I know that there are many of those who would see promotions for Paul Rudd in an R-rated comedy and automatically assume that Hollywood is simply barraging audiences with yet another raunchy film, but a number of factors make Our Idiot Brother quite distinct. First and foremost, Our Idiot Brother is an independent film that premiered at the 2011 Sundance Film Festival and only later earned a wide release, so it was virtually guaranteed that this film would offer more than crude laughs. Second, this latest entry at the theater boasted a remarkably talented cast, many of whom have worked with Paul Rudd before to produce significant laughs. Finally, not only was Paul Rudd being given the chance to play the kind of character that accentuates his strengths, but he would also be able to blend in drama and reality by focusing on a family dynamic that many moviegoers can recognize. So, it was quite clear that Our Idiot Brother would be different from the raunchy comedies that have saturated the 2011 Summer Movie Season, and I was looking forward to seeing what this newest festival sweetheart could offer.
Paul Rudd may give a charming performance as an optimistic simpleton, but that represents the only element of Our Idiot Brother that is consistent, as the rest of the film’s quality is decidedly erratic. Considering the résumés of the supporting cast, you would think that they would have no problem working together to produce a story filled with laughs, but almost everyone is guilty of strained over-acting. The one standout is Rashida Jones, who clearly has fun with her role and gets a little bit creative, but unfortunately, she isn’t given much screen time. As far as the story goes, not only does the pacing drag for quite some time, but the narrative devices that ultimately unfold are also shamefully boring…don’t get me wrong, the last thirty minutes are funny, engaging, and heartfelt, but the film asks far too much of its audience by taking more than an hour to get there and truly start entertaining. If you are a fan of the cast, I am sure that you will enjoy Our Idiot Brother, but do not expect extreme laughs; instead, focus on the story and characters and have faith that they ultimately deliver an enjoyable message.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Our Idiot Brother: Full Review
Our Idiot Brother - (August 26th, 2011): R
Distributor: The Weinstein Company
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $7,011,631
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $7,880,301
Gross Revenue: $7,880,301
Production Budget: $5 million
Director: Jesse Peretz
Perhaps one of the hardest working comedic actors in Hollywood, Paul Rudd has had an incredibly prevalent presence among moviegoers over the years, bringing his unique brand of humor to classics like Anchorman, The 40-Year-Old Virgin, and Dinner for Schmucks. Along the way, Rudd has crossed paths with a number of talented comedic actresses, like Elizabeth Banks in Role Models and Rashida Jones in I Love You, Man, and in Our Idiot Brother, he would get the chance to reteam with a number of his past partners-in-crime. Add in other comedic talents like Zooey Deschanel (Yes Man), Adam Scott (Step Brothers), T.J. Miller (She’s Out of My League) and Steve Coogan (Tropic Thunder, The Other Guys), and this modestly-budgeted indie film seemed to promise a very high level of humor. Given this comedy-drama’s strong performance at the Sundance Film Festival and the diverse and incredibly diverse cast offered, The Weinstein Company really didn’t have that big of a challenge in filling theaters. Audiences might be growing tired of raunchy comedies, but given its relatable and simple subject matter about a frustrating sibling, Our Idiot Brother looked like it would be filled with heart, depth, drama, and considerable laughs.
Telling the story of an endearing simpleton, Our Idiot Brother introduces audiences to Ned (Paul Rudd), a biodynamic farmer who naively sells marijuana to a uniformed police officer and ends up in prison. Released early for good behavior, Ned returns to his farm only to discover that his girlfriend, Janet (Kathryn Hahn) has moved on with another man, Billy (T.J. Miller) and is subsequently kicking Ned out and keeping his beloved dog, Willie Nelson. Suddenly homeless are required to report to a parole officer, Ned turns to his three unique sisters, Miranda (Elizabeth Banks), Natalie (Zooey Deschanel), and Liz (Emily Mortimer), for help. Miranda is an aspiring journalist for Vanity Fair who has a flirtatious relationship with her downstairs neighbor, Jeremy (Adam Scott); Natalie is a bisexual hipster who lives with her girlfriend, Cindy (Rashida Jones); and Liz is a married homemaker who is struggling through her marriage to Dylan (Steve Coogan), an arrogant documentary filmmaker. Slowly but surely, Ned’s blunt honesty and lack of tact spell disaster for his three sisters, threatening not only his relationship with his family but also his newfound freedom.
As the titular character, Paul Rudd shines as Ned, an instantaneously likable and endearingly optimistic individual who is sure to bring a smile to your face. Rudd also plays surprisingly well off of his supporting cast, genuinely making the audience believe that he is related to and has a shared history with the other actresses. If there is one cast member other than Rudd who makes the most of their screen time, it is undoubtedly Rashida Jones, who sacrifices her normally sweet persona for one that is blunt, crude, and contagiously energetic. In terms of story, the last half hour of Our Idiot Brother is immaculate, showering laughs and genuine pathos on the audience that build an unforgettable dynamic between the characters. Unfortunately, for as good as this last portion of Our Idiot Brother really is, the film takes forever to get there, nearly sacrificing its audience in the process.
With as talented a cast that is boasted by this newest comedy-drama, Our Idiot Brother is painfully and shamefully boring. For a majority of the film, the story drags along trying to build up momentum without delivering any true laughs, which is immensely disappointing when you consider the acting talent involved. A number of the supporting actors and actresses are guilty of over-acting, but the biggest culprit by far is Emily Mortimer, who dramatizes her character to the point that she does little more than cry or look like she’s about to cry…I understand that she is supposed to be going through a troubled marriage, but her “suffering” was far more distracting than meaningful. The film is lighthearted and humorous, but it is far from the laugh-out-loud type of comedy that I was expecting, and without any kind of warning to deter my expectation, it is simply too much to ask for anyone to sit for over an hour and wait for things to get better. If you’re willing to stick things out and patiently wade through the slower parts of Our Idiot Brother, you will be rewarded, but I understand that such a request is a pretty tall order when you consider the other hilarious comedies that surfaced during the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
When you consider the fact that Our Idiot Brother opened in fifth place its first weekend and only generated just over $7 million in ticket sales, it looks like audiences have truly grown weary of raunchy comedies. Still, I was a little surprised that the heavy promotions and undeniably popular cast were unable to generate a slightly larger crowd, even if indie films usually boast smaller numbers. While a weak performance like this might make some studio execs nervous, The Weinstein Company has already helped recover the $5 million budget, so anything more is pure profit…not many summer “blockbusters” were able to cover their costs in just one weekend. No other real comedies are hitting in the immediate future, so maybe some positive word-of-mouth can generate some higher popular interest. It may not be perfect, but as long as you are patient and not expecting to roll out of your chair laughing, I still think that you will enjoy Our Idiot Brother.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
Distributor: The Weinstein Company
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $7,011,631
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $7,880,301
Gross Revenue: $7,880,301
Production Budget: $5 million
Director: Jesse Peretz
Perhaps one of the hardest working comedic actors in Hollywood, Paul Rudd has had an incredibly prevalent presence among moviegoers over the years, bringing his unique brand of humor to classics like Anchorman, The 40-Year-Old Virgin, and Dinner for Schmucks. Along the way, Rudd has crossed paths with a number of talented comedic actresses, like Elizabeth Banks in Role Models and Rashida Jones in I Love You, Man, and in Our Idiot Brother, he would get the chance to reteam with a number of his past partners-in-crime. Add in other comedic talents like Zooey Deschanel (Yes Man), Adam Scott (Step Brothers), T.J. Miller (She’s Out of My League) and Steve Coogan (Tropic Thunder, The Other Guys), and this modestly-budgeted indie film seemed to promise a very high level of humor. Given this comedy-drama’s strong performance at the Sundance Film Festival and the diverse and incredibly diverse cast offered, The Weinstein Company really didn’t have that big of a challenge in filling theaters. Audiences might be growing tired of raunchy comedies, but given its relatable and simple subject matter about a frustrating sibling, Our Idiot Brother looked like it would be filled with heart, depth, drama, and considerable laughs.
Telling the story of an endearing simpleton, Our Idiot Brother introduces audiences to Ned (Paul Rudd), a biodynamic farmer who naively sells marijuana to a uniformed police officer and ends up in prison. Released early for good behavior, Ned returns to his farm only to discover that his girlfriend, Janet (Kathryn Hahn) has moved on with another man, Billy (T.J. Miller) and is subsequently kicking Ned out and keeping his beloved dog, Willie Nelson. Suddenly homeless are required to report to a parole officer, Ned turns to his three unique sisters, Miranda (Elizabeth Banks), Natalie (Zooey Deschanel), and Liz (Emily Mortimer), for help. Miranda is an aspiring journalist for Vanity Fair who has a flirtatious relationship with her downstairs neighbor, Jeremy (Adam Scott); Natalie is a bisexual hipster who lives with her girlfriend, Cindy (Rashida Jones); and Liz is a married homemaker who is struggling through her marriage to Dylan (Steve Coogan), an arrogant documentary filmmaker. Slowly but surely, Ned’s blunt honesty and lack of tact spell disaster for his three sisters, threatening not only his relationship with his family but also his newfound freedom.
As the titular character, Paul Rudd shines as Ned, an instantaneously likable and endearingly optimistic individual who is sure to bring a smile to your face. Rudd also plays surprisingly well off of his supporting cast, genuinely making the audience believe that he is related to and has a shared history with the other actresses. If there is one cast member other than Rudd who makes the most of their screen time, it is undoubtedly Rashida Jones, who sacrifices her normally sweet persona for one that is blunt, crude, and contagiously energetic. In terms of story, the last half hour of Our Idiot Brother is immaculate, showering laughs and genuine pathos on the audience that build an unforgettable dynamic between the characters. Unfortunately, for as good as this last portion of Our Idiot Brother really is, the film takes forever to get there, nearly sacrificing its audience in the process.
With as talented a cast that is boasted by this newest comedy-drama, Our Idiot Brother is painfully and shamefully boring. For a majority of the film, the story drags along trying to build up momentum without delivering any true laughs, which is immensely disappointing when you consider the acting talent involved. A number of the supporting actors and actresses are guilty of over-acting, but the biggest culprit by far is Emily Mortimer, who dramatizes her character to the point that she does little more than cry or look like she’s about to cry…I understand that she is supposed to be going through a troubled marriage, but her “suffering” was far more distracting than meaningful. The film is lighthearted and humorous, but it is far from the laugh-out-loud type of comedy that I was expecting, and without any kind of warning to deter my expectation, it is simply too much to ask for anyone to sit for over an hour and wait for things to get better. If you’re willing to stick things out and patiently wade through the slower parts of Our Idiot Brother, you will be rewarded, but I understand that such a request is a pretty tall order when you consider the other hilarious comedies that surfaced during the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
When you consider the fact that Our Idiot Brother opened in fifth place its first weekend and only generated just over $7 million in ticket sales, it looks like audiences have truly grown weary of raunchy comedies. Still, I was a little surprised that the heavy promotions and undeniably popular cast were unable to generate a slightly larger crowd, even if indie films usually boast smaller numbers. While a weak performance like this might make some studio execs nervous, The Weinstein Company has already helped recover the $5 million budget, so anything more is pure profit…not many summer “blockbusters” were able to cover their costs in just one weekend. No other real comedies are hitting in the immediate future, so maybe some positive word-of-mouth can generate some higher popular interest. It may not be perfect, but as long as you are patient and not expecting to roll out of your chair laughing, I still think that you will enjoy Our Idiot Brother.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Colombiana: Short and Sweet
Whereas I can usually claim that I’ve tracked a summer movie for months prior to its release, I confess that Colombiana caught me by surprise, only showing up on my radar a few weeks before it hit theaters. True female action heroes like Angelina Jolie and Mila Jovovich are few and far in-between, but TriStar seemed to be going out of its way to position Zoe Zaldana as the next in line. Produced by Luc Besson, known for adding a distinct style to action super-hits like The Transporter and Taken, it seemed like Colombiana had all the makings of a modest and underestimated blockbuster. As the last true action film of the 2011 Summer Movie Season, trailers and promotions for Colombiana promised an adventure with an undeniably sexy woman taking no prisoners using big weapons and brutal tactics…it was an absolute no-brainer rushing to the theater during opening weekend.
I’m a pretty big fan of Zoe Zaldana’s work, so I had pretty high expectations for Columbiana, but while she did a great job as the “action hero,” the rest of the film was mediocre at best. To be fair, Colombiana does have a number of awesome and truly creative scenes, but by-and-large, the film resorts to thoroughly unlikely plot elements to advance a shaky story. The film is also shamefully predictable…it’s one thing to have a general idea concerning what direction the story will go, it’s quite another to be able to lay out, scene-for-scene, what is going to occur, minutes before it actually happens. Some of the stronger performances on the part of the cast were also cut short in favor of an almost obligatory and unmotivated romantic sub-plot, the most notable instance involving Cliff Curtis as Zoe’s no-nonsense uncle. If, in its entirety, Colombiana’s quality matched that of a few key scenes, it could have gone down as a new action film classic, but as it stands, the film will remain in the shadow of far superior offerings and is nothing that you absolutely have to see immediately.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
I’m a pretty big fan of Zoe Zaldana’s work, so I had pretty high expectations for Columbiana, but while she did a great job as the “action hero,” the rest of the film was mediocre at best. To be fair, Colombiana does have a number of awesome and truly creative scenes, but by-and-large, the film resorts to thoroughly unlikely plot elements to advance a shaky story. The film is also shamefully predictable…it’s one thing to have a general idea concerning what direction the story will go, it’s quite another to be able to lay out, scene-for-scene, what is going to occur, minutes before it actually happens. Some of the stronger performances on the part of the cast were also cut short in favor of an almost obligatory and unmotivated romantic sub-plot, the most notable instance involving Cliff Curtis as Zoe’s no-nonsense uncle. If, in its entirety, Colombiana’s quality matched that of a few key scenes, it could have gone down as a new action film classic, but as it stands, the film will remain in the shadow of far superior offerings and is nothing that you absolutely have to see immediately.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Colombiana: Full Review
Colombiana - (August 26th, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: TriStar Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $10,408,176
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $11,569,483
Gross Revenue: $17,773,545
Production Budget: $40 million
Director: Olivier Megaton
If you stop to think about it, Zoe Saldana is perhaps one of the best actresses in Hollywood who has never really gotten a chance to carry a blockbuster project by herself. She has appeared in a surprisingly large number of successful films, my personal favorites being her roles as immigration agent Dolores Torres in 2004’s The Terminal and Lieutenant Nyota Uhura in 2009’s Star Trek. And anyone questioning her acting ability had to be silenced by her performance as Neytiri in Avatar, which many praised and believed deserved an Academy Award nomination. Finally getting the chance to portray a stand-alone heroine, TriStar went out of their way to portray Zaldana as the next action superstar, showing clips of pulse-pounding action and focusing on the fact that Colombiana was produced by the same decision-makers who made 2008’s Taken a runaway hit. This newest film may not have had the time to build the same amount of buzz as other summer blockbusters, as marketing promotions for Colombiana only surfaced a few weeks prior to release, but with a sexy starlet in the lead-role and plenty of action, many predicted that a very specific male demographic would respond enthusiastically and fill theaters.
As Colombiana opens, the audience is introduced to young Cataleya Restrepo (Amandla Stenberg) as she witnesses her parents being brutally murdered in Bogotá, Colombia on the orders of a local drug kingpin. Swearing revenge, Cataleya escapes from the kingpin’s right-hand man, Marco (Jordi Mollà) and makes her way to Miami, where she is taken in by her uncle, Emilio (Cliff Curtis), who promises to teach her the skills she will need to avenge her parents’ deaths. Fast forward a few years, and the now-adult Cataleya (Zoe Saldana) works as a high-profile and anonymous assassin, marking her victims as a way to send a message to the mobsters she is trying to draw out of hiding. When not moving closer and closer to her objective, Cataleya tries to pursue a casual relationship with local artist, Danny (Michael Vartan), though she is less-than-honest about how she makes a living. Though she is constantly warned by Emilio to be more careful, Cataleya’s professional and personal lives start to merge as the authorities zero-in on her identity, but she must maintain her resolve to find and punish those who took away her family.
