Sexy Cineplexy: Reviews

I also liked American Psycho too, though it is a rather one-note film, I suppose. I guess I just get a morbid kick out of that shallow 80s vibe. Plus Bale's performance was delightful, imo.

__________________
#31 on SC's Top 100 Mofos list!!

I'm a big fan of American Psycho, I think it's a very well done movie and a good social commentary on the shallowness of corporate America in the 80s. Btw, if I'm not mistaken Bright Lights, Big City was written by Jay McInerny who was part of the "literary bratpack" with Easton Ellis and co.

Jack and Jill
(directed by Dennis Dugan, 2011)



For my birthday, I went to see Jack and Jill with my own sister. Had a great time. She wanted to go see A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas but I vetoed it because it was my birthday, I'm the younger brother and frankly, I didn't care for the first Harold & Kumar film and never saw the second one.

Despite all - and I mean all - the very bad reviews for this movie, I actually liked it a lot. I don't know if I'd consider myself an Adam Sandler fan -- well, actually, yes, in a sense, I am, but not a true fan -- but I tend to like his movies that everyone else hates the most. For example, I love Little Nicky, but so many other people think it's his worst. Judging by all the critical responses for this Jack & Jill film, it's looking more and more like it's turning into his newest worst film ever.

I really don't understand why. I honestly think people see this movie and automatically start chanting, "AWFUL! AWFUL!" I see so many movie reviewers repeating the same diatribe and I just think -- it's a meme.

meme/mēm/Noun:

• An element of a culture or behavior that may be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, esp. imitation.

And I really don't want to cry out, "HOMOPHOBIA!" -- but -- there's a thought process going on in my head when I see everyone automatically destroying the reputation of a film that features a guy in a dress as its star. The fact that more serious films involving crossdressing doesn't matter -- people are gonna bend over backwards for more elegant queens. Yes, I'm talkin' to you, Tootsie and Priscilla. Thanks for everything, Wong Foo.

It's the fact that this is an Adam Sandler movie -- and Adam Sandler gets no respect. It just seems even worse to me with Jack & Jill and I can't help but think it might be because of the gay angle -- while Jack & Jill never deals with homosexuality (I don't think there's even one reference in the film) anytime a man puts on a dress, gay comes to mind. The idea of Adam Sandler in drag certainly attracted to me this movie (but, in complete honestly, I had other reasons, too.) I just have a nagging suspicion that Adam as a lady is automatically making people come to the conclusion that this is godawful. I actually even wonder if Adam Sandler would have cut an even bigger break if he had been black -- really stupid comedies featuring black men in drag are practically a yearly event. People have nervous breakdowns when black male celebrity crossdressers have been gone for too long -- recently, there was even a Hollywood pageant for black male celebrity crossdressers and Madea won.



That's right -- Madea is Miss Black Male Celebrity Crossdresser. She rules them all. That's why she's around every year now. And I completely worship her, too. But where's the Miss White Male Celebrity Crossdresser contest? I really hope I don't sound like a racist or something by comparing black and white crossdressers, but seriously -- nobody's gonna put up with you if you're a white male in drag in a bad movie. You have to be black.

Onto the actual movie review. Adam Sandler plays Jack and he's some kind of important guy in Los Angeles who gets celebrities for name brand commercials. He needs to get Al Pacino for a Dunkin' Donuts commercial. His twin sister, Jill, flies in for Thanksgiving and won't leave. There's a very surreal plot about how Al Pacino has fallen for Jill (they both grew up in the Bronx) and is doing everything to have her, but, unfortunately, she doesn't want him -- this isn't good for Jack, 'cause he needs Pacino for his commercial.

Despite this plot, most of the film involves Jill being an obnoxious houseguest, but it's not really as ridiculous and dumb as you might think. Yes, it's dumb, but to me, everything seems like it's a structured dumb. There are a lot of bizarre sight gags and oddly arranged things put everywhere into the film. Jack's daughter is obsessed with dolls that look exactly like the way she's dressed at the moment. His son is obsessed with taping odd things to his body. Jill brings along her exotic bird for the trip and it's always getting itself into strange places (a chocolate fountain, for instance, was a really odd place to dunk an exotic bird in.) A lobster turns up in a strange place. An old Mexican woman has bulging eyes and only one tooth -- and everytime she's kicked to the ground in her wheelchair, her Mexican family runs over to her and puts long, red hot peppers in her mouth. It's like some kind of Salvador Dali surrealist film -- and I loved that. It was breathtaking. It was different.

