Fast Five

Fast Five is so ridiculous at times that I caught myself thinking, “is this a SciFi or something?” a few times. And the dialogue: ‘this just went from Mission Impossible to Mission Insanity!” But when it comes down to it, Fast Five is a less clever version of Ocean’s 11 with better action.

Very little in this movie makes any logical sense, but it’s fun.

For the record, I’m not positive I saw the second ‘Fast and Furious’ and I know I didn’t see the 3rd or 4th… Suffice it to say, I wasn’t too lost.

6/10

Quantum of Solace: trailer

The trailer for the new 007 is out and Quantum of Solace looks fucking sweet.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY(!!!), Owl Pellets

Just over one year ago Owl Pellets was created. We’ve come a long way – more writers and a lot more readers. With the summer movie season approaching and festival season on its way, expect more posts and more reviews.

Happy Birthday, Owl Pellets!

Doomsday

Directed and Written by Neil Marshall (The Descent). Starring Rhona Mitra, Bob Hoskins, Alexander Siddig, MyAnna Buring (also in The Descent), David O’Hara, and Malcolm McDowell.

“… maddening mash-up genre picture…”

“You know all those referential spoofs we’ve been getting lately… ? Well, Doomsday is like one of those, except played completely straight.”

This is the reasoning provided by the critics who are bashing Doomsday, which is currently at a 33% on Rotten Tomatoes; of course, that’s only after nine reviews. Well, I agree with their argument, but I disagree with their final conclusion: I thought Doomsday was a good blast of fun and excitement.

I went into this movie wanting to like it (I mean, Doomsday is a film by the guy that did The Descent, one of my favorite movies in the last few years), but expecting I wouldn’t, just from what I had seen in the trailers. I can understand people’s disdain for it – major problems with the plot, lack of focus, etc. etc., but I give credit where it’s due and it’s due.

Doomsday begins and is coupled with an infection story, similar to that in 28 Weeks Later, etc., but the infection/virus is not the focus. The story is about a really kick ass chick and some other dudes crossing into Scotland, which was quarantined; fighting some crazy people – a bunch of punks who are in a war with some even weirder dudes in a castle (I don’t want to give too much away); and then it gets more kick ass.

I truly enjoyed the mash-up of genre films like Road Warrior, Escape from New York, Resident Evil, something with knights; at the same time that the film was mashing-up these genre concepts, it was paying tribute without being a tribute film. For these reasons, Doomsday is a refreshing and unique apocalyptic film. In addition to all this mashing-up, Marshall creates an odd mix of action comedy, straight-up comedy, horror,straight-up action, thriller, and political commentary (the political commentary being much more prevalent during the first third of the film, or so).

Marshall does deliver some Descent-like suspense and motifs, but other than that, it’s a very different kind of film. Perhaps it’s problem is just how weird it is. Well, I appreciated it.

The best way to describe the final product is this: I wouldn’t say it hit its mark, but I wouldn’t say it completely missed it, either; it’s somewhere on the board, which is a board created by Marshall, himself, for this film.

If you hate it, you hate it. I won’t hate you for hating it. But I enjoyed it. The cast isn’t that bad looking, either.

B- 

10,000 B.C.

Dir. Ronald Emmerich, Writ. Ronald Emmerich & Harald Kloser, Star. Cliff Curtis, Steven Strait, and Camilla Belle

The worst movie I’ve seen this year. *SPOILERS*

Here’s some trivia: It was not written and directed by a 3rd grader. That may be hard to believe, but I imdb’d it. The dude is 50 something with no obvious mental disability. Go figure.

I’ll give you the rundown of the plot in case you go to a cocktail party hosted by a remedial english class for jerk-offs getting their G.E.D.s:

It starts off in New Zealand where you meet a village. They are a stubborn and proud neolithic people, who prefer to live on top of an icy mountain in only loin clothes. Back in the day, race was not a dominant phenotype; the village is white, black, pacific islander, and latino. DNA was weird then. Fluid exchange meant one thing: dreadlocks.