Channeling undeniable brutality and near-psychotic obsession, Zoe Saldana is easily the best part of Colombiana, mercilessly dispatching her enemies but still reminding the audience of the pain she feels at the loss of her family. Other notable performances include Amandla Stenberg as the blunt and vengeful young Cataleya, who entertains the audience during the slightly drawn-out opening, and Cliff Curtis as Cataleya’s sarcastic and empathic uncle, who injects some much-needed humor and humanity in the life of his niece. Strong performances aside, Colombiana also offers a number of truly entertaining action sequences, the most notable being Cataleya’s first assassination, during which she breaks into a police station and shoots a prisoner. This scene and a number of others are sure to have action-junkies giggling in delight over gratuitous explosions and awesome weapons that echo significant energy and creativity. Unfortunately, in spite of these commendable elements, Colombiana suffers most from a weak and undeniably predictable narrative.
Promotions for Colombiana promised an engaging action film filled with revenge in the same vein as Taken, but the story is decidedly uneven, significantly weakening the film’s overall quality. As a character, Cataleya is supposed to be a sexy and independent hero relentlessly focused on revenge, but while Saldana definitely channels the sexy, an unnecessary romantic subplot completely halts the film’s momentum and turns the hardcore heroine into a slightly incompetent and overly-dependent loner. Something else about Colombiana that is undeniably disappointing involves the fact that, for every awesome and engaging scene, there are about three that are shamefully idiotic and absurdly predictable. I understand that there are times you may have to stretch believability in order to advance a story, but this film gives its audience almost no credit for being able to follow the sequence of events, and the end result produces ridiculous and formulaic plot elements. I understand that I see more movies than the average moviegoer, but even I shouldn’t be able to see a “twist” coming from a mile away and map out the exact order of events that will play out on the screen. If Colombiana were to make some tweaks and match the energy and creativity of its few enjoyable scenes, this action film would a surprising and well-revered entry in the genre…better luck next time.
Second place in the opening weekend isn’t something that a summer action film likes to see, but considering that this is Zoe Saldana’s first standalone entry, Colombiana has had a much stronger performance than a number of other recent offerings. With a combined domestic and foreign total of over $17 million, Colombiana is slowly chipping away at its modest production budget, but given its inherent appeal to the lucrative male 18-25 demographic, it isn’t necessarily set-in-stone that the film will end up losing money. At the very least, though critics aren’t in love with this newest action flick, it should prove that Zoe Saldana can handle the top billing that she has been denied for some time. Thoroughly entertaining at points, I only wish that Colombiana had been of a more consistent quality, as someone of Saldana’s talent deserved a far better story to work with than what she was ultimately given. So, even if you are a fan of Saldana, I’d wait for Netflix or Redbox before running to the theater.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Distributor: TriStar Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $10,408,176
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $11,569,483
Gross Revenue: $17,773,545
Production Budget: $40 million
Director: Olivier Megaton
If you stop to think about it, Zoe Saldana is perhaps one of the best actresses in Hollywood who has never really gotten a chance to carry a blockbuster project by herself. She has appeared in a surprisingly large number of successful films, my personal favorites being her roles as immigration agent Dolores Torres in 2004’s The Terminal and Lieutenant Nyota Uhura in 2009’s Star Trek. And anyone questioning her acting ability had to be silenced by her performance as Neytiri in Avatar, which many praised and believed deserved an Academy Award nomination. Finally getting the chance to portray a stand-alone heroine, TriStar went out of their way to portray Zaldana as the next action superstar, showing clips of pulse-pounding action and focusing on the fact that Colombiana was produced by the same decision-makers who made 2008’s Taken a runaway hit. This newest film may not have had the time to build the same amount of buzz as other summer blockbusters, as marketing promotions for Colombiana only surfaced a few weeks prior to release, but with a sexy starlet in the lead-role and plenty of action, many predicted that a very specific male demographic would respond enthusiastically and fill theaters.
As Colombiana opens, the audience is introduced to young Cataleya Restrepo (Amandla Stenberg) as she witnesses her parents being brutally murdered in Bogotá, Colombia on the orders of a local drug kingpin. Swearing revenge, Cataleya escapes from the kingpin’s right-hand man, Marco (Jordi Mollà) and makes her way to Miami, where she is taken in by her uncle, Emilio (Cliff Curtis), who promises to teach her the skills she will need to avenge her parents’ deaths. Fast forward a few years, and the now-adult Cataleya (Zoe Saldana) works as a high-profile and anonymous assassin, marking her victims as a way to send a message to the mobsters she is trying to draw out of hiding. When not moving closer and closer to her objective, Cataleya tries to pursue a casual relationship with local artist, Danny (Michael Vartan), though she is less-than-honest about how she makes a living. Though she is constantly warned by Emilio to be more careful, Cataleya’s professional and personal lives start to merge as the authorities zero-in on her identity, but she must maintain her resolve to find and punish those who took away her family.
Channeling undeniable brutality and near-psychotic obsession, Zoe Saldana is easily the best part of Colombiana, mercilessly dispatching her enemies but still reminding the audience of the pain she feels at the loss of her family. Other notable performances include Amandla Stenberg as the blunt and vengeful young Cataleya, who entertains the audience during the slightly drawn-out opening, and Cliff Curtis as Cataleya’s sarcastic and empathic uncle, who injects some much-needed humor and humanity in the life of his niece. Strong performances aside, Colombiana also offers a number of truly entertaining action sequences, the most notable being Cataleya’s first assassination, during which she breaks into a police station and shoots a prisoner. This scene and a number of others are sure to have action-junkies giggling in delight over gratuitous explosions and awesome weapons that echo significant energy and creativity. Unfortunately, in spite of these commendable elements, Colombiana suffers most from a weak and undeniably predictable narrative.
Promotions for Colombiana promised an engaging action film filled with revenge in the same vein as Taken, but the story is decidedly uneven, significantly weakening the film’s overall quality. As a character, Cataleya is supposed to be a sexy and independent hero relentlessly focused on revenge, but while Saldana definitely channels the sexy, an unnecessary romantic subplot completely halts the film’s momentum and turns the hardcore heroine into a slightly incompetent and overly-dependent loner. Something else about Colombiana that is undeniably disappointing involves the fact that, for every awesome and engaging scene, there are about three that are shamefully idiotic and absurdly predictable. I understand that there are times you may have to stretch believability in order to advance a story, but this film gives its audience almost no credit for being able to follow the sequence of events, and the end result produces ridiculous and formulaic plot elements. I understand that I see more movies than the average moviegoer, but even I shouldn’t be able to see a “twist” coming from a mile away and map out the exact order of events that will play out on the screen. If Colombiana were to make some tweaks and match the energy and creativity of its few enjoyable scenes, this action film would a surprising and well-revered entry in the genre…better luck next time.
Second place in the opening weekend isn’t something that a summer action film likes to see, but considering that this is Zoe Saldana’s first standalone entry, Colombiana has had a much stronger performance than a number of other recent offerings. With a combined domestic and foreign total of over $17 million, Colombiana is slowly chipping away at its modest production budget, but given its inherent appeal to the lucrative male 18-25 demographic, it isn’t necessarily set-in-stone that the film will end up losing money. At the very least, though critics aren’t in love with this newest action flick, it should prove that Zoe Saldana can handle the top billing that she has been denied for some time. Thoroughly entertaining at points, I only wish that Colombiana had been of a more consistent quality, as someone of Saldana’s talent deserved a far better story to work with than what she was ultimately given. So, even if you are a fan of Saldana, I’d wait for Netflix or Redbox before running to the theater.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Conan the Barbarian: Short and Sweet
It’s no secret that I’ve been skeptical of a number of the projects released during the 2011 Summer Movie Season, but the biggest red flags and loudest warning bells came from Conan the Barbarian. When I previewed all of the films that were going to be released over these past few months, I questioned the choice to remake a film that was made nearly thirty years ago with an unknown actor taking up a character synonymous with Hollywood legend Arnold Schwarzenegger. Jason Momoa may have fans from his work on Stargate: Atlantis and Game of Thrones, but he was nowhere near famous enough to carry of summer blockbuster, especially when there were no other truly bankable actors present in the supporting cast. Needless to say, I had absolutely no desire to see Conan the Barbarian, but I knew that I couldn’t legitimately claim a thorough and diverse analysis of the Summer Movie Season without reviewing this likely train-wreck. Still, there were a number of films this summer that should have been disasters but ended up being fantastic, so maybe the trend started by Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Fright Night could continue with this sword-and-sorcery adventure.
After the high quality of some films that I was certain would be failures, I feared that my film instincts might be deteriorating, but thankfully, I can now be vindicated, because Conan the Barbarian is horrible in every way imaginable. Loud, crude, and shockingly tasteless, this newest “blockbuster” was absolute torture to sit through, and as hard as I tried, I could not identify a single redeeming quality. Jason Momoa proves he can scowl, but that’s where the acting quality stops, with the leading man and the rest of the cast choking through mind-numbing dialogue and a thoroughly ridiculous story. I know what you’re thinking, maybe there were some cool 3D fight scenes to keep the audience entertained…hate to break it to you, but any action sequences that weren’t lazy were absolutely destroyed by shoddy cinematography and shamefully poor editing. Completely unnecessary and shockingly bad, Conan the Barbarian borrows from much better action films of the past, but the film is only able to execute enough in order to earn the title of worst film of the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
After the high quality of some films that I was certain would be failures, I feared that my film instincts might be deteriorating, but thankfully, I can now be vindicated, because Conan the Barbarian is horrible in every way imaginable. Loud, crude, and shockingly tasteless, this newest “blockbuster” was absolute torture to sit through, and as hard as I tried, I could not identify a single redeeming quality. Jason Momoa proves he can scowl, but that’s where the acting quality stops, with the leading man and the rest of the cast choking through mind-numbing dialogue and a thoroughly ridiculous story. I know what you’re thinking, maybe there were some cool 3D fight scenes to keep the audience entertained…hate to break it to you, but any action sequences that weren’t lazy were absolutely destroyed by shoddy cinematography and shamefully poor editing. Completely unnecessary and shockingly bad, Conan the Barbarian borrows from much better action films of the past, but the film is only able to execute enough in order to earn the title of worst film of the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Conan the Barbarian: Full Review
Conan the Barbarian - (August 19th, 2011): R
Distributor: Lionsgate
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #4 with $10,021,215
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $17,058,504
Gross Revenue: $22,558,504
Production Budget: $90 million
Director: Marcus Nispel
The character of Conan the Barbarian has been around since 1932 and has appeared in a variety of different media, but his most memorable incarnation is undoubtedly the 1982 Arnold Schwarzenegger film. Hollywood has never shied away from remakes, but I had to question the wisdom of resurrecting a film that critics hated nearly thirty years ago with an unknown actor in the leading role and a supporting cast filled with a number of Hollywood B-listers. Don’t get me wrong, Rachel Nichols (G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra), Rose McGowan (Grindhouse), Stephan Lang (Avatar), and Ron Pearlman (Hellboy) have all had noteworthy offerings at the box office, but none of them were anywhere near famous enough to draw a large audience beyond devoted sword-and-sorcery fans. Clearly, Lionsgate had one hell of a challenge convincing audiences that Jason Momoa could carry a summer action film, but early trailers seemed to promise more than enough entertaining action. Still, I saw most marketing efforts as nothing more than vain attempts to support a film almost guaranteed to fail…were I not such a dedicated film analyst, there is no way I would have paid to see Conan the Barbarian.
Set in the fictional Hyborean Age, Conan the Barbarian introduces warlord Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang), who is seeking an ancient and supernatural mask that will give him the power to rule the world. The pieces of the mask have been scattered around the globe and are protected by various barbarian tribes, but Zym is able to collect the pieces and traces the final component of the mask to a barbarian tribe led by the respected warrior Corin (Ron Pearlman). Zym wastes no time in slaughtering the entire village and stealing the mask piece, the only surviving member being Corin’s young son, Conan, who vainly tried to save his father’s life. Fast forward twenty years, and the now-adult Conan (Jason Momoa) is thirsting for revenge, while Zym and his sorceress daughter, Marique (Rose McGowan), are searching for someone of pure spirit to use as a sacrifice in order to unlock the full power of the mask. After attacking a monastery and kidnapping one of its students, Tamara (Rachel Nichols), Zym and Marique make their way to the sacrificial temple, only to be interrupted by Conan. After kidnapping Tamara, Conan decides to retreat and regroup, so that the two can find a way to defeat Zym and save the world from his tyranny.
If the above plot synopsis sounds overly-complicated and completely formulaic, you have identified only one of the multiple weak elements that make Conan the Barbarian a complete disaster. The film throws the audience into a deep mythology with little explanation or guidance (aside from the grossly-misplaced narration by Morgan Freeman…yes, that Morgan Freeman), hoping that the moviegoers will be able to follow what is unfolding on-screen. The cast does little, if anything, to remedy this shortcoming, with Jason Momoa only proving he can scowl and Ron Pearlman being killed-off before he gets a chance to do anything memorable…I guess I could give them credit for not breaking-out into laughter during the mind-numbing dialogue. Besides the base story and weak acting, other film elements from set design to costuming are shockingly tasteless, sacrificing any credibility the film could have hoped to build in order to keep the audience entertained. The truly sad thing is that Conan the Barbarian borrows heavily from past sword-and-sorcery offerings that were far more successful in producing an acceptable film, but the filmmakers still clearly didn’t learn anything meaningful.
Almost a decade ago, there was a movie about a brutal ancient warrior who set out to avenge his slaughtered family against a warlord, starring a then-unknown actor; last summer, audiences watched a young orphan stop his uncle from gaining an ancient artifact with the help of a kidnapped princess with spiritual connections…sound familiar? The first film was 2002’s The Scorpion King starring new leading man Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, while the second was Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time; neither were perfect, yet they were undeniably entertaining and successful…even though Conan the Barbarian’s plot shamelessly borrows from both adventures, it still disappointingly squanders proven film formulas. Now, in the face of all of these bad elements, I vainly searched for any kind of redeeming qualities, but every single aspect of this supposed blockbuster is just awful. Case-in-point, as a character, Conan is a bloodthirsty warrior who can kick-ass with a sword, but where the film should have offered some impressive fight scenes and action sequences, but I can’t even identify if any actually made it into the final film, because shoddy camera-work and poor editing make every “battle” nauseating to watch; I lost count of how many villains were supposedly killed only to later reappear on-screen. Confusing, loud, and offering no impressive 3D effects whatsoever, Conan the Barbarian is an insulting waste of both time and money.
Last week, I would have identified Green Lantern as the worst movie of the 2011 Summer Movie Season, but luckily for Ryan Reynolds, Conan the Barbarian is not only the worst movie of the season, but it may also be the worst film I have ever seen, period. The box office seems to agree with me, as Conan opened in forth place and has yet to crack $20 million domestically, which is a pretty bad sign for a film that cost $90 million to produce. Even with an expansive international presence, the expanded audience has only added around $5.5 million to the gross revenue, a sharp contrast from the original, which made most of its money overseas. Luckily, I am not alone in my disdain for this film, because Conan the Barbarian has been critically panned…forget small changes to make this supposed adventure better, filmmakers would have been better completely scrapping this project, as Lionsgate and anyone else involved is clearly going to lose money. Bottom line, I guarantee that you have better things to do with your time; DO NOT see Conan the Barbarian…it sucks!