At its worst, it resorts to farting and diarrhea -- BUT -- every review you'll read for this movie will play up on the farting and diarrhea bits. There's actually not that many. It's maybe only in two scenes, and the first one is very brief. The second one is long, but it actually fits in with the plot. It's just strange that it's even there -- but I thought it worked.

I actually think Adam Sandler has serious intelligence. This film kept me entertained and it made me laugh. TRUST ME -- I hate really bad comedies. I know when something is terribly conceived. This film might look like it's for ten year olds, but I actually think they must be pretty intelligent ten year olds -- not retarded ones. The movie is a total feast and there must be others who believe in Adam Sandler -- not only does Al Pacino play a large part in this film, but Johnny Depp even appears in a cameo with Al Pacino. Regis Philbin makes a cameo, too (but, personally, I didn't care at all for Regis Philbin.) David Spade appears at the end of film in drag.

At its heart, Jack and Jill is a touching look at siblings, particularly twins, but siblings. Family. Before the opening credits and during the end credits, we are shown groups of identical twins -- random people chosen for the film to just stand there and talk about growing up with their twin. I didn't care for the sappiness of this, but I still think it's an interesting touch.

I predict that Jack and Jill will one day be remembered very fondly -- and be referenced a lot. This is classic Adam Sandler and it even shows that he's matured. If you are or were ever an Adam Sandler fan, absolutely do not miss Jack and Jill. If you've got nothing else to see and you're hesitant about seeing it, I dare you to enter that theatre and watch it. It's a freakshow of the first order and I mean that with complete respect.



Despite all the love I'm showing, I'm giving it this rating. This isn't a bad rating, but it's not the best. I believe that Jack & Jill is the kind of film you must think about -- as strange as that may sound. Emotionally, I admit, it doesn't totally work with me, except on some random levels. I'm giving it this rating for the effort it achieved as something constructed by an original thinker -- the artist Adam Sandler. I believe he could do a lot better. Though, to be honest, in this day and age, I'm almost glad he doesn't -- I suspect if Adam Sandler was more beloved, it would really get to his head and he'd make, what I feel, would be true crap. But I'd like to see him push himself and make something that really amazes me -- even if it doesn't amaze everyone else. There is a style to this guy that I think is more profound than we realize. When this guy leaves this world someday, people will cry - and not with joy.

FIGHT CLUB
(directed by David Fincher, 1999)



Fight Club is a movie about men running away from women -- or, to put it another way, it's about men running away from their sensitive sides. It is not really a story about consumerism. It's about a guy (played by Edward Norton) who is afraid to grow up and get married and live a normal, boring life. The woman he runs away from the most is Marla Singer (played by Helena Bonham Carter, before she became a slave to Tim Burton and Harry Potter.) She certainly looks like a Tim Burton creation in this film, but that's Helena Bonham Carter for you.

The movie begins with a guy - known as the Narrator - who keeps going to all of these support groups in town - ones that deal with illnesses. He becomes addicted to the brutal honesty - sensitivity - of everyone who is suffering at these places. He is able to let go and cry with them. This allows him to beat insomnia. However, he starts seeing Marla Singer at all of these support groups, and he realizes... she's faking. She doesn't have any of these illnesses, just as he doesn't, either. The charm of the support groups dies with Marla Singer and from there on, the Narrator's past time is ruined.

As fate would have it, he meets Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt), a soap salesman who changes his life - dramatically. A simple curiosity on Tyler's part - he wants to get hit by another man as hard as possible - leads to Tyler and the Narrator forming "Fight Club" -- an underground men's club where men do nothing but fight each other. "Fight Club" grows and grows and grows until it becomes nothing but a major terrorist operation. Meanwhile, Marla Singer continues to drop by the headquarters -- a run down house that Tyler and the Narrator have been living in -- to have sex with Tyler.

There's a lot that goes on in this movie, which runs for 2 hours and 15 minutes. I have always loved this movie ever since I first saw it on a movie channel late one night in 2000 or 2001. But I'll let you in on a little secret -- at times, Fight Club has bored me. I have watched it many, many times -- but -- many, many times I have had difficulty with getting through the whole thing. The events of this film drag and drag and drag. However, as of my last viewing of Fight Club... I was able to get through the whole thing. Having it now on Blu-ray has helped, although, this is only the second time I've watched it on Blu-ray and the first time... I didn't finish it.

