Gideon58's Reviews

OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL

Based on the writings of L. Frank Baum, Oz the Great and Powerful is a colorful and elaborate dramatic fantasy that is, in effect, a prequel to the 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz, which centers around the title character and how he came to Oz, an idea that doesn't always work and often reminds us of how timeless the 1939 film is, but there is definitely more hit than miss here, thanks primarily to some impressive work from director Sam Raimi.

The 2013 film centers on a second rate carnival magician in Kansas named Oz (James Franco) who, upon escaping his humdrum career, finds himself swept away to the same magical land that Dorothy visited in 1939, but long before Dorothy's arrival, where his arrival is expected as the kingdom has already been informed that a Wizard is on his way but before he can assume his duties, our second rate magician finds himself involved in a very convoluted power struggle with three very different witches.

Raimi, with the aid of screenwriters Mitchell Kapner and David Lindsey-Abaire have taken the end of the 1939 film and constructed a story around that character, utilizing a lot of the characters and settings that we met in '39 and giving them a clever flip...remember those flying monkeys back in '39 who aided the Wicked Witch and gave this reviewer nightmares? Well, here we have one winged monkey named Finley (voiced by Zach Braff) who is Oz' sidekick and the Witch now has winged orangutans doing her bidding. But what they have done most effectively here is construct an elaborate story that centers completely around Frank Morgan's final moments in the '39 film, his confession to being a 2nd rate phony amateur magician and eventually utilizing his ability with smoke and mirrors to save the Emerald City from a couple of witches with some real self-esteem issues.

Raimi has spared no expense in mounting this ambitious fairy tale. The film features first rate production values, with special nods to cinematography, art-direction-set direction, visual effects, and some exquisite costumes. Somehow Raimi has also managed not to neglect his actors, getting a first rate movie star turn from James Franco in the title role, who is flawed, rakish, and endlessly charming. Michelle Williams made a lovely Glinda and Oscar winner Rachel Weicz tore scenery up right and left as the evil Evanora. Mila Kunis was a little hard to take as the Wicked Witch of the West sometimes and the film did have a couple of too many endings, but in the long run, it was a very entertaining ride during which I never looked at my watch.

SEX AND THE CITY 2

I wish I had seen Sex and the City 2 before I had done my list of worst sequels because if I had, this film would have been # 1 on the list...yes, it is worse than Son of the Mask and is probably the worst film that I have seen since I have joined this site.

This 2010 travesty takes place two years after the last film where we find Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) and Big (Chris Noth) entering a marriage rut while Carrie has a reunion with an old flame; Samantha (Kim Cattrall) is dealing with the onslaught of menopause and a reunion with Smith (Jason Lewis) that actually leads to a middle eastern adventure for the girls; Charlotte (Kristin Davis) is overwhelmed by the adoption of her second child and her voluptuous new nanny and Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) becomes a new person after quitting her job and becoming the ambassador of fun in the middle east.

Director and screenwriter Michael Patrick King, who created these characters is clearly depending on the history of these characters to get the viewer through this mess because if this film is your initial exposure to them, I'm pretty sure it will have you wondering what the fuss was all about. It is our central character, Carrie Bradshaw Preston who takes some really unattractive turns here...Carrie spent years on HBO and in the first film trying to turn Big into something that he's not but all of a sudden nothing Big does is right and, if the truth be told, Carrie comes off like a selfish bitch in this movie and this is coming from someone who liked the series and liked Carrie.

There is a whole lot of ridiculous stuff going on here, from the opening scenes at the the gayest-ever wedding of Stanford (Willie Garson) and Anthony (Mario Cantone), presided over by Liza Minnelli to the ridiculous girls-only vacation in Abu Dhabi that produces contrived adventures that range from ridiculous to just plain stupid.

This film is just an embarrassment to everyone involved and I'm trying to think of something to recommend here, but I'm drawing a blank...even the costumes are hideous. The rating I have assigned to this film is only out of respect for Cynthia Nixon.

I didn't hate Sex and the City 2 but I think it's a massive disappointment after the first Sex and the City movie, which I think is a very good movie, even though it's like a couple of centuries too long. I've actually been wanting to rewatch the first movie lately.

