Day 108: August 16th, 2010

VAMP



The first kiss could be your last.

Vamp, unfortunately doesn't get interesting or good until the second half of the film. As a horror film, it doesn't scare and as a comedy it gets no laughs. I found Vamp to be oddly trying to balance both and not succeeding very well. The overall feel of the film is off, but the last half or so is some neat stuff.

The entire town is overrun by vampires and we gradually see this as the night goes on and the characters become more desperate. The story is about two fraternity pledges who try to find a stripper to entertain their college friends. Things go awry when, of course, they are vampire strippers. If this sounds like From Dusk Till Dawn, then congratulations. From Dusk Till Dawn obviously borrowed many elements from this film.

As far as vampire films go, I'd stick with Fright Night and the Lost Boys, but wouldn't necessarily count Vamp out just yet. It's got all the essentials to be a good movie, the 80's cheese is pouring through here. I just didn't dig it as much as I would have expected. It might have been the production values, or again, that oddly balanced humour that fails. Putting aside the lame parts with people popping up that should be dead and other nonsense, the film is entertaining in parts. The pinks and greens that illuminate the street add to the surreal world these characters find themselves in.

To wrap things up, Vamp is a mediocre film. Not much else to say, if you're a lover of 80's horror then I would say this is right up your alley.

5.5/10

Day 107: August 15th, 2010

Captivity



I'll give credit where credit is due. I like the poster.

Captivity is the story and I use that term loosely, about a young female model who is abducted and tortured. She finds out she is not the only one being tortured and along with her new friend, try to escape. In a nutshell, it's a poor imitation of a Saw film.

Captivity suffers from many things, one being a lack of interest. Nothing interesting happens in this film. We are introduced to a character who seems to care about no one but herself and her little princess dog. She is abducted before we even really get a chance to see what kind of person she is. We are thrown into this situation too quickly and the gimmick runs short pretty quick. The repetitiveness of this film is ridiculous. Scene after scene is one torture/game after another. Thus the film becomes predictable before it should be.

Enter the second character who is captured. We never see his capture, so really, we can't trust him. As soon as we see this character I had my suspicions about him. Will the film surprise me in anyway? Of course not, it follows the predictable path it lays out from the beginning. The twists and turns are so obvious a blind man can see it coming from a mile away. Oh and the reasoning behind the torture is beyond pathetic. If you even call what they give us a reason.

This is worse than Hostel, and I didn't like that film at all. At least Eli Roth knows the genre he is playing with and his love of it helps create the much needed atmosphere. This film is devoid of everything it should have. No thrills, or suspense, no moment of giving up or breaking down. Captivity is nothing more than a film that you pass on a shelf and shouldn't think twice of looking at.

2/10

Day 106: August 14th, 2010

The Other Guys




Meet The Other Guys

This comedy film puts Will Ferrell back in the right direction. He still has some ways to go before becoming actually funny again, but with the help of his long time collaborator and new comer Marky Mark Wahlberg, we have a slightly funnier comedy than one would expect.

The Other Guys is in the vein of Hot Fuzz, only with less jazz and more stupid Ferrell humour. It takes the buddy cop action film genre and parodies it. Sam 'The Man' Jackson & Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson are two egocentric big time cops who will do more than millions of dollars in damages to the city just to bust some people running dope. Tango & Cash on steroids. Their untimely exit (you knew it happened, come on) gives the others guys a chance to shine. The other guys are of course Ferrell and Wahlberg. Two polar opposites that when together make for some laughs.

Wahlberg plays up on his bad boy rep as he berates Ferrell every chance he gets. This is a fish out of water style of film for Wahlberg who finally just seems to have found his footing in comedy. Specifically this style of comedy. Ferrell tones it down a notch, but does his typical long winded comedic bits at others. His backstory involving hoes and pimps was a huge misfire in my opinion.

Eva Mendes is the sexy wife who gets nothing to do but be the good looking woman of the film. Her role is minute and her talents are kind of wasted, she does the best she can with the material. I really dug Michael Keaton as the Captain. With this film and Toy Story 3, I hope he has the comeback his so deserves.

The comedy is really hit and miss. I expected it to be a lot worse. As far as McKay and Ferrell comedies go, it's pretty light. It's more grounded than their previous efforts and actually has a bit of plot to give the viewer. The Other Guys is a rental.

7/10

Day 105: August 13th, 2010

Rope



Sometimes those who have nothing find each other.

Rope, no not the classic Alfredy Hitchcock film, but a short about a man who must make a life changing decision with a piece of rope, is a mere 4 minutes long. Is that enough time to engage the audience, tell a good story and let the viewer be absorbed in the filmmaking aspect of it?

Rope is done very well for a film shot, directed and written by the same man, Ian Clay. The film has a rough and tough vibe to it that in some strange way connects with the character who is at a crossroad in his life. It's dark subject matter and the film doesn't look clean and pretty. It works for it rather than against it.