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Distributor: Lionsgate
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #4 with $10,021,215
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $17,058,504
Gross Revenue: $22,558,504
Production Budget: $90 million
Director: Marcus Nispel
The character of Conan the Barbarian has been around since 1932 and has appeared in a variety of different media, but his most memorable incarnation is undoubtedly the 1982 Arnold Schwarzenegger film. Hollywood has never shied away from remakes, but I had to question the wisdom of resurrecting a film that critics hated nearly thirty years ago with an unknown actor in the leading role and a supporting cast filled with a number of Hollywood B-listers. Don’t get me wrong, Rachel Nichols (G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra), Rose McGowan (Grindhouse), Stephan Lang (Avatar), and Ron Pearlman (Hellboy) have all had noteworthy offerings at the box office, but none of them were anywhere near famous enough to draw a large audience beyond devoted sword-and-sorcery fans. Clearly, Lionsgate had one hell of a challenge convincing audiences that Jason Momoa could carry a summer action film, but early trailers seemed to promise more than enough entertaining action. Still, I saw most marketing efforts as nothing more than vain attempts to support a film almost guaranteed to fail…were I not such a dedicated film analyst, there is no way I would have paid to see Conan the Barbarian.
Set in the fictional Hyborean Age, Conan the Barbarian introduces warlord Khalar Zym (Stephen Lang), who is seeking an ancient and supernatural mask that will give him the power to rule the world. The pieces of the mask have been scattered around the globe and are protected by various barbarian tribes, but Zym is able to collect the pieces and traces the final component of the mask to a barbarian tribe led by the respected warrior Corin (Ron Pearlman). Zym wastes no time in slaughtering the entire village and stealing the mask piece, the only surviving member being Corin’s young son, Conan, who vainly tried to save his father’s life. Fast forward twenty years, and the now-adult Conan (Jason Momoa) is thirsting for revenge, while Zym and his sorceress daughter, Marique (Rose McGowan), are searching for someone of pure spirit to use as a sacrifice in order to unlock the full power of the mask. After attacking a monastery and kidnapping one of its students, Tamara (Rachel Nichols), Zym and Marique make their way to the sacrificial temple, only to be interrupted by Conan. After kidnapping Tamara, Conan decides to retreat and regroup, so that the two can find a way to defeat Zym and save the world from his tyranny.
If the above plot synopsis sounds overly-complicated and completely formulaic, you have identified only one of the multiple weak elements that make Conan the Barbarian a complete disaster. The film throws the audience into a deep mythology with little explanation or guidance (aside from the grossly-misplaced narration by Morgan Freeman…yes, that Morgan Freeman), hoping that the moviegoers will be able to follow what is unfolding on-screen. The cast does little, if anything, to remedy this shortcoming, with Jason Momoa only proving he can scowl and Ron Pearlman being killed-off before he gets a chance to do anything memorable…I guess I could give them credit for not breaking-out into laughter during the mind-numbing dialogue. Besides the base story and weak acting, other film elements from set design to costuming are shockingly tasteless, sacrificing any credibility the film could have hoped to build in order to keep the audience entertained. The truly sad thing is that Conan the Barbarian borrows heavily from past sword-and-sorcery offerings that were far more successful in producing an acceptable film, but the filmmakers still clearly didn’t learn anything meaningful.
Almost a decade ago, there was a movie about a brutal ancient warrior who set out to avenge his slaughtered family against a warlord, starring a then-unknown actor; last summer, audiences watched a young orphan stop his uncle from gaining an ancient artifact with the help of a kidnapped princess with spiritual connections…sound familiar? The first film was 2002’s The Scorpion King starring new leading man Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, while the second was Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time; neither were perfect, yet they were undeniably entertaining and successful…even though Conan the Barbarian’s plot shamelessly borrows from both adventures, it still disappointingly squanders proven film formulas. Now, in the face of all of these bad elements, I vainly searched for any kind of redeeming qualities, but every single aspect of this supposed blockbuster is just awful. Case-in-point, as a character, Conan is a bloodthirsty warrior who can kick-ass with a sword, but where the film should have offered some impressive fight scenes and action sequences, but I can’t even identify if any actually made it into the final film, because shoddy camera-work and poor editing make every “battle” nauseating to watch; I lost count of how many villains were supposedly killed only to later reappear on-screen. Confusing, loud, and offering no impressive 3D effects whatsoever, Conan the Barbarian is an insulting waste of both time and money.
Last week, I would have identified Green Lantern as the worst movie of the 2011 Summer Movie Season, but luckily for Ryan Reynolds, Conan the Barbarian is not only the worst movie of the season, but it may also be the worst film I have ever seen, period. The box office seems to agree with me, as Conan opened in forth place and has yet to crack $20 million domestically, which is a pretty bad sign for a film that cost $90 million to produce. Even with an expansive international presence, the expanded audience has only added around $5.5 million to the gross revenue, a sharp contrast from the original, which made most of its money overseas. Luckily, I am not alone in my disdain for this film, because Conan the Barbarian has been critically panned…forget small changes to make this supposed adventure better, filmmakers would have been better completely scrapping this project, as Lionsgate and anyone else involved is clearly going to lose money. Bottom line, I guarantee that you have better things to do with your time; DO NOT see Conan the Barbarian…it sucks!
Overall Recommendation: Very Low
Monday, August 29, 2011
Fright Night: Short and Sweet
There was once a time when vampires were considered absolutely horrifying; undead creatures of the night that had absolutely no problem tearing out your throat and draining your blood for sustenance…then Twilight came along and suddenly every vampire was misunderstood and full of angst over the fear of sparkling when exposed to sunlight. It’s no secret that I’m a huge purist when it comes to superheroes, but I’m also a pretty big fan of vampire mythology, so understandably, Edward Cullen has been pissing me off for years. Having never seen the original, when I first caught wind of Fright Night, I feared that Colin Farrell would only be perpetuating the stereotype of a romantic vampire, but it became quickly apparent that he would be nothing short of a sadistic predator. The horror genre may not be on my list of favorites, but an entertaining cast and the chance to see a classic type of movie monster redeemed was more than enough to compel my attendance at the theater. Critical reviews were surprisingly positive, but I was still slightly pessimistic, as a few bad decisions could easily turn Fright Night into a disaster.
Both genuinely scary and surprisingly funny, Fright Night is a highly entertaining adventure that pays respect to established mythos without taking itself too seriously. The film evokes classic horror strategies to bring suspense to life, but it also takes time to poke fun at some of the sillier elements of the subject matter that the script wisely adheres to throughout the narrative. This balance is bolstered by the strong performances delivered by the cast, the standouts being David Tennant as the frazzled vampire hunter and Colin Ferrell as the thoroughly evil antagonist who clearly loves to be feared. Strong special effects also accentuate the gore and action, making the end result not only fun, but also fully worth seeing in 3D. Plain and simple, if you are looking for a good scare or simply miss the horrific nature of classic vampires, then Fright Night is definitely something you should not miss.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Both genuinely scary and surprisingly funny, Fright Night is a highly entertaining adventure that pays respect to established mythos without taking itself too seriously. The film evokes classic horror strategies to bring suspense to life, but it also takes time to poke fun at some of the sillier elements of the subject matter that the script wisely adheres to throughout the narrative. This balance is bolstered by the strong performances delivered by the cast, the standouts being David Tennant as the frazzled vampire hunter and Colin Ferrell as the thoroughly evil antagonist who clearly loves to be feared. Strong special effects also accentuate the gore and action, making the end result not only fun, but also fully worth seeing in 3D. Plain and simple, if you are looking for a good scare or simply miss the horrific nature of classic vampires, then Fright Night is definitely something you should not miss.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Fright Night: Full Review
Fright Night - (August 19th, 2011): R
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures (subset of Walt Disney Pictures)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #6 with $7,714,388
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $14,207,000
Gross Revenue: $14,207,000
Production Budget: $30 million
Director: Craig Gillespie
Before Robert Pattinson caused legions of teenage girls to swoon and start biting their boyfriends to recreate some warped notion of affection, a surprising number of high profile A-listers donned fangs on the big screen. Gary Oldman and Gerard Butler have both played incarnations of Count Dracula, while Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Antonio Banderas, and Kirsten Dunst all terrified audiences as bloodsuckers in 1994’s Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles…it was now Colin Farrell’s turn to bring a horror icon to life (in a manner of speaking). In addition to Farrell, Fright Night was also stacked with a diverse and popular cast, which included Anton Yelchin (Star Trek, Terminator Salvation) and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (Superbad, Role Models, Kick-Ass)…even David Tennet would draw a strong crowd, because even though I know him best for his role as Barty Crouch Jr. in 2005’s Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, he has a devoted fan following from his time on the insanely popular series Dr. Who. A remake of the 1985 original, Fright Night had some serious hurdles to clear…thanks to Stephanie Meyers and Twilight, few people now regarded vampires as something scary, so could an attempt at a legitimate horror film be taken seriously? Early trailers certainly didn’t help, as the story looked ridiculous (if your neighbor is a vampire, sell your house and get the hell out of there), but as devoted fan of vampire mythos, I still hoped the film could return some legitimacy to the movie monster that was once a feared horror icon.
Set in a suburb of Las Vegas, Fright Night follows teenager Charley Brewster, (Anton Yelchin), who lives happily with his mother (Toni Collette) and enjoys spending time with his girlfriend, Amy (the undeniably sexy Imogen Poots). This domestic bliss is shattered when Charley’s childhood friend, “Evil” Ed Lee (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), reveals that he has been investigating a number of local disappearances, and that he believes the culprit is Charley’s new neighbor, Jerry Dandridge (Colin Farrell). When Ed claims that he has evidence that Jerry is a vampire, Charley dismisses him, but once his former friend disappears, Charley decides to investigate his new neighbor and discovers the startling truth. Soon enough, Jerry lets on that he knows Charley is aware of his secret, and that Charley’s mother and girlfriend represent his next intended victims, so the panicked teenager decides to consult Vegas magician and self-proclaimed vampire “expert” Peter Vincent (David Tennant). Though it takes some convincing, Vincent eventually agrees to help Charley, and the two newly converted vampire hunters must work together in order to find a way to destroy Jerry before he is able to hurt anyone else.
Easily the best part of Fright Night is that the film is able to blend both horror and humor without overdoing either element. What makes the film so scary is Colin Farrell’s performance as the centuries-old vampire who clearly loves killing and has no qualms about terrorizing others or mocking anyone who could ever attempt to stop him…anytime he shows up on screen coolly smirking, you know that any human in his immediate vicinity doesn’t stand a chance. Special effects were also key additions in regard to the horror element, as Jerry’s lack of reflection, healing ability, and monstrous appearance are as cool as they are horrifying to watch…in 3D. The humor comes from the fact that, while Fright Night is loyal to vampire mythology, it still pokes fun at some of the more ridiculous elements of the subject matter. A few examples: vampires cannot enter a home without an invitation, so Jerry proceeds to open a gas line and blow up the house; one way to kill a vampire is trough beheading, but when Charley tries and fails, the vampire comments on how difficult bone is to cut through; and when Jerry is shot with a silver bullet, he removes the casing and quips: “Not a werewolf.” The one cast member who further enhances this balance of film elements is David Tennet, who clearly has fun as the skeptical vampire authority, lamenting the uselessness of a weapon he purchased on eBay or suggesting that Charley cook Jerry a garlic omelette. You will undoubtedly laugh during the jokes and panic anytime a character enters a dark hallway, but if I had to define a weaker element of Fright Night, it would be the simplistic story…thankfully, a few clever film elements help gloss over this shortcoming.
As I mentioned earlier, when I first heard about the plot element of a vampire as a neighbor, I dismissed any validity on the grounds that if the intended victims moved away, the movie was over. Thankfully, the characters and narrative pacing frame this simplistic story in such a way as to make it believable…once Jerry’s identity is revealed, chaos ensues so quickly that its obvious that Charley and his family have no time to react any differently. And, in order to school the audience on the finer elements of vampire lore, the casting director couldn’t have made a better choice than Christopher Mintz-Plasse, the cool nerd who is more than capable of claiming a neighbor is undead and not sounding like a complete moron. Still, the rapid way in which many characters accept the existence of vampires without question is a little unsettling, but then again, how would you react if Colin Farrell sprouted fangs, chased you and your family down, and then proceeded to kill everyone in sight in as gory a manner as possible? In the end, it is clear that everyone involved in the film had fun with this project, and by extension, the audience will be undoubtedly entertained as Fright Night reminds them that vampires are to be feared, not loved.
I may have been excited to see Fright Night, but apparently true vampire fans are few and far in-between, because this horror flick’s performance at the box office is sure to cause a few nightmares for Hollywood executives. In its first weekend, Fright Night placed sixth at the box office and was only able to drum up around $7 million, nowhere near enough to displace The Help or Rise of the Planet of the Apes. It really is a shame, because the film is a pleasant surprise that is thoroughly entertaining and has charmed critics, hopefully word-of-mouth can push the numbers a little higher to cover the modest budget. Perhaps this is nothing more than an instance of failed distribution strategy…just like Mr. Popper’s Penguins would have performed far better around Christmas, I know that a stronger audience would have followed Fright Night had it been released right around Halloween. Disappointing performance aside, I cannot emphasize enough how strong and enjoyable this newest summer film is as the 2011 Summer Movie Season draws to a close.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures (subset of Walt Disney Pictures)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #6 with $7,714,388
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $14,207,000
Gross Revenue: $14,207,000
Production Budget: $30 million
Director: Craig Gillespie
Before Robert Pattinson caused legions of teenage girls to swoon and start biting their boyfriends to recreate some warped notion of affection, a surprising number of high profile A-listers donned fangs on the big screen. Gary Oldman and Gerard Butler have both played incarnations of Count Dracula, while Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Antonio Banderas, and Kirsten Dunst all terrified audiences as bloodsuckers in 1994’s Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles…it was now Colin Farrell’s turn to bring a horror icon to life (in a manner of speaking). In addition to Farrell, Fright Night was also stacked with a diverse and popular cast, which included Anton Yelchin (Star Trek, Terminator Salvation) and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (Superbad, Role Models, Kick-Ass)…even David Tennet would draw a strong crowd, because even though I know him best for his role as Barty Crouch Jr. in 2005’s Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, he has a devoted fan following from his time on the insanely popular series Dr. Who. A remake of the 1985 original, Fright Night had some serious hurdles to clear…thanks to Stephanie Meyers and Twilight, few people now regarded vampires as something scary, so could an attempt at a legitimate horror film be taken seriously? Early trailers certainly didn’t help, as the story looked ridiculous (if your neighbor is a vampire, sell your house and get the hell out of there), but as devoted fan of vampire mythos, I still hoped the film could return some legitimacy to the movie monster that was once a feared horror icon.
Set in a suburb of Las Vegas, Fright Night follows teenager Charley Brewster, (Anton Yelchin), who lives happily with his mother (Toni Collette) and enjoys spending time with his girlfriend, Amy (the undeniably sexy Imogen Poots). This domestic bliss is shattered when Charley’s childhood friend, “Evil” Ed Lee (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), reveals that he has been investigating a number of local disappearances, and that he believes the culprit is Charley’s new neighbor, Jerry Dandridge (Colin Farrell). When Ed claims that he has evidence that Jerry is a vampire, Charley dismisses him, but once his former friend disappears, Charley decides to investigate his new neighbor and discovers the startling truth. Soon enough, Jerry lets on that he knows Charley is aware of his secret, and that Charley’s mother and girlfriend represent his next intended victims, so the panicked teenager decides to consult Vegas magician and self-proclaimed vampire “expert” Peter Vincent (David Tennant). Though it takes some convincing, Vincent eventually agrees to help Charley, and the two newly converted vampire hunters must work together in order to find a way to destroy Jerry before he is able to hurt anyone else.