Sex and the City 2..... seems pointless. Apparently they have a story idea for a third and final film, and it just makes me think.... why didn't you use it for 2? 'Cause part 2 seems pointless. The first film, while long, and while many people think it's stupid.... I found it interesting and fun and rewatchable. But part 2 is dull and doesn't really have a good story, if any story at all. So I feel it was a waste. Whatever story they have planned for part 3, which may be their last story.... should have been used in 2. And now 3 may never happen.

Also, Stanford and Anthony are a ridiculous couple. I'm sorry, but they both seem like two very queeny bottoms who need two very butch tops for lovers, not each other.

The first film was long but it was a documentary short compared to the second one...this movie just seemed to go on and on and on and on, I didn't think it was ever going to end. And pointless is putting it kindly. And I totally agree with you regarding Stanford and Anthony...there's no chemistry there, there never has been and I was grateful when I was certain they were only going to be in the opening scenes. As for a third film, I just can't see it, I mean what else can they cover that hasn't been covered already? I think it's time to finally let this franchise die and let us live in our HBO memories.

I loved the series, but the first film was more than poor enough to ensure I had no interest in seeing this. Also, add me to the Stanford and Anthony never worked club. It screams 'we've got two more characters to marry off. What shall we do? Oh, they're both gay, just have them go with each other.'

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Sex and the City was a movie? who knew

It feels like a stunt. "Let's make a statement and have our two big gay male characters get MARRIED to show we support gay marriage."

If it was the TV show, they might experiment with each other for one episode, but by the end of it, they'd be over with and hating what had happened. In fact, I thought they were kinda disgusted with each other on the show at one point?

If they wanted to get real, in the third movie (if it ever happens), they'd be divorced. But I imagine they'd show them still together, now with adopted children.

I can see that. I think it was just lazy "we've got two unattached gay characters" writing, but the support of gay marriage (especially considering the release date) could be a much better reason. Frankly, I hope it is for that reason.

They had something like this in Neighbours last year and worked it pretty well. There were two characters (one a recent arrival, the other had just finished with his b/f) and the brother of the new arrival kept trying to set them up even though they hated each other and neither appreciated the effort by the brother.

At one point, after another failed attempt to get them together, the brothers had an exchange which went something like;

Aaron: Why are you trying to set us up?
Tyler: I'm just trying to help. Y'know, you've got some stuff in common.
Aaron: You mean we're both gay?
Tyler: Well, yeah. Kinda.
Aaron: We don't all fancy each other, y'know!

That's how hearing those two get toghether feels to me. As if Tyler had written the storyline and just put them together because they're gay and gay people all love each other.


I almost wrote the same thing last night. As an episode of the series where they, for whatever reason, got together and decided it was at least as terrible as they thought it'd be, might've worked. I still don't think it would've rang true to me, but at least it might produce some entertainment. Also, yes they did hate each other and, even at their best, they were never really friends.

I mean, I could buy that Stanford and Anthony now love each other and are committed to each other. To hell with the top/bottom assignments. Love is love, right?

But I doubt they're monogamous. Especially Anthony. They're getting action on the side and just coming home to each other when it's all taken care of. That's my theory.

ENEMY

A fascinating pair of performances by Jake Gyllenhaal are the main reason to check out a 2013 film called Enemy, a riveting and enigmatic psychological thriller that assumes and requires complete attention from the viewer delivering heart-pounding entertainment, despite a couple of dangling plot holes.

Gyllenhaal plays Adam, a college professor who rents a movie one night on the recommendation of a friend and notices an actor in the movie who looks exactly like himself. Adam does a little research and is eventually able to track down the actor, whose name is Anthony, who initially wants nothing to do with Adam until he learns about a phone conversation that Adam had with Anthony's pregnant wife (Melanie Laurent), which sets in motion of a series of events we never see coming. This is definitely another one of those movies that reviewing without revealing major spoilers is difficult.