I totally believe that I just have my own personal reasons for why I couldn't get through the movie sometimes, but I also have my own personal reasons for loving it. Fight Club is extraordinary - a one of a kind event. One of the best movies ever made (from the small selection I've seen, of course.) It has a weird plot... I was going to say more, but I think that's it. It just has a weird plot. And it has Brad Pitt as the hottest motherf**ker I think I've ever seen in a movie. I never cared for Brad Pitt until I saw Fight Club and, honestly, although I love him, he hasn't been as great as this since. If he could always be Tyler Durden in real life, the world would be a better place.

The movie has breathtaking apocalyptic visuals, fabulous characters, a body morphing soundtrack, but most of all... Fight Club is a legend. It is immortal, it is unforgettable, it is the beginning of the universe brought to film.

I would say more, but I'm not really supposed to discuss Fight Club with anybody.

Really nice review, 5 out of 5 couldn't agree more, one of the best movies I have seen.

__________________

i like Fight Club, but i think your reviews suffer a little when you really love the film in question. if that makes any sense.

__________________
letterboxd

I thought it was mainly about expressing the uncertainty of what it means to be a modern male. The consumerism is just a symptom of that, an exploitation of the deep feeling of being lost, angst...

Women seem to like the movie too, more than might be first assumed. And for more than superficial reasons too. It feels geared toward the alienated masculine, but it's so powerfully on point and entertainingly told that it really resonates with anyone who identifies with the outsider.

You guys have me thinking about gender and how it influences the movies we watch and what we relate to. I never think about these movies as guy movies that I like. They are just a type of movie that very much appeals to me. I always wonder in gender how much is really innate and how much is expected.

I don't know how much more I would relate to Fight Club if I were a man, but it's interesting to think about.

this reminds me of this article about women in film making up less than 1/3 of all movie roles that i read the other day, which is fairly interesting/amusing. it's somewhat relevant.

by the way, Sexy, i know Helena Boham Carter was not THE reason i like Fight Club. well, let me be more clear: i used to really love the movie back when it first came out, and it wasn't because of her character. i was about 17 when i got around to seeing it, and i think it was "the film" that got me really interested in movies and discussing them and really thinking about them. so it holds that special place in my heart. and it's not because i'm a rebel or i want to start a Fight Club or i was in love with Brad Pitt, it wasn't any of those things. i just thought it was well written, well shot, and entertaining as hell, and i wanted to know more about it. i must have watched the commentary a bajillion times.

anyway, i think it's the perfect movie for someone that's 18-years-old, male or female.

Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives
(directed by Apichatpong Weerasethakul (???), 2010)



Some movies are mind f**ks. And some movies, like Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, are mind f**k sluts who never stop! This particular mind f**k slut has full blown AIDS. It's about a man dying of a disease (I guess the movie gave it to him) and his dead wife returns to him as a ghost and his long lost son returns to him as a red, glowing eyed Bigfoot-like monster. Cut to a random LONG ASS scene of a jeweled princess who feels unattractive going into a lake and having sex with a talking catfish. Cut to a LONG ASS, boring as hell scene of the dying man (Uncle Boonmee) traveling through a cave to die. Cut to random snapshot photos of a monkey man either being pulled around on a leash by military guys, or posing for pictures with them! Cut to a rebellious monk getting naked and taking a shower. Cut to a bizarre ending in which the monk and a woman, who is the star of this movie, suddenly have TWIN VERSIONS OF THEMSELVES walking out of a room!

This movie made No Sense. Maybe it makes sense to Achipadong Weeresekal, or whatever his name is, but it does not make sense to me. It might make sense when you read about what's supposed to be going on, but it does not make any sense as you watch it. And it's BORING AS HELL.

Oh, I forgot to tell you about the random opening involving a cow traipsing off into the woods that made no sense as well. The film starts off very boring -- but -- when the ghost of the dead wife suddenly appears, following by the hysterical (I laughed long and hard at this) introduction of the son (who looks like Bigfoot with red eyes) sneaking up the stairs and heading over to the dinner table where the family and the ghostly wife are already sitting down -- I thought Uncle Boonmee was going to start becoming vastly entertaining -- at least in a bad way. In a way, it does -- but it's still very boring -- and makes no sense. This movie was made with drugs, not skill. And this movie won the Palm d'Or? This movie makes me want to never watch another movie ever again.

