There are many who will swear this film is 100% truth. However, there are also those who believe it to be a complete farce- concocted by Shepard Fairy (the Obama poster guy) and everyone's favorite guerilla stenciler, Banksy. Regardless of the film's true history, it is a statement about street art and, more importantly, an examination of the true values which motivate it. The film opens in 1999 with Thierry Guetta, a clothing mogul and amateur filmmaker. Guetta is a bumbling, stumbling and nearly incoherent Frenchman who accidentally discovers his cousin's role in the rapidly growing street art community. This chance occurrence sends Guetta on a 10 year, global journey to document prominent members of the fledgling art movement- from its grimy, urban roots on street corners and the sides of buildings, to its rise into galleries, auction houses and the homes of wealthy collectors. The odd, quirky and moving art in the film plays as much of a role as Guetta, Banksy and the other artists. Guetta represents the unknowing public who is forced to view this street art created by individuals who are fueled by cynicism and disgust for the modern, commercial and censored world we live in. And, naturally, he wants to be a part of it. Without giving too much away, 'Exit through the Gift Shop' is first an intimate look into the world of street art and how mainstream consumerism is destroying it- the same way it did coffee houses, acoustic music, and, well, art in general. And then it is one man's odyssey into the street art world. He is overcome by one of the last great outlets of independent social criticism and some of the movement's greatest contributors. Then, he attempts to become one of them and really makes a mess. 'Exit through the Gift Shop' is a documentary in the way that 'Borat' was a documentary. It's farce which forces its viewers to look deeper into the subject. Rhys Ifan provides narration for the film, which only adds to the humor and overall dry wit. In a perfect synthesis, 'Exit' combines great art, a few nail biting and anxiety inducing moments and a clever and hilarious story which is both too far-fetched to be fully believable but also simply be written off as a complete hoax.
Reviews
12 Reviews
Exit Through the Gift Shop
(2010)
Excellent whether you think it's a hoax or 100% truth!
8 July 2010
Documentation of True Injustice
26 April 2010
There are few injustices more notorious, ignored and ingrained in history than that of the land stolen from the Native people of North America. When European invaders came into the areas now known as the United States and Canada, they dominated the land, killing many of its original inhabitants, took advantage of resources and made countless empty promises. This poor treatment lasted for centuries and continues today. Rarely, native groups attempt to stand up against injustices inflicted on their land and their people and often times the results are unsavory and violent. However, at times, when injustices are made Native People can ban together and attempt to stand up in the name of their ancestors and their natural rights. Such is seen in Alanis Obomswaim's Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance. The film is controversial and important in that it instills a sense of anger and a lack of understanding in anyone who views it. The blatant abuse and mistreatment of the indigenous people of the area is down right shocking.
The film documents the 1990 standoff between a faction of Mohawk and the town of Oka, Quebec over a stretch of sacred land that was to be acquired and made into a luxury golf course. In the film is an age old story between the power elite of a community and the taken advantage of, fed up native people who only want to preserve the land that is rightfully their's. The land had been the property of the Mohawk in the area as stated in an agreement by the ancestors of the Mohawk and the French and British governments who had taken over the land during the 16 and 1700s. However, as historically illustrated, the non-native people inhabiting the land continued to decrease and push back the land set aside for the Mohawk to the point where it was currently at the time of the documentary. At the film's start, the town of Oka intended to come onto land set aside for the Mohawk to build a new golf course. Angered by this, the Mohawk blocked off the road to incoming construction equipment and workers and a standoff ensued. Interestingly, the Mohawk, local city officials, police and the army actually worked together in a kind of uncomfortable cooperation for the first part of the protest. After some time, however, the Army was given full control and the Mohawk were forced off the road and into a community center.
Throughout the film there are many notable moments that make the audience question how and why one group of people could treat another group in such away. Portions of the film are down right eerie in the almost totalitarian treatment of both native and non native people who inhabit the area. Citizens are relocated, traffic is diverted and local city establishments are taken over to be used for military support. The mixture of military occupation and Mohawk demonstration infuriates the town and a series of racially motivated attacks occur on either side. Throughout the stand off, as seen through various interviews and newscasts, bad sentiments are felt on both sides.
Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance truly shows the adverse effects of overbearing power on an oppressed people. In the end, there is no real resolution to the stand off. The Mohawks confined to the community center eventually leave. They are jailed for a short time and then released. As the movie ends it is stated that there is still an ongoing debate concerning the land. The film is a firm example of a group pushed over their limits. It is invigorating to see the various unforgettable members of the Mohawk tribe and how they ban together to fight against a common cause they see as unjust. There are many members of the other side of the struggle who are unforgettable as well, although for very obvious different reasons. There is a certain level of disappointment experienced when viewing this film. Primarily the film is of an independent production company. It is for this reason that the film received such limited exposure to both American and world audiences. It could be assumed that if more were to view this film there would be more outrage. The film is well made and has a very strong message of unity and never shying away in the face of danger as well as a very intimate look at the lives of modern, passionate warriors in a desperate attempt to preserve what is rightfully theirs.
The film documents the 1990 standoff between a faction of Mohawk and the town of Oka, Quebec over a stretch of sacred land that was to be acquired and made into a luxury golf course. In the film is an age old story between the power elite of a community and the taken advantage of, fed up native people who only want to preserve the land that is rightfully their's. The land had been the property of the Mohawk in the area as stated in an agreement by the ancestors of the Mohawk and the French and British governments who had taken over the land during the 16 and 1700s. However, as historically illustrated, the non-native people inhabiting the land continued to decrease and push back the land set aside for the Mohawk to the point where it was currently at the time of the documentary. At the film's start, the town of Oka intended to come onto land set aside for the Mohawk to build a new golf course. Angered by this, the Mohawk blocked off the road to incoming construction equipment and workers and a standoff ensued. Interestingly, the Mohawk, local city officials, police and the army actually worked together in a kind of uncomfortable cooperation for the first part of the protest. After some time, however, the Army was given full control and the Mohawk were forced off the road and into a community center.
Throughout the film there are many notable moments that make the audience question how and why one group of people could treat another group in such away. Portions of the film are down right eerie in the almost totalitarian treatment of both native and non native people who inhabit the area. Citizens are relocated, traffic is diverted and local city establishments are taken over to be used for military support. The mixture of military occupation and Mohawk demonstration infuriates the town and a series of racially motivated attacks occur on either side. Throughout the stand off, as seen through various interviews and newscasts, bad sentiments are felt on both sides.
