Change Your Image
overcranked
Reviews
Up in the Air (2009)
Another hit from the Director of Juno, Jason Reitman
Anyone who has ever been fired must see "Up In The Air." Jason Reitman has done again. The director of "Thank You For Smoking" and "Juno" puts real life out there in an incredible way, where we all laugh and then walk out of the theatre thinking about what is really important. A film with a message that's entertaining: what a concept.
George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a man that flies all over the country firing people for companies that don't have the spine to do it themselves. He is so proficient at it, when he meets his "expert traveler" equivalent, Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga); he is emotionally drawn to another person, beyond a passing interest, for the first time.
Bingham's travels are a quest to be a traveling legend. When his company takes the advice of young newbie, Natalie Keener (Kendrick), he is grounded, endangering his quest to achieve frequent flier miles that number in the, uh, stratosphere. When his boss (Jason Bateman) assigns him to "show her the ropes," so she can revolutionize the company's firing technology, the resulting road trip is not only riotously funny, it is a self-exploring journey into the three people's strengths and weaknesses. The life decisions they make are the emotionally important message of the film.
The rest of the story must go untold, so you can savor every morsel from your own perspective. For that is what this film does best. Almost all of us have been canned. Sitting across the table, being told we'll be glad it happened, one day. Our participation in the film is subtle, as we sit across the table from Bingham as he cans us.
The film's cast is like the story: they suck you in. Clooney is Clooney, like Cary Grant was Cary Grant. You think he's not acting, that's just who he is in real life. Maybe it is. Vera Farmiga's performance is seductively natural. You've met people like her. You admire her. Then you find out you don't know her at all. She is the mystery you wish you were. Anna Kendrick as Natalie is a perfect, perky, know-it-all that becomes all too human. Kendrick makes her character's transformation special parts of the film, when she could have easily have been regulated to a supporting character. This has become Reitman's trademark as a director. He empowers actors to make the movie their own.
Up In The Air is a movie that is over before you want it to be. You want to get to know the characters better, to follow them around a little longer and make sure everything goes well for them. Another credit to Reitman for his extraordinary skill at taking the common things in life and make them extraordinary. Which makes us all feel better about the common-ness of our own lives.
Written by: Vincent for Overcranked.net If you liked this come read more reviews http://www.overcranked.net/movies.php
Zombieland (2009)
Top 5 Zombie Movie
Zombieland Reviewer: Josh, www.overcranked.net
Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) has made a habit of running from what scares him. Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson) doesn't have fears. If he did, he'd kick their ever-living ass. In a world overrun by zombies, these two are perfectly evolved survivors. But now, they're about to stare down the most terrifying prospect of all: each other. --© Sony
Not since Shaun of the Dead has a zombie movie been more than just a zombie movie. Zombieland is a combination of Zombie/Road Trip/Romantic Comedy movie. There are sight gags, one liners, and plenty of witty dialogue that keeps you laughing through the horror. Sure you get everything you want out of a zombie movie as well, but the comedy in the movie is smart and makes the movie an instant classic. Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson make a great comedic duo in the movie playing Eisenberg as the straight man and Harrelson being unwittingly funny. Also the narration by Eisenberg gives the movie another source of comedy that just feels right within the world of Zombieland. Eisenberg throughout the movie lists his rules for survival in Zombieland, and the way in which they are implemented into the movie is brilliant and made me laugh every time.
The chemistry between Emma Stone and Jesse Eisenberg is very real, and you are cheering him on the whole way. This is because Eisenberg is playing a neurotic, and at times socially awkward, twenty something that has had no luck in his life. Also Harrelson has a scene that tugs at the heartstrings and gives more to his character than that he is just a zombie killing machine. Another big selling point of the movie is a cameo by a certain comedic actor that if I shed any real light on it you won't enjoy it nearly as much.
When comparing this movie to other zombie comedies the only one that really stacks up is Shaun of the Dead, but Zombieland is the superior movie. Part of that is because if you don't enjoy dark humor or British humor then Shaun of the Dead doesn't reach you like Zombieland will. Zombieland mixes dark humor in with other more "normal" brands of comedy giving the movie a wider reach as far as getting the laughs. Also Zombieland is faster paced than Shaun of the Dead, and has far more gore in it than Shaun of the Dead. I never thought I would say it, but Shaun of the Dead has been replaced as my favorite Zombie movie.