I'm sorry for being so negative towards this film, but I don't get it, and from comments I'm reading from other people on the internet, they don't get it, either. I'd rather be honest and tell you that I think this movie really, really sucks. The film ended and I literally felt like I had gained nothing from it. The most I enjoyed was the visuals from the waterfall scene involving the princess who gets it on with a catfish. Plus my laughs from the scene where the ghost and Bigfoot are introduced -- but I won't laugh the next time I watch this movie. I know better. I know there's nothing else coming along that's gonna keep my interest up.

People, please be very wary of "acclaimed" films. I don't wanna come off and say that this movie is pretentious or anything - because it may very well speak to a lot of people, particularly people who believe in karma, reincarnation -- even though there's practically no mention of reincarnation in this film at all! I think the random scenes, perhaps with the princess and the monkeys, all have to do with the past lives, but it's never noted during the film that it is. If they said anything about it, I fell asleep. The movie is subtitled, which doesn't bother me -- I wish there had been more dialogue.

But, really... this movie was definitely an experience, but it was not a pleasurable experience. I was happy when it was over and I felt like I hadn't even watched anything. Well, my eyes were saying differently -- my mind was definitely upset, though. If this movie was a person, it would be on its next life already, 'cause I would have killed it!

(for visuals, general nuttiness and because I managed to not turn it off -- but the film feels like a 0 to me.)

SC, i have to ask, what made you want to watch this? it definitely doesn't seem like the sort of thing you'd normally pick.

^ It's his christmus pressie.

The World According to Garp
(directed by George Roy Hill, 1982)



SPOILER ALERT: THIS REVIEW BASICALLY REVEALS EVERYTHING ABOUT THE MOVIE.

Wow, what a piece of trash. I'm currently reading John Lithgow's autobiography, Drama, and in it he mentioned playing a transsexual in this film. I had no idea and since I had the film and hadn't got around to watching it yet, I decided to finally give it a go so I could see this John Lithgow transsexual, and Yowza Minelli was this film awful.

The sad thing is - for the first 90 minutes of the movie, I was actually really liking it. I thought the film was FLYING by - and it was never boring. No, this movie isn't boring at all. Sadly, it gets too emboldened or something and it madly dashes off into The Land of Craptacularness. Actually, I might as well start the spoilers now -- it literally drives and CRASHES into Hell.

The only thing I was hating about the first 90 minutes of the film, though, was GLENN CLOSE. She plays a woman who - well, let me start at the beginning - she plays a woman in the 1940's who is an unwed mother and a nurse. We learn that she was stationed in the war or something and this pilot came in with a severe head injury (or something, I didn't commit to memory the things that came out of Glenn Close's mouth) -- she had always wanted to have a baby, but never wanted a husband. Since this injured pilot happened to have a strange condition where he had constant erections that would never go away, and since he was practically retarded now after his accident, she climbs on top of his erection one night and rapes him in order to get his sperm so she can have a baby. That baby grows up to be Garp (Robin Williams), named after the only thing the near-dead and raped pilot could speak aloud.

I hated Glenn Close's character. She was a bitch. She plays an overprotective mother who hates sex. She's always rattling away about LUST! and hating the male sex for having lust. But she's so strange, too -- she buys her son a prostitute for a night after sitting down at a coffee shop with the prostitute to discuss her career. Funny, right? In theory, yes, but the truth was, I never once laughed during The World According to Garp and nothing Glenn Close did could really spare her character for me.

Everything's going well, otherwise, in the movie. I didn't, however, really like Robin Williams playing the Garp character, though. I thought the child actor who played Garp seemed bright and intelligent -- Robin Williams, however, acts dumber than the child actor did. But I think Robin did a very good job later on in the film once his family life (he marries a college sweetheart) turned to *****. And with that, so did the movie, unfortunately.

A few things before that, though -- Glenn Close starts running a house where she helps troubled women who stay with her. John Lithgow as former football star Robert, aka Roberta, is there to help her. The women running around her house have all cut out their tongues as part of some weird movement revolving around a little girl who got raped and had her tongue cut off so she wouldn't tell anyone. Glenn Close has also written a bestselling book and has become the leading voice in the feminist movement. Garp is also writing books, but his books aren't as successful as Glenn Close's, since that bitch seems to get everything in this movie (more on that later). Major drama unfolds around the 90 minute mark when Garp's wife, Helen, starts having an affair with a student that she teaches.