Kanehsatake: 270 Years of Resistance truly shows the adverse effects of overbearing power on an oppressed people. In the end, there is no real resolution to the stand off. The Mohawks confined to the community center eventually leave. They are jailed for a short time and then released. As the movie ends it is stated that there is still an ongoing debate concerning the land. The film is a firm example of a group pushed over their limits. It is invigorating to see the various unforgettable members of the Mohawk tribe and how they ban together to fight against a common cause they see as unjust. There are many members of the other side of the struggle who are unforgettable as well, although for very obvious different reasons. There is a certain level of disappointment experienced when viewing this film. Primarily the film is of an independent production company. It is for this reason that the film received such limited exposure to both American and world audiences. It could be assumed that if more were to view this film there would be more outrage. The film is well made and has a very strong message of unity and never shying away in the face of danger as well as a very intimate look at the lives of modern, passionate warriors in a desperate attempt to preserve what is rightfully theirs.
Smoke Signals
(1998)
Literally Unparalleled Native American Comedy
26 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Through the history of American mainstream cinema there has been a both surprising and disturbing lack of Native American influence. Too often, filmmakers rely on half truths, fabrications and demeaning stereotypes to portray the Native American on screen. In the "golden age" of Hollywood, actors such as Clint Eastwood and John Wayne were made into prolific, American figures, while Native Americans were made out to be savage and bloodthirsty enemies. This is a trend that has carried over from the past and into the present and is truly disappointing. Thankfully, Chris Eyre and Sherman Alexie's Smoke Signals reverses this trend and creates a heartwarming and engaging tale about two modern Native Americans and their unique struggle with personal demons, conformity and the constant, overbearing, white culture that dominates them. The film is amongst the most notable Native American productions and of the most successful. The productions is also amongst the few films to be fully written, directed and produced exclusively by Native Americans.
The Film, based on a collection of loosely related short stories written by Alexie entitled The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven, centers around Thomas Builds-the-fire and Victor Joseph. Both characters are members of the Coer D'Alene tribe and reside on the tribe's reservation in central Idaho, though the characters are marginally different. These differences both inhibit and enhance the journey they must share. When Victor, the more aggressive, athletic and conflicted of the pair, must travel to Arizona to retrieve the ashes of his estranged and deceased father, he must rely on Thomas for both unwanted support and extra money to supply funds for the trip. While on their journey, Thomas acts as narrator, both adding to scenes and fabricating stories about both his and Victor's pasts.
The film relies heavily on a specific type of humor to drive the plot. The humor is almost exclusively Native American in its dry and sarcastic tone. The humor is offset by the shocking reality of the situation faced by the two main characters. Located in Idaho, the reservation is isolated from the rest of the world. This is illustrated in the opening scene as the reservation's radio station, "K-REZ", reports on local happenings and non-existent traffic conditions. As it is seen, both characters rarely leave the reservation and it is apparent that contemporary, predominantly white American culture is almost completely foreign to them. What average American citizens see as day to day society is both strange and new.
The film, although humorous, tackles many issues faced by modern Native Americans. The issue of identity is of the most prominent. Victor is in constant conflict with who he actually is and where he has come from. He is aware that he holds a certain amount of aggression toward his father, but he does not understand this aggression until the very end, and it is at the point where he understands why his father ran away that he can accept his father's mistakes and celebrate his spirit. This is also the point where the idea of running from problems is also resolved. Running from problems is a constant in the plot. Arnold Joseph, Victor's father, is in constant guilt after being responsible for the fire that kills Thomas's parents. Although he saves Thomas from the fire he must live with the guilt until it becomes too much for him to handle. At the movie's climax, rather than running away, Victor literally runs toward the issue at hand and ends up saving the victim of a drunk driving crash. Additionally, alcoholism, a problem which faces both Native and Non Native Americans, is constantly examined. It is the reason why Arnold Joseph burns down the Builds-the-fire home and the reason why he leaves his own home. At first Victor is unwilling to accept his father's change after death. However, after coming to his father's home and seeing that his father still did care, even after leaving, he is able to come to terms with his father's struggle as both an Alcoholic and a Native person in American society. Victor leaves Arizona with a new understanding of his identity, a new found appreciation for his friend, Thomas, and the ability to face problems head on without inner struggle or violence.
The identity of the Native American is studied deeply in Smoke Signals. Alexie's unique style creates a story that is one of a kind and completely different from the average American conception of Native life. Although it is entertaining and down right hysterical in some parts, the story evokes an important messages about inner struggle, understanding the family dynamic, addiction and acquiring the ability to cope in a less than acceptable setting.
The Film, based on a collection of loosely related short stories written by Alexie entitled The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven, centers around Thomas Builds-the-fire and Victor Joseph. Both characters are members of the Coer D'Alene tribe and reside on the tribe's reservation in central Idaho, though the characters are marginally different. These differences both inhibit and enhance the journey they must share. When Victor, the more aggressive, athletic and conflicted of the pair, must travel to Arizona to retrieve the ashes of his estranged and deceased father, he must rely on Thomas for both unwanted support and extra money to supply funds for the trip. While on their journey, Thomas acts as narrator, both adding to scenes and fabricating stories about both his and Victor's pasts.
The film relies heavily on a specific type of humor to drive the plot. The humor is almost exclusively Native American in its dry and sarcastic tone. The humor is offset by the shocking reality of the situation faced by the two main characters. Located in Idaho, the reservation is isolated from the rest of the world. This is illustrated in the opening scene as the reservation's radio station, "K-REZ", reports on local happenings and non-existent traffic conditions. As it is seen, both characters rarely leave the reservation and it is apparent that contemporary, predominantly white American culture is almost completely foreign to them. What average American citizens see as day to day society is both strange and new.
The film, although humorous, tackles many issues faced by modern Native Americans. The issue of identity is of the most prominent. Victor is in constant conflict with who he actually is and where he has come from. He is aware that he holds a certain amount of aggression toward his father, but he does not understand this aggression until the very end, and it is at the point where he understands why his father ran away that he can accept his father's mistakes and celebrate his spirit. This is also the point where the idea of running from problems is also resolved. Running from problems is a constant in the plot. Arnold Joseph, Victor's father, is in constant guilt after being responsible for the fire that kills Thomas's parents. Although he saves Thomas from the fire he must live with the guilt until it becomes too much for him to handle. At the movie's climax, rather than running away, Victor literally runs toward the issue at hand and ends up saving the victim of a drunk driving crash. Additionally, alcoholism, a problem which faces both Native and Non Native Americans, is constantly examined. It is the reason why Arnold Joseph burns down the Builds-the-fire home and the reason why he leaves his own home. At first Victor is unwilling to accept his father's change after death. However, after coming to his father's home and seeing that his father still did care, even after leaving, he is able to come to terms with his father's struggle as both an Alcoholic and a Native person in American society. Victor leaves Arizona with a new understanding of his identity, a new found appreciation for his friend, Thomas, and the ability to face problems head on without inner struggle or violence.
