One Movie A Day Review Thread

Personally, I loved the Redux. I thought it fleshed the film out more and added to the story.

DAY 107: December 18th, 2008.

The Nightmare Before Christmas



Re-watching this classic might hurt the original viewing for some. The animation is not as smooth as the recent flicks like Corpse Bride or even Wallace and Gromit. Still, the originality and musical entertainment is still there. I had a friend who loved this movie, then the recent popularity with kids wearing clothing from the film apparently ruined it for him. How does that happen, don't ask me.

NBC is a film that is indeed a classic and rightfully so. The animation may be stiff today, but I think it works for the world they've created. These aren't humans we're seeing. It's horrific creatures from the mind of Tim Burton and it has his stamp all over it. Seeing two worlds collide, such as Halloween and Christmas, is marvelous to see. Watching Jack as he first enters Christmas Town is like watching a kid discover the world around him when he learns to walk.

The musical numbers are catchy and serve the story well. The film is a lot faster paced then I remember. It flies by really quick and before you know it Jack is delivering the toys of horror to kids all over town.

The Oogie Boogie man is really well done and is still scary today as he was when I first watched this film. The voice over work is crisp and alive with emotion. It's not just some celebrity lending their voice to an animated film, it's skill voice actors doing their thing.

The originality and entertainment factor in this film are high and you can see the passion the filmmakers had in bringing this nightmare alive. Burton gets a lot of credit for this film, so much that many people mistake him for the director. Instead it was Henry Selick, the director of the film Coraline. Some credit should be thrown his way, but alas, his name is hardly ever mentioned. Just ask the two guys who directed the Star Wars sequels....

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

Suspect's Reviews

DAY 108: December 19th, 2008.

Yes Man




Carl is a loner who never wants to do anything with anyone. This includes his best friend who is about to get married. After missing a few important dates in his friends life and having a bizarre dream about being dead and nobody caring, he decides to attend a YES MAN seminar. He is challenged to say YES to EVERYTHING, or else bad things will happen to him.

This kind of sound like Liar Liar and that is the film most people will be comparing it to, even though both of them are almost completely different. The only similarity is that the main character HAS to do something. One is to tell the truth, the other is to say yes. Well, the similarities stop there. I want to say that this film is funny, and I will, but it wasn't funny enough. I got a few chuckles here and there but not one scene stands out in my mind as the funniest or the most memorable. Which is a bad thing for a comedy.

Jim Carrey does his usual and brings the funny faces and physical comedy. At some points it seems unnecessary and forced, like when he is having a weird face making competition with his boss. At other times, it just simply works cause it's Jim Carrey and he's being doing it for years. As Carl, who is played by Carrey, soon finds out that saying yes leads to good things in his life, he embraces the idea. Unfortunately that idea is never fully realized and we never really see where this could take us. It felt like they were playing it safe this time, which is really odd considering the amount of adult material in here.

There are a few swear words, I remember hearing the F-BOMB a few times, which surprised me. Also there is a scene in which my girlfriend found completely gross and it involves an elderly lady taking out her teeth to 'perform' on Carl. The scene is used to show that when he says NO, bad things happen to him, but at the same time it seems completely like it should belong in another film.

Everything you see in the trailer is pretty much what he says yes to. The Korean, the guitar lessons, the plane lessons. There are only a few that you don't know about but they aren't that funny. Driving a homeless man home is one of them and it never got a laugh from me.

The supporting cast helps the film immensely. Zooey Deschanel is wonderful as always. I find her always to be charming and cute with a funny side. Carl's boss and new friend due to him having to say yes to everything is Rhys Darby. People may recognize him from the TV show Flight of the Conchords as the band manager. He steals the show in every scene and is far more funny then Jim Carrey. It's a shame because I always liked Jim Carrey. It seems that the older comedians are losing it while the newer ones seem fresh and hot. Terence Stamp has three scenes in the film, two of which are at the seminars. He doesn't really add too much to the film and the role could have been played by anyone.

The film is indeed a romantic comedy, so I warn you. Be prepared for every romantic comedy cliché. This one has them. Boy meets girl, loses girl and races against time to win her back. What makes it not really work is that I can't see Deschanel really hooking up with Carrey. It must be the age gap. Even though these two work well together, I just can't see them romantically involved. Maybe best friends would work better.

I wanted more from Yes Man, it could have really done some funny things with it's premise but it plays it safe. I do find the film to be one of Carrey's better ones of late. Fun with Dick & Jane was horrible and let's not even mention The Number 23. Yes Man is a film you want to be able to laugh constantly at, but will only find yourself laughing every now and again. I recommend Yes Man as a rental and nothing to rush to see.

Have you read the book UF? It's based on a book which, in turn, was based on the guy's real life 'adventures' when he started to say "yes" to everything offered. That's why the 'old woman' scene is in there.

UF? I'm not Used Future.

So disappointed.

DAY 109: December 20th, 2008.

Extreme Movie



I caught this flick before it was released and had no idea what it was about. The title instantly gives you a bad feeling all over. Is it really one of those franchise " ______ Movie". Is it really as bad as those films? The answer is no.


It is incredibly worse.

Ladies and gentlemen this flick has cracked my top ten on the list of the worst movies ever made. It is truly that terrible.

The film, if you can even call it that, has no virtually no story or plot. It is honest to god, a bunch of sketches. Something off of SNL or Mad TV, but for raunchy. There is one character that runs throughout the entire film and he tries to get the girl. Nothing new, original or funny there.

The "film" for some reason has recognizable names. Stars like Jamie Kennedy, Matthew Lillard, Frankie Muniz and Michael Cera. This "film" is an embarrassment for all involved and should be locked away with films like Belly or Carnivore.