A girlfriend of the male student whom Helen is having an affair with catches them in the act and goes to inform Garp of the situation. Humiliated and angered, he takes his kids away from the house for the night, hiding out in restaurants and movie theatres, unsure of what to do. Fueled by rage, he is cheered on by his two young boys in the backseat of the car who want their dad to drive faster and faster - as if they're flying. They end up flying straight into a car where Helen is giving a blowjob to her boy toy.

One of their kids DIES. The other loses an eye and has to wear a glass eye from now on. Garp and Helen suffer head (and tongue) injuries and the boy toy apparently had his dick chopped off by Helen's teeth during the blowjob and car crash combo. My problem with this? Although there's a dramatic moment during the crash letting us know that one of the kids is killed, it is NEVER really brought up afterwards! Everyone stays in the wacko house run by Glenn Close to recover, with John Lithgow attending to their needs as Heaven's Transsexual. What should have been the most melodramatic moment of the film - wasn't! Everyone seems FINE! Garp is pretty mad at Helen, but ridiculously, he forgives her - and they go off and have another baby! This time it's a little girl, 'cause they have a have a little girl, since this movie is a big feminist film and all that.

The movie, however, isn't done being insane. The best scene comes up next -- Glenn Close is ASSASSINATED at one of her feminist rallies. Someone literally hides behind a window and aims a rifle at her and does her in! John Lithgow tries to transsexually save her, but it's too late. She dies. And of course, Glenn Close gets a funeral and everything, unlike the poor kid who died. She even gets a FEMINIST FUNERAL -- for women only -- no men allowed -- not even her son! He has to dress up like a woman to attend the funeral, but he's caught.

Oh, but the madness isn't even over yet. At the very end of this movie, during a wrestling match, a woman comes up to Garp and TRIES TO ASSASSINATE HIM! The film ends with him being flown in a helicopter, still alive, but heading to a hospital. We have no idea if he lives or not -- check out the book by John Irving, I guess, to find out. And that's the end.

I'm not sure what to really think other than I think the film was handled horribly. It literally turns into John Lithgow Transsexual Massacre by the end. It suddenly goes on a mission to kill every major character and then ends abruptly. I felt like it all amounted to really nothing. I wasn't moved by Glenn Close and her feminist mission. Everything about this movie was strange. Nothing felt like it was saying, "This is the world according to Garp!" It felt more like the world according to Glenn Close. What went wrong? There was something about Robin Williams' performance which just wasn't... it was Robin Williams, but he wasn't ROBIN WILLIAMS, you know? Maybe because it was 1982, he wasn't taken too seriously as an actor yet or something and they let Glenn Close rob him of what emotional weight he really could have brought. I blame her and the screenplay.

It's an awful movie. It really is. It's an entertaining movie, but it's really like a prehistoric Jackass movie -- bizarre situations, characters you don't ordinarily meet on the street, daredevil stunts, deaths and missing body parts. But at least Glenn Close gets shot dead. At least it had that.

Saw Garp at the movies when it came out people were raveing about it but i wasn't a fan of it back then

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

Dish Dogs
(directed by Robert Kubilos, 2000)



Oh, you know nobody's seen this movie since I can't even find a picture from it on the internet except for the DVD cover. Dish Dogs actually isn't that bad. It stars Sean Astin and Matthew Lillard as best friends in their mid-20's who drive around in a red pickup truck called Scarlett, going town to town, stopping at restaurants to wash dishes for a few days at a time before they take off and go to another one. Why are they doing this? This is their "career." These guys are philosophers who are out to stay single, preferring to only wash dishes as it gives them some sort of esoteric reason for living. It's actually just dumb, and one of them - Jason (Matthew Lillard) is starting to realize this, but Morgan (Sean Astin), the lead character, is having a much harder time. The film begins with one of their friends getting married. At the reception, Jason gets back together with an old girlfriend. Meanwhile, Morgan is hitting it off with Anne (Shannon Elizabeth), a dancer at a girlie bar. But he's pretending that he doesn't really feel anything for her. The point of the movie is that he's searching for some kind of huge epiphany -- and of course, later on, he does get it.

The film is completely predictable and one note. At the time of its release, the character of Morgan was probably very weird and strange to audiences, but nowadays, thanks to things like The Big Bang Theory, geeky guys who over-analyze things and have problems with women are more understandable and even sort of in vogue, I guess. This character, Morgan, literally believes that body and mind are not connected and everything he could possibly experience can be thought away and avoided, which is his entire problem throughout this movie. This was, I believe, a very odd concept for the movie, at least I thought it was as I was watching it. It plays quite seriously and intensely. I must say, though, personally, I wasn't bothered or even bored by the concept, however, the pacing of this film and the predictable chain of events, touched with the fact that the film feels very 90's direct-to-video (which I admit I love sometimes)... it all just made the movie feel slow and flat. Plus, there was too much music and singing at times. I admit I stopped the movie probably a minute or two before it even finished, but I believe everything was said and done.