Easily the best part of Fright Night is that the film is able to blend both horror and humor without overdoing either element. What makes the film so scary is Colin Farrell’s performance as the centuries-old vampire who clearly loves killing and has no qualms about terrorizing others or mocking anyone who could ever attempt to stop him…anytime he shows up on screen coolly smirking, you know that any human in his immediate vicinity doesn’t stand a chance. Special effects were also key additions in regard to the horror element, as Jerry’s lack of reflection, healing ability, and monstrous appearance are as cool as they are horrifying to watch…in 3D. The humor comes from the fact that, while Fright Night is loyal to vampire mythology, it still pokes fun at some of the more ridiculous elements of the subject matter. A few examples: vampires cannot enter a home without an invitation, so Jerry proceeds to open a gas line and blow up the house; one way to kill a vampire is trough beheading, but when Charley tries and fails, the vampire comments on how difficult bone is to cut through; and when Jerry is shot with a silver bullet, he removes the casing and quips: “Not a werewolf.” The one cast member who further enhances this balance of film elements is David Tennet, who clearly has fun as the skeptical vampire authority, lamenting the uselessness of a weapon he purchased on eBay or suggesting that Charley cook Jerry a garlic omelette. You will undoubtedly laugh during the jokes and panic anytime a character enters a dark hallway, but if I had to define a weaker element of Fright Night, it would be the simplistic story…thankfully, a few clever film elements help gloss over this shortcoming.
As I mentioned earlier, when I first heard about the plot element of a vampire as a neighbor, I dismissed any validity on the grounds that if the intended victims moved away, the movie was over. Thankfully, the characters and narrative pacing frame this simplistic story in such a way as to make it believable…once Jerry’s identity is revealed, chaos ensues so quickly that its obvious that Charley and his family have no time to react any differently. And, in order to school the audience on the finer elements of vampire lore, the casting director couldn’t have made a better choice than Christopher Mintz-Plasse, the cool nerd who is more than capable of claiming a neighbor is undead and not sounding like a complete moron. Still, the rapid way in which many characters accept the existence of vampires without question is a little unsettling, but then again, how would you react if Colin Farrell sprouted fangs, chased you and your family down, and then proceeded to kill everyone in sight in as gory a manner as possible? In the end, it is clear that everyone involved in the film had fun with this project, and by extension, the audience will be undoubtedly entertained as Fright Night reminds them that vampires are to be feared, not loved.
I may have been excited to see Fright Night, but apparently true vampire fans are few and far in-between, because this horror flick’s performance at the box office is sure to cause a few nightmares for Hollywood executives. In its first weekend, Fright Night placed sixth at the box office and was only able to drum up around $7 million, nowhere near enough to displace The Help or Rise of the Planet of the Apes. It really is a shame, because the film is a pleasant surprise that is thoroughly entertaining and has charmed critics, hopefully word-of-mouth can push the numbers a little higher to cover the modest budget. Perhaps this is nothing more than an instance of failed distribution strategy…just like Mr. Popper’s Penguins would have performed far better around Christmas, I know that a stronger audience would have followed Fright Night had it been released right around Halloween. Disappointing performance aside, I cannot emphasize enough how strong and enjoyable this newest summer film is as the 2011 Summer Movie Season draws to a close.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Monday, August 22, 2011
30 Minutes or Less: Short and Sweet
Just like Captain America: The First Avenger represented the end of the superhero segment of the 2011 Summer Movie Season, 30 Minutes or Less signaled the final raunchy comedy. Based on who you ask, Columbia Pictures definitely stacked this entry with some heavy comedic talent; I may not be the biggest fan of Aziz Ansari or Nick Swardson, but Danny McBride’s involvement virtually guaranteed that I would shell out the money for a ticket. And while many would question the presence of Best Actor nominee Jesse Eisenberg, it’s easy to forget that before he portrayed Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Network, he made his name in hybrid-comedies like 2009 entries Adventureland and Zombieland. One big speed bump involved the subject matter; while the idea of two idiots strapping a bomb to somebody and forcing him to rob a bank may sound like a wacky comedy, this scheme actually occurred in 2003 with tragic results. Volatile plot aside, 30 Minutes or Less still looked like it could be ludicrous enough to provide some great laughs.
By and large, 30 Minutes or Less was pretty disappointing, with the ludicrous story unfolding almost exactly as expected with very little genuine humor. Don’t get me wrong, the movie has some undeniably hysterical moments, but many of the attempts at humor fall flat, with McBride and Swardson often rambling and hoping to generate a laugh. The best part of this comedy is easily Aziz Ansari, freaking out and ranting with so much energy that you cannot help but laugh and wait for his next outburst. The story is so out-of-this-world insane that it does manage to entertain on a very simplistic level, but I’m afraid that some moviegoers might walk out actually thinking they can now pull off a bank robbery. It may not be the deepest film or the strongest comedy to help close out the Summer Movie Season, but 30 Minutes or Less can still entertain a specific audience; I just wouldn’t recommend that anyone rush out to the theater.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
By and large, 30 Minutes or Less was pretty disappointing, with the ludicrous story unfolding almost exactly as expected with very little genuine humor. Don’t get me wrong, the movie has some undeniably hysterical moments, but many of the attempts at humor fall flat, with McBride and Swardson often rambling and hoping to generate a laugh. The best part of this comedy is easily Aziz Ansari, freaking out and ranting with so much energy that you cannot help but laugh and wait for his next outburst. The story is so out-of-this-world insane that it does manage to entertain on a very simplistic level, but I’m afraid that some moviegoers might walk out actually thinking they can now pull off a bank robbery. It may not be the deepest film or the strongest comedy to help close out the Summer Movie Season, but 30 Minutes or Less can still entertain a specific audience; I just wouldn’t recommend that anyone rush out to the theater.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
30 Minutes or Less: Full Review
30 Minutes or Less - (August 12th, 2011): R
Distributor: Columbia Pictures (subset of Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $13,330,118
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $25,864,430
Gross Revenue: $25,864,430
Production Budget: $28 million
Director: Ruben Fleischer
When I first saw the trailer for 30 Minutes or Less, I was thrilled to not only see Jesse Eisenberg in a more lighthearted role, but also watch Danny McBride once again embrace the type of character he has become known for, an idiotic and explosives-happy simpleton. Unfortunately, I was less enthused by some of the other names attached to the project; I may be a fan of Nick Swardson’s stand-up comedy, but I thought he burned his chance to transition to film when he went full-moron in Adam Sandler’s train-wreck from February, Just Go With It. When it comes to Aziz Ansari, while he has legions of fans from his work on NBC’s Parks and Recreation, I can admit that I always found him more arrogant and annoying than genuinely funny. And screenwriters can deny it all they want, but this plot bears way too much of a resemblance to a bank heist that occurred in August 2003 and claimed the life of a pizza delivery man who had a bomb strapped to his neck…I’m not sure it’s okay to laugh at something like that just yet. Still, with more than enough star-power to generate some big laughs, I found myself really looking forward to 30 Minutes or Less as a strong raunchy comedy closeout for the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
In case the title isn’t a dead giveaway, 30 Minutes or Less focuses on a pizza delivery driver, Nick (Jesse Eisenberg). The central antagonists are Dwayne (Danny McBride) and his childhood friend, Travis (Nick Swardson); Dwayne is an out-of-work slacker who is constantly demeaned by his rich father (Fred Ward), so he plans to have his father killed so that he can gain early access to his inheritance. In order to pay for the assassin, Chongo (Michael Peña), Dwayne and Travis need $100,000, but to prevent any connection to the crime, the two decide to force someone else to commit the bank robbery. After Travis constructs an explosive vest, the two deviant masterminds kidnap Nick and strap the bomb to him, informing their hostage that he has ten hours to rob a bank or the vest will detonate. Clearly panicked, Nick goes to his best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) for help, and the two unwilling criminals end up hatching a plan to rob a bank in the little time that they have left.
If the plot description above sounds ludicrous, your instincts are dead-on accurate, and that’s the beauty of 30 Minutes or Less…the events unfolding onscreen are so out-of-this-world insane that you cannot help but laugh. Of all the actors, Aziz Ansari is by far the funniest, using rants of harsh reality on the other characters that are as energetic as they are hilarious, and I guarantee that you will be quoting him for months…I can now count myself as one of his fans. Even Jesse Eisenberg was a pleasant surprise, reverting back from the seriousness of his previous work in The Social Network and even lightheartedly poking fun at his famous role. The audience lost their minds when Eisenberg quipped that he doesn’t use Facebook and prefers to stay “off the grid”; that kind of clever humor is what makes most comedies fun to watch. Unfortunately, these high points I have identified are few and far in-between, meaning that, for all of its potential, 30 Minutes of Less still dropped the ball.
Even with all the different comedic talent present in the cast, the writers of 30 Minutes or Less clearly seemed more interested in being shocking rather than genuinely clever. For a shameful majority of the “jokes” present, any laughs generated were more a reaction of surprise than genuine humor, and the biggest culprit of this illusion is Michael Peña…you may laugh, but you wouldn’t call him funny. And, as much as it pains me to say it, Danny McBride was just not funny, rambling and ad-libbing constantly in almost-pathetic attempts to land on a funny comment; he had a few brief and fleeting laughs, but I’ve come to expect much more from him. In terms of story, what is on paper is exactly what you get on screen…no surprise, no depth, no substance, and no redemption for its crude characters. I guess you could give 30 Minutes or Less credit for making a bank robbery seem plausible, but what happens when a few morons actually try to recreate what they saw on screen?
You may have thought that four was too high a number for superhero films in one summer movie season, but just stop and consider that 30 Minutes or Less is the SIXTH raunchy comedy in the past three months. Audience fatigue is clear, with this newest entry opening fifth in its first weekend with a meager $13 million and equally disappointing reviews. With no international presence and a domestic haul of just below $26 million after over a week in theaters, it is sad to think that this well-known cast is actually in danger of not recovering a $28 million budget. If some distribution changes had been made in order to launch 30 Minutes or Less a little earlier in the summer, there is a chance that it would have had a stronger performance, but then again, the current box office has done anything but conform to expectations. Plain and simple, this newest comedy will probably make you laugh if you are a fan of the cast, but in all honesty, there is nothing here to demand your immediate theater attendance.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Distributor: Columbia Pictures (subset of Sony Pictures Entertainment)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $13,330,118
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $25,864,430
Gross Revenue: $25,864,430
Production Budget: $28 million
Director: Ruben Fleischer
When I first saw the trailer for 30 Minutes or Less, I was thrilled to not only see Jesse Eisenberg in a more lighthearted role, but also watch Danny McBride once again embrace the type of character he has become known for, an idiotic and explosives-happy simpleton. Unfortunately, I was less enthused by some of the other names attached to the project; I may be a fan of Nick Swardson’s stand-up comedy, but I thought he burned his chance to transition to film when he went full-moron in Adam Sandler’s train-wreck from February, Just Go With It. When it comes to Aziz Ansari, while he has legions of fans from his work on NBC’s Parks and Recreation, I can admit that I always found him more arrogant and annoying than genuinely funny. And screenwriters can deny it all they want, but this plot bears way too much of a resemblance to a bank heist that occurred in August 2003 and claimed the life of a pizza delivery man who had a bomb strapped to his neck…I’m not sure it’s okay to laugh at something like that just yet. Still, with more than enough star-power to generate some big laughs, I found myself really looking forward to 30 Minutes or Less as a strong raunchy comedy closeout for the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
In case the title isn’t a dead giveaway, 30 Minutes or Less focuses on a pizza delivery driver, Nick (Jesse Eisenberg). The central antagonists are Dwayne (Danny McBride) and his childhood friend, Travis (Nick Swardson); Dwayne is an out-of-work slacker who is constantly demeaned by his rich father (Fred Ward), so he plans to have his father killed so that he can gain early access to his inheritance. In order to pay for the assassin, Chongo (Michael Peña), Dwayne and Travis need $100,000, but to prevent any connection to the crime, the two decide to force someone else to commit the bank robbery. After Travis constructs an explosive vest, the two deviant masterminds kidnap Nick and strap the bomb to him, informing their hostage that he has ten hours to rob a bank or the vest will detonate. Clearly panicked, Nick goes to his best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) for help, and the two unwilling criminals end up hatching a plan to rob a bank in the little time that they have left.
If the plot description above sounds ludicrous, your instincts are dead-on accurate, and that’s the beauty of 30 Minutes or Less…the events unfolding onscreen are so out-of-this-world insane that you cannot help but laugh. Of all the actors, Aziz Ansari is by far the funniest, using rants of harsh reality on the other characters that are as energetic as they are hilarious, and I guarantee that you will be quoting him for months…I can now count myself as one of his fans. Even Jesse Eisenberg was a pleasant surprise, reverting back from the seriousness of his previous work in The Social Network and even lightheartedly poking fun at his famous role. The audience lost their minds when Eisenberg quipped that he doesn’t use Facebook and prefers to stay “off the grid”; that kind of clever humor is what makes most comedies fun to watch. Unfortunately, these high points I have identified are few and far in-between, meaning that, for all of its potential, 30 Minutes of Less still dropped the ball.
Even with all the different comedic talent present in the cast, the writers of 30 Minutes or Less clearly seemed more interested in being shocking rather than genuinely clever. For a shameful majority of the “jokes” present, any laughs generated were more a reaction of surprise than genuine humor, and the biggest culprit of this illusion is Michael Peña…you may laugh, but you wouldn’t call him funny. And, as much as it pains me to say it, Danny McBride was just not funny, rambling and ad-libbing constantly in almost-pathetic attempts to land on a funny comment; he had a few brief and fleeting laughs, but I’ve come to expect much more from him. In terms of story, what is on paper is exactly what you get on screen…no surprise, no depth, no substance, and no redemption for its crude characters. I guess you could give 30 Minutes or Less credit for making a bank robbery seem plausible, but what happens when a few morons actually try to recreate what they saw on screen?
You may have thought that four was too high a number for superhero films in one summer movie season, but just stop and consider that 30 Minutes or Less is the SIXTH raunchy comedy in the past three months. Audience fatigue is clear, with this newest entry opening fifth in its first weekend with a meager $13 million and equally disappointing reviews. With no international presence and a domestic haul of just below $26 million after over a week in theaters, it is sad to think that this well-known cast is actually in danger of not recovering a $28 million budget. If some distribution changes had been made in order to launch 30 Minutes or Less a little earlier in the summer, there is a chance that it would have had a stronger performance, but then again, the current box office has done anything but conform to expectations. Plain and simple, this newest comedy will probably make you laugh if you are a fan of the cast, but in all honesty, there is nothing here to demand your immediate theater attendance.
Overall Recommendation: Low
The Help: Short and Sweet
Though it may not seem like it, buzz for The Help has been building for quite some time in the absence of a terribly aggressive marketing campaign, and that discrepancy could be due to a number of factors. In addition to a strong cast that included Emma Stone, Bryce Dallas Howard, and Academy Award nominee Voila Davis, The Help was also an adaptation of the ridiculously popular novel of the same name. If anything, a comedy-drama hybrid would be a welcome change from all the big-budget popcorn flicks that have been saturating theaters over the past few months. Now, the presence of Emma Stone alone was more than enough to draw me to the theater, but even though I had never read the novel myself, I was still curious to see how a strong story with very volatile themes would translate to the big screen. Needless to say, my expectations were very high heading into The Help.
