One Movie A Day Review Thread

Awww Raising Arizona it

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

I'm trying to watch films tha I either have never seen or barely remember.

Every once in a while I'll watch something that I've seen a few times, it makes I eaiser to watch one movie a day.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

DAY 69: November 8th, 2008.

Changeling



Taken From Reviews Section


Christine Collins is called in to work on her day off. She leaves her son at home and promises to take him out tomorrow to make it up to him. When she returns, he is missing, nowhere to be found. 5 months later the LAPD claim to have found him, but when they present the boy to Christine, she refuses him, saying he is not her son. Instead of making the department look embarrassed and admit failure, they throw her in a mental institution.

What makes Changeling even more depressing is that this is all based on true events.

Eastwood has yet another winner under his belt with Changeling. Some might find it a hard film to enjoy, but I was engaged throughout, due to the performances, art direction, story and Eastwood's talented directing. It's Eastwood's eye to detail that brings this 1920's era to life. I was really impressed with the design of this film and it felt completely real to me. From the set design to the costume design. Normally you can see through the fabric and know that it was made for the film, but here it simply fits.

A lot of the film rests on the shoulders of Angelina Jolie, as the mother of the lost child. I believed her in this role. Her eyes do most of the acting, subtle and honest. Yet at times her overbearing yelling distracts. At first it's believable, but near the end it seems more of the same and irritating at times. It's a strong enough performances to garner attention from Award ceremonies. On the supporting side is John Malkovich, who kicks all kinds of ass without doing much. His presence is enough to make you cheer. He is in command and you can tell by simply listening to his tone of voice. Colm Feore is someone you can count on to play any man with questionable morals. It's all in his face, perfectly cast here as the Chief of police. I have to say that a weak link in the acting is Jeffrey Donovan. I enjoyed him to a degree, but his voice/accent is just too annoying to get use to. I squirmed in my seat a couple of times, not from his characters actions, but from the accent.

One person to watch for here is Jason Butler Harner, who plays a serial killer. He takes a slightly different approach to the subject matter. He isn't too crazy, he isn't too weird, he's a mix of both. But what makes it a more horrifying performance is that he is human. We are not seeing Hannibal Lector up on the screen, we are seeing a human being. I wouldn't be surprised if a Supporting Acting nod went in his direction. Also, Amy Ryan makes a small appearance, nothing too big, but her scenes are well enough to make a mention of.

The story is strong, and it is strengthened by the fact that it is based on a true story. If it were fabricated, then the emotion might not have been there, at least not as much as what this film delivers. Jolie delivers a performance that is heart wrenching, at times, and it is heightened by that small little fact that someone in this world went through those emotions, those barriers and heartaches.

Yes, this film is depressing. Eastwood knows it, and uses it to his advantage. Throughout the entire film I found myself just wanting to punch some people in the face, to yell at them and help Jolie in her cause to get her son back. Malkovich does this for the audience, which is why I think his character kicks ass. He does what we as the audience want to do. The tension in this film is high, not from thrills, but from the horrible things that these characters do to Jolie. She stands her ground, we cheer, and they throw more rocks at her, we tense up. Great flow for this film.

Although, with all it's greatness, it does have a weakness. It's too freaking long. I thought the film was going to end, then it went on for another 20 minutes. I think with a bit more editing and tightening up, you can easily shave off those 20 minutes. Even though I was entertained and engaged in the last little bit of the film, mostly the trial and the bits in between the trial, I couldn't help but think that the film should wrap up soon. Real soon.

Much like Eastwood's Oscar baby, Mystic River, Changeling deals with a missing child. Only this time it's the feminine aspect and the time period is drastically different. The film is strong enough to stand as one of his better works and if it were a bit tighter and shorter...I might have been able to call it a masterpiece.

Too bad.

DAY 70: November 9th, 2008.

2 Days In The Valley



Here is an example of a film that tries too hard to be something it isn't. In this case, 2 Days In The Valley tries to be several different things at once. It tries to come off as this sleek crime film that has numerous characters whose lives interconnect over the course of 2 days. It's cast includes Jeff Daniels, Eric Stoltz, Charlize Therone, James Spader and Teri Hatcher, just to name a few.