Love Sean Astin and Matthew Lillard, though. Shannon Elizabeth was good in this, too. I've seen worse. At least it's only about 90-96 minutes long. Some scenes, though -- such as the truck breaking down and being towed away to a redneck's gas station -- were a little painful to endure.

DRIVE
(directed by Nicolas Winding Refn, 2011)



I loved this movie, yet I don't understand what all the fuss is about. I think that Drive has a sort of old, classic, 1960's, 1970's obscure, Taxi Driver kind of feel to it, and I love how bloody and violent it gets (eventually....)

But there's something wrong about it. Let me try to explain to you what I'm feeling is wrong: Okay, so, hopefully you all know what Drive is about. In short: Ryan Gosling plays a Hollywood car stunt driver for the movies who also works as a mechanic. He lives next to a woman in an apartment building - the woman has a young son. Her husband is in jail. Her husband gets out of jail. Unfortunately, trouble still finds the husband once he gets home. Ryan Gosling, as "The Driver", gets caught up in it all when he learns that the woman and her son now have their lives threatened because of the husband. He wants to protect them and an interesting, surprising twist unfolds.

For starters, Ryan Gosling is gorgeous. Ryan Gosling interests me.

BUT HE'S A MANNEQUIN!

And everytime I see Ryan Gosling in a movie, I feel like I'm watching an autistic actor or something. Drive full on exploits this. He plays the ultimate male mannequin character. He is a Crash Test Dummy. Actually, I take that back, because I remember the Crash Test Dummies and they actually had more life in them! All Ryan seems to do in this movie is just... be quiet! He's like Michael Myers in Halloween. In fact, I think Drive would have been a lot better if it had been a horror movie. Ryan Gosling is the perfect quiet murderer. There is something about him that just screams... crazy. In Lars and the Real Girl, he was having sex with that love doll (mannequin!!!) In All Good Things, he was a wacko that eventually became a mute transvestite murderer. Ryan Gosling is just... he's the sexiest mental patient in the world. I want to see him do strait jacket porn.

I don't really like the ending. Yet, I think my feelings about the ending are contributed by all the other elements that I feel are wrong with Drive. Technically, I think Drive works, as a story -- but technical is emotionless. Major spoiler below....

View Spoilers

WARNING: "Drive" spoilers below

He should have went back for the woman and her child. I'm very glad that he lived -- I had seen a picture of him getting stabbed and I feared it meant he died. I was so relieved that he lived, but it feels wrong that he drove off and I guess left town without the woman and her child. I get that in a way it's saying a pretty serious job was taken care of by him - the man who is incredible - but for all that protection he did for her... willingly... and for the passionate love he seemed to have for her... it feels so wrong to me. I don't agree with it. The ending left me unsatisfied. If he and the other guy had both died... I actually, even though I didn't want it, think it would have been more suitable.

He should have went back for the woman and her child. I'm very glad that he lived -- I had seen a picture of him getting stabbed and I feared it meant he died. I was so relieved that he lived, but it feels wrong that he drove off and I guess left town without the woman and her child. I get that in a way it's saying a pretty serious job was taken care of by him - the man who is incredible - but for all that protection he did for her... willingly... and for the passionate love he seemed to have for her... it feels so wrong to me. I don't agree with it. The ending left me unsatisfied. If he and the other guy had both died... I actually, even though I didn't want it, think it would have been more suitable.

There is a very narcissistic aspect to the Driver character in Drive. Drive is about male beauty. The movie is really a woman's movie disguised as a rough and dirty violence and cars male movie. Note the soundtrack: All of the songs, from what I remember, are sang by women. And it feels odd to me. I'm also noticing that this movie is extremely popular with girls. This is a movie about a Ken doll if Ken wanted to go and do something - a motion picture - without Barbie - but the Barbie corporation still had to have a hand in it. This is Ken meets Quentin Tarantino. And in the end, when all is said and done, Ken must leave Quentin and go back to Barbie.