The identity of the Native American is studied deeply in Smoke Signals. Alexie's unique style creates a story that is one of a kind and completely different from the average American conception of Native life. Although it is entertaining and down right hysterical in some parts, the story evokes an important messages about inner struggle, understanding the family dynamic, addiction and acquiring the ability to cope in a less than acceptable setting.
Kick-Ass
(2010)
Wild and Crazy Examination of the Human Condition
24 April 2010
I waited a really long time to see Kick Ass because I have a lot of comic book, fan boy friends who always gripe and complain about how inaccurate the adaptations are and how little attention is paid to details from the original story whenever we get together to watch one of these movies. Honestly, I would rather take a brutal ass kicking than sit through another movie with one of them painstakingly tearing the movie apart. It was for that reason that I stayed home when they went out and saw it and waited until now to get my own, unbiased and completely fan boy free opinion.
The film takes great elements from good old run and gun Kung Fu shoot em' ups, blood soaked, gore fests and sadistic, dark comedies. It combines these elements with initially traditional hero and villain archetypes which audiences members are used to and creates a new, offbeat and non contemporary world where everyday citizens are afraid to face any kind of evil that lurks in the shadows.
That is until a few misfits realize that there are no REAL superheros out there and there's a desperate need for change- as well as a bit of well placed retribution.
In my opinion they cast the Kick Ass character perfectly. Aaron Johnson is the epitome of pathetic and invisible until he dons the skin green and yellow tight scuba suit and Timberlands and takes to the streets. Nick Cage is still Nick Cage, but I take back a few of the things I've said about him (only some). He really diluted himself and became something different than what we're all used to seeing. He didn't even have overtly goofy hair! But, it was really Chloe Moretz that took the cake. Her comedic timing was perfect and, out of all the characters, I felt for her the most. As Hit Girl she was a miniature Uma Thurman in Kill Bill. There are not many movies that come to mind when I think cold blooded killer and also prepubescent girl. It was new and different to see a girl portrayed in movie like this doing the kind of things she did.
Overall, it's a fun movie. On the core it's a mixture of a few very different kind of films. It's both feel good, semi-comedy and also a commentary on society; while it still serves up enough gun Kata inspired violence and fighting to win over even the most stoic of movie nerds. It makes one consider the plight of the human condition when people will turn the other cheek when they see a mugging, although, it sends kind of a positive message that if people are pushed far enough they can do some pretty crazy, amazing things.
The film takes great elements from good old run and gun Kung Fu shoot em' ups, blood soaked, gore fests and sadistic, dark comedies. It combines these elements with initially traditional hero and villain archetypes which audiences members are used to and creates a new, offbeat and non contemporary world where everyday citizens are afraid to face any kind of evil that lurks in the shadows.
That is until a few misfits realize that there are no REAL superheros out there and there's a desperate need for change- as well as a bit of well placed retribution.
In my opinion they cast the Kick Ass character perfectly. Aaron Johnson is the epitome of pathetic and invisible until he dons the skin green and yellow tight scuba suit and Timberlands and takes to the streets. Nick Cage is still Nick Cage, but I take back a few of the things I've said about him (only some). He really diluted himself and became something different than what we're all used to seeing. He didn't even have overtly goofy hair! But, it was really Chloe Moretz that took the cake. Her comedic timing was perfect and, out of all the characters, I felt for her the most. As Hit Girl she was a miniature Uma Thurman in Kill Bill. There are not many movies that come to mind when I think cold blooded killer and also prepubescent girl. It was new and different to see a girl portrayed in movie like this doing the kind of things she did.
Overall, it's a fun movie. On the core it's a mixture of a few very different kind of films. It's both feel good, semi-comedy and also a commentary on society; while it still serves up enough gun Kata inspired violence and fighting to win over even the most stoic of movie nerds. It makes one consider the plight of the human condition when people will turn the other cheek when they see a mugging, although, it sends kind of a positive message that if people are pushed far enough they can do some pretty crazy, amazing things.
Super Fly
(1972)
A True Black Power Masterpiece
4 March 2010
Rather than sugar coating subject matter and attempting to be politically correct, exploitation films blatantly depicted drug use and violence forcing movie goers into situations they may or may not be comfortable with viewing. Blaxploitation does this just as any other films encompassed in the genre and, unfortunately, has gotten excess criticism from both film critics, advocacy groups and even Civil Rights leaders. Films like Dolemite, Blacula and especially Superfly have been said to further stereotypes, promote violence and generally cast Black culture in a negative light. However, what many fail to see is that movies like Superfly are truly liberating to the culture the film is targeted for and further more, a commentary on social lives of Blacks at the time. Much like H. Rap Brown's, Die N!@@^# Die, Superfly is a commentary of two kinds of African American thought during the late 60s and into the late 70s.
Of the many positions taken in the book, H. Rap Brown argues that there were different kinds of African American mentalities during the Black Power movement. There were those who were ready and willing to fight for change and move away from a society dominated by white ideals and racism. Although, there were also those who were complacent with their lives and unwilling to take any stance against the race who continued to force them into second class lifestyles. These mentalities are clearly stated in Superfly and it is an issue that the protagonist, Priest, struggles with throughout the film. Priest is a streetwise cocaine dealer in the midst of making a life changing decision. Rather than continuing his life dealing drugs, fighting rivals and avoiding the corrupt police he decides to make one final deal and leave the life. The Priest character's archetype is very similar to the second of the two groups mentioned in Brown's book. Often times, African Americans tired of the white controlled system turned to drugs and crime. Rather than trying to better society, they often times made it worse, killing and corrupting others. The Priest, fed up with the white dominated society, had acquired a small wealth selling drugs. Although, after some time of dealing he realizes he is putting both his own life and the lives of other in danger.
It is at this point that Priest becomes some what of a black power symbol, slowly removing himself from his previous lifestyle, liberating himself from his white girlfriend; who is clearly using him for his connections in the drug world, and attempting to cast negative light on the corrupt, drug dealing police officers in power. Priest's partner, Eddie, is his stark opposite in the film. Where Priest attempts to leave his old life, Eddie wants to delve deeper into the world after Priest and Eddie are forced into doing deals for the police. Eddie sees this as an opportunity for more wealth, where Priest knows it is truly a form of modern slavery; where the police are the masters and individuals like Priest and Eddie are the slaves and Priest is not willing to tolerate this abuse.