Non of the sketches are funny. We've seen all these things before. It tries to be edgy, but comes off as juvenile. A woman gets her cellphone stuck in her vagina and it constantly goes off, pleasuring her at the most inappropriate times. A kid buys a sex toy, a life like vagina and the entire skit is his relationship with it, it becomes jealous and kills itself. Matthew Lillard some reason unknown reason inter cuts the sketches with unoriginal jokes that your father probably knows.

The only tolerable bit was Cera, and it's only because he sells it, not the writing.

For the love of god and all that is good, never watch this trash.

DAY 110: December 21st, 2008.

Bringing Out The Dead



What this film lacks in plot, it makes up for in everything else. It stars Nic Cage as a paramedic who requests the night shifts. He ends up having three different partners throughout the nights, they include Tom Sizemore, Ving Rhames, and John Goodman.

Now, this film isn't regarded as something to look out for and it kind of got a bad wrap. Why? Because it was directed by Martin Scorsese. This film is a perfect example of people expecting it to be something great just because of the director. When it turns out to be something different, they just disregard it. It's unfair and this film is underrated.

Cage gives an interesting performance as a depressed lonely character who asks to be fired from his job as an Ambulance Driver. I really dug his performance and it worked well with the rest of the film. The film is gritty and cold. It does not hold back with what it wants to say. This is New York at night.

This is, surprisingly, one of my favourite Scorsese films. When he has his masterpiece and high-profile films, this one sneaks under the radar and does not disappoint. I must stress though, it's not for everyone. It's depressing and dark, which is why I liked it so much. The stressful life of these characters who do this everyday and the toll it takes on them. Each supporting character (Sizemore, Rhames and Goodman) all have their own unique vision of the world.

That sounds like a challenge.

__________________
I used to be addicted to crystal meth, now I'm just addicted to Breaking Bad.

I've always been a fan of Bringing Out the Dead as well, it could be considered an underrated film by some.

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

DAY 111: December 22nd, 2008.

Three Kings



Say what you will about the director, or Mark Walhberg's acting, this is a really good movie. The bleach bypass process they used in the film gives it an instantly unique looks and sets it apart from other 'Hollywood' movies.

The film handles both drama and comedy really well and never confuses the two, the style of the film is what makes the film so interesting. It is incredible funny at times, and of course violent when needs to be. Russell is a good director and this is his best film, to date.

The bullet traveling through the body sequence holds the viewer in awe and the way Russell decides to depict the action sequences in some scenes. Specifically when they first leave with the gold, the shoot out is not your average shootout. It's instead played up with simple camera movement and audio. You see the shooter, pan over to the victim, and you hear the sound of the bullet hitting them. No flash or over the top styles, simple and effective.

Clooney gets billed as a movie star and sex symbol, but rarely gets praise for his acting ability. Here he shows what he can do, along side Wahlberg, who usually annoys, and Ice Cube, who usually bores. Spike Jonze makes an appearance as the fourth tag along as well.

Watch this film, it's one of the best of the recent years. It was what Jughead wanted to be before Jughead was even around. This film is technically pleasing with both a message and entertainment value. don't miss it.

If you end up liking it, I have no choice but to take you off my friends list.

And I've always been a fan of Three Kings too, perhaps another underrated film.

I'm a little curious as to why you saw Extreme Movie in the first place. I mean, you can tell exactly what kind of movie it is by the name alone...

DAY 112: December 23rd, 2008.

V For Vendetta



Alan Moore is not a fan of Hollywood. Who can blame him after watching them butcher his League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen into a brainless popcorn action film that couldn't hold my attention, let alone anyone else. But Moore wasn't a fan of From Hell either. Another bastardized version of a story Moore tells in comic book form. It was style over substance, something that seemed like would happen to this next entry, V For Vendetta.

The film and the graphic novel are really different, so I see myself commenting on this as a film itself and not in any way to the original source material. V For Vendetta excels at many levels. It is well written, directed and acted by everyone involved. It has many levels and doesn't get out done by it's high octane style.

The script is strong and has a faceless "hero" or anti-hero, however you look at it. The dialogue is witty, but at times can be a bit much. You either love or hate the introduction V does and if you love it, then you'll most likely love the rest of the film too. The script has a sense of mystery to it and it takes the viewer on the ride of unraveling the truth behind everything. Almost like a murder mystery.

The atmosphere helps the film greatly. It has the British taking power in a Hitler like regime and V uses terrorist acts for freedom. The action junkie expecting some thrills will be really disappointed, the film moves at a relative pace, but it's telling a story, not killing dozens of armed men with explosions.

Portman does a decent job here, she is incredibly cute in her little girl outfit, then later becomes all Ellen Ripley on us. It's bold, beautiful and is a sign of her commitment to the craft.

The film ends up a punch and it leaves you with a smile on your face, the chosen music works perfect with the subject matter and the style of the film. It could be a masterpiece, for it's given genre, but it does have a few missteps, mainly pacing.

Overall, I enjoyed this one. It isn't your average comic book flick, it has deeper roots and it is really well done.

Alas, it was not my choice. A friend of mine wanted to see it, so I was the unfortunate victim that was with him at the time.

If only I had a dollar every time Suspect watched a crap film because "a friend made him do it".

You still have to see Postal, though.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

So my excuse can be Iro made me do it?

Depends. Surely my judgment can't be any less trustworthy than whatever friend leads you to watch some of the worst movies you've ever seen....

Yeah, this guy likes horrible flicks, don't know why.

Maybe he just likes torturing you with them?