You meet the players. There’s the protagonist Ted (I could care less what his real name was), the mentor Tic-tac, the biddie, and some little turd-burrito kid. You get some voice over narration (from who I like to imagine is a drunk, homeless guy talking to himself).

So, they’re all chilling on top of this mountain eating Manacs (Mammoths), when, oh no, some vikings hike all the way up this mountain to kidnap ten kiwis who are too stupid to wear coats in the winter.

Ted is all like, “Oh, no, you didn’t.” So, Ted, Tic-tac, and the turd-chili chase after the vikings. They walk for a weekend and end up in the middle of Africa. The Africans shit their pants because Ted isn’t eaten by a long-tooth (sabretooth tiger) and some other African had drawn a dude and a long-tooth on a rock previously. Of course, all the different tribes rally under Ted to go fetch that biddie.

They walk for another weekend, and end up in Egypt and about 7000 years into the future. By the way, the Vikings were Egyptian, and the Egyptian empire only covered about 15 city blocks.

Ted is a little freaked. Tic-tac is dead, and he doesn’t know how to lead. He makes an expert plan: get the Egyptians’ Manacs all riled up. It works and there is a big ol’ riot.

Everyone freaks out. They’re all like, “the egyptian king is a god.” Ted is all like, “He’s just a dude in a dress.” He yells Sparta and defeats his Egyptian foe.

Unfortunately, the biddie dies, but she comes back to life. The turd-salad is very sad and then very relieved.

The End.

Such horrible, horrible trash.

2.5/10

Out on DVD: This is England

Written and directed by Shane Meadows. Starring Thomas Turgoose and Stephen Graham (Snatch).  Winner of the BAFTA Film Award for Best British Film. Nominated for the BAFTA Film Award for Best Screenplay.  Winner of the Best British Independent Film. Nominated for the Best British Independent Film Award for Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Supporting Actor and Actress, Best Technical Achievement (original music by Ludovico Einaudi).

This is England is set during Margret Thatcher’s reign over England, The Falklands War, and serious economic decline and unemployment in England. The film follows Shaun (Turgoose), a twelve year old boy who lost his father in The Falklands War, and his journey into England’s skinhead culture. When Combo (Graham) – the former leader of the skinheads – returns from three and a half years in prison, he is obsessed with English pride and purity. Needless to say, a schism occurs within the group of friends – some opt out of Combo’s crusade against “Paki-Bastards” (please excuse the racial slur), while others join him, including Shaun.

The film is provides a look into the roots of racist thought and racist skinhead culture in England during the 1980s – primarily a result of the economic hardship of the time, according to the film. The storyline isn’t hard to predict, but, even though you can see the climatic scene coming from a mile away, it is executed perfectly. So perfectly, in fact, that I am tempted to say that the director wanted the film to end in a predictable manner that the viewer expected so that the tension could rise and build until it’s horrifying, amazingly delivered climax debuts. The film may be a bit predictable, but it still manages to daze you. And who said predictability was a bad thing?

The acting is more than on par. The stars of the film, Turgoose and Graham, are especially good. There are brief, moments of cheese that could have been avoided by simply delaying the score by a second or two, but I can really only think of one instance at the moment; it’s not much to complain about.

Check out this film for the climax if for nothing else. The plot isn’t anything especially new, but the delivery is really worth noting.

B+/A-

Be Kind Rewind

Dir. Michel Gondry Writ. Michel Gondry Star. Jack Black, Mos Def, Danny Glover, and Melonie Diaz

Pretty good, I’ll say that. I wouldn’t spend my last seven bucks on it, but it’s good for a Sunday afternoon.

Let’s get Gondry out of the way. He does need Kaufman for a whole, cohesive script. Be Kind Rewind’s plot had some of the same flare as Eternal Sunshine. Still, there was some pretty glaring plot holes.

I read some reviews for Be Kind Rewind before I saw it, and I have to agree with their major plot critique on Jack Black being magnetized. I can understand Gondry wanting a magical element to the film, but it was wholly unnecessary, implausible, and confusing. A swarm of bees destroying the videos would have made more sense.