James Spader tries to emulate this cool talking bad-ass who gives his victims one minute to think about their life before they die. He literally takes out a timer and does this before shooting someone. It's a neat idea that doesn't come off as threatening or 'cool', which is what it looks like they were trying to do. I did like his performances though, just the little things that the character does is annoying.

I didn't care for any of the characters, except for one. Now, this is where the film really drops the ball and is my main problem with it. I thought Jeff Daniels had the most interesting character out of the entire batch, but his story is never resolved or revisited. They literally drop him out of the picture half way through and this saddens me because I didn't give a crap about anyone else.

I give the film props for the Teri Hatcher VS Charlize Theron cat fight. Even if it was just for the sake of having these two cuties get the guys all riled up. Their stories needed more attention I thought and others just didn't gel well with the rest of the script. A lot of the comedy was off and didn't flow with the rest of the film either.

DAY 71: November 10th, 2008.

The Black Dahlia



Style over substance is the first thing that pops into my head when I think of this flick. I thought the story itself was interesting and the film noir storytelling aspect was interesting, but it never reaches the part of getting me interested to a point where I actually cared. That and De Palma just steals from other directors.

First of all the cast is average at best, I hated Swank in this film and Hartnett has yet to really impress me. Eckhart was a strong anchor, but that didn't last very long. Johansson doesn't look the least bit interested in her character. This great cast, who have all done better films, seem to have their minds elsewhere. Just listen to Hartnett's so called film noir voice over. So wooden and plain it hurts.

De Palma gets the film rolling at a snails pace. I didn't get into it, and when I did it was very little, until the third act. Even then, the resolution isn't satisfying.

The film had a lot going for it, so much potential has gone to waist. When we should have been investigating the Dahlia, we were treated to Hartnett and Eckhart as enemies, then partners, then friends. Wow, that was fast.

The film has too many sub-plots when it should have been focusing on the one that we all wanted to see, but are never really shown. I liked the film noir atmosphere and thought they nailed it perfectly, but that counts for nothing is the story isn't there.

DAY 72: November 11th, 2008.

The Crow



The Crow is a film that I knew I would like before I even watched it. Directed by Alex Proyas, who also directed my favourite sci/fi flick of all time, Dark City, works his Gothic magic here and shows us that not all fantasy/comic book films have to be immature.

Whenever I talk to people about The Crow, they either love it (because it's apparently the new emo thing to do, just like Darko) or hate it because it was too dark. Both of these reasons are unfair to an intelligent and well directed film.

Although the idea of revenge in films has been done to death numerous times before, The Crow takes a unique approach to the subject. This is mainly due to the main character himself, who is a favourite of mine. Well acted by Brandon Lee, who tragically died on the set of the film. Much like the death of health Ledger, one can only imagine what his career would have been like if he were still alive today.

Alex Proyas is someone to look out for in his future projects, his weakest film, I, Robot is still pretty decent. I think he is underrated as is this film. It's a shame that they made so many crappy sequels that the original sometimes gets thrown into that bad mix. I mean come on, Furlong as The Crow? I can't take that seriously. As it is today, this film stands out from those and many other comic book flicks. It's definitely in my top 5 comic book adaptations and in a sense it breaks that genre, well before Dark Knight did. But not many people see that.

If you haven't seen this one, pick it up now. It's Gothic atmosphere, great direction and acting will draw you in. The story of love, revenge and redemption is one for the ages.

Thanks for your interesting reviews

The Crow is rather good, although I have to admit I don't think it's that great. I watched it for the second time ever a few weeks ago. It definitely held up well, even on the old VHS copy I had.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

DAY 73: November 12th, 2008.

Drillbit Taylor



I knew watching this flick wouldn't change my life, or make me laugh for that matter. There was nothing else on and I needed to watch something so I did something stupid. I watched Drillbit Taylor.

The story is about these 3 kids who are deemed losers at their school by these two bullies, who make it their mission to make theirs lives hell on earth. It's gets to the point where they need to hire a bodyguard (which let's face it, is what any grade 9 kid would do right?) After numerous meetings with people who charge more then the kids can afford, they meet Drillbit Taylor. A homeless man who poses as a tough bodyguard to make some easy cash. The rest of the film plays out exactly how you would think.

What surprises me about this flick is that it was written by Seth Rogen and even more surprising John Hughes (under another name). Both of these men have written funny films in their past, but it seem like they are restraining themselves. Why? Because of the PG friendly rating? Drillbit Taylor plays like a film that 'wants' to be dirty and filthy and has to settle for barely crossing the threshold.