Curtis Mayfield composed and performed all of the songs featured in the film. The films main song, "Superfly", sums up the issues faced by drug dealers on a day to day basis. The lyrics, "Hard to understand ,what a hell of a man, this cat of the slum, had a mind, wasn't dumb, but a weakness was shown, 'cause his hustle was wrong, his mind was his own, but the man lived alone" illustrate Priest's lifestyle as a hustler with a strong mind. He finally recognizes the wrong doings he has committed and must pull himself up from the streets. Similarly, the song "Pusherman" tackles other inner struggles faced by Priest. Lyrics such as, "been told I can't be nothing' else, just a hustler in spite of myself, I know I can rake it, this life just don't make it" show white America's perceptions of Black Americans who have given up on society. Powerful whites, at the time, felt that there was no retribution for those who committed their lives to crime and drugs. Furthermore, a statement is made that inner city African Americans are never given the chances of whites outside the cities; also a trend in Brown's book. Black youths were often times told that there is nothing for them outside of inner city life. The expectations of those around Priest are to deal drugs, make money and risk their lives. Anyone who tries to leave the life will face scrutiny and they are actually expected to fail.
Overall, Superfly black America's response to white America's perceptions about inner city life. Superfly and the Priest are black America's version of John Wayne, Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson. The film defines ideas proposed by black power figures and does all of this while still incorporating an entertaining and engaging story. The film is also a commentary of the relationships between different groups of African American groups in violent times. It is a story about retribution and exceeding the expectations of both those in power and those around an individual. Using strong black power themes, a once corrupted drug dealer becomes a symbol of black strength and perseverance at a time when racism was at its worst
Of the many positions taken in the book, H. Rap Brown argues that there were different kinds of African American mentalities during the Black Power movement. There were those who were ready and willing to fight for change and move away from a society dominated by white ideals and racism. Although, there were also those who were complacent with their lives and unwilling to take any stance against the race who continued to force them into second class lifestyles. These mentalities are clearly stated in Superfly and it is an issue that the protagonist, Priest, struggles with throughout the film. Priest is a streetwise cocaine dealer in the midst of making a life changing decision. Rather than continuing his life dealing drugs, fighting rivals and avoiding the corrupt police he decides to make one final deal and leave the life. The Priest character's archetype is very similar to the second of the two groups mentioned in Brown's book. Often times, African Americans tired of the white controlled system turned to drugs and crime. Rather than trying to better society, they often times made it worse, killing and corrupting others. The Priest, fed up with the white dominated society, had acquired a small wealth selling drugs. Although, after some time of dealing he realizes he is putting both his own life and the lives of other in danger.
It is at this point that Priest becomes some what of a black power symbol, slowly removing himself from his previous lifestyle, liberating himself from his white girlfriend; who is clearly using him for his connections in the drug world, and attempting to cast negative light on the corrupt, drug dealing police officers in power. Priest's partner, Eddie, is his stark opposite in the film. Where Priest attempts to leave his old life, Eddie wants to delve deeper into the world after Priest and Eddie are forced into doing deals for the police. Eddie sees this as an opportunity for more wealth, where Priest knows it is truly a form of modern slavery; where the police are the masters and individuals like Priest and Eddie are the slaves and Priest is not willing to tolerate this abuse.
Curtis Mayfield composed and performed all of the songs featured in the film. The films main song, "Superfly", sums up the issues faced by drug dealers on a day to day basis. The lyrics, "Hard to understand ,what a hell of a man, this cat of the slum, had a mind, wasn't dumb, but a weakness was shown, 'cause his hustle was wrong, his mind was his own, but the man lived alone" illustrate Priest's lifestyle as a hustler with a strong mind. He finally recognizes the wrong doings he has committed and must pull himself up from the streets. Similarly, the song "Pusherman" tackles other inner struggles faced by Priest. Lyrics such as, "been told I can't be nothing' else, just a hustler in spite of myself, I know I can rake it, this life just don't make it" show white America's perceptions of Black Americans who have given up on society. Powerful whites, at the time, felt that there was no retribution for those who committed their lives to crime and drugs. Furthermore, a statement is made that inner city African Americans are never given the chances of whites outside the cities; also a trend in Brown's book. Black youths were often times told that there is nothing for them outside of inner city life. The expectations of those around Priest are to deal drugs, make money and risk their lives. Anyone who tries to leave the life will face scrutiny and they are actually expected to fail.
Overall, Superfly black America's response to white America's perceptions about inner city life. Superfly and the Priest are black America's version of John Wayne, Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson. The film defines ideas proposed by black power figures and does all of this while still incorporating an entertaining and engaging story. The film is also a commentary of the relationships between different groups of African American groups in violent times. It is a story about retribution and exceeding the expectations of both those in power and those around an individual. Using strong black power themes, a once corrupted drug dealer becomes a symbol of black strength and perseverance at a time when racism was at its worst
Inglourious Basterds
(2009)
10 Scalped Nazis out of 10!
21 August 2009
This movie was absolutely insane. I am almost speechless and I do not know where to begin. 'Inglorious Basterds' is going to get talked down for some many reasons. It is inaccurate, it is low and it is messy. I remember seeing the trailer and envisioning effigies of Quentin Tarantino being strung up in Middle American towns and burned and human chains comprised of ticked off Germans blocking people from seeing this movie at theaters across the world. No such thing happened and it was PACKED when I saw it just a few hours ago.
I was apprehensive at first. When Tarantino directs a movie it is going to rely heavily on its dialog. The visual effects, blood and gore and basically everything about the film is just after effect. I do not think war movie when I think of Mr. Tarantino. His movies have a feel, much like George Lucas or Wes Anderson. I thought about recent disappointing revamps like 'Terminator Salvation', or if you really want to go back, 'Live Free or Die Hard'. These movies did not feel like the originals and it was as if they were entirely different movies with just the same, or similar name just tacked on and packaged as an addition.
The 'Basterds' was not the same deal. Although not a sequel or prequel to any other movies it still has a similar feel to Taratino's other, more palatable works. This was a Tarantino movie, only instead of being set in an LA Warehouse, Jack Rabbit Slim's, or a Drug Dealer's living room it was set in Nazi Occupied France. All of the typical characterizations were there, as was the wit ridden dialog and to top it all off was a healthy dosage of explosions, violence and gun play. This violence was not as artistic as in 'Kill Bill'. But, IMO it was way more satisfying. There is nothing like the sound of a wooden baseball bat connecting with a Nazi officer's skull! There are going to be surprises and a shameless laughter. During the movie a lot of my fellow patrons applauded. Usually this is something I frown upon- I did pay $10.25 to see the thing, I do not need your applause every 10 minutes- but there are just some instances that are worth it. Tarantino has not just created a film here, he has created a good time. This is imagination at its best. Historical Fiction is really underrated and it is done to perfection.
To the haters out there(especially the person who had a problem with the film's weird spelling of the word bastard- give me a break!): SUCK IT UP! Who cares if it's politically incorrect? This is a work of fiction and it does not reflect the actual German people at all. At best its a parody and an homage to the old war flicks where American hero's impale Hitler with a pole with an American Flag on the end. This is no more harmful than Bugs Bunny dressing like a girl and giving Hitler/ Tojo a big wet kiss then giving him a gift wrapped bomb with an obviously lit fuse. You people are a real pain. If you find a problem with this movie you are probably the person who shows up to a party and complains that there are not enough places to sit down.
I am going to see this again as soon as I can! (note: I do respect people's opinions. I was just taking my time to be a jerk. I really enjoyed this movie but I will acknowledge the fact that other people may not have had the same experience and that is reasonable!)
I was apprehensive at first. When Tarantino directs a movie it is going to rely heavily on its dialog. The visual effects, blood and gore and basically everything about the film is just after effect. I do not think war movie when I think of Mr. Tarantino. His movies have a feel, much like George Lucas or Wes Anderson. I thought about recent disappointing revamps like 'Terminator Salvation', or if you really want to go back, 'Live Free or Die Hard'. These movies did not feel like the originals and it was as if they were entirely different movies with just the same, or similar name just tacked on and packaged as an addition.
The 'Basterds' was not the same deal. Although not a sequel or prequel to any other movies it still has a similar feel to Taratino's other, more palatable works. This was a Tarantino movie, only instead of being set in an LA Warehouse, Jack Rabbit Slim's, or a Drug Dealer's living room it was set in Nazi Occupied France. All of the typical characterizations were there, as was the wit ridden dialog and to top it all off was a healthy dosage of explosions, violence and gun play. This violence was not as artistic as in 'Kill Bill'. But, IMO it was way more satisfying. There is nothing like the sound of a wooden baseball bat connecting with a Nazi officer's skull! There are going to be surprises and a shameless laughter. During the movie a lot of my fellow patrons applauded. Usually this is something I frown upon- I did pay $10.25 to see the thing, I do not need your applause every 10 minutes- but there are just some instances that are worth it. Tarantino has not just created a film here, he has created a good time. This is imagination at its best. Historical Fiction is really underrated and it is done to perfection.
To the haters out there(especially the person who had a problem with the film's weird spelling of the word bastard- give me a break!): SUCK IT UP! Who cares if it's politically incorrect? This is a work of fiction and it does not reflect the actual German people at all. At best its a parody and an homage to the old war flicks where American hero's impale Hitler with a pole with an American Flag on the end. This is no more harmful than Bugs Bunny dressing like a girl and giving Hitler/ Tojo a big wet kiss then giving him a gift wrapped bomb with an obviously lit fuse. You people are a real pain. If you find a problem with this movie you are probably the person who shows up to a party and complains that there are not enough places to sit down.
I am going to see this again as soon as I can! (note: I do respect people's opinions. I was just taking my time to be a jerk. I really enjoyed this movie but I will acknowledge the fact that other people may not have had the same experience and that is reasonable!)
Drop Dead Fred
(1991)
Warms even the coldest of Hearts.
18 August 2009
As part of my old job I was allowed all of the free DVD's I could handle. At one point I had over 500. I am in the midst of selling a lot of them and it is a painful process. I had a solid pile of about 100 that I wanted to sell. 'Drop Dead Fred' was at the top of the pile. I had never watched the movie and for some reason, last night, it was calling to me. I am really glad I decided to watch it and remove it from the doomed pile.
On the surface this is one of those early 90's kids movies that actually is not really intended for kids. Do you remember that movie with Martin Short? 'Clifford'? It is the same idea. It is a style of film making that is not utilized nearly enough. The movie is crewed and lewd and almost perfect. Fred rules! I love the imaginary friend idea and I think it was depicted in perfect absurdity.
The plot is simple but far from stale in the way it is presented. Girl has crappy life, remembers childhood imaginary friend and then said imaginary friend comes back into girl's life and wreaks havoc. The film's colorful and quirky nature invigorates the plot 200%. It is also really heartfelt and gives you a warm mushy feeling at the end which honestly is something that we all need to experience every now and again seeing as we live is such a cruel and depressing world full of heartless and blood thirsty ingrates.
Underneath the comical veneer is something else- something much darker and disturbing. There is something very psychological about this film. Fred, the imaginary friend, is ID through and through. I would go as far to say that this film should be shown in PSY100 classes to demonstrate the ID, EGO and SUPER EGO and how they work. Although the film is comical I think the plot plays with the idea of mental illness a lot. I will make the argument that Lizzy suffers from Schizophrenia and this film is a depiction of her battle with the illness.
I am told that a remake is in the works and that British Comedian Russell Brand is set to play Fred. He is getting a lot of flack on both his message board and this message board as well. Part of me, as Any fan of this movie would, agrees that it is near perfect and a remake is pointless- however if I had one complaint it is that the film does not look all that great (with the exception of Phoebe Cates). Visually, the film is kind of dull. I think it would be invigorating to see the film done with more in terms of effects. And in Russell Brand's defense, have we really seen enough of his work to discriminate against him and know that he will ruin a remake? I HATED 'Forgetting Sara Marshall' but Russell Brand really made it's excruciating length and general blandness slightly more bearable.
On the surface this is one of those early 90's kids movies that actually is not really intended for kids. Do you remember that movie with Martin Short? 'Clifford'? It is the same idea. It is a style of film making that is not utilized nearly enough. The movie is crewed and lewd and almost perfect. Fred rules! I love the imaginary friend idea and I think it was depicted in perfect absurdity.
The plot is simple but far from stale in the way it is presented. Girl has crappy life, remembers childhood imaginary friend and then said imaginary friend comes back into girl's life and wreaks havoc. The film's colorful and quirky nature invigorates the plot 200%. It is also really heartfelt and gives you a warm mushy feeling at the end which honestly is something that we all need to experience every now and again seeing as we live is such a cruel and depressing world full of heartless and blood thirsty ingrates.
Underneath the comical veneer is something else- something much darker and disturbing. There is something very psychological about this film. Fred, the imaginary friend, is ID through and through. I would go as far to say that this film should be shown in PSY100 classes to demonstrate the ID, EGO and SUPER EGO and how they work. Although the film is comical I think the plot plays with the idea of mental illness a lot. I will make the argument that Lizzy suffers from Schizophrenia and this film is a depiction of her battle with the illness.