Easily one of the most mature and engaging dramas I have seen in quite some time, The Help shines a bright and shameful light on a period of history that is often overlooked today. Each of the cast members strongly occupies a distinct role from the Civil Rights era, with Emma Stone defiantly questioning conventions, Bryce Dallas Howard maliciously fighting to prevent change, and standouts Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer sacrificing their own safety to take a stand against inequality. The pain and despair experienced by the maids during this period is palpable and heartbreaking, but The Help cleverly intersperses moments of levity to keep things from getting too depressing. Unfortunately, for as important a story as is being told, at over two-hours, the pacing does tend to drag and, at times, threaten to lose the audience’s attention. Still, even with some less than riveting moments, the finished product is still inherently enjoyable and undoubtedly showcases some contenders for the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress categories at next year’s Academy Awards ceremony.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: High
Easily one of the most mature and engaging dramas I have seen in quite some time, The Help shines a bright and shameful light on a period of history that is often overlooked today. Each of the cast members strongly occupies a distinct role from the Civil Rights era, with Emma Stone defiantly questioning conventions, Bryce Dallas Howard maliciously fighting to prevent change, and standouts Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer sacrificing their own safety to take a stand against inequality. The pain and despair experienced by the maids during this period is palpable and heartbreaking, but The Help cleverly intersperses moments of levity to keep things from getting too depressing. Unfortunately, for as important a story as is being told, at over two-hours, the pacing does tend to drag and, at times, threaten to lose the audience’s attention. Still, even with some less than riveting moments, the finished product is still inherently enjoyable and undoubtedly showcases some contenders for the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress categories at next year’s Academy Awards ceremony.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: High
The Help: Full Review
The Help - (August 10th, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures (subset of Walt Disney Pictures)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $26,044,590
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $71,340,829
Gross Revenue: $71,340,829
Production Budget: $25 million
Director: Tate Taylor
The 2011 Summer Movie Season is finally slowing down, and even though August is usually not full of offerings that will turn heads, Touchstone decided to offer up a riveting drama that would stand out against comedy or action mainstays. Kathryn Stockett’s 2009 novel about black maids during the early 1960s is immensely popular, and many were excited to hear that the book would be receiving a big-screen adaptation. Beyond revered source material, The Help also boasted a surprisingly strong cast, from the increasingly prevalent Emma Stone to Best Supporting Actress nominee Viola Davis, who wowed audiences with her single-scene, eleven minute-long performance in 2008’s Doubt. Add in Hollywood veterans Allison Janney and Sissy Spacek, and The Help would be sure to draw a very large audience. If anything else, this character-driven drama echoed last summer’s small-budget super-hit, The Kids Are All Right, so I was more than willing to give this newest drama a chance.
Set in early-1960s’ Jackson, Mississippi, The Help highlights the trials of African American maids making their livelihood as second-class housekeepers who, more often then not, are responsible for raising white children. The two central characters are Aibileen Clark (Viola Davis) and Minny Jackson (Octavia Spencer); Aibileen has suffered much heartbreak in her life and disapproves of her employer’s neglect of her own daughter, while Minny is frequently humiliated by her snooty and cruel employer, Hilly Holbrook (Bryce Dallas Howard). Enter Eugenia “Skeeter” Phelan (Emma Stone), a recent college graduate and aspiring writer who disapproves of the treatment of the maids despite her mother Charlotte’s (Allison Janney) dismissive attitude. Skeeter kindly approaches Aibileen and Minny to be consultants for a book from the perspective of “The Help,” but both are hesitant to challenge the established order. When Minny is humiliated and subsequently fired by Hilly, both she and Aibileen decide to take Skeeter up on her offer and shed some light on the cruel and demeaning practices that many of these Mississippi socialites would prefer stay hidden.
As was expected, easily the best part of The Help is the phenomenal acting, which brings the diverse characters to life in a thoroughly enjoyable way. As the kindhearted and aggressive Skeeter, Emma Stone moves far beyond her comedy background by illustrating a young woman’s reaction to a perceived injustice, while, at the opposite end of the spectrum, Bryce Dallas Howard defiantly showcases Hilly’s poisonous “well-meaning” bigotry, which is both shocking and shameful. Even Allison Janney and Sissy Spacek (who plays Hilly’s mother) bring a new dimension to the film: you don’t get the sense that these older women are inherently bad, they have just complacently accepted the established order. The top performances belong to Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer, as they bring the anger, heartbreak, and fear that dominated this period of history to light…the audience quickly reveres the bravery that these women ultimately decide to show. These talented character showcases compliment a dynamic story, but at times, things do drag a little too slowly.
The story that is told by The Help is anything but simple, and the film does not shy away from its controversial subject matter…it is truly troubling to think that the type of behavior criticized was once thought perfectly acceptable. With such volatile themes, The Help could easily have been hopelessly depressing, but the film wisely intersperses moments of humor and levity, which are largely due to Octavia Spencer’s no-nonsense attitude. Unfortunately, I still felt like some of the narrative’s pacing was a little too slow, as the audience waits for the book’s publication and subsequent reader reaction so long that things actually start to get boring. At a two hour and seventeen minute running time, The Help is not a film that can be approached lightly, you just need to stick with it and rest assured that your persistence will be rewarded. For as strong as the rest of the elements of the film are, such a shortcoming is disappointing, but not overtly damning.
From a box office perspective, The Help has had a very unique impact…it wasn’t strong enough to earn top spot its opening weekend, but it actually gained momentum and emerged victorious in its second weekend. This rare occurrence is a unique testament to the power of word-of-mouth; it may not have been the only contributing factor, but it definitely had an influence in increasing moviegoer presence at the theater. With a domestic total of over $71 million so far, Hollywood execs have to be thrilled with The Help’s performance; not only has the modest $25 million production budget been more than fully recovered, but the film will undeniably resurface during awards season. It also cannot hurt that no big drama is set to be released in the near-future, so The Help is unlikely to face any significant competition during the notoriously weak month of September. It may not be perfect, but The Help is a unique offering this summer and something that should not be missed.
Overall Recommendation: High
Distributor: Touchstone Pictures (subset of Walt Disney Pictures)
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $26,044,590
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $71,340,829
Gross Revenue: $71,340,829
Production Budget: $25 million
Director: Tate Taylor
The 2011 Summer Movie Season is finally slowing down, and even though August is usually not full of offerings that will turn heads, Touchstone decided to offer up a riveting drama that would stand out against comedy or action mainstays. Kathryn Stockett’s 2009 novel about black maids during the early 1960s is immensely popular, and many were excited to hear that the book would be receiving a big-screen adaptation. Beyond revered source material, The Help also boasted a surprisingly strong cast, from the increasingly prevalent Emma Stone to Best Supporting Actress nominee Viola Davis, who wowed audiences with her single-scene, eleven minute-long performance in 2008’s Doubt. Add in Hollywood veterans Allison Janney and Sissy Spacek, and The Help would be sure to draw a very large audience. If anything else, this character-driven drama echoed last summer’s small-budget super-hit, The Kids Are All Right, so I was more than willing to give this newest drama a chance.
Set in early-1960s’ Jackson, Mississippi, The Help highlights the trials of African American maids making their livelihood as second-class housekeepers who, more often then not, are responsible for raising white children. The two central characters are Aibileen Clark (Viola Davis) and Minny Jackson (Octavia Spencer); Aibileen has suffered much heartbreak in her life and disapproves of her employer’s neglect of her own daughter, while Minny is frequently humiliated by her snooty and cruel employer, Hilly Holbrook (Bryce Dallas Howard). Enter Eugenia “Skeeter” Phelan (Emma Stone), a recent college graduate and aspiring writer who disapproves of the treatment of the maids despite her mother Charlotte’s (Allison Janney) dismissive attitude. Skeeter kindly approaches Aibileen and Minny to be consultants for a book from the perspective of “The Help,” but both are hesitant to challenge the established order. When Minny is humiliated and subsequently fired by Hilly, both she and Aibileen decide to take Skeeter up on her offer and shed some light on the cruel and demeaning practices that many of these Mississippi socialites would prefer stay hidden.
As was expected, easily the best part of The Help is the phenomenal acting, which brings the diverse characters to life in a thoroughly enjoyable way. As the kindhearted and aggressive Skeeter, Emma Stone moves far beyond her comedy background by illustrating a young woman’s reaction to a perceived injustice, while, at the opposite end of the spectrum, Bryce Dallas Howard defiantly showcases Hilly’s poisonous “well-meaning” bigotry, which is both shocking and shameful. Even Allison Janney and Sissy Spacek (who plays Hilly’s mother) bring a new dimension to the film: you don’t get the sense that these older women are inherently bad, they have just complacently accepted the established order. The top performances belong to Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer, as they bring the anger, heartbreak, and fear that dominated this period of history to light…the audience quickly reveres the bravery that these women ultimately decide to show. These talented character showcases compliment a dynamic story, but at times, things do drag a little too slowly.
The story that is told by The Help is anything but simple, and the film does not shy away from its controversial subject matter…it is truly troubling to think that the type of behavior criticized was once thought perfectly acceptable. With such volatile themes, The Help could easily have been hopelessly depressing, but the film wisely intersperses moments of humor and levity, which are largely due to Octavia Spencer’s no-nonsense attitude. Unfortunately, I still felt like some of the narrative’s pacing was a little too slow, as the audience waits for the book’s publication and subsequent reader reaction so long that things actually start to get boring. At a two hour and seventeen minute running time, The Help is not a film that can be approached lightly, you just need to stick with it and rest assured that your persistence will be rewarded. For as strong as the rest of the elements of the film are, such a shortcoming is disappointing, but not overtly damning.
From a box office perspective, The Help has had a very unique impact…it wasn’t strong enough to earn top spot its opening weekend, but it actually gained momentum and emerged victorious in its second weekend. This rare occurrence is a unique testament to the power of word-of-mouth; it may not have been the only contributing factor, but it definitely had an influence in increasing moviegoer presence at the theater. With a domestic total of over $71 million so far, Hollywood execs have to be thrilled with The Help’s performance; not only has the modest $25 million production budget been more than fully recovered, but the film will undeniably resurface during awards season. It also cannot hurt that no big drama is set to be released in the near-future, so The Help is unlikely to face any significant competition during the notoriously weak month of September. It may not be perfect, but The Help is a unique offering this summer and something that should not be missed.
Overall Recommendation: High
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Rise of the Planet of the Apes: Short and Sweet
Ask any of my close friends: leading up to its release, I was convinced that Rise of the Planet of the Apes was going to be a disaster and I had absolutely no desire to see this newest recycled project. The original Planet of the Apes from 1968 is an undoubted classic, but Hollywood unsuccessfully tried a modern remake with Mark Wahlberg in 2001, so I saw no reason why the franchise should be revisited a decade later. I also lost a considerable amount of respect for James Franco after his arrogant reaction to the criticism he received concerning his perceived laziness in hosting the 83rd Academy Awards, so his being the top name attached to this project certainly didn’t help. If there was one element that added any semblance of credibility to Rise of the Planet of the Apes, it was the presence of Andy Serkis, who is widely regarded as the hardest working motion-capture actor in Hollywood. Expecting nothing and undoubtedly confused about all the praise the film was receiving, I was only hoping that I could make it through this newest origin story.
At the end of the month, I will put together a synopsis of the entire movie season, awarding honors to different projects, and Rise of the Planet of the Apes is the clear winner for Biggest Surprise of the Summer. Despite my desire to hate it and point out every conceivable shortcoming, Rise of the Planet of the Apes overcame my bias and was absolutely fantastic. Combining stylish direction with jaw-dropping special effects and a surprising cast led by a tour-de-force performance by Andy Serkis, this newest science fiction film tells a smart story filled with thrills and genuine empathy. If anything, there were a few uneven portions of the narrative that threatened the proposed plausibility of the film, but the end result is still thoroughly entertaining. You may be inclined to think that Rise of the Planet of the Apes is nothing more than a retelling of an established story, but critical reaction and box office performance prove that this film should not be missed.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
At the end of the month, I will put together a synopsis of the entire movie season, awarding honors to different projects, and Rise of the Planet of the Apes is the clear winner for Biggest Surprise of the Summer. Despite my desire to hate it and point out every conceivable shortcoming, Rise of the Planet of the Apes overcame my bias and was absolutely fantastic. Combining stylish direction with jaw-dropping special effects and a surprising cast led by a tour-de-force performance by Andy Serkis, this newest science fiction film tells a smart story filled with thrills and genuine empathy. If anything, there were a few uneven portions of the narrative that threatened the proposed plausibility of the film, but the end result is still thoroughly entertaining. You may be inclined to think that Rise of the Planet of the Apes is nothing more than a retelling of an established story, but critical reaction and box office performance prove that this film should not be missed.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Rise of the Planet of the Apes: Full Review
Rise of the Planet of the Apes - (August 5th, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $54,806,191
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $117,464,360
Gross Revenue: $211,632,415
Production Budget: $93 million
Director: Rupert Wyatt
Even with the pedigree established by the historic Planet of the Apes media franchise, 20th Century Fox had a considerable challenge in convincing audiences that this reboot would be worth seeing. With the bitter taste of 2001’s Planet of the Apes as a failed remake still lingering amongst moviegoers, no truly bankable actors to attach to the project, and an overly-complicated title that used the phrase “of the” twice, there wasn’t much credibility attached to this origin story. The one saving grace was Andy Serkis, who has added his considerable motion-capture talents to the Lord of the Rings trilogy and 2005’s King Kong, and was sure to bring considerable emotion to this newest role. Even with the aggressive marketing campaign that was launched that put previews and posters all over the place, I wasn’t convinced that Rise of the Planet of the Apes would leave any kind of mark on the box office…personally, I thought it was a big mistake not to leverage Tom Felton’s presence in the film to try and draw the legions of fans who know him as Draco Malfoy from the Harry Potter series. Imagine my shock when the film not only generated a ridiculously high amount of critical praise, but also took the top spot its opening weekend in far excess of studio expectations…maybe I would have to see Rise of the Planet of the Apes after all.
Seeking to establish how apes evolved into the dominant species on Earth, Rise of the Planet of the Apes focuses on one ape in particular, Caesar (Andy Serkis). In present day, San Francisco scientist Will Rodman (James Franco) is working to develop a cure for Alzheimer’s disease through the use of retroviruses that are tested on chimpanzees and rapidly improve brain function. When one of the chimpanzees goes on a rampage and is killed, Will is ordered to shut down the project and terminate all test subjects, but he decides to keep and raise the chimpanzee’s baby, who is named Caesar. Fast forward a few years and Caesar’s intelligence levels are through the roof, to the point where he can freely communicate using sign language and regularly interacts with Will’s sickly father, Charles (John Lithgow), and veterinary girlfriend, Caroline (Slumdog Millionaire’s Freida Pinto). One day, Caesar comes to Charles’ defense against an abusive neighbor and ends up confined to a primate facility run by John Landon (Brian Cox), where he is abused by Landon’s cruel son, Dodge (Tom Felton). Embittered by his treatment, Caesar eventually escapes and steals the retrovirus, later exposing the other apes in the facility and setting the stage for an inevitable confrontation.
In all previous installments of the Planet of the Apes franchise, the apes themselves have been rendered using a combination of makeup, animatronics, or special effects, but this time around, the primates would be entirely computer-generated. While this decision could easily have resulted in disaster, it was executed flawlessly with truly impressive animation, and your jaw will drop when you see the legions of apes lay siege to the Golden Gate Bridge. The emotion and depth etched on the faces of the animated characters is most prominent with Caesar, as Andy Serkis brings his joy and pain to life with such astounding talent that you will find yourself actually rooting for the apes when they finally fight back. In a way, each member of the cast comes into their own at some point, with Tom Felton once again embracing his inner villain and James Franco proving he can do far more on the big screen than goof around. If I had to identify any weak elements in Rise of the Planet of the Apes, I thought that some elements of the story were a little unrealistic, but the film more than compensates for this small shortcoming.
Yes, I do realize that I just complained that some story elements in a film where apes gain super-intelligence and overthrow the human race were “unrealistic,” but hear me out: Rise of the Planet of the Apes stylishly brought a unlikely revolution to life that foreshadows a now-historic fictional future, but for as clever a manner as this idea was presented in, some of its simpler elements were disappointing. If this criticism seems like nothing more than mere nitpicking, I’m not going to disagree with you, but that should be a testament to how strong the film is in its entirety. The music score is enthralling and the action is exciting, while director Rupert Wyatt goes out of his way to showcase the curiosity and yearning for freedom that Caesar experiences…seeing Caesar climb trees for the first time is beautiful and watching his incarceration is heartbreaking. There are also more than enough references to the original film to placate movie buffs (Tom Felton gets to deliver one of the most famous lines in cinematic history), and this added extra only further enhances the story that had the entire theater sitting on the edge of their seats. If you are on the fence in any way concerning Rise of the Planet of the Apes (as I once was), I cannot emphasize enough how much you need to see this newest film.