If you had any doubts about if the zombie movie genre had any steam left in it then Zombieland is going to knock that idea clean out of your head. This movie is an instant classic for me, and is one that I would pay to go see multiple times. In an attempt to not ruin any of the parts of the movie I can just assure you that this is not one of those movies where all of the good parts are in the trailer. So, hurry to the theater and watch Zombieland!
District 9 (2009)
One of the better Sci-Fi Movies lately
District 9 is the story of what happens when aliens come to South Africa and become refugees. The story picks up 20 years after the aliens have arrived on Earth and the movie can be divided into two sections. The first section is shot like a documentary, which is where we are given all the background information we need to understand the story. The second half of the movie is more like your typical Action Sci-Fi movie with documentary scenes laced into the action.
Over all the film aspires to do two things. One is to comment on how man kind is capable of severely inhumane treatment of others. The aliens are used in the film to reflect the way that Apartheid effected South Africa, and on a larger scale how segregation and ignorance is practiced by man on a wide scale. The other thing that appears to be what they wanted to do was to show off their skills with special effects. This film has some of the best CGI I've seen in years! It is seamless how it blends images created on a computer and real life. This brings me to my first of three problems with the movie. There was more gore in this movie than in most Sci-Fi movies. Now, I'm not squeamish about gore one bit, but there was no reason for it in the movie. The only purpose it served was to show off their skills with CGI. My second problem with the movie was that while he kind of is a bumbling corporate drone, Wikus is not a character you care about. He's constantly abusive to the aliens in the film, and never is motivated by anything but his own selfishness until the very end of the movie. Now, I didn't hate Wikus, but I didn't really feel a deep connection to the character or his plight. The third problem was that the movie never fulfills it's goal from the beginning of the movie to talk about social issues like Apartheid, and instead switches tracks into an Action movie.
In the end District 9 is entertaining and probably one of the better Sci-Fi films to come out recently. However, there are a few problems within the film that weaken its overall impact. The idea of the film and the way it was made is excellently done, but that fails to push the movie over the edge. It's absolutely one of the better films to come out this summer, and worth a look, but be prepared because it's not what you would expect. After all, there are a lot of secrets in District 9.
Review Written by Josh for http://www.overcranked.net Visit us for more movie and video game reviews!
Taken (2008)
Great Action Movie!
Taken is an action movie which really does justice to the genre—it avoids shallow Hollywood excesses (like ridiculous explosions, expensive cars, and half-naked women) and really focuses on creating a serious, moving piece of cinema. The premise itself is very simple and even conventional, but it works. Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson), a former secret service agent, employs his highly developed set of skills to find and rescue his daughter Kim (Maggie Grace), who has been kidnapped and sold into the Albanian slave trade while on a visit to Europe.
The film's premise is set up in what feels like the first ten minutes of the movie, and, while the background story and character development seem rushed, the intention is made clear: the movie is about the events that follow—about one man's unrelenting hunt both for his daughter and for revenge upon her kidnappers.
Liam Neeson is a perfect cast for the role of Bryan Mills. He calm, stern, and almost dispassionate in the way he works, bitterly vowing to find and kill the kidnappers. It is clear from the outset that he is ruthlessly professional, a legacy of his training as a government spy. Every move made by Bryan Mills is cold and calculated, which means that the movie never drifts into cliché shootouts where one man infiltrates some warehouse and manages to evade the bullets of countless attackers. Instead the movie's writers respect the viewers' intelligence and opt for a more inventive plot which revolves around Bryan Mills abilities and deadly efficiency. Another point to be made about the writing is that—despite the one against hundreds odds—the viewer never has to suspend their disbelief. Never did I find myself saying "yeah, right" under my breath, and for that matter, neither did I find myself yelling at Bryan Mills or thinking how he could have done things differently. The plot is very, very believable.
Credit must also be given to the director, Pierre Morel, in this regard. It comes as no surprise that the Morel has worked mostly as a cinematographer, as much of the action and fighting is realistic and almost palpable at times. The camera angles, the choreography, and even the sound effects have a gritty, arresting quality to them (in a way that surpasses the Bourne movies), and much of the directing is something foreign to big screen action flicks.