Also, I’m a little confused about Mos Def. Maybe he needs a little more experience as an actor. Maybe his character, Mike, was supposed to be a little slow, a little challenged. There could have been more of the romance between Mos Def and Diaz too.

Complaints aside, it was a good film. It was especially visually pleasing. It has the raw, gritty romanticized feel of Eternal Sunshine. It’s worth seeing for that alone. Plus, it’s funny.

The “Sweden”ed (remake) films were the highlight of the movie. Jack Black brought out his A game for Rush Hour 2 and Driving Miss Daisy.

Anyone who has made a bad home movie will probably get a kick out of Be Kind Rewind.

7/10

Charlie Bartlett (vs. Ferris Bueller)

Dir. Jon Poll Writ. Gustin Nash Star. Anton Yelchin, Robert Downy Jr., Kat Dennings, Tyler Hilton.

I suppose it’s unfair to solely judge Charlie Bartlett by comparison to Ferris Bueller. I don’t go to the Portland art museum and call paintings inferior to Goya or Delacroix. Still, Bueller has cornered the market on this fairly specific sub-genre of high school comedy, and the filmmakers had to know it. If I made a film about a young boy from a broken home befriending an alien, I’d be competing with E.T., right?

I liked Charlie from Charlie Bartlett, but I liked him less than Ferris Bueller. It was interesting to watch the filmmakers combat this likely universal sentiment. They didn’t try to take Bueller head on (an impossible feat, in my opinion), and they didn’t try to ride Bueller’s coattails for a few Box Office profits over a couple of weekends (not on the whole at least, I hope). Instead, they tried to carve a little niche for Bartlett in this high school sub-genre. Bartlett was like Bueller’s drug-dealing, less clever younger brother. I’m not so convinced the whole pharmacy angle separated Bartlett from Bueller nearly enough, but, hey, at least they tried.

I’ll give Bartlett this, I liked his sidekick better than Bueller’s. Though presented and developed in a much less sophisticated manner, I prefer Bartlett’s punk bully, Murphey, to Bueller’s neurotic Cameron. (Unfortunately, Bartlett’s girl doesn’t hold a candle to Bueller’s)

Robert Downy Jr. was okay, I guess. It was too sappy a character for me. “I’m Robert Downy Jr., and, guess what, my character is a mopey drunk with a heart of gold buried under a world of problems.” Yeah, yeah; blah, blah; etc, etc. He’s especially hard to like when you consider the ridiculous principle from Ferris Bueller. It turns out zero antics, self-destructive rage, and contemplative intoxicatedness isn’t that funny.

The only place I can really see anyone watching Charlie Bartlett is at a matinee. Not that it is not enjoyable, but when it leaves theaters and goes to DVD there is really no reason to watch Bartlett over Bueller.

6.5/10

P.S. They pretty much have the same movie posters:

Oscar Predictions

Here are my predictions for Sunday’s Oscars, along with a few alternates in each category plus some general thoughts. I’ve refrained from posting any predictions for the Best Foreign Film category because of how wildly unpredictable it is. Amelie lost, Pan’s Labyrinth lost, and the 3 frontrunners this year weren’t even nominated. Everyone, even the academy, is confused about it. But without further ado, here are my Oscar predictions:

Best Picture:

1) No Country for Old Men

2) There Will Be Blood

3) Juno

-No Country’s definitely the frontrunner, but still, something doesn’t feel right. I hope Blood will make an upset, but it’s pretty unlikely, especially considering it took in the smallest amount at the box office. Juno and Michael Clayton also have a shot, but Atonement is completely out of the running.

Best Director:

1) Joel & Ethan Coen – No Country for Old Men

2) Julian Schnabel – The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

3) Paul Thomas Anderson – There Will Be Blood

-Here I’d love to see Julian Schnabel win. He won the Golden Globe and he’s got a decent chance at the Oscar, but the Coens are still my pick. PTA has a shot, but I highly doubt he wins it. The other nominees, Jason Reitman for Juno and Tony Gilroy for Michael Clayton, don’t have a chance.