Based on a novel by Jose Saramago, who adapted the book for the screen with Javier Gullon, the writers have created an intriguing story that actually offers a little too much information along the way. There are red herrings in the screenplay that end up leading nowhere and only adding to the confusion about what's going on. It might be purposely, but said red herrings may have been made part of the story in order to distract us from what's really going on and, if the truth be told, we never really learn.

What makes this film so fascinating is watching these two men who look exactly alike and are two completely different people and how their eventual meeting initiates a disturbing shift in both men about what they have learned. Adam is initially obsessed with learning about Anthony and pushes non-stop for their meeting, which Anthony resists but upon their meeting, the obsession seems to shift to Anthony, who is determined to get to the bottom of this...I love the moment when Anthony shows Adam a scar that he has on his chest and from the look on his face, it is obvious that Adam has the same scar even though he doesn't show it to Anthony.

The other thing that makes the film so fascinating is intense and quietly-detailed work Jake Gyllenhaal puts into the creation of these two characters, clearly aided by director Denis Villeneuve. Every time the actor appears onscreen, I had to wait a minute to figure out if I was watching Adam or Anthony, which I actually found to be a lot of fun.

This tidy little thriller fascinates from beginning to end and every time you think you've figured out what's going on, you'll realize that you haven't and despite a problematic climax and other unexplained plot elements, this was a riveting cinematic roller coaster ride that kept me guessing for its entire running time and has still left me with questions.

I still have to finish watching that. I watched an hour AND GAVE UP! However, Swan explained to me what was going on and it sounds better now.

It's an odd little movie but I really enjoyed it and anytime with Jake is time well spent.

THE EQUALIZER

Antoine Fuqua, who guided Denzel Washington's Oscar winning performance in Training Day reunited with his star for The Equalizer, a 2014 big screen reboot of the 1980's CBS television series that starred Edward Woodward. This review comes from someone who did not watch the television series.

Washington plays Robert McCall, an everyman who lives a seemingly monk-like existence, working in a discount superstore and hanging out at a local coffee shop where he has struck up a friendship with a young prostitute (Chloe Grace Moretz) who wants more out of her life, but when McCall gets to see the kind of people the girl works for, he offers unasked for assistance which launches him into a one man war against the entire Russian mob.

As I mentioned, I did not watch the series, but what I saw here is Fuqua's dark mounting of an overly elaborate and alternately deliberate screenplay that sets up McCall as this character with a mysterious past whose layers are slowly peeled away like an onion...perhaps a bit too slowly, but we are inclined to believe this man is more than what is on the surface when we watch him handle some small time hoods who are squeezing an elderly store owner for protection money and a punk who robs the superstore and takes a co-worker's ring. What we are told is that this is a guy who works in a store and likes to help his co-workers but his actions reveal brains and training that are only utilized in the defense of people who cannot help themselves.

There are things here and there that happen in the reveal of who McCall is that contradict and confuse...in one scene, we see McCall economically cripple five Russian mobsters in a matter of minutes, but when the punk comes into the superstore to rob it and take his co-worker's ring, he just lets the guy walk out. Oddly, we see the woman get her ring back but we are never privy as to exactly how that happened. We eventually learn that McCall is some kind of former government agent in some form of witness protection who also lost a wife somewhere along the way. This is a man who is a deadly force trying to put that part of his life behind him but cannot stand idly by and watch people be bullied or controlled who can't help themselves. He has the power to kill when he wants, to cripple when he wants, and to torture enough to extract information when he wants. My favorite line in the movie is when he visits a former agent whose husband (Bill Pullman) asks if she was able to help McCall and the agent (Oscar winner Melissa Leo) replies "He didn't come here for help, he came here for permission."

There's a lot left unexplained and the film is darkly photographed making it hard to see sometimes what's going on, but you forgive all this because this film has one thing going for it and it's all it really needs...a 100 mega-watt starring performance from Denzel Washington, a two-time Oscar winner who has already documented his ability to carry a film on his star power alone and he does that effortlessly here... you never worry about McCall because you know Denzel is playing him, but you still want to go for the ride anyway because Denzel is always worth the ride.