Drive's failure to pick up any Oscar nominations is because of what I'm saying here. Imagine if Justin Bieber had played the Driver -- it would look ridiculous. Yet, he COULD have played the Driver, because that's what Drive is -- it's a pretty boy girly film trying to be manly. It's very covered up because that's what Ryan Gosling is required to do -- he is a very masculine looking stud, but he is also doing a mannequin role here. He is window dressing. He is the ultimate secret agent.

The fact that The Driver never truly feels invincible -- the fact that he does seem like he could be killed -- adds to the truth that he's not quite a real man. He is a silent pinup male model -- he never feels invincible. This movie reminded me of the Pam Grier 1970's Blaxploitation films that I love, like Coffy and Foxy Brown, where Pam is a badass mofo who is getting revenge and always succeeding. Pam had more life and power than Ryan Gosling does here. It bothers me that Ryan Gosling didn't. I blame the script for the most part. Ryan's silent presence doesn't come off as silent but deadly. He's sexy, but it's all surface. He is not sexy under the surface. If any ugly guy had played that character, nobody would care about Drive. Nobody. He really needed more life in him. It was frustrating just watching him act like a stump. The other men in this movie were loud and intimidating -- I can't really buy that Ryan Gosling was able to do battle with them. At least when Pam Grier went to battle, she was loud, she was sassy - she was a killer mama. Ryan Gosling is like cancer -- he might win, but he might lose. And for a movie like Drive, where he's a stunt driver and a mechanic... I don't think it works. He's hollow and he should be filled up with all kinds of complex stuff. There's nothing interesting about his mysteriousness. Even his apartment is really seen only in darkness. There's nothing to give him life. He's dead.

I even feel like there's a possible homosexual undertone to the Driver character, as well. But I've written a lot already and I've only seen the film once, so... not now.

Besides all this, though, I liked the movie.

i kinda skimmed over this one because i haven't seen Drive yet and am going to soon, but the mannequin thing was erm... interesting.

21 Jump Street
(directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller, 2012)



I wish 21 Jump Street had made me laugh more, although I wasn't completely laughless, and sometimes I laughed unexpectedly, even for a prolonged, but short length. That's the kind of comedies I love. On a small-medium-large scale of movies that make me laugh a lot, 21 Jump Street is definitely a medium. A medium french fry. However, the crowd in the movie theatre laughed quite a lot and seemed to be having a good time. On a plus side, though, the humor in this movie is rather raunchy and strange and unique AND to top it off, 21 Jump Street, while initially appearing like it's going to be slow and boring at first, catches you and becomes completely engaging and even classic.

I have never seen the TV show, 21 Jump Street, but I have a feeling this isn't a bad movie adaptation. It makes me interested in seeing the TV show now and I would love to see a sequel to this movie. I hope they make one that's even better than the first. There already appears to be a setup for the next one. In this movie, Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum play two people from different high school cliques (circa 2005) who, in 2012, meet up again when they join the police force. They become friends because Jonah Hill's character is smart and can help Channing with tests and such. Then they end up working together - on bicycles. After they bust some redneck thugs with drugs in the park, but fail to read them their Miranda Rights, they are assigned to a secret location - a church - which is 21 Jump Street. There they meet Ice Cube playing a hilarious and thoroughly wonderful, badass police captain, who gives them their new mission - to go undercover as high school students and stop a new and dangerous drug from virally being passed around to other schools.

Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum have good chemistry. I have to say, though, that I prefer Jonah Hill over Channing Tatum, which might seem odd. Not only has he lost some weight and looks better than ever here, he is a far more amusing and talented actor than Channing Tatum. Channing was good for being the solid meat and Sylvester Stallonish force of the team, however, his character gets put to work with really horrible, unnecessary minor characters -- dweeby school geeks who help him with some kind of phone-spying plot that never pans out to be anything interesting or useful -- and Jonah Hill ends up with the cool kids, who are more developed in the story and more interesting. Channing's character doesn't have much life, while Jonah's is bursting with life -- we even get to meet his parents, but we learn nothing about Channing's family. If I was him, I'd demand a better role in the next film, though hopefully they won't cut back on Jonah's as well.