I am told that a remake is in the works and that British Comedian Russell Brand is set to play Fred. He is getting a lot of flack on both his message board and this message board as well. Part of me, as Any fan of this movie would, agrees that it is near perfect and a remake is pointless- however if I had one complaint it is that the film does not look all that great (with the exception of Phoebe Cates). Visually, the film is kind of dull. I think it would be invigorating to see the film done with more in terms of effects. And in Russell Brand's defense, have we really seen enough of his work to discriminate against him and know that he will ruin a remake? I HATED 'Forgetting Sara Marshall' but Russell Brand really made it's excruciating length and general blandness slightly more bearable.
Joshua Tree
(1993)
It's a true Shame
17 August 2009
Of all the foreign action stars mass produced and exported to America and cast in over the top movies, I feel that Mr. Lundgren is my favorite. Schwarzenegger comes off as unrealistic. Vandam is just laughable. And honestly, anyone else is just forgettable. When it comes down to it, Dolph Lundgren is VERY underrated and until I watched 'Joshua Tree' I did not even come close to knowing it. To me, he was just the bad guy in the Rocky movie that I never watched.
Lundgren is a steamroller. He plows through cops, thugs and anyone else that gets in his way. They are left in a wake of insanity and the whole while he keeps a cool composure and it never gets overly comical. 'Joshua Tree' is in no way realistic; though it has a grittiness to it that movies like 'True Lies' and 'Commando' will never have. Casting Schwarzenegger as 'John Kimble' or 'Harry Trasker' takes me out of the film. With that brutal accent and and the overbearing brawn he will never be a street smart American protagonist that he is cast to be and this is detrimental to his character and the movie as a whole. Lundgren is the antithesis. He has the cold European gaze, but he adds a different flare that actually fits. He can riddle a body with bullets and give a snappy line and the audience will laugh- but they are laughing with him and not at him.
Action directors today can learn a lot from this film. It should be mandatory viewing for action directors in film school. Directors today rely too heavily on CGI. This movie is raw. Everything was done by hand and it adds to the realism that a Schwarzenegger flick, like I mentioned before, lacks. Sure, you can see camera reflections on shiny surfaces and guns fire countless rounds without any need to reload but it is just fun.
I stated that Lundgren was a superior actor when compared to his European action star peers- that does not, by any means, make the acting in this movie great. Regardless, the characters are vibrant and colorful. The cops are crooked and gaudy. The babes are buxom and bodacious and any all stereotypes are laid on thick and smooth.
Without giving away a whole lot: the infamous warehouse scene is amazing- a true high point. I am sure this movie was not the first to do a shot like this but it was executed wonderfully; or, at least a hell of a lot better than many action movies that would follow. When combined with the great car chases and countless fight scenes I cannot speak highly enough.
From all of this I cannot help but wonder what the world would be like today if it were Lundgren cast in The Terminator or Predator. I will definitely check out more of his work and re-watch 'Joshua Tree' again and again.
On a side note, does anyone know why my copy of the film is titled, 'Army of One' instead of 'Joshua Tree'?
Lundgren is a steamroller. He plows through cops, thugs and anyone else that gets in his way. They are left in a wake of insanity and the whole while he keeps a cool composure and it never gets overly comical. 'Joshua Tree' is in no way realistic; though it has a grittiness to it that movies like 'True Lies' and 'Commando' will never have. Casting Schwarzenegger as 'John Kimble' or 'Harry Trasker' takes me out of the film. With that brutal accent and and the overbearing brawn he will never be a street smart American protagonist that he is cast to be and this is detrimental to his character and the movie as a whole. Lundgren is the antithesis. He has the cold European gaze, but he adds a different flare that actually fits. He can riddle a body with bullets and give a snappy line and the audience will laugh- but they are laughing with him and not at him.
Action directors today can learn a lot from this film. It should be mandatory viewing for action directors in film school. Directors today rely too heavily on CGI. This movie is raw. Everything was done by hand and it adds to the realism that a Schwarzenegger flick, like I mentioned before, lacks. Sure, you can see camera reflections on shiny surfaces and guns fire countless rounds without any need to reload but it is just fun.
I stated that Lundgren was a superior actor when compared to his European action star peers- that does not, by any means, make the acting in this movie great. Regardless, the characters are vibrant and colorful. The cops are crooked and gaudy. The babes are buxom and bodacious and any all stereotypes are laid on thick and smooth.
Without giving away a whole lot: the infamous warehouse scene is amazing- a true high point. I am sure this movie was not the first to do a shot like this but it was executed wonderfully; or, at least a hell of a lot better than many action movies that would follow. When combined with the great car chases and countless fight scenes I cannot speak highly enough.
From all of this I cannot help but wonder what the world would be like today if it were Lundgren cast in The Terminator or Predator. I will definitely check out more of his work and re-watch 'Joshua Tree' again and again.
On a side note, does anyone know why my copy of the film is titled, 'Army of One' instead of 'Joshua Tree'?
District 9
(2009)
Every Summer has One
15 August 2009
There are always a few movies, every summer, where one cannot help but be thoroughly pleased after exiting the theater. Last summer it was hands down The Dark Knight and this summer, after a lot of waiting around and disappointment (The Hangover excluded) we were finally given 'District 9'.
I did not know what to expect from this movie. I feel like the allure for me came from the allure of the director's fledgling career. He only has a few films under his belt and the majority of his work has been done in other aspects of film making. With such a clever idea he had a lot to live up to. Neill Blomkamp appears to have done much in the way of visual effects in his film career. And for this reason the film soars. His expertise becomes crystal clear in the opening sequence of the film. The creatures, or Prawns as they are called, meld seamlessly into the set. The CGI is evident but close to flawless.
The story itself is interesting for a number of reasons. I found myself coming back to the setting, Johannesburg South Africa, over and over again. This is in no way an American movie, and for it to be received so well by American audiences is great. There are a lot of political undertones and a plethora of sociological statements to be made in this film. It is gritty but beautiful. The creatures and their technologies are inventive but slightly familiar and this is never once a detrimental aspect that is the down fall for similar films.
My complaints are few. As any ignorant American, I found their accents to be a bit much at times. Also, there is a a bit too much in the way of shaky camera work. I do understand that this had to be done but it is still very hard to keep track of everything that is happening while the camera shakes violently. I felt the main character, Wikus, has a lot of morality issues hat could have been either explored more or toned down a bit. In addition, I wanted to more about the Prawns- why did they come here? Who sent them? etc.