MATCH POINT

Woody Allen mounted one of his most challenging and emotionally manipulative stories with Match Point, a 2005 film that treads familiar territory for Allen such as infidelity and the art of self-preservation, but dresses it up by setting it on a British canvas that is so intoxicating at times that one almost doesn't notice how unappealing and unerringly human these characters are until the manipulation grabs the viewer and does not let go.

Chris Wilton (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) is a former tennis pro and new resident to London now giving tennis lessons who becomes friends with one of his students named Tom Hewitt (Matthew Goode), getting in good with Tom's wealthy family and sealing the deal by marrying Tom's sister, Chloe (Emily Mortimer). He also accepts a job with Toom and Chloe's father's company. Unfortunately, Chris becomes obsessed with Tom's fiancee, an American named Nola Rice (Scarlett Johansson), putting everything at risk.

Allen's Oscar-nominated screenplay provides us with a central character of dubious ethics who makes a lot of wrong moves in his battle for self-preservation, but what I found was Chris was not the only character with defects here...all the players did things that made me squirm at some point through the many twists and turns that this prickly story takes. I didn't like the way Chloe attempted to smother Chris and bully him into starting a family that he clearly wasn't ready for. I also didn't like Nola from the start either...it was aggravating watching Nola do nothing to discourage Chris' obsession and then turning on him when he was unable to just walk away from his other life for her.

Allen's screenplay does recall earlier work like Hannah and her Sisters and Crimes and Misdeamenors, but Allen has cleverly taken his normally neurotic and tragically flawed characters and placed them across the pond. These characters look and sound so proper and pious at times that you almost don't notice how messy these people are and how every central character produces repulsive and squirm worthy moments at some point in this sometimes ugly story. Tom is the only exception, the only true victim in this story.

As always, Allen scores with some unconventional casting and pulls first rate performances from his cast, with standout work from Jonathan Rhys Meyers, whose baby-faced features provide a frightening dichotomy to this sometimes slimy central character and Johansson, who does some of the strongest work her career as the jilted mistress, bringing an intelligence that you usually don't see in this kind of character, even if it doesn't last.

Allen has set this very unpleasant story on a very pleasant canvas...his use of London locations is just as effective as his use of Manhattan locations in his most famous work and once again, Allen's flawless ear with music works here by using minimal operatic recordings that lends further power to the piece. Despite a troublesome conclusion that left a bad taste in my mouth, this film rivals Interiors and Crimes and Misdeamenors as one of Allen's most ambitious challenging pieces which tells a story that does not pander to the audience.

Do you know you've double posted this? Though I do see that you've fixed the ending of the second paragraph.

Match Point is something which I always thought I'd like and see but have yet to do so.

Just noticed that I did...deleting one right now, thanks Honeykid. Regarding the film, it's not typical Woody Allen so if you normally hate Allen, don't let that deter you from watching this one, but be warned, this one will run roughshod over your emotions.

THE OBJECT OF MY AFFECTION

The 1998 film The Object of My Affection is a romantic comedy that attempts to tell a contemporary story but suffers due to a TV movie type cast and a story that plays like an extended episode of the NBC series Will & Grace.

The film stars Jennifer Aniston as Nina, a social worker involved in a shaky relationship, who invites a gay schoolteacher named George (Paul Rudd) to movie in with her after he breaks up with his lover. A very complicated relationship ensues as Nina begins developing feelings for George while learning that she's become pregnant with her boyfriend's baby and deciding she would rather raise the baby with George than with the baby daddy(John Pankow).

Based on a novel by Stephen McCauley, Wendy Wasserstein's screenplay digs just deeply enough to some sensitive areas to make the viewer squirm, but doesn't really take a permanent stand on said issues either. The character of Nina does have a lot of parallels to the Grace Adler character on Will & Grace...she understands that George is homosexual but she allows herself to fall in love with him anyway. The difference between Nina and Grace is that Grace accepted who Will is and became his best friend. Nina does not accept the same about George and quietly goes about trying to "straighten" him out.

There are bothersome elements to this story that I just can't get past. I was really bothered by the fact that Nina's primary inspiration on her mission to "turn" George was the story of his first sexual experience, not to mention the way she uses her pregnancy to manipulate George, which would have been acceptable if George was the father of the baby, but watching the character of Nina trying to change a man's sexual orientation based on his past and with the help of a baby made it hard to like Nina at times.