Wilson is on autopilot and the sub-plot with the teacher is not given any attention or even drama. There is no real hurdle he has to climb over in that situation. His relationship with the kids is obvious. He tries to con them, becomes friends with them, loses their friendship and trust when they find out the truth, and finally wins it back. Sorry if that ruined the film for anyone, but it's so formulaic that I cannot see anyone not seeing that coming.

The main bully in the film is way too crazy to be taken seriously. Almost everything he does would never happen in any reality that I know of. First of all, he lives on his own because his parents are in Hong Kong or something, yet he still feels the need to go to school. It appears as if he's failed a lot of grades because he is on one of the classes with the other kids. He chases after them in his car, going over flowers, grass, bushes, what-not. Destroying everything. He destroys his home by fighting these kids, breaking windows, railings on stairs, lamps, other appliances. That's not even that worst of it, at the end after he gets his ass kicked by Taylor (again sorry for ruining something you should have already seen coming) he takes out a Samurai sword and throws it at the kids. I'm not making this up at all.

The story is not funny, the kids are not funny or even good at playing 'dorks' (with the exception of the really small one) and worst of all the main actor looks like he doesn't want to be there. Skip the film and this is proof that Apatow isn't the comedy god people claim him to be, if he were he wouldn't need to R rating to get laughs.

DAY 74: November 13th, 2008.

The Perfect Score



Another film that has me wondering why I bothered to see it. I will get this out of the way right here and now. The best thing about this flick is the 2 second shot of Scarlett Johansson's underwear.

Well, now on to more depressing matters. Like the film. It is impossible to steal SAT tests because to the best of my knowledge they are all different. Did the writer's know this, or simply overlook it.

All the characters are poorly written and are written one dimensionally in different extremes just so that the audience thinks they all have depth. The smart girl who needs to pass to get into the right school? Check. Basketball player who needs to get into school, yet his grades suck? Check. Oh yeah, the guy cannot act either, stick to sports buddy. Smart Asian who is always high, check, main character who has 'moral issues at times' check. Oh yeah, the inside girl too plays a part and the funny best friend is there as well.

By the end non of them use the answers to the test because they found ethical reasons not to. Or whatever, I really didn't care at that point as to what they did because I was falling asleep. Skip it.

DAY 76: November 15th, 2008.

Doodle Bug



If you've never heard of this short, don't worry, you are not alone. This is a 3 minute short from some guy, a nobody really. But everyone has to start somewhere, and he started here and with this.

It came off as an exercise to me, no real story or purpose, but a way to show other people that 'Hey, I'm in film and here is what I can do in 3 minutes'. But if you really want to dig down deep and find meaning here, I can you can say that he was trying to convey the message that there will always be somebody better than you?

For it's short length, I can't really complain. I didn't feel one way or the other about it. Although I did see the ending coming once the reveal happens. I included the short at the top so you can view it.

It has interesting use of the title card and gets the 'message' across with no use of dialogue, so I applaud that as well.

I think the director went on to direct some film called 'The Dark Knight'.

I thought the message was that we are all self-destructive, especially if we're paranoid, and if we don't accept some help (for example, the phone call, even if it is just a recording), it'll be a never-ending cycle. On the other hand, a "doodle bug" is something which is involved with reproduction which most people find disgusting. Then again, the clock says 8:40. That's 4:20 times two. Maybe "the man" missed a break so he's even more paranoid than normal. Those roving eyes on the title card seem paranoid. My first impression is , and I doubt that it would go lower.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

DAY 77: November 16th, 2008.

Vincent

&feature=related

Yet another early short from a well known director early in their career. Even without me telling you or seeing his name anywhere, within the first ten seconds you know it's Tim Burton.

This tells the story of a young boy named Vincent, who wants to be, or believes he is Vincent Price. The story is narrated, coincidentally by Price himself. It's was obviously a tribute to the man himself and his body of work with a dash of Edgar Allen Poe thrown in.

The animation is wonderful and bizarre, exactly what you would expect. You can clearly see the resemblance to the film Corpse Bride and more inspirations for Nightmare Before Christmas. On a little side note, if the video is taken down, this amazing short is also on the Nightmare special edition dvd.