Best Female Actor:

1) Julie Christie – Away From Her

2) Marion Cotillard – La Vie En Rose

3) Ellen Page - Juno

-Though I’m rooting for Marion Cotillard, I’m fairly certain this is Christie’s year. She’s the clear frontrunner (she’s won most of the major awards, including the Golden Globe and the Screen Actors Guild Award). Ellen Page is in the race, but Cate Blanchett and Laura Linney are out.

Best Male Actor:

1) Daniel Day-Lewis – There Will Be Blood

-If anybody else wins something’s seriously fucked up. All the other nominees are telling the academy to vote for him, he’s won every possible award up to this point, he’s been very humble during his acceptance speeches and his few interviews, and of course his performance was freaking incredible.

Best Original Screenplay:

1) Diablo Cody – Juno

2) Tony Gilroy – Michael Clayton

-This should easily go to Diablo Cody. The other nominated films (except for Michael Clayton)- Ratatouille, The Savages, and Lars and the Real Girl- have little to no chance.

Best Adapted Screenplay:

1) Joel & Ethan Coen – No Country for Old Men

2) Paul Thomas Anderson – There Will Be Blood

3) Ronald Harwood – The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

-This will be a battle between PTA and the Coens. I’m predicting the Coens to win, but I really think it should go to PTA for There Will Be Blood. We’ll see.

Best Female Supporting Actor:

-This one’s wide open. All 5 nominees have a good chance. Blanchett won the Globe, Rudy Dee won the SAG, Tilda Swinton won the BAFTA, and Amy Ryan won most of the the critics awards. It’s basically a toss-up, but here are my guesses:

1) Cate Blanchett – I’m Not There

2) Tilda Swinton – Michael Clayton

3) Amy Ryan/Ruby Dee/Saoirse Ronan

Best Male Supporting Actor:

1) Javier Bardem – No Country for Old Men

-I’d put all my money on Bardem.

Best Original Score:

1) Dario Marianelli – Atonement

-The scores for Ratatouille, The Kite Runner, and Yuma could win, but I think this rightfully goes to Atonement. It was an incredible score and I’d be pretty surprised to see it not win.

Best Animated Feature:

1) Ratatouille

2) Persepolis

-Ratatouille’s all over this one. Persepolis could upset, but it’s not likely. 3rd nominee Surf’s Up is lucky it was even nominated.

Best Cinematography:

1) Robert Elswit – There Will Be Blood

2) Roger Deakins – The Assassination of Jesse James/No Country for Old Men

-There Will Be Blood will most likely take this one due to double nominee Roger Deakins splitting the vote. Otherwise, I’d say Jesse James, which probably deserves the award more. It was a pretty incredible year for cinematography, so anything could upset.

Best Documentary:

1) Sicko

-Michael Moore won for Bowling for Columbine and would’ve won for Fahrenheit 9/11 had it been eligible, and since Sicko is just as praised and popular but slightly less controversial, I’d say it’s a lock.

And there we are, predictions in the 12 major categories. I’m actually hoping that my predictions turn out to be almost completely wrong other than the male acting awards, since I’m rooting for an underdog in almost every category.

Remember, the Oscars are this Sunday, the 22nd.

Persepolis

Persepolis is an animated film about a young girl, Marjane (the name of the woman who wrote the autobiographical graphic novel which the film is based on), growing up during the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Although this movie’s subject matter is rather serious in nature, the film takes on a mostly chipper tone. You’ll find yourself laughing more than thinking about the socio-economics of Iran, both past and present. This could be seen as both a positive or a negative aspect of the film; I’m not sure where I stand.

This is for certain, the animation is amazing. Not since Les Triplettes de Belleville (2003) have I been so impressed and engrossed by the animation in front of my eyes. The animation alone is worth paying to see.

The storyline moves quickly: we see Marjane go from child to adult in ninety minutes. The flow isn’t off, but you are forced to take in a lot of story and I don’t think the film really allows you to invest yourself in the peoples’ lives your watching, or even the story, for that matter.

But it’s beautiful, very beautiful. The ending is great and it’s incredibly enjoyable to watch.

8/10

Trailer: