very late this week, my apologies to those of you in dying need of a movie to watch this week. But, we still have something to watch even if it is late. With the NCAA Basketball Tournament starting this week I thought it was right to have a basketball movie this week. That being said this was much harder than I thought because there are not very many good basketball movies out there. So, I simply narrowed it down to probably the best basketball movie of all time, Hoosiers. 

    First of all it is not about Indiana University, thank God, it is about an Indiana high school giving a coach who has had a rough past a second chance at doing what he knows best, coaching. He takes over a high school basketball team that is not very good and turns them into winners. In the process he gives the town drunk a second chance at coaching because he sees something in him. It is a true story set in 1954 with some changes to history but it is still a very good true underdog story. 

    There is really not much of a cast here, most people today would only know two of them and they are Gene Hackman and Dennis Hopper. We have Barbara Hershey in a very good supporting role, but not very many people know who she is, but nevertheless she still does a very good job. But, we have Gene Hackman, as Coach Norman Dale, who is great here and delivers us another fine "Gene Hackman" performance. We also have Dennis Hopper as Shooter, the town drunk who also gets a second chance, and he too is phenomenal as he went on to be nominated of an Oscar. You can tell that he prepared for his role very well as he convinced the audience that he was truly the town drunk who struggled at getting his life together. 

    There are a few things that make this a good film, the first is the direction. This was directed by David Anspaugh, the same guy who directed Rudy, and he gave this film the classic feel to it as he used very little effects and classical camera work. That being said the cinematography is great here as it sets the perfect mood of the Midwest and the feel of high school basketball in the 1950's. The score here is also very moving and inspiring. We can thank Jerry Goldsmith for that because he knew exactly how to score this film, he was nominated for an Oscar as well, and give it the final boost of inspiration it needed. He was also the man that gave us the Rudy score. What this film is really about is second chances and that the underdog can really win and in the end it will inspire you and leave a smile on your face.

3/4 Stars.

Movie of the Week: Tombstone

   

    Movie of the Week (3/10/14-3/15/14): Most of us know the legend of Wyatt Earp and how he was a legendary lawmen and that we was never grazed by a single bullet. You probably also know that there have been several movies made about his life. Some you know and some you don't. The two most popular are Wyatt Earp, which had Kevin Costner in the role, and this film here, Tombstone, which had Kurt Russell embracing the role of Wyatt Earp. Now the funny thing is, is that these two films came out in back to back years and were being filmed on different lots right next to each other. Most people like this film more, but that is probably because it is pretty much and action movie where Wyatt Earp is more of a biography and action movie mixed. I like them both, but when it comes to accuracy, neither one is very accurate.
    Tombstone is not a biography film about Wyatt Earp, it is more so just about what happens when the Earp brothers arrive in Tombstone, Arizona. If you want more details on his life, you can watch Wyatt Earp, which is a very good and underrated film. Now, this film here focuses more on the Earp brothers' feud with a group called "The Cowboys," who didn't where red sashes by the way, and how all of the lawlessness leads up to the shootout at the O.K. Corral and afterwards. And, just so we are clear, the shootout didn't actually happen at the O.K. Corral, it happened just down the street in an empty lot, but the name stuck. Also, Virgil and Morgan Earp were not shot just after the shootout. The shootout occurred on October 26, 1881, Virgil was shot on December 28th and Morgan was shot and killed on March 18, 1882.
    However, Kurt Russell plays Wyatt Earp in this movie and he is my favorite actor to play Earp, even over Kevin Costner, because he looks the most like him. He also did a great job, there are several scenes where he displays wonderful emotion and outrage that just fuel the film. Val Kilmer plays Doc Holliday and he too gives us a powerful performance, possibly his best, plus his chemistry with Russell is great. Sam Elliott plays the older Earp brother, Virgil, and does a great job with his commanding deep voice. We have Bill Paxton as Morgan Earp, Powers Boothe as Curly Bill Brocius, Michael Biehn as Johnny Ringo, Stephen Lang as Ike Clanton, Thomas Haden Church as Billy Clanton, Michael Rooker as Sherman McMasters, and even Charlton Heston has a nice cameo. So, as you can see we have a wonderful veteran cast here and I have no complaints.
    What made this film good was that it was written well, though not accurate, but it kept the audience stuck to the screen. It had great mix of drama and action throughout as Wyatt begins to fall for Josephine yet trying to balance it with all of the death happening around him. Although, in real life it was much more spaced out and did not happen as quickly as it did in the movie, but it was done right to keep the audience involved. That was also helped by the the director, George P. Cosmatos, who stepped in at the last minute. I say that because he was known for directing action films, which is why this is more of an action picture with less drama like most westerns have. But, you still like his style a little, even if it might have been a bit much for a film like this at times.
    Nevertheless it was shot very well and looks great throughout, especially during the shootouts. That being said the editing also takes over during the shootouts and was done very well, particularly during the O.K. Corral shootout. We also have a very intense and fast paced score here, which is rare for a western, but it works since the film is more of an action film anyways. Now, this is a good movie and a good western, it is not a great movie or great western, I can think of several off the top of my head that are better. Plus, the several goofs that are clearly visible along with the historical inaccuracies also helps it stay at good movie status instead of higher. But, there are enough high points like the great cast, the well shot shootouts, and good direction, since it is an action movie, that it has enough to keep you drawn in from start to finish.
3/4 Stars