With an impressive opening weekend of just under $55 million, Rise of the Planet of the Apes far surpassed its initial forecast of $45 million. This performance was undoubtedly impressive, but I guarantee that more than a few analysts did a double-take when the primates took the top spot in the film’s second weekend with almost $28 million against three new releases that included a drama (The Help), a comedy (30 Minutes or Less), and a horror flick (Final Destination 5). I’ve commented again and again on the fact that this summer box office as been anything but predictable, but maybe this unusual turn of events means that audiences are looking from something uniquely entertaining…enter Rise of the Planet of the Apes. At the very least, a $93 million production budget was a gamble, and 20th Century Fox has to be happy that foreign receipts alone have more than covered that expense. There is not much more here I can do to convince you to get to the theater, so I’ll keep it simple: Rise of the Planet of the Apes is fantastic, DO NOT miss it!
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $54,806,191
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $117,464,360
Gross Revenue: $211,632,415
Production Budget: $93 million
Director: Rupert Wyatt
Even with the pedigree established by the historic Planet of the Apes media franchise, 20th Century Fox had a considerable challenge in convincing audiences that this reboot would be worth seeing. With the bitter taste of 2001’s Planet of the Apes as a failed remake still lingering amongst moviegoers, no truly bankable actors to attach to the project, and an overly-complicated title that used the phrase “of the” twice, there wasn’t much credibility attached to this origin story. The one saving grace was Andy Serkis, who has added his considerable motion-capture talents to the Lord of the Rings trilogy and 2005’s King Kong, and was sure to bring considerable emotion to this newest role. Even with the aggressive marketing campaign that was launched that put previews and posters all over the place, I wasn’t convinced that Rise of the Planet of the Apes would leave any kind of mark on the box office…personally, I thought it was a big mistake not to leverage Tom Felton’s presence in the film to try and draw the legions of fans who know him as Draco Malfoy from the Harry Potter series. Imagine my shock when the film not only generated a ridiculously high amount of critical praise, but also took the top spot its opening weekend in far excess of studio expectations…maybe I would have to see Rise of the Planet of the Apes after all.
Seeking to establish how apes evolved into the dominant species on Earth, Rise of the Planet of the Apes focuses on one ape in particular, Caesar (Andy Serkis). In present day, San Francisco scientist Will Rodman (James Franco) is working to develop a cure for Alzheimer’s disease through the use of retroviruses that are tested on chimpanzees and rapidly improve brain function. When one of the chimpanzees goes on a rampage and is killed, Will is ordered to shut down the project and terminate all test subjects, but he decides to keep and raise the chimpanzee’s baby, who is named Caesar. Fast forward a few years and Caesar’s intelligence levels are through the roof, to the point where he can freely communicate using sign language and regularly interacts with Will’s sickly father, Charles (John Lithgow), and veterinary girlfriend, Caroline (Slumdog Millionaire’s Freida Pinto). One day, Caesar comes to Charles’ defense against an abusive neighbor and ends up confined to a primate facility run by John Landon (Brian Cox), where he is abused by Landon’s cruel son, Dodge (Tom Felton). Embittered by his treatment, Caesar eventually escapes and steals the retrovirus, later exposing the other apes in the facility and setting the stage for an inevitable confrontation.
In all previous installments of the Planet of the Apes franchise, the apes themselves have been rendered using a combination of makeup, animatronics, or special effects, but this time around, the primates would be entirely computer-generated. While this decision could easily have resulted in disaster, it was executed flawlessly with truly impressive animation, and your jaw will drop when you see the legions of apes lay siege to the Golden Gate Bridge. The emotion and depth etched on the faces of the animated characters is most prominent with Caesar, as Andy Serkis brings his joy and pain to life with such astounding talent that you will find yourself actually rooting for the apes when they finally fight back. In a way, each member of the cast comes into their own at some point, with Tom Felton once again embracing his inner villain and James Franco proving he can do far more on the big screen than goof around. If I had to identify any weak elements in Rise of the Planet of the Apes, I thought that some elements of the story were a little unrealistic, but the film more than compensates for this small shortcoming.
Yes, I do realize that I just complained that some story elements in a film where apes gain super-intelligence and overthrow the human race were “unrealistic,” but hear me out: Rise of the Planet of the Apes stylishly brought a unlikely revolution to life that foreshadows a now-historic fictional future, but for as clever a manner as this idea was presented in, some of its simpler elements were disappointing. If this criticism seems like nothing more than mere nitpicking, I’m not going to disagree with you, but that should be a testament to how strong the film is in its entirety. The music score is enthralling and the action is exciting, while director Rupert Wyatt goes out of his way to showcase the curiosity and yearning for freedom that Caesar experiences…seeing Caesar climb trees for the first time is beautiful and watching his incarceration is heartbreaking. There are also more than enough references to the original film to placate movie buffs (Tom Felton gets to deliver one of the most famous lines in cinematic history), and this added extra only further enhances the story that had the entire theater sitting on the edge of their seats. If you are on the fence in any way concerning Rise of the Planet of the Apes (as I once was), I cannot emphasize enough how much you need to see this newest film.
With an impressive opening weekend of just under $55 million, Rise of the Planet of the Apes far surpassed its initial forecast of $45 million. This performance was undoubtedly impressive, but I guarantee that more than a few analysts did a double-take when the primates took the top spot in the film’s second weekend with almost $28 million against three new releases that included a drama (The Help), a comedy (30 Minutes or Less), and a horror flick (Final Destination 5). I’ve commented again and again on the fact that this summer box office as been anything but predictable, but maybe this unusual turn of events means that audiences are looking from something uniquely entertaining…enter Rise of the Planet of the Apes. At the very least, a $93 million production budget was a gamble, and 20th Century Fox has to be happy that foreign receipts alone have more than covered that expense. There is not much more here I can do to convince you to get to the theater, so I’ll keep it simple: Rise of the Planet of the Apes is fantastic, DO NOT miss it!
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Thursday, August 11, 2011
The Change-Up: Short and Sweet
In a summer absolutely saturated with raunchy comedies, you would think that Hollywood would be running out of ideas, but when in doubt, theirs is always the possibility of defaulting to a familiar, if slightly modified, storyline. If you stop to think about it, it’s actually quite surprising how often Hollywood recycles the body/identity-switch sub-plot to draw in an audience, whether it’s mother and daughter (Jamie-Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan in 2003’s Freaky Friday), man and woman (Rob Schneider and Rachel McAdams in 2002’s The Hot Chick), or hero and villain (John Travolta and Nicolas Cage in 1997’s Face/Off) trading places. When picking the comedic actors to take the lead for The Change-Up, Universal wouldn’t have too much trouble filling theaters with fan-favorites Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds. Granted, Green Lantern was definitely a step backwards for Reynolds, but The Change-Up looked like the perfect chance for redemption; as for Jason Bateman, he’s still riding the wave of success from Horrible Bosses…who wouldn’t want to see these two together? Throw in the increasingly popular and perpetually gorgeous Olivia Wilde, and it looked like the raunchy comedy genre would be delivering yet another winner for the 2011 Summer Movie Season.
The Change-Up centers around the concept of two guys switching bodies after drunkenly urinating in a fountain…clearly the story wasn’t going to be perfect, but almost every narrative element still felt a little stale and formulaic. When it comes to whether the recycled idea was actually funny enough to be counted alongside something like Bridesmaids, as much as I wanted to love The Change-Up, I have to admit that Universal still managed to drop the ball. There is definite comedic value in watching Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds play against character, with Bateman cutting loose in a thoroughly enjoyable way, but the jokes they ultimately had to work with were clearly trying too hard to be edgy. The biggest surprise comes from Olivia Wilde, who is finally given a chance to establish some kind of on-screen persona, and thankfully, she’s sexy, sassy, and surprisingly funny. In the end, The Change-Up definitely has its moments and is good for a laugh, but please don’t be expecting anything fantastic.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
The Change-Up centers around the concept of two guys switching bodies after drunkenly urinating in a fountain…clearly the story wasn’t going to be perfect, but almost every narrative element still felt a little stale and formulaic. When it comes to whether the recycled idea was actually funny enough to be counted alongside something like Bridesmaids, as much as I wanted to love The Change-Up, I have to admit that Universal still managed to drop the ball. There is definite comedic value in watching Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds play against character, with Bateman cutting loose in a thoroughly enjoyable way, but the jokes they ultimately had to work with were clearly trying too hard to be edgy. The biggest surprise comes from Olivia Wilde, who is finally given a chance to establish some kind of on-screen persona, and thankfully, she’s sexy, sassy, and surprisingly funny. In the end, The Change-Up definitely has its moments and is good for a laugh, but please don’t be expecting anything fantastic.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
The Change-Up: Full Review
The Change-Up - (August 5th, 2011): R
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #4 with $13,531,115
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $18,381,570
Gross Revenue: $18,381,570
Production Budget: $52 million
Director: David Dobkin
From a marketing perspective, the promotion tactics used for The Change-Up were not overtly creative, but then again, with both a familiar storyline and familiar actors, the common perception was that this comedy should largely be able to sell itself. As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, the body/identity switch genre crops up pretty often, so the key selling point for The Change-Up would be seeing this surprisingly common supernatural phenomenon befall crowd-pleasers Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds. It may take comic book fans a few years to forgive Reynolds for Green Lantern, but audiences still love him for 2009’s The Proposal; and if you have any doubts about Jason Bateman’s popularity, consider the fact that he has appeared in 19 films in the past five years…that’s remarkably impressive. Even the main female leads have enjoyed high exposure, as Leslie Mann is a mainstay in almost every Judd Apatow production (he happens to be her husband), and Olivia Wilde has had every red-blooded male begging to see her again and again beyond Tron: Legacy or Cowboys & Aliens. Many of the comedies released this summer have been hit-or-miss (consider Bridesmaids and Horrible Bosses against The Hangover: Part 2 and Bad Teacher), but with popular actors tackling an overused plot, there was no definitive way to call whether The Change-Up would end up a winner or a loser.
In The Change-Up, lifelong friends Dave Lockwood (Jason Bateman) and Mitch Planko (Ryan Reynolds) live in vastly different realities: Dave is an overworked lawyer, father, and husband, while Mitch is a lazy, womanizing, out-of-work actor. After a night of drowning their sorrows, the two friends openly envy each other while urinating in a fountain, and the next morning, Dave and Mitch discover that they have magically switched bodies. Though initially freaked-out and unable to reverse the process, Dave and Mitch eventually begin to enjoy their new existences; now single and free of responsibility, Dave (in Mitch’s body) relishes the freedom to enjoy hobbies and spend time with his sexy co-worker, Sabrina (Olivia Wilde), whom he has always fantasized about. Mitch (in Dave’s body), though initially disillusioned with the concept of family life and full-time employment, finds himself enjoying the challenge of corporate life; unfortunately, his gruff mannerisms offend and alienate Dave’s wife, Jamie (Leslie Mann). Learning new things about themselves, Dave and Mitch must not only consider whether they will still be able to switch back, but also whether they ultimately want to return to their former lives.
Essentially playing each other, Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds demonstrate considerable acting range, as the audience is instantaneously convinced that these two men have indeed switched bodies. That is where the key appeal of The Change-Up lies, as Jason Bateman transforms from responsible to off-the-wall uninhibited, while Ryan Reynolds goes from carefree to nervous-wreck…the end result is big laughs, with the crazed Bateman slightly outshining the more-subdued Reynolds. Even the female talent in the film expands their horizons, as even though Leslie Mann is normally good for a crude laugh or two, I was still surprised to see her push the envelope a bit. The biggest surprise comes from Olivia Wilde, who is finally given a chance to develop some kind of on-screen personality. In both Tron: Legacy and Cowboys & Aliens, Wilde was given little more to do than look pretty and rattle off lines intended to further explain an overly-complicated plot, but this time around, she clearly has fun and connects with the audience in a funny and sassy way, proving that her appeal is not limited to her beauty…though that remains a definite plus. It is clear that we will be seeing much more of her in theaters in the next few months. With such likable and talented actors, The Change-Up had the potential to be one of the best comedies of the summer, unfortunately, the film tried way too hard to gain that desirable title.
As far as stories go, having Bateman and Reynolds switch bodies because of public urination in a “mystic” fountain clearly wasn’t going to garner any nominations from The Academy, but that doesn’t justify the overly-formulaic narrative. Basically, if you have ever seen any kind of body-switch film before, you already have a pretty good idea of how this movie is going to turn out, with the two friends having learned something profound about their own lives over the course of this ordeal. In terms of actual comedy, there are some definite high-notes, but by-and-large it seems like the filmmakers were simply trying way too hard to justify the R-rating…we get it, The Change-Up is supposed to be raunchy. Thankfully, this style of humor is eventually toned-down, but it still causes some irreparable damage to the film’s overall quality. Don’t get me wrong, The Change-Up is enjoyable, but it still feels like this latest summer comedy squandered most of its potential.
I usually consider myself pretty good at predicting a film’s overall performance, but this summer box office has been anything but predictable, as I didn’t think there was a chance in hell that The Change-Up would lose to Rise of the Planet of the Apes, much less open up in forth place. It’s not like this newest comedy was facing obvious competition from theater newcomers, but holdovers like The Smurfs are still going strong and it is possible that audiences have grown tired of the genre, which does not bode well for 30 Minutes or Less, opening this weekend. Still, Universal has to be a little bit baffled that two bankable actors like Bateman and Reynolds will likely end up losing money against a modest $52 million production budget. I can admit that The Change-Up is far from perfect, but I still don’t think it deserves all the negative critical reaction that it has been receiving…it’s not a bad film, it’s just not great. I maintain that, if you are a fan of the cast or just looking for a good laugh, then The Change-Up remains worth seeing.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #4 with $13,531,115
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $18,381,570
Gross Revenue: $18,381,570
Production Budget: $52 million
Director: David Dobkin
From a marketing perspective, the promotion tactics used for The Change-Up were not overtly creative, but then again, with both a familiar storyline and familiar actors, the common perception was that this comedy should largely be able to sell itself. As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, the body/identity switch genre crops up pretty often, so the key selling point for The Change-Up would be seeing this surprisingly common supernatural phenomenon befall crowd-pleasers Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds. It may take comic book fans a few years to forgive Reynolds for Green Lantern, but audiences still love him for 2009’s The Proposal; and if you have any doubts about Jason Bateman’s popularity, consider the fact that he has appeared in 19 films in the past five years…that’s remarkably impressive. Even the main female leads have enjoyed high exposure, as Leslie Mann is a mainstay in almost every Judd Apatow production (he happens to be her husband), and Olivia Wilde has had every red-blooded male begging to see her again and again beyond Tron: Legacy or Cowboys & Aliens. Many of the comedies released this summer have been hit-or-miss (consider Bridesmaids and Horrible Bosses against The Hangover: Part 2 and Bad Teacher), but with popular actors tackling an overused plot, there was no definitive way to call whether The Change-Up would end up a winner or a loser.
In The Change-Up, lifelong friends Dave Lockwood (Jason Bateman) and Mitch Planko (Ryan Reynolds) live in vastly different realities: Dave is an overworked lawyer, father, and husband, while Mitch is a lazy, womanizing, out-of-work actor. After a night of drowning their sorrows, the two friends openly envy each other while urinating in a fountain, and the next morning, Dave and Mitch discover that they have magically switched bodies. Though initially freaked-out and unable to reverse the process, Dave and Mitch eventually begin to enjoy their new existences; now single and free of responsibility, Dave (in Mitch’s body) relishes the freedom to enjoy hobbies and spend time with his sexy co-worker, Sabrina (Olivia Wilde), whom he has always fantasized about. Mitch (in Dave’s body), though initially disillusioned with the concept of family life and full-time employment, finds himself enjoying the challenge of corporate life; unfortunately, his gruff mannerisms offend and alienate Dave’s wife, Jamie (Leslie Mann). Learning new things about themselves, Dave and Mitch must not only consider whether they will still be able to switch back, but also whether they ultimately want to return to their former lives.