This short shows how much of a talent Burton is and he has obviously crafted his skills to much greater things. I can see this be a full length feature, but as it stands, it's perfect as a short.

Watch this one A.S.A.P

Thanks

DAY 78: November 17th, 2008.

Underworld



The critics were not fair to Underworld and it's a shame because it's not a bad flick. Starring Kate Beckinsale, Scott Speedman and directed by Len Wiseman. Wiseman would later go on to direct the 4th Die Hard installment and marry Beckinsale.

The story is a horror fan's wet dream of Vampires versus Werewolves. The difference is that this so called horror film is not a horror film, it's actually a suspenseful action flick. It manages to take horror elements and turn it into something else. I enjoy and applaud that. Although, it seems others thought of it as The Matrix with Vampires.

Wiseman, who first worked with props in the art department for films does a good job on his first directing outing. While the film is no masterpiece, it is far from the disaster people said it was.

Don't expect much from the acting department, it's just Beckinsale posing with guns and fangs, but what does one really expect when the go to see Vampires shooting at werewolves with guns and vice versa? The story holds throughout the film and not once was I bored, which is a good sign because the film runs a long 2 and a half hours.

DAY 79: November 18th, 2008.

Underworld: Evolution



Again, unfairly bashed upon by the critics. They didn't like the first one, so surprise surprise they hated this one even more. Well, I enjoyed it. Story problems aside, it did entertain me and it did keep my interest.

Wiseman is back and so is the icy cold blue atmosphere that the first one was so proud of. This time around there is more blood, more action and more excitement. Because of this the story is lacking, but I forgive it because I had a good time.

Beckinsale does the same old song and dance again, but damn does she look good in tight leather. Scott Speedman doesn't do much, in fact he never does much. So it's safe to say that the acting is on the same level as the first one.

If you dug the first one and want more of the same. Check this one out.

Very good reviews, UsualSuspect. While I enjoyed both, I thought the original Underworld was superior to its sequel and warranting of a half-popcorn bag higher rating (in my opinion). I felt that the original had better direction and more substance to its story and Evolution was just a follow-up action fest.

__________________
"The mind is its own place, and in itself
Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven."
John Milton, Paradise Lost

My Movie Review Thread | My Top 100

I can see that.

DAY 80: November 19th, 2008.

Wanted



The film never really grabbed me from the trailers. It was simply taking the action genre to another level of absurdity. That's exactly what I expected and exactly what I got. I did have fun, but was left unfulfilled by the end of it. It was immature and inane in a lot of parts and the wow factor never really got me. It was all done in the trailers, leaving an empty film for us viewers to watch.

It has the beautiful Jolie, who after a handful of serious roles is able to relax and have fun here. She is Laura Croft with a more bad ass attitude and sexy tattoos. James McAvoy tries his best as the leading man, he does a decent job, but fails to have any connection with Jolie. Terence Stamp is hardly in the movie to really comment on him and Morgan Freeman takes a different role here as the baddie. Without a doubt, he has the best line of the film...No, the best line of 2008. His delivery is hilarious and frightening at the same time.

I've seen Nightwatch and see the same hyper style here. It's something that I expect to see a lot more of from him, it may get tiring fast for some people.

I never heard of the GN before the film and didn't think anything that wasn't popular would be turned into a film. This film proved me wrong. Twists and turns happen here, all for predictable and some of really aggravating. Specifically what Jolie does at the end. Anyway, I can recommend the film simply on a pure entertainment, never take a single frame of this film seriously type way.

DAY 81: November 20th, 2008.

Revolver



Revolver...simply put is a bad film.

The film faults mostly from the inane script that is hard to follow. It tries it hardest to be interesting and engage the viewer, but all it ends up doing is confuses and angers the viewer. The main problem is that is has no idea what it is about and comes off as some kid who made a film that is pretentious and dumb.

For reasons unknown, this "crime" film has a twist, an unoriginal, unneeded, inane twist that doesn't flow with the rest of the flick. Now, if the film decided to play it straight, instead of trying to mess around with the viewers mind, it could have been decent. I had more interest in the game of chess that is played then what the movie is actually about.

Skip this movie because the cast is horrible and the direction is appalling and you will kick yourself for wasting your time with it. Ray Liotta is alright, but cannot save the train-wreck that is Revolver.