What Taken accomplishes is the best kind of cinematic experience, with refreshingly believable fight sequences, a clever and engaging plot, and some great acting from Liam Neeson. While the movie's subject may be lacking in originality, it taken the best aspects of the action genre and reinvigorated them with a bold sense of realism.
Written by Anton for www.overcranked.net
Angels & Demons (2009)
Definitely better than The Di Vinci Code, but still lacking
Angels and Demons is another movie adapted from one of Dan Brown's best selling novels. Like The Di Vinci Code before it, Angels and Demons pits symbology expert Professor Robert Langdon against a thought to be extinct society. Once again the Catholic church is targeted for humiliation and destruction. Instead of revealing a giant cover-up by the church, Robert Langdon unravels the reason behind four church officials being kidnapped and has to find them before they are murdered publicly one by one.
This story feels very familiar yes, but just as with the books I enjoyed this movie more than The Di Vinci Code. The story is more fantastic than the other one, although still grounded deep in historical facts and accurate knowledge of the workings of the church and government agencies that get involved. This element of the story is what draws people to these movies and the books that they are based off of. There is nothing like it out there. Most movies are far over the top of realism so that you can escape into the world on screen, but with Angels and Demons you feel like you are watching news coverage of an actual event taking place. You can easily put yourself into the shoes of the characters and have the adventure with them.
This face is probably the saving grace of this movie, because the acting sure isn't the greatest out there. While Tom Hanks has made some great movies ( we have all seen Forrest Gump and Apollo 13 ) this really isn't his best work. While it could have been the director mucking things up; I really think someone with his level of experience should be able to overcome such hurdles and turn out something on a higher scale than this.
I still enjoyed myself throughout the movie, even knowing the story and the ending. This definitely is more of a rental though. Seeing it in the theater did nothing to enhance the experience for me. I would much rather be comfortably in bed or on the couch watching this than pay the expense of the movie theater.
So, the final verdict is wait for the dollar theater or to rent Angels and Demons. While the story is solid, it's too much like the last movie in the plot and acting.
Written by Sam for www.overcranked.net
Knowing (2009)
Mildly Entertained
I didn't expect much going into Knowing—just something to keep me reasonably entertained for a few hours while I stuffed my face with overpriced popcorn—but even the big screen special effects couldn't save a movie as hopelessly absurd as Knowing.
John Koestler (Nicolas Cage), an MIT physics professor, comes into the possession of a paper which contains the dates and locations of every major disaster in the last fifty years. Koestler discovers that the paper, retrieved from a fifty year old time capsule, also makes predictions of major disasters to come, and he attempts in vain to convince those around him that the fate of the entire planet is at stake. The premise, while a bit outlandish, is not so ridiculous for a sci-fi flick, but the unbelievably sloppy movie-making that follows is such a major disaster that one wonders how the director and writers did not predict it, or, for that matter, divert it.
The first two acts of the movie are only mildly entertaining, while seriously lacking in substance. One knows exactly where the storyline is heading, so the only thing that really keeps the movie going is the special effects sequences that occur when John Koestler witnesses the disasters predicted by the paper. Unfortunately, the special effects are hardly enough to keep one absorbed in the movie, let alone keep the whole movie afloat. While at times the CG is shockingly realistic, for the most part it is extremely overdone and unnecessarily violent, which ultimately adds to the strange clumsiness of the storyline. The acting throughout the movie leaves something to be desired, the dialogue was truly appalling, and as the whole film drudges on, more and more characters are introduced but never adequately developed.
The third act is where the movie really takes a turn for the worse as the cheesy sci-fi/fantasy elements of the movie (mysterious men in black trench coats, children hearing whispers, etc) take center stage. The pace of the movie picks up, but the plot becomes utterly ridiculous—something that seems inevitable in a movie that predicts the destruction of the entire planet. The movie is insulting in its stupidity, and it is unclear whether the key to avoiding the imminent global apocalypse (discovered in an abandoned trailer home, mind you) is natural, supernatural, or extraterrestrial. And if the story isn't muddled enough to make you shudder, the movie's execution is just as appalling. The third act of the movie revolves around car chases, magical unexplained rocks, and aliens—wait, no, angels— oh, I don't know. It was unbelievable what the writers were willing to do to make the pieces of their puzzle fit, resorting at one point to killing off a character in the most frivolous way.