Aniston and Rudd do create a a certain chemistry onscreen though I never really bought Rudd as a gay character. Pankow is unconvincing as the baby daddy but I liked Allison Janney and Alan Alda as Nina's sister and brother-in-law. The story is kind of aggravating but hardcore Aniston finds might find some appeal here.

SOURCE CODE

In addition to being immensely talented and drop dead gorgeous, Jake Gyllenhaal has proven to be one of our most fearless and courageous actors, taking on complex characters in life-altering situations and accepting the reluctant hero position that the character has been thrown into or accepting roles that might be considered career killers...he took on the role of Jack Twist in Brokeback Mountain when other actors, Mark Wahlberg among them, didn't have the guts to and continues on a career path that could make him the new Millenium Harrison Ford with his performance in a 2011 sci-fi thriller Source Code.

Gyllenhaal plays Colter Stevens, a soldier who wakes up and finds himself inside the body of a man named Sean Ventrice who is on a Chicago commuter train flirting with a woman named Christina (Michelle Monaghan). It is revealed that Stevens is actually part of a special government experiment and he has been placed on this train to prevent it from being blown up and he only has eight minutes to complete the mission. When he is initially unable to stop the explosion, he is sent back to the train repeated times until the mission is completed with the same eight minute window, but with a little more information that he had during the previous attempt.

Director Duncan Jones, whose previous assignment was directing Sam Rockwell in Moon, has taken on an ambitious and detail-oriented story that requires the recreation of a series of onscreen events multiple times with pinpoint accuracy in order for the story to make sense, but the viewer doesn't realize this as we watch this man board this commuter train and have various seemingly inconsequential encounters with other passengers, and suddenly minor details become more and more important as the story progresses. It is important that as this series of events are recreated, similar to what happens to Bill Murray in Groundhog Day, that everything happens exactly as it did the first time when we weren't really paying attention, so I actually found myself rewinding to document this and Jones nailed it.

Jones and screenwriter Ben Ripley have mounted a riveting story that offers what appears to be red herrings to throw the viewer off, like another Gyllenhaal film Enemy, but unlike that film, what appears to be red herrings are anything but...everything onscreen here is pertinent to the story. This story demands and requires complete attention but it is definitely rewarded.

Gyllenhaal is wonderful as the reluctant hero who accepts his position and eventually moves above and beyond the call of duty. There are also a pair of solid supporting performances from Vera Farmiga and the amazing Jeffrey Wright as the military personnel manipulating Colter's fate and, oh, that's Scott Bakula as the voice of Colter's father. The film also has some first rate editing and visual effects. This is a solid little mystery thriller that is not only deliciously entertaining but surprisingly economical.

ABOUT LAST NIGHT (2014)

File under unnecessary remakes, About Last Night, an allegedly hip re-thinking of the 1986 Rob Lowe-Demi Moore romantic comedy that, with the exception of telling the story with black principals, really offers nothing new that motivates a remake.

Bernie (Kevin Hart) and his current squeeze, Joan (Regina Hall) bring together their BFF's (Michael Ealy, Joy Bryant) who actually are attracted to each other and begin developing a serious relationship, while the relationship between Bernie and Joan starts to fall apart.

The motivation behind this remake is such a mystery because the original film was passable entertainment but nothing that really merited re-visiting in 2014, despite the change in race for the central characters. The issues addressed here are not much different than the issues addressed in the '86 film and this fact is actually driven home by a scene where we actually see Ealy and Bryant sitting at home watching the original film. What I guess was intended to be an homage just made it clear what a waste of time this remake is.

Don't get me wrong...Kevin Hart is a funny guy and always brings the funny, but he is not the lead character here and the film comes to a dead stop whenever he's not onscreen. Ealy and Bryant are very easy on the eyes but they don't have anywhere near the charisma that Lowe and Moore generated in '86 and make it hard to stick this one out. For hardcore Kevin Hart fans only.

I seem to be in the minority as someone who didn't think much of Source Code. I thought it was ok, but just kind of routine.