Essentially playing each other, Jason Bateman and Ryan Reynolds demonstrate considerable acting range, as the audience is instantaneously convinced that these two men have indeed switched bodies. That is where the key appeal of The Change-Up lies, as Jason Bateman transforms from responsible to off-the-wall uninhibited, while Ryan Reynolds goes from carefree to nervous-wreck…the end result is big laughs, with the crazed Bateman slightly outshining the more-subdued Reynolds. Even the female talent in the film expands their horizons, as even though Leslie Mann is normally good for a crude laugh or two, I was still surprised to see her push the envelope a bit. The biggest surprise comes from Olivia Wilde, who is finally given a chance to develop some kind of on-screen personality. In both Tron: Legacy and Cowboys & Aliens, Wilde was given little more to do than look pretty and rattle off lines intended to further explain an overly-complicated plot, but this time around, she clearly has fun and connects with the audience in a funny and sassy way, proving that her appeal is not limited to her beauty…though that remains a definite plus. It is clear that we will be seeing much more of her in theaters in the next few months. With such likable and talented actors, The Change-Up had the potential to be one of the best comedies of the summer, unfortunately, the film tried way too hard to gain that desirable title.
As far as stories go, having Bateman and Reynolds switch bodies because of public urination in a “mystic” fountain clearly wasn’t going to garner any nominations from The Academy, but that doesn’t justify the overly-formulaic narrative. Basically, if you have ever seen any kind of body-switch film before, you already have a pretty good idea of how this movie is going to turn out, with the two friends having learned something profound about their own lives over the course of this ordeal. In terms of actual comedy, there are some definite high-notes, but by-and-large it seems like the filmmakers were simply trying way too hard to justify the R-rating…we get it, The Change-Up is supposed to be raunchy. Thankfully, this style of humor is eventually toned-down, but it still causes some irreparable damage to the film’s overall quality. Don’t get me wrong, The Change-Up is enjoyable, but it still feels like this latest summer comedy squandered most of its potential.
I usually consider myself pretty good at predicting a film’s overall performance, but this summer box office has been anything but predictable, as I didn’t think there was a chance in hell that The Change-Up would lose to Rise of the Planet of the Apes, much less open up in forth place. It’s not like this newest comedy was facing obvious competition from theater newcomers, but holdovers like The Smurfs are still going strong and it is possible that audiences have grown tired of the genre, which does not bode well for 30 Minutes or Less, opening this weekend. Still, Universal has to be a little bit baffled that two bankable actors like Bateman and Reynolds will likely end up losing money against a modest $52 million production budget. I can admit that The Change-Up is far from perfect, but I still don’t think it deserves all the negative critical reaction that it has been receiving…it’s not a bad film, it’s just not great. I maintain that, if you are a fan of the cast or just looking for a good laugh, then The Change-Up remains worth seeing.
Overall Recommendation: Medium
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Cowboys and Aliens: Short and Sweet
Though I hope there was a point in Hollywood’s history where anyone pitching a movie where aliens invaded the Wild West would have been laughed out of every producer’s office, with the recent comic book-movie revolution opening the way for virtually any kind of storyline, now seemed like the perfect time to bring such an idea to life. The core concept for Cowboys & Aliens may have sounded ridiculous, but when some of the names attached to the project were revealed, expectations skyrocketed. Not only would talented director Jon Favreau be taking the lead, but two actors associated with some of the most legendary characters in movie history would be seen together for the first time. You can deny it all you want, but I guarantee that when it was first announced that Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford would be teaming up, everyone had the mental image of James Bond and Indiana Jones/Han Solo kicking the snot out of rejects from the Star Wars universe…how could that not be awesome? Despite the film’s shaky potential, Universal Pictures deserves credit for not trying to oversell the simple premise of Cowboys & Aliens, and for all I knew, with iconic actors and strong special effects, this Western/Sci-Fi hybrid could end up surprising even the most logical of naysayers.
It is shameful to think that even with a talented director, a strong cast, and a virtually blank-slate to reinvent established genres with a creative story, Cowboys & Aliens still squandered almost all of its potential. A shortcoming like zero-character development usually doesn’t matter all that much when the actors behind the characters are so well-received, but it can spell disaster for a newcomer like Olivia Wilde. Action heroes Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig are novel to watch together, but that’s where the appeal of Cowboys & Aliens ends, as an unnecessarily complicated story and uneven narrative pacing doom the quality of this potential blockbuster. Who could have thought that cowboys chasing after and battling alien star-fighters could actually come across as mediocre and drawn-out? Plain and simple, Cowboys & Aliens may not be a truly terrible film, but it is still one hell of a letdown.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
It is shameful to think that even with a talented director, a strong cast, and a virtually blank-slate to reinvent established genres with a creative story, Cowboys & Aliens still squandered almost all of its potential. A shortcoming like zero-character development usually doesn’t matter all that much when the actors behind the characters are so well-received, but it can spell disaster for a newcomer like Olivia Wilde. Action heroes Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig are novel to watch together, but that’s where the appeal of Cowboys & Aliens ends, as an unnecessarily complicated story and uneven narrative pacing doom the quality of this potential blockbuster. Who could have thought that cowboys chasing after and battling alien star-fighters could actually come across as mediocre and drawn-out? Plain and simple, Cowboys & Aliens may not be a truly terrible film, but it is still one hell of a letdown.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Cowboys and Aliens: Full Review
Cowboys & Aliens - (July 29th, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $36,431,290
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $56,369,000
Gross Revenue: $56,369,000
Production Budget: $163 million
Director: Jon Favreau
As an actor, Jon Favreau has had a respectable career in Hollywood, but after his directorial work in both 2003’s Elf and the Iron Man films, his popularity and demand hit the stratosphere. Set to helm the thoroughly unique Cowboys & Aliens, Jon Favreau would be working with Daniel Craig, who was critically-praised for bringing new life to the James Bond franchise, and Harrison Ford, the Hollywood legend behind Indiana Jones, Han Solo, and a number of other noteworthy characters. Now, even though these two actors are infamously private and notoriously disinclined to grant promotional interviews, buzz for Cowboys & Aliens was still spreading like wildfire. Set to premiere at Comic-Con and featuring the increasingly popular and intoxicating beautiful Olivia Wilde (of television-series House fame), the expected level of quality in Cowboys & Aliens was still surrounded by question marks. Critics were calling it bold, daring, and unique, so I found myself increasingly excited for this potential summer surprise hit.
Based on the 2006 graphic novel of the same name, Cowboys & Aliens opens in 1873, where an unnamed loner (Daniel Craig) awakens in the New Mexico Territory with no memory of his past and a strange metal bracelet bonded to his wrist. Stumbling into town and meeting the kindly barkeep, Doc (Sam Rockwell), the helpful preacher Meachem (Clancy Brown) and a mysterious woman who hints at his past named Ella (Olivia Wilde), the loner is identified as notorious outlaw Jake Lonergan. Though he tries to maintain a low profile, Jake almost immediately runs afoul of Colonel Woodrow Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford), a cattleman who not only controls the town, but who was also recently robbed by Jake’s gang and thirsts for revenge. As Jake is being taken into custody, his bracelet begins to glow and spaceships appear to destroy the town and kidnap the townspeople, the most notable being Dolarhyde’s own son. When it is revealed that Jake’s bracelet transforms into a powerful weapon, Dolarhyde allows him to join a posse (which includes Doc, Ella, and Meachem) that ultimately sets out to save the townspeople and fight the “demons.” Trying to piece together his past, Jake forms a bond with Ella and works with Dolarhyde to confront and ultimately defeat a new threat, the likes of which the Wild West has never seen.
It should come as no surprise that the best part of Cowboys & Aliens is watching Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig together, with Ford channeling the gruff and no-nonsense demeanor that fans have come to love and Craig establishing a whole new definition for not-to-be-messed-with badass. Unfortunately, the personalities of these beloved actors completely overshadow the characters they are supposed to be playing; audiences are not watching two cowboys with established back-stories or evolving emotional depth, they are simply watching Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford…and for some audiences, that will be enough. This lack of character development may be okay for two Hollywood heavyweights, but it plagues almost every other character, especially newcomer Olivia Wilde, who, though nice to look at, is not given the chance to connect with the audience, as she does little more beyond staring into the camera with wide-eyed wonder. In fact, the one character with any kind of distinct personality, Meacham the preacher, runs into an ill-tempered alien a little too quickly in the story. For as novel as it was to see some of these actors together for the first time, you would think that the writers would go out of their way to establish an exciting and engaging story, but such was not the case, and this shortcoming almost destroys all the appeal this hopeful blockbuster had in the first place.
By having aliens invade the Wild West and battle cowboys with no sense of the larger universe or other worlds beyond the spiritual (they label the aliens as nothing more than “demons”), this Western/Sci-Fi hybrid would obviously stretch the bounds of logic but still have considerable creative freedom…too bad it was all squandered. The plot itself is overly complicated and glosses over some very-much-needed clarifications, deciding instead to introduce an anticlimactic twist with Olivia Wilde’s character for the sole purpose of keeping the story on life-support for another half-hour before an equally-disappointing ending. The weak story itself is also not helped by the uneven pacing between the action sequences and expository scenes, as every time the action starts to pick up and draw in viewer attention, the momentum ends up falling flat within minutes. I accept that Westerns can be a little slow and still offer some cool elements, but how in the hell can anyone make a battle between cowboys and shiny-CGI aliens filled with explosions and spaceships actually boring? Jon Favreau tried to pay homage to two distinct genres in Cowboys & Aliens, but unfortunately, each got little more than lip-service in this mediocre and largely disappointing action flick.
For further indication of the poor quality of Cowboys & Aliens, just look at its box office performance: even though it took in $36 million and earned the top spot its opening weekend, it almost lost out to The Smurfs in a race that was dead-even for most of the weekend. The film has been projected to earn as much as $95 million total in the United States and Canada and $140 million once it is released overseas, but with this kind of sub-par performance so far, I doubt expectations will ultimately be met. With a $163 million production budget, Paramount definitely gambled big with Cowboys & Aliens, and it’s sad that the project couldn’t be saved by Daniel Craig or Harrison Ford. If you really want to see Indy and 007 kick ass together, then I can’t stop you from going to the theater, but if you are expecting anything truly special, you are in for a disappointment. Blending genres can be tricky, but to see the results of this experiment, you can definitely wait for Netflix or Redbox.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $36,431,290
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $56,369,000
Gross Revenue: $56,369,000
Production Budget: $163 million
Director: Jon Favreau
As an actor, Jon Favreau has had a respectable career in Hollywood, but after his directorial work in both 2003’s Elf and the Iron Man films, his popularity and demand hit the stratosphere. Set to helm the thoroughly unique Cowboys & Aliens, Jon Favreau would be working with Daniel Craig, who was critically-praised for bringing new life to the James Bond franchise, and Harrison Ford, the Hollywood legend behind Indiana Jones, Han Solo, and a number of other noteworthy characters. Now, even though these two actors are infamously private and notoriously disinclined to grant promotional interviews, buzz for Cowboys & Aliens was still spreading like wildfire. Set to premiere at Comic-Con and featuring the increasingly popular and intoxicating beautiful Olivia Wilde (of television-series House fame), the expected level of quality in Cowboys & Aliens was still surrounded by question marks. Critics were calling it bold, daring, and unique, so I found myself increasingly excited for this potential summer surprise hit.
Based on the 2006 graphic novel of the same name, Cowboys & Aliens opens in 1873, where an unnamed loner (Daniel Craig) awakens in the New Mexico Territory with no memory of his past and a strange metal bracelet bonded to his wrist. Stumbling into town and meeting the kindly barkeep, Doc (Sam Rockwell), the helpful preacher Meachem (Clancy Brown) and a mysterious woman who hints at his past named Ella (Olivia Wilde), the loner is identified as notorious outlaw Jake Lonergan. Though he tries to maintain a low profile, Jake almost immediately runs afoul of Colonel Woodrow Dolarhyde (Harrison Ford), a cattleman who not only controls the town, but who was also recently robbed by Jake’s gang and thirsts for revenge. As Jake is being taken into custody, his bracelet begins to glow and spaceships appear to destroy the town and kidnap the townspeople, the most notable being Dolarhyde’s own son. When it is revealed that Jake’s bracelet transforms into a powerful weapon, Dolarhyde allows him to join a posse (which includes Doc, Ella, and Meachem) that ultimately sets out to save the townspeople and fight the “demons.” Trying to piece together his past, Jake forms a bond with Ella and works with Dolarhyde to confront and ultimately defeat a new threat, the likes of which the Wild West has never seen.
It should come as no surprise that the best part of Cowboys & Aliens is watching Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig together, with Ford channeling the gruff and no-nonsense demeanor that fans have come to love and Craig establishing a whole new definition for not-to-be-messed-with badass. Unfortunately, the personalities of these beloved actors completely overshadow the characters they are supposed to be playing; audiences are not watching two cowboys with established back-stories or evolving emotional depth, they are simply watching Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford…and for some audiences, that will be enough. This lack of character development may be okay for two Hollywood heavyweights, but it plagues almost every other character, especially newcomer Olivia Wilde, who, though nice to look at, is not given the chance to connect with the audience, as she does little more beyond staring into the camera with wide-eyed wonder. In fact, the one character with any kind of distinct personality, Meacham the preacher, runs into an ill-tempered alien a little too quickly in the story. For as novel as it was to see some of these actors together for the first time, you would think that the writers would go out of their way to establish an exciting and engaging story, but such was not the case, and this shortcoming almost destroys all the appeal this hopeful blockbuster had in the first place.
By having aliens invade the Wild West and battle cowboys with no sense of the larger universe or other worlds beyond the spiritual (they label the aliens as nothing more than “demons”), this Western/Sci-Fi hybrid would obviously stretch the bounds of logic but still have considerable creative freedom…too bad it was all squandered. The plot itself is overly complicated and glosses over some very-much-needed clarifications, deciding instead to introduce an anticlimactic twist with Olivia Wilde’s character for the sole purpose of keeping the story on life-support for another half-hour before an equally-disappointing ending. The weak story itself is also not helped by the uneven pacing between the action sequences and expository scenes, as every time the action starts to pick up and draw in viewer attention, the momentum ends up falling flat within minutes. I accept that Westerns can be a little slow and still offer some cool elements, but how in the hell can anyone make a battle between cowboys and shiny-CGI aliens filled with explosions and spaceships actually boring? Jon Favreau tried to pay homage to two distinct genres in Cowboys & Aliens, but unfortunately, each got little more than lip-service in this mediocre and largely disappointing action flick.
For further indication of the poor quality of Cowboys & Aliens, just look at its box office performance: even though it took in $36 million and earned the top spot its opening weekend, it almost lost out to The Smurfs in a race that was dead-even for most of the weekend. The film has been projected to earn as much as $95 million total in the United States and Canada and $140 million once it is released overseas, but with this kind of sub-par performance so far, I doubt expectations will ultimately be met. With a $163 million production budget, Paramount definitely gambled big with Cowboys & Aliens, and it’s sad that the project couldn’t be saved by Daniel Craig or Harrison Ford. If you really want to see Indy and 007 kick ass together, then I can’t stop you from going to the theater, but if you are expecting anything truly special, you are in for a disappointment. Blending genres can be tricky, but to see the results of this experiment, you can definitely wait for Netflix or Redbox.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Crazy, Stupid, Love. - Short and Sweet
Say what you will, I have no problem admitting that I enjoy romantic comedies; unfortunately, there haven’t been too many quality entries in this genre in recent memory. When I first saw the trailer for Crazy, Stupid, Love., I wasn’t immediately sold over the plot device of a recently-divorced couple, but the star-studded cast was more than enough to hold my attention. Steve Carell is immensely entertaining to watch whether he’s playing an oblivious buffoon or an amiable loser, Kevin Bacon has been a legendary presence in Hollywood for decades, and Ryan Gosling has been making female moviegoers swoon ever since he poured his heart out in 2004’s The Notebook. Still, I was most excited for the leading ladies…not only are Julianne Moore and Marisa Tomei two of the most talented actresses in Hollywood, but I would also marry Emma Stone tomorrow if presented with the opportunity. Early critical praise was through the roof for Crazy, Stupid, Love., so I was curious to see what kind of story could charm critics in a movie season traditionally filled with fantasy and special effects.