The end of the movie was the crescendo of the absurdity, and one has to give credit to the CG animators for attempting to craft a scene as unbelievably senseless and laughable as the conclusion itself. It's hard to really describe how awful this movie is without spoiling the 'plot' or discussing events in detail... You just have to use your imagination—or watch the movie for yourself.
Ultimately, Knowing made the mistake of taking its own subject matter too seriously, when no intelligent person could do the same. And so my one regret about this movie-watching experience is that I didn't see the comically awful movie Next (starring Nicolas Cage) until a few months later—or else I would have had an uproariously good laugh at the expense of Knowing's creators.
Written by Anton for www.overcranked.net
Killzone 2 (2009)
Very cool game
Killzone 2 was finally released February 2009 and was long awaited by just about all PlayStation 3 owners. It is the third installment in the Killzone franchise. The first game, Killzone was released on the PlayStation 2 and Killzone: Liberation was later released for the PlayStation Portable. Killzone 2 continues the story of the first two games having you fight as the Interplanetary Strategic Alliance against the Helghasts. This time however you take the fight to the Helghast and invade their planet, Helghan. Your goal is to stop the Helghast war machine by capturing the Helghast leader, Scolar Visari, and making him answer for his crimes.
You start the assault on Helghan from an ISA cruiser stationed high in the clouds above the planet. Your squad joins countless others that are launched from the cruiser toward Helghan. Once landed you are immediately in the fight taking on Helghast soldiers from behind walls and above on walkways and bridges. The controls were a little odd for me, but there are plenty of ways to configure them. After getting the controls to my usual layout, I began my assault. The Helghast are not a wimpy race though and it takes plenty of rounds to take one down. Even aiming for a headshot doesn't mean you are taking down that soldier. It took me on average two or three shots to the head to take one down. The first shot pops their helmet off and then depending on the level of damage he has already taken you may have to hit his head another two times. This was the most frustrating part for me, but I got used to it pretty quickly.
The Helghast are also skilled on the battlefield. They react as you would expect them to; ducking behind walls to avoid your bullets and waiting until it's all clear to come back out. They also scatter from grenades and try to flank you and your teammates. You and the ISA however aren't quite as skilled. I found my biggest disappointment in this game was the cover system. You could "attach yourself to cover," but this didn't mean you'd actually hide behind anything. I found that sometimes he wouldn't attach to cover, sometimes he would, but I'd still be getting hit and all the while your teammates are telling you to find some cover. You teammates don't follow their own advice however. Towards the end of the game my teammate would end up running into the open and be cut down quickly by enemy fire and yell for me to come save him. When he wasn't getting killed he was shooting at enemies and doing what seemed like no damage. They are mainly there for distraction; any killing you want done you have to do yourself.
OK, AI is hard to create, but you did it with the enemy why not do it with the good guys too? Aside from that the story was decent and the landscape and characters were beautifully done, even if they aren't in the full resolution of 1080p. The scripting wasn't bad for a video game, but the timing and triggering of the conversation was slow and low pauses happened in the middle of conversations and sometimes the dialogue would be cut off before they finished their sentence.
This game was fun though and the multiplayer maps are very well designed so that each team has a balanced area to work with. If you like FPS and want a short campaign to play through before you go pop the top of your friends online then I highly recommend this game. If you aren't an online gamer then I still think you should try this time, but don't buy it just go rent it. I give Killzone 2 three downed teammates out of five.
Written by Sam for www.overcranked.net
Brüno (2009)
Horrifying and only slightly humorous
I'm going to keep this one short and sweet because honestly there isn't much to say about Brüno. If you saw Borat you have a small idea of what to expect in this movie because it is shot with the same formula. The big difference is I thought Borat was actually funny, whereas with Brüno I was mainly just disgusted with what I saw.
There is a large amount of Homosexual scenes that even blacked out are very graphic. Towards the beginning there is a long montage of Brüno and his "partner" engaging in horrifying acts. After this the homosexual acts do slow down, but aren't completely gone. He has an assistant who is gay and eventually they act on it as well.
In between these acts there were some funny parts in this movie and if the movie only consisted of the funny parts I'd tell you to wait for the dollar movie to get Brüno and then go see it. It just isn't worth it to pay ten dollars and have to sit through such a bad movie. There were the typical stereotypical Americans made fun of and some needed the flaws shown and were extremely funny to watch reacting to Brüno, but this was still too little too late.