Regardless of minuscule short comings all movie goers will find something in this film. There is a healthy serving of blood, gore and explosions and this mixes nicely with the allusions to historical events and provocative statements made about society and human nature. The film is also a study of relationships and the nature of trust. For lack of a better term: if you possess any kind of pulse you will find something in this movie. It will both excite and incite in you some kind of deep thought.
I did not know what to expect from this movie. I feel like the allure for me came from the allure of the director's fledgling career. He only has a few films under his belt and the majority of his work has been done in other aspects of film making. With such a clever idea he had a lot to live up to. Neill Blomkamp appears to have done much in the way of visual effects in his film career. And for this reason the film soars. His expertise becomes crystal clear in the opening sequence of the film. The creatures, or Prawns as they are called, meld seamlessly into the set. The CGI is evident but close to flawless.
The story itself is interesting for a number of reasons. I found myself coming back to the setting, Johannesburg South Africa, over and over again. This is in no way an American movie, and for it to be received so well by American audiences is great. There are a lot of political undertones and a plethora of sociological statements to be made in this film. It is gritty but beautiful. The creatures and their technologies are inventive but slightly familiar and this is never once a detrimental aspect that is the down fall for similar films.
My complaints are few. As any ignorant American, I found their accents to be a bit much at times. Also, there is a a bit too much in the way of shaky camera work. I do understand that this had to be done but it is still very hard to keep track of everything that is happening while the camera shakes violently. I felt the main character, Wikus, has a lot of morality issues hat could have been either explored more or toned down a bit. In addition, I wanted to more about the Prawns- why did they come here? Who sent them? etc.
Regardless of minuscule short comings all movie goers will find something in this film. There is a healthy serving of blood, gore and explosions and this mixes nicely with the allusions to historical events and provocative statements made about society and human nature. The film is also a study of relationships and the nature of trust. For lack of a better term: if you possess any kind of pulse you will find something in this movie. It will both excite and incite in you some kind of deep thought.
Knowing
(2009)
Can Cage be Fired Yet?
31 July 2009
Is it fair to say that a movie must utilize the plot devices it presents to its audience in a full circle? If I show you lemons, water and sugar and tell you I am making a drink, is it fair for you to assume I am making lemonade? Would you not be shocked if you drank my concoction and instead of tasting sweet and tarty lemonade you were instead met with Dr. Pepper? I found myself thinking about this while watching 'Knowing'. The film is an insult to standard human intelligence and that is an understatement. I recall seeing the trailer and thinking, 'this is a movie I will not be seeing.' But I found myself watching it just a few hours ago.
Nicholas Cage is only capable of playing Nicholas Cage. There is no difference between his character in this film and his performance in, 'The Rock' or 'Con Air'. This was my first problem with the film and a primary issue which I kept coming back to. There is nothing wrong with an actor who adds his own personal touch to a character but Cage is no Brando or Nicholson. He just thunders through scenes with bad hair and an even worse attitude. Cage spends most of the film rushing through crowds and barking orders. He seems to always be in the right place at the right time. He is confused, but at the same time he knows where he is going. I want to feel for the protagonist but I cannot feel a thing for this person because he is Nicholas Cage.
Another issue is one that has plagued the psychological thriller for years. The use of a creepy kid as a vehicle for plot. This film has not one but three! To be fair, the first creepy kid is necessary for the plot. But they make Cage's son and his Love Interest's daughter creepy as well. There is some kind of statement to be made about the purity of the child's soul in this film but I cannot bring myself to acknowledge that there can be such a concrete idea in all of the muck and mire.
Coming back to my Lemonade analogy, I cannot help but feel that this film has difficulty deciding what it actually is about. There is just too much going on. There are aliens, precognitions and disasters. This is all mashed together in an ugly cooking pot and then heartily seasoned with an unhealthy amount of apocalypse. The end result is aggravating and tiring. I was lead to believe one thing up until the very end and then it turned out to be something completely different. I have not problem with a twist but this was ridiculous. Also, the Christian undertones really left a sour taste in my mouth.
I would also like to take this time and address the awful dialog. I am not one to be nitpicky about it but I must be brought up. There is a scene where Cage is talking with his sister. She explains that Cage's dead wife had one wish and that wish was that her son would have a lasting relationship with Cage's estranged father. WHY???!!!???!?!?!?! When you mix that with the vomit inducing ending dialog between Cage and Son and Cage and Father it is enough to make suicide sound appealing.
Hollywood has become a singularly offensive bile inducing factory bent on the exploitation of tired ideas. This movie is no exception- it is in fact a poster child for this awful movement. 'Knowing' is a mish mash of overused ideas and in the end it is just outright bad. If you want twists and turns with a rewarding twist just rent a Hitchcock movie or 'The Usual Suspects'. This is film is simply sick and feeble. If it were a barn yard animal I would hope it would be taken out, behind the barn, and put out of its misery.
I submit a movement be started whose soul purpose is removing Nicholas Cage from movies forever. He is like the socially awkward son of a great business owner whose allowed to continue working at one of his dad's stores even though he constantly makes mistakes and is detrimental to any form of progress.
Nicholas Cage is only capable of playing Nicholas Cage. There is no difference between his character in this film and his performance in, 'The Rock' or 'Con Air'. This was my first problem with the film and a primary issue which I kept coming back to. There is nothing wrong with an actor who adds his own personal touch to a character but Cage is no Brando or Nicholson. He just thunders through scenes with bad hair and an even worse attitude. Cage spends most of the film rushing through crowds and barking orders. He seems to always be in the right place at the right time. He is confused, but at the same time he knows where he is going. I want to feel for the protagonist but I cannot feel a thing for this person because he is Nicholas Cage.
Another issue is one that has plagued the psychological thriller for years. The use of a creepy kid as a vehicle for plot. This film has not one but three! To be fair, the first creepy kid is necessary for the plot. But they make Cage's son and his Love Interest's daughter creepy as well. There is some kind of statement to be made about the purity of the child's soul in this film but I cannot bring myself to acknowledge that there can be such a concrete idea in all of the muck and mire.
Coming back to my Lemonade analogy, I cannot help but feel that this film has difficulty deciding what it actually is about. There is just too much going on. There are aliens, precognitions and disasters. This is all mashed together in an ugly cooking pot and then heartily seasoned with an unhealthy amount of apocalypse. The end result is aggravating and tiring. I was lead to believe one thing up until the very end and then it turned out to be something completely different. I have not problem with a twist but this was ridiculous. Also, the Christian undertones really left a sour taste in my mouth.