My biggest gripe about this movie, though, was that it was extremely fast paced with many short scenes. It was hard to focus. At 1:30 in the morning, I was already sleepy and I seriously thought I might fall asleep during the first thirty minutes of the film. Things would happen and I just wasn't alert enough to pick up on what happened -- I blame the movie for this, I really do. It has a very erratic style. It's also one of those movies where scenes happen and you think the scene will serve at least some kind of purpose by ending on a funny note, but it doesn't happen and it just falls flat. It's like endlessly slurping from a straw and never stopping to rest and savor what you intake. The movie also has a very cool, modern, 2012-ish feel to it, which is good - I want movies to keep up with the times - but I wish it could have breathed more and maybe tried not to always be too cute. One annoying thing I hated about 21 Jump Street was its overuse of flashy words suddenly appearing on the screen. For example, during a scene where someone is doing drugs, every time the person experienced a new stage of effects that the drug causes, a screen would appearing exclaiming something like, "PHASE ONE: THE GIGGS." This kind of thing happened a lot, even when they weren't doing drugs. That's not to say that it happens all the time, but it was more than I cared for.

All in all, though, I thought 21 Jump Street was way better than average and definitely one of the best things Jonah Hill has done (though, I haven't seen Moneyball). It could have been better in a lot of ways, but then again, it could have been a whole lot worse. This is a medium-well affair. Have at it.

I can't say for sure, but from what I've heard about the film and what I've seen from the trailer, this is about as loosely connected to Jump Street as it's possible for it to be. The two main characters sound a bit like Hanson and Penhall (Johnny Depp and Peter DeLuise) with Ice Cube playing Captain Fuller (Steven Williams). It's about young looking police officers who are sent undercover to high schools and youth groups/gangs because of their appearance. 21 Jump Street was a church, but I think that's where the similarities are ending. Unless there are some cameos and/or familiar storylines included. It was a serious programme and was only shown over here on satellite tv. Needless to say, I loved it.

Halloween 5:
The Revenge of Michael Myers
(directed by Dominique Othenin-Girard, 1989)



I was in the mood to revisit this entry in the Halloween series. Its always been one of my favorites from the franchise, though a lot of other people have always complained that it's the worst one -- now I see why. Although, I still can't agree with them -- there are worse Halloween films (parts 6 and 8 come to mind.) I should be reviewing a Friday the 13th film since it's Friday the 13th, but, oh well.

The Halloween films revolve around a psycho killer named Michael Myers who stalks around a town called Haddonfield in Illinois. For some reason, he up and killed his teenage sister when he was six years old and he was sent to a mental institution for many years. He breaks out of the institution and his doctor, Loomis, played by Donald Pleasance, has to always chase after him. In the first two films, Michael's after his sister (played by Jamie Lee Curtis) and her friends. The third film had nothing to do with Michael Myers. The fourth film saw Michael going after his eight year old niece (Danielle Harris) and after failing to stop him in that film, he's back again to get her in Halloween 5.

At the end of 4, his niece, Jamie, stabbed her stepmother, leading you to think she's going to turn out to be just like her uncle. A year goes by and now she's in a children's hospital - and she's mute. However, she has some sort of psychic bond with her scary uncle Michael and can see him wherever he is. Whenever she knows he's around somebody she cares for, she starts shaking violently and almost chokes. Loomis sends a distress signal to cops, who go and try to save the intended victim. They usually do end up saved -- but only momentarily. Because of this, it is late into the film before people really start believing that Michael Myers has come back, as most people think Jamie's "warnings" are really nothing at all.

I don't know why I really need to write a review for this movie, but I'll just say that I found it interesting and enjoyable for a horror sequel, although the movie is kind of a mess. There are laughable, unintended sight gags such as Michael Myers wading through a river after he's avoided cops who just tried to bomb him. I never realized just how intelligent Michael Myers actually is for a guy who's never talked for most of his life - and, how human-like he can be, which is strange because this guy has been shot by probably hundreds of bullets and yet he never goes down. And people are still pretty confident that they have some way they can kill him. Especially Loomis.

This movie used to seem pretty frightening to me. Not that it actually did frighten me, but it looked like a pretty frightening movie. Some of the characters here aren't so bad and the majority of them end up slaughtered. It's a very bleak film, though. A young girl spends the majority of her time fearing for the life of her family and friends and it never lets up. She never gets any relief. The ending is a cliffhanger which leads to another dismal sequel that took six years to come around and wrap the story up - at least the one dealing with the little girl. Watching this movie almost seems like a waste of time unless you like scary, masked monsters hunting people down, ruining things like a blonde teenage girl's initiation to sex in a barn, occasionally wearing a Ronald Reagan mask or having emotional moments with his niece that actually make him shed a tear.

If it's ruthless, diabolical revenge you want, Michael Myers will bring it.