Sacha Baron Cohen likes to push things and see just how far we allow him to take his antics. I say this was too far and he needs to back way up and rethink what he's doing. I won't be going to see his next movie no matter what it looks like in the previews. I give Brüno half a star and highly recommend going to see something else or just stay home and read a book. Save your brain from the horrors that Brüno contains.
This review was written by Sam for www.overcranked.net
The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009)
Not the original, but entertaining
Being a fan of the original (1974) version, starring Walter Matthau, I ignored the title and pretended this remake wasn't a remake. This was a good decision, for it helped me to appreciate what the film offers, rather than compare it to a great first effort. So, I can safely say, save for a few of distractions, the film is entertaining.
The first distraction was the prolific profanity by John Travolta's character, Ryder, the leader of the hijackers. His limited vocabulary belies the character, a former stock trader, recently released from prison for white-collar crime. Ryder is supposed to be brilliant, but he never stops talking like a deranged longshoreman. It just doesn't add up. This lack of believability nags at the film from beginning to end.
Another distraction is director Scott's heavy-handed action and violence scenes. Scott's over-exaggerating approach makes what is suppose to be tension-building scenes, comical. This is especially evident in the film's "anti-climatic" climatic end (which also could have used a little script polishing before filming).
The good news about the film is its great cast. Denzel Washington wonderfully plays Walter Garber, the hero of the film. Garber is the dispatcher responsible for the smooth operation of Pelham 123 who becomes liaison between the hijackers and New York City's leaders. Garber's own integrity flaw twists the plot to a higher tension level while allowing him to become a flawed, and thus more believable, hero. As stated earlier, John Travolta plays Ryder, leader of the hijackers. A psychopath one minute and a brilliant criminal the next, Ryder's actions continually remind the audience they are in a theater watching a movie.
The supporting cast does an admirable job of playing believable characters. Of note are John Turturro, who does an excellent job as the police department's hostage negotiator and James Gandolfini, who plays New York City's lame duck mayor. The supporting characters offer most of the tension-releasing humor in the film. These moments are nicely timed and in some cases, laugh-out-loud funny.
Pelham 123 should have been much better than it was. Tony Scott should not give into the temptation to over blow action scenes to the extent that they harm a good story. If you can overlook this harm, the film offers some fine moments and respectable performances.
written by: Vincent for www.overcranked.net
Eden Log (2007)
Not for everyone
When a man named Tolbiac (Clovis Cornillac) awakens to find himself naked, disoriented and trapped somewhere deep underground, he begins an epic journey through a labyrinth of tunnels and dark caverns on his way toward the surface. Pursued by strange digital ghosts and other technological monsters, he uncovers clues to his predicament, which involves a scientific biosphere experiment gone awry.
Eden Log opens with a man awakening in a cavern. We see flashes of the action, which we come to find out is caused by a strobing light. As the man shambles through the cavern he finds his way to what appears to be the entrance to a place called "Eden Log". As I watched this French Sci-Fi thriller I was struck right from the start that it felt almost like the plot of an Action Adventure/Survival video game. As the plot progresses I think this idea is only more enforced by the story and imagery presented to us.
One of the weaknesses and strengths of the film is that you are dropped into the middle of the over all story. However, you are faced with this dark, underground world the same way that Tolbiac is. It enables you to put yourself into his shoes as he stumbles around in the dark with no memory of who he is or where he is. The reason that it is a weakness is that some people will be turned off by this. I found it all the more engaging to have to put the clues together with him as he journeys upward to what we assume will be freedom.
As we journey upward we run into mutant creatures, and this is where the film takes a turn toward Sci-Fi horror over thriller. The introduction of the monsters is very clever because they are kept off screen most of the time. We are only given glimpses for a good while of what the monsters are, and this builds the terror that they create. Also the entire opening of the film is almost in black and white using high contrast lighting. This gives the film a film noir look, and also builds the suspense as Tolbiac travels through the caverns. In fact it wasn't until a little way into the film that I realized that it was in fact not shot in black and white. The film's color is actually desaturated to such a degree that it is almost none existent. I loved this because it worked wonderfully with the setting and mood of the film.