I would also like to take this time and address the awful dialog. I am not one to be nitpicky about it but I must be brought up. There is a scene where Cage is talking with his sister. She explains that Cage's dead wife had one wish and that wish was that her son would have a lasting relationship with Cage's estranged father. WHY???!!!???!?!?!?! When you mix that with the vomit inducing ending dialog between Cage and Son and Cage and Father it is enough to make suicide sound appealing.
Hollywood has become a singularly offensive bile inducing factory bent on the exploitation of tired ideas. This movie is no exception- it is in fact a poster child for this awful movement. 'Knowing' is a mish mash of overused ideas and in the end it is just outright bad. If you want twists and turns with a rewarding twist just rent a Hitchcock movie or 'The Usual Suspects'. This is film is simply sick and feeble. If it were a barn yard animal I would hope it would be taken out, behind the barn, and put out of its misery.
I submit a movement be started whose soul purpose is removing Nicholas Cage from movies forever. He is like the socially awkward son of a great business owner whose allowed to continue working at one of his dad's stores even though he constantly makes mistakes and is detrimental to any form of progress.
Brüno
(2009)
Some laughs- A LOT of shock
11 July 2009
I remember pretending to go to sleep some nights and then waiting for my parents to go to bed. After the coast was clear I would sneak downstairs and watch HBO. One of my favorite shows, besides 'Real Sex', was 'Da Ali G Show'. I still try and catch it whenever its on now and it still is classic and timeless.
I had no idea how they were going to pull it off but I saw 'Borat' in its opening weekend and I, along with the rest of the audience, laughed from start to finish. Borat was pretty close to perfect and definitely engaging and re-watchable. It was fresh and it was nice to see a movie that did not have a tired, recycled plot.
It is hard to watch 'Bruno' without making comparisons to Bruno's first carnation on 'Da Ali G Show'. I was expecting something along the lines of Borat. I went into this film with the same hopes and expectations of 'Borat' and honestly the magic just was not there.
The beauty of 'Borat' was in the reactions of the people interviewed. People were intolerant, racist and sexist. 'Borat' was a complete study of American ignorance and a great sociological experiment.
There was ample opportunity for Cohen to capture this feeling again. Homophobia is a big issue today and I was really hoping to see some kind of exploration into the subject.
It was there but not in the way I expected. It felt, to me at least, that Bruno was there to simply make everyone around him uncomfortable. This was funny the first time but it got a little stale. It would have been nice to see more in terms of intolerance.
I also expected more in terms of parodying the shallowness and unpractical nature of the fashion industry. There were plenty of opportunities to take stabs at fashion but this was only done in the beginning.
Without giving anything away there is a lot of shock and a great scene with Harrison Ford- but other than that it just seemed kind of under enthusiastic. I expected a lot more.
I had no idea how they were going to pull it off but I saw 'Borat' in its opening weekend and I, along with the rest of the audience, laughed from start to finish. Borat was pretty close to perfect and definitely engaging and re-watchable. It was fresh and it was nice to see a movie that did not have a tired, recycled plot.
It is hard to watch 'Bruno' without making comparisons to Bruno's first carnation on 'Da Ali G Show'. I was expecting something along the lines of Borat. I went into this film with the same hopes and expectations of 'Borat' and honestly the magic just was not there.
The beauty of 'Borat' was in the reactions of the people interviewed. People were intolerant, racist and sexist. 'Borat' was a complete study of American ignorance and a great sociological experiment.
There was ample opportunity for Cohen to capture this feeling again. Homophobia is a big issue today and I was really hoping to see some kind of exploration into the subject.
It was there but not in the way I expected. It felt, to me at least, that Bruno was there to simply make everyone around him uncomfortable. This was funny the first time but it got a little stale. It would have been nice to see more in terms of intolerance.
I also expected more in terms of parodying the shallowness and unpractical nature of the fashion industry. There were plenty of opportunities to take stabs at fashion but this was only done in the beginning.
Without giving anything away there is a lot of shock and a great scene with Harrison Ford- but other than that it just seemed kind of under enthusiastic. I expected a lot more.
Adventureland
(2009)
Public Enemy said it best, Don't Believe the Hype
5 April 2009
Let me start by saying that just because a movie is set in the 80s and provides some form of nostalgia for the time period, this does not make it good. While 'Adventureland' creates the atmosphere very well with appropriate music and attire, it does nothing more.
What is the directors affinity for stuttering, blundering and awkward protagonists? That was my primary issue with this poor excuse for comedy. James (Eisenberg), as a character, is boring. He does nothing but fidget and mutter from start to finish. Em (Stewart) is not much better. When she is not biting her lower lip and trying to act disturbed she is just making the on screen romance unbelievable. The scenes where they fight and the very end are both laugh out loud funny, but not for any of the right reasons.
The supporting cast provides little support. I felt Ryan Reynolds was, at first, cast as something more than a lustful deviant. But, by the end of the film his character just comes off creepy. I kind of liked Joel (Star) but the character was not used to capacity at all. I am in utter shock he did not return to Adventureland with an assault rifle and mow down the entire cast for their idiot romances.
The only aspect of the film that did ANYTHING for me was Bill Hader. He played the role he was given to perfection. Was that mustache real? He and Kristen Wiig are very weird and I kind of like it. They really don't do much for me on SNL.
Overall, I guess I just expected the raunchiness of 'Superbad'. I really think it would have been much better that way. If you want a movie which dissects the prangs of working a monotonous and unsatisfying job you might as well just watch 'Clerks'. At least Dante can finish a line with out looking at his feet and trying to hold back a foolish grin.
What is the directors affinity for stuttering, blundering and awkward protagonists? That was my primary issue with this poor excuse for comedy. James (Eisenberg), as a character, is boring. He does nothing but fidget and mutter from start to finish. Em (Stewart) is not much better. When she is not biting her lower lip and trying to act disturbed she is just making the on screen romance unbelievable. The scenes where they fight and the very end are both laugh out loud funny, but not for any of the right reasons.
The supporting cast provides little support. I felt Ryan Reynolds was, at first, cast as something more than a lustful deviant. But, by the end of the film his character just comes off creepy. I kind of liked Joel (Star) but the character was not used to capacity at all. I am in utter shock he did not return to Adventureland with an assault rifle and mow down the entire cast for their idiot romances.
The only aspect of the film that did ANYTHING for me was Bill Hader. He played the role he was given to perfection. Was that mustache real? He and Kristen Wiig are very weird and I kind of like it. They really don't do much for me on SNL.
Overall, I guess I just expected the raunchiness of 'Superbad'. I really think it would have been much better that way. If you want a movie which dissects the prangs of working a monotonous and unsatisfying job you might as well just watch 'Clerks'. At least Dante can finish a line with out looking at his feet and trying to hold back a foolish grin.
Tell Your Friends