I expected Crazy, Stupid, Love. to be good, but I didn’t expect it to be absolutely fantastic, telling an earnest story that slowly transformed into one of the best films I’ve seen in recent memory. Seamlessly interweaving three distinct and relatable plotlines together with a thoroughly engaging cast, Crazy, Stupid, Love. mesmerizes audiences by playing on mature themes with an unmistakable earnestness. You will love the entire cast, but the standout performance is Ryan Gosling as a suave ladies-man, humorously imparting his experiential wisdom concerning the fairer sex. Some of the characters are disappointingly underused and there are moments when the story begins to drag, but this romantic comedy imparts a smart reality that audiences will not soon forget. Heartfelt and endlessly enjoyable, Crazy, Stupid, Love. stands out in this summer movie season as a fantastic example of genuine story-telling that should not be missed.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
I expected Crazy, Stupid, Love. to be good, but I didn’t expect it to be absolutely fantastic, telling an earnest story that slowly transformed into one of the best films I’ve seen in recent memory. Seamlessly interweaving three distinct and relatable plotlines together with a thoroughly engaging cast, Crazy, Stupid, Love. mesmerizes audiences by playing on mature themes with an unmistakable earnestness. You will love the entire cast, but the standout performance is Ryan Gosling as a suave ladies-man, humorously imparting his experiential wisdom concerning the fairer sex. Some of the characters are disappointingly underused and there are moments when the story begins to drag, but this romantic comedy imparts a smart reality that audiences will not soon forget. Heartfelt and endlessly enjoyable, Crazy, Stupid, Love. stands out in this summer movie season as a fantastic example of genuine story-telling that should not be missed.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Crazy, Stupid, Love. - Full Review
Crazy, Stupid, Love. - (July 29th, 2011): PG-13
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $19,104,303
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $33,810,000
Gross Revenue: $33,810,000
Production Budget: $50 million
Director(s): Glenn Ficarra and John Requa
As any marketing analyst would undoubtedly tell you, the simplistic promotion surrounding Crazy, Stupid, Love. made it clear that this romantic comedy wasn’t going to be generating the buzz of a traditional action-packed blockbuster or franchise tent-pole. Clearly, audiences would have to be drawn by the stellar cast, whether that included the Hollywood mainstays (Julianne Moore, Marisa Tomei, Kevin Bacon, and Steve Carell), or the rising stars (Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone). Between the Golden Globe and Academy Award nominations shared by the cast and the devoted fan-followings of the younger stars, Warner Bros. had undoubted faith that the cast would be able to fill theaters. At the very least, Ryan Gosling has troves of female fans from his heart-throb performance in 2004’s The Notebook, and Emma Stone has repeatedly charmed audiences across a number of different genres…Superbad, Zombieland, and Easy A may be hard to categorize in a simple way, but the distinct fan-base of each virtually guarantees a diverse audience each time this sassy starlet hits the screen. With the Summer Movie Season beginning to wind down, a simple and non-recycled romantic story (are you listening, Friends with Benefits?) would be a welcome change at the theater after so many special effects-laced franchises and raunchy comedies.
Crazy, Stupid, Love. tells three distinct stories that illustrate the roller-coaster that often characterizes love and romance in the different stages of life. The notion of first love is represented by 13-year-old Robbie (Jonah Bobo), who is obsessively in love with his 17-year-old babysitter, Jessica (Analeigh Tipton). New love is shown by recently-graduated law student Hannah (Emma Stone), who, while unsure of her status with her current boyfriend, still resists the advances of notorious ladies man, Jacob (Ryan Gosling). Mature love is left a little shaky when family man Cal Weaver (Steve Carell) discovers that his wife, Emily (Julianne Moore), has cheated on him with a co-worker, David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon). The stories converge in a number of different ways: Robbie happens to be Cal and Emily’s son, it is revealed that Jessica harbors a crush for Cal, and Jacob takes pity on the depressed Cal and decides to coach him in the art of seduction, which is wildly unsuccessful until the divorcee meets a kind-hearted teacher, Kate (Marisa Tomei). Taking an earnest and through-provoking look at relationships with considerable humor and a clever zaniness, Crazy, Stupid, Love. has something that a surprisingly broad audience will be able to relate to in some way.
Now, audiences may not have first-hand experience concerning the exact storylines present in Crazy, Stupid, Love., but the characters and scenarios echo reality so strongly that this romantic comedy is completely validated. We all know the guy with the ability to pick up any woman at a bar, or have come across a recently divorced couple…hell, I can completely relate to the heartache of falling in love with the older babysitter, and that resonance is what makes the film so completely engrossing. Each of the actors completely embraces and shines as their respective distinct characters, the easy standout being Ryan Gosling as the lothario who berates and coaches Steve Carell’s heartbroken homemaker…the interaction between the two is comedic gold, but I would be remiss if I didn’t identify Analeigh Tipton as a rising star that Hollywood casting directors should definitely keep their eyes on. The story weaves the characters together seamlessly and showcases the love and heartbreak they each share with a surprising mix of pathos and humor. I also have to give credit to the screenwriters, because they sneak in a twist in the story that I didn’t see coming at all; thankfully, instead of stopping the momentum dead like countless other films (Hancock), the big reveal only adds to the zaniness and sends the film into overdrive by setting the stage for a heartwarming ending. Though near-perfect, there are a few elements that the film could have been improved upon, but even then, audiences will be so charmed that I doubt they will be compelled to criticize.
Unfortunately, with such a loaded cast, there was the risk that some well-known names wouldn’t receive enough screen time, and in this romantic comedy, Marisa Tomei was the clear victim. Playing the first woman that Cal successfully seduces, Marisa Tomei was only on screen a disappointingly short amount of time for someone of her acting ability, but thankfully, she makes the most of every second. Even Emma Stone is absent for a noticeably long portion of time after her introduction, but once she finally does reappear, the screenwriters wisely made sure that she stuck around. And, for as enjoyable as the film was in its entirety, there are some elements of Crazy, Stupid, Love. that are a little too over-the-top; Robbie’s declarations of love to his babysitter and Cal’s sappy pleas to reconcile with Emily get old rather quickly. These shortcomings do drag the film’s pacing after a while, but as I mentioned before, the clever twist breathes new life into the romantic comedy and makes it so that these trivial shortcomings are easily forgiven and forgotten.
Now, I said earlier that Warner Bros. was counting on star-power to fill theaters, but tragically, that gamble did just not work, as Crazy, Stupid, Love. opened in fifth its opening weekend. Granted, $19 million would normally reward a film with a much higher ranking at the box office, but in this Summer Movie Season, the substantial competition provided by fellow new-releases The Smurfs and Cowboys & Aliens proved too much. With no overseas presence, it is tragic to think that a movie this strong might actually end up losing money against its $50 million production budget. I can only hope that word-of-mouth adds to the positive buzz already surrounding Crazy, Stupid, Love. and compels audiences (even those adamantly against romantic comedies) to jump to the theater. An easy front-runner for Best Film of the Year with a stellar cast, I guarantee that you will love Crazy, Stupid, Love. and be talking about it for months.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #5 with $19,104,303
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $33,810,000
Gross Revenue: $33,810,000
Production Budget: $50 million
Director(s): Glenn Ficarra and John Requa
As any marketing analyst would undoubtedly tell you, the simplistic promotion surrounding Crazy, Stupid, Love. made it clear that this romantic comedy wasn’t going to be generating the buzz of a traditional action-packed blockbuster or franchise tent-pole. Clearly, audiences would have to be drawn by the stellar cast, whether that included the Hollywood mainstays (Julianne Moore, Marisa Tomei, Kevin Bacon, and Steve Carell), or the rising stars (Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone). Between the Golden Globe and Academy Award nominations shared by the cast and the devoted fan-followings of the younger stars, Warner Bros. had undoubted faith that the cast would be able to fill theaters. At the very least, Ryan Gosling has troves of female fans from his heart-throb performance in 2004’s The Notebook, and Emma Stone has repeatedly charmed audiences across a number of different genres…Superbad, Zombieland, and Easy A may be hard to categorize in a simple way, but the distinct fan-base of each virtually guarantees a diverse audience each time this sassy starlet hits the screen. With the Summer Movie Season beginning to wind down, a simple and non-recycled romantic story (are you listening, Friends with Benefits?) would be a welcome change at the theater after so many special effects-laced franchises and raunchy comedies.
Crazy, Stupid, Love. tells three distinct stories that illustrate the roller-coaster that often characterizes love and romance in the different stages of life. The notion of first love is represented by 13-year-old Robbie (Jonah Bobo), who is obsessively in love with his 17-year-old babysitter, Jessica (Analeigh Tipton). New love is shown by recently-graduated law student Hannah (Emma Stone), who, while unsure of her status with her current boyfriend, still resists the advances of notorious ladies man, Jacob (Ryan Gosling). Mature love is left a little shaky when family man Cal Weaver (Steve Carell) discovers that his wife, Emily (Julianne Moore), has cheated on him with a co-worker, David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon). The stories converge in a number of different ways: Robbie happens to be Cal and Emily’s son, it is revealed that Jessica harbors a crush for Cal, and Jacob takes pity on the depressed Cal and decides to coach him in the art of seduction, which is wildly unsuccessful until the divorcee meets a kind-hearted teacher, Kate (Marisa Tomei). Taking an earnest and through-provoking look at relationships with considerable humor and a clever zaniness, Crazy, Stupid, Love. has something that a surprisingly broad audience will be able to relate to in some way.
Now, audiences may not have first-hand experience concerning the exact storylines present in Crazy, Stupid, Love., but the characters and scenarios echo reality so strongly that this romantic comedy is completely validated. We all know the guy with the ability to pick up any woman at a bar, or have come across a recently divorced couple…hell, I can completely relate to the heartache of falling in love with the older babysitter, and that resonance is what makes the film so completely engrossing. Each of the actors completely embraces and shines as their respective distinct characters, the easy standout being Ryan Gosling as the lothario who berates and coaches Steve Carell’s heartbroken homemaker…the interaction between the two is comedic gold, but I would be remiss if I didn’t identify Analeigh Tipton as a rising star that Hollywood casting directors should definitely keep their eyes on. The story weaves the characters together seamlessly and showcases the love and heartbreak they each share with a surprising mix of pathos and humor. I also have to give credit to the screenwriters, because they sneak in a twist in the story that I didn’t see coming at all; thankfully, instead of stopping the momentum dead like countless other films (Hancock), the big reveal only adds to the zaniness and sends the film into overdrive by setting the stage for a heartwarming ending. Though near-perfect, there are a few elements that the film could have been improved upon, but even then, audiences will be so charmed that I doubt they will be compelled to criticize.
Unfortunately, with such a loaded cast, there was the risk that some well-known names wouldn’t receive enough screen time, and in this romantic comedy, Marisa Tomei was the clear victim. Playing the first woman that Cal successfully seduces, Marisa Tomei was only on screen a disappointingly short amount of time for someone of her acting ability, but thankfully, she makes the most of every second. Even Emma Stone is absent for a noticeably long portion of time after her introduction, but once she finally does reappear, the screenwriters wisely made sure that she stuck around. And, for as enjoyable as the film was in its entirety, there are some elements of Crazy, Stupid, Love. that are a little too over-the-top; Robbie’s declarations of love to his babysitter and Cal’s sappy pleas to reconcile with Emily get old rather quickly. These shortcomings do drag the film’s pacing after a while, but as I mentioned before, the clever twist breathes new life into the romantic comedy and makes it so that these trivial shortcomings are easily forgiven and forgotten.
Now, I said earlier that Warner Bros. was counting on star-power to fill theaters, but tragically, that gamble did just not work, as Crazy, Stupid, Love. opened in fifth its opening weekend. Granted, $19 million would normally reward a film with a much higher ranking at the box office, but in this Summer Movie Season, the substantial competition provided by fellow new-releases The Smurfs and Cowboys & Aliens proved too much. With no overseas presence, it is tragic to think that a movie this strong might actually end up losing money against its $50 million production budget. I can only hope that word-of-mouth adds to the positive buzz already surrounding Crazy, Stupid, Love. and compels audiences (even those adamantly against romantic comedies) to jump to the theater. An easy front-runner for Best Film of the Year with a stellar cast, I guarantee that you will love Crazy, Stupid, Love. and be talking about it for months.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Friday, August 5, 2011
Captain America: The First Avenger - Short and Sweet
In a summer filled with superhero films, Captain America: The First Avenger had the unfortunate distinction of being the last one to hit theaters; luckily, Chris Evans would be embodying a character who is not only more widely-known than Thor, the X-men, or the Green Lantern, but who also is easily one of the most iconic comic book heroes of all time. Since 2008’s Iron Man, Marvel Studios has been building a shared cinematic universe among its characters with the ultimate plan of bringing all its heroes together for next summer’s The Avengers, and Captain America was the last piece of the puzzle. While fans were excited to see the super-soldier hit the big screen, there was heavy skepticism concerning Evans’ casting, primarily because he was already known as another Marvel superhero, The Human Torch from the heavily-criticized Fantastic Four series. Still, that inconsistency didn’t stop Paramount from launching an aggressive marketing campaign to merchandise the patriotic superhero in almost every way possible. As a big fan of the character, I was understandably excited for The First Avenger, but I also fully acknowledged that, since it was featuring a superhero from World War II who would eventually resurface in the present-day to fight alongside other Marvel mainstays, the complicated story that would have to be told could easily end up a complete disaster.
Prior to this latest entry in the comic book genre, many fans would have accurately claimed that Chris Evans was the perfect Human Torch, but after The First Avenger, it is obvious that he was born to play Captain America. Almost instantaneously likable as the scrawny Steve Rogers, Chris Evans embodies the perfect underdog that everyone loves to root for and genuinely support as he makes his eventual transformation into the iconic hero. Evans is also supported by a surprisingly strong cast, whether that includes Hayley Atwell as the spunky love interest or the always-enjoyable Tommy Lee Jones as the grizzled commanding officer. Still, perhaps the most impressive element of The First Avenger is the film’s ability to capture the spirit of the WWII era and successfully blend the comic book and war genres together. Despite some weak story elements and definite missed opportunities, Captain America: The First Avenger still delivers plenty of action, excitement, and humor…simply put, do not miss it!
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Prior to this latest entry in the comic book genre, many fans would have accurately claimed that Chris Evans was the perfect Human Torch, but after The First Avenger, it is obvious that he was born to play Captain America. Almost instantaneously likable as the scrawny Steve Rogers, Chris Evans embodies the perfect underdog that everyone loves to root for and genuinely support as he makes his eventual transformation into the iconic hero. Evans is also supported by a surprisingly strong cast, whether that includes Hayley Atwell as the spunky love interest or the always-enjoyable Tommy Lee Jones as the grizzled commanding officer. Still, perhaps the most impressive element of The First Avenger is the film’s ability to capture the spirit of the WWII era and successfully blend the comic book and war genres together. Despite some weak story elements and definite missed opportunities, Captain America: The First Avenger still delivers plenty of action, excitement, and humor…simply put, do not miss it!
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)