The last thing I want to mention is the cinematography. Eden Log is shot beautifully, and is visually stunning. The camera is used in a beautiful way to capture the scenes perfectly. Add this to the lack of colors, lighting, and the soundtrack and I was hooked very quickly. If you are at all into films like Event Horizon or other Sci-Fi thriller films I highly recommend Eden Log to you. If you are not as into Sci-Fi thrillers you might not enjoy Eden Log as much as I did. For fans of this type of movie I give it a 5 of 5. For people who might not care for it as much I give it a 4 of 5.
Written by Josh for www.overcranked.net
Terminator Salvation (2009)
Expectations were low, so I enjoyed it
When a movie series exceeds a trilogy I tend to become leery of each film that comes out. It can become far to easy to pump out a script with a predictable formula that Hollywood knows will work to get butts in the seats. It is an unfortunate part of the movie business, but it is after all a business. Because of this I was doing my best to refrain from getting overly excited about Terminator Salvation. Helping me to restrain my anticipation was the simple fact that McG was directing it. I mean seriously? You call yourself "McG" and wonder why Hollywood doesn't take you seriously? However, that's an entirely different post. So, thanks to the specter of McG, and the fact that the third installment of the Terminator franchise was not so great, I kept my expectations down and did my best to not be too excited. I think this was an effective method to use in this case because it made the movie that much more enjoyable.
We pick up the Terminator story in the year 2018, and the war between Skynet and mankind has been raging ever since Judgment Day. Over the last three films we've been seeing the same story: A Terminator is sent back in time to kill John/Sarah Connor and a protector is sent back to protect them from the Terminator. I think it is to the credit of this movie that they strayed from that format and gave us a more original take on the struggle between the Connor family and Skynet. This time around John Connor, played by Christian Bale (The Dark Knight, The Machinist, American Psycho), is being dubbed a false prophet by the leaders of the human resistance, but is being looked to as a rallying figure for the rest of humanity. In his life long struggle with Skynet Connor has come to know his enemy, but his enemy has also come to understand that their methods in the past have failed.
This movie also introduces a new character Marcus Wright, played by Sam Worthington (Hart's War, The Great Raid), Marcus is an ex-con who somehow has been brought back to life after being executed prior to Judgment Day. I was unsure of how I felt about Marcus, but as the movie worn on it became obvious that he was stealing the show in this film. Yes, Christian Bale is a talented actor and I enjoy his work, but while his performance is what I would expect of an older, war-hardened John Connor, Marcus steals every scene he's in.
Overall I think Terminator Salvation overcame the third installment in the series, and has setup Terminator for another entertaining three films. There's enough here for old fans to enjoy the film like references to the previous films that go beyond the, "I'll be back" and "Come with me if you want to live" lines. There hare many more subtle nods to the previous films that any die hard fan will recognize. For new fans it's simple enough of a story that they won't be lost, but interesting enough to get them to wonder, "why is it that John Connor has been fighting these machines since he was born?" and go catch up on the story. I think that Terminator Salvation proved that it is possible to make an entertaining movie without throwing the same old schlock at audiences.
Written by Josh for www.overcranked.net
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is the second film in the Transformer series about the famous Hasbro toy line. We pick back up with Shia LaBeouf (Disturbia, Eagle Eye), reprising his role as Sam WitWicky, two years after the first Transformers film preparing to head off to college. Megan Fox (Transformers, How to Lose Friends and Alienate People) returns as his girlfriend, Mikaela Banes. Sam stumbles upon a fragment of the Allspark, which broke off and was hidden among his things after the final battle of the first film. This discovery will lead to the Autobots having to battle their oldest foe the Fallen.
There are two things that can define this film, or any Michael Bay film, explosions and slow motion. In fact the explosions at times happen when it doesn't seem possible, like when a robot flies through the wall of an apartment. This pales in comparison to the blatant ethnic stereotypes that are two of the new Autobots, Mudflap and Skids. These two characters are grating they are such awful stereotypes of "urban" people. Add to them the needless shots of dogs humping and the repeated use of profanity for a cheap laugh and you see the age group Bay was aiming for: 13-18 year old boys. He also relies on Judy Witwicky for comic relief when none is needed, and in fact abuses her for such a purpose. Comedy and slap stick just do not seem to be something Michael Bay really understands. While these elements were able to get the 13 to 18 year old kids in the audience to laugh it fell very flat to me. In fact he seemed to be trying too hard to get me to laugh with his attempts at comedy.
One of the things Bay gets right in the film is giving us extended fight sequences of the Autobots and Decepticons. However, while we see long takes of these battles the actions of the humans in the scene seemed forgotten as they would seem to magically get from A to B without the audience seeing anything. This made the film seem jumpy and almost fractured to such a degree that it began to make it hard to follow even with such a plain plot. Also it seems that Megan Fox is employed as a distraction for the audience in the film from what is actually on the screen. It was effective as the 13-18 demographic cat called at the screen whenever she bent over or did anything slightly sexual. It is almost as if Bay knew he had a weak story and tried to use a type of slide of hand to distract us from the flaws throughout the film.
The strongest part of the film actually was Shia Labeouf's performance. While it won't be remembered as his best work he shines through the film and actually pulls off his role. Sure the dialogue was not always great and the editing left holes in the film, but LaBeouf overcomes these with his acting. In fact his acting is far better in the sequel than in the first film when a good number of his lines were reduced to, "No no no no!" However, the chemistry between Shia Labeouf and Megan Fox just left me wanting more from them. It came across very flimsy and flat to the point that it made me wonder why they bothered calling each other "Babe." Even with that the film is beautiful in visual terms with special effects that dazzle the eye and led to many "Did you see that!"'s being spoken in the audience. It is to Michael Bay's credit that he uses so many explosions because at least it gives us something to watch that works in the film.
In the final rundown Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen simply falls short of the intended goal. If you aren't looking for much from a movie you won't be disappointed, but in the end the only things working for the movie are the special effects, Shia LaBeouf's acting, and Megan Fox running in slow motion. Aside from that you won't find much here. In fact this well is dry, very dry. Even with it being a dry well Bay manages to stretch the film a good 30 minuets longer than it deserves with it's plot. The only way to describe the plot is as shallow, and fun, as a kiddie pool.
Written by Josh for www.overcranked.net
Public Enemies (2009)
Public Enemies
Public Enemies tells us the story about America's first war on crime and the pursuit of John Dillinger by the fledgling FBI. The film picks up four years into the Great Depression, which was a time when many people were out of work and standing in soup kitchen lines. The film begins with what appears to be John Dillinger, played by Johnny Depp, being taken to prison, but we soon find out that it is really a part of his plan to bust out some fellow criminals. Meanwhile, Melvin Purvis, played by Christian Bale, successfully hunts down Pretty Boy Floyd, and due to this success is tapped by J. Edgar Hoover to lead a task force to capture Dillinger. This is the story that the film centers on as we see these two men play a game of cat and mouse.
Throughout the film Michael Mann utilizes a lot of hand held camera work, which puts us right into the scene with Dillinger and Purvis. Also the look of how some of the gun battles with lighting and camera work gives the film almost the same look as a war documentary. It is almost like you are there with Dillinger dodging bullets and racing to avoid the police. The lighting is very dark and moody for many of the scenes which gives these scenes a feel similar to old gangster movies from the 1930's and 40's. In fact near the end of the film there is a Clark Gable film playing in the movie theater that Dillinger has gone to for a night out. I think that many of these old gangster movies were on the mind of Michael Mann as he made this film.
Johnny Depp delivers a wonderful performance as the lovable outlaw and pulls you in with his charisma very quickly. He plays Dillinger just as I would assume him to have been in real life. Dillinger became somewhat of a folk hero in America since his exploits in the 30's stealing money from banks and not the banks customers. While these stories may or may not be true Dillinger is portrayed in the film like a kind of rock star to the common man. Christian Bale also delivers a great performance that is very different from what many people dubbed as an "arrogant" character in his other summer blockbuster. Bale comes across as a determined man that will stop at nothing, within the law, to catch Dillinger. Bale is very effective when he gets to play in roles where he has to be motivated and stern, not just told "look as serious as you can about everything." Public Enemies is my favorite movie so far this summer and it is captivating. The scenes are shot beautifully. The lighting fits the mood quite well, and on top of that the sound track is great. When Dillinger robs a bank we get this great Blues track and fits the swagger of the men walking into the bank. If you've sat through some of the bad movies this summer, like Transformers 2, then Public Enemies might be just what you need to wash that bad taste right out of your mouth. Review by: Josh Cleveland (http://www.overcranked.net)