Great music that heightens the tension and pulls the viewer in. You can have a crappy looking film and people will still enjoy it, but if it sounds like crap, people will hate it. The music does it's job of creating a sense of emotion in the viewer as well as hide some obvious dodgy voice over recordings. The voice over is done in a room, it's obvious and should have been hidden better.

The dialogue is repetitive, some of it works some of it doesn't. It's hard to tell a story in under 5 minutes, Clay does it in 4. We get the basic idea of what is going on and why within the dialogue of this guy's head. His constant rambling is nonsensical and at times might make irritate you, but the overall message and theme are all present.

The film is not nicely tight up in a bow, it is left ambiguous. The question you must ask yourself at the end of the film is if you care whether or not this man decides to take his own life or not. If you don't care, the film has failed. If you do care, then it is a success. If you even make a conscience choice of whether or not he dies makes the film a success. When watching the film, you assume it will be left open ended and it is.

For a film on such a small budget and super small crew, I can't really fault it for anything that doesn't look great. The film actually does look good. The writing is good despite some lazy/nonsensical parts and the film is only 4 minutes, so give it a watch. You can spare 4 minutes of your time.

6.5/10

Day 104: August 12th, 2010

Precious



Life is hard. Life is short. Life is painful. Life is rich. Life is....Precious.

This is a film that might make some people a little uneasy. It deals with family abuse in the form of rape, physical and verbal violence. The one character it follows is Precious, an overweight illiterate teenage girl who is pregnant with her second child from her biological father. She is kicked out of her school because of her pregnancy and is enrolled in another educational institution called each one teach one. She wants to do better things, but doesn't have the will or motivation because of the constant abuse at the hands of her mother. She day dreams about being a big star and getting out of the hellish life she lives.

The film is raw with the material and doesn't really hold any punches. Lee Daniels second feature film shows vast improvement over the messy Shadowboxer starring Cuba good Jr. His grasp of the material and dedication to have the story be told is evident in his attention to translate the novel to screen. Daniels has put together a cast that care about the subject matter and the story as much as he does and is surrounded by the talent that is needed to pull it off.

Gabourey Sidibe is Precious, the troubled teen wanting more out of life. She shines in her first starring role and it's no walk in the park for her. The role demanded talent and Sidibe delivers what is needed. Of course the one who stands out the most is Mo'Nique earning herself a much deserved Oscar for her role as the abusive and sloth ridden mother. Her confrontation with her daughter after the birth of the second child is intense and will have you holding your breath in fear for the safety of the child.

Precious is a film that is driven by a strong story and an emotional cast that cares about the work they are doing. It's a glimmer of hope that keeps the story moving in a world that is hard edged and usually leads nowhere. It's not a relatively long film, but I did find myself checking my watch every now and then and some bits in the film happen without much clarification. Where did that one white boy come from in her Each One Teach One class? In any event, the final product is a good film with a message about hope and Tyler Perry finally has his name attached to something good in his career (Star Trek not included).

7.5/10

Day 103: August 11th, 2010

Identity



Identity is a secret. Identity is a mystery. Identity is a killer.

A whodunnit mystery that revolves around a group of people who are stranded at a motel after a storm hits. Identity is a strong film that just when you think you know everything, it throws another curveball. The film is surprising in it's predictability. Does that make sense? As the film progresses, it's obvious what the spin will be, yet it takes it a step further.

The film is wet and dark, it adds to the creep factor that is already there because it's set at a motel. Thank you Psycho. The film has Hitchcock and Agatha Christie written all over it. Ten Little Indians meets Psycho would be a good way to pitch the film.

Liotta plays his hot tempered role again and Cusack gives us the everyman who must take control of the situation. The chemistry between everyone is great and the mystery adds to the tension and uneasy tension that everyone has. Can they trust each other? Is everyone who they say they are? Why are they all here and what do they have in common?

Identity is a good addition to this genre of films and it serves it purpose. It gets things right and gives you a twist that's actually worth talking about. Recommended.

8/10

Day 102: August 10th, 2010

John Q



Give a father no options and you leave him no choice.

Being a Canadian, I can't really relate to the problem at the centre of this film. Affording health care is not a problem for me, but John Q somehow struck a cord with me. I'm not surprised that many people pick on this film, but I will strongly defend it. It's a good film, there I said it.

Let's look at the cast, Denzel Washington, James Woods, Anne Heche, Kevin Connolly, Ethan Suplee, Eddie Griffin, Robert Duvall, Ray Liotta. Sure some of these names mean nothing, but I'm surprised at the well rounded cast here. Denzel gives a strong personal and heartfelt performance as John Q. He's back into a corner regarding the life of his son and he's out of his league here. How far would a father go to save the life of his child. People criticize the film because everyone has problems and he has no right to endanger the lives of others, blah, blah. It's a father's love for his son. The greatest fear of parents is to outlive their children.

One scene that gave me goosebumps is when John is willing to kill himself to give his kid a heart. The moment he puts that gun in his mouth, a great scene. Cassavetes is quite the interesting person. Acting in Face/Off directing this and The Notebook and even Alpha Dog. He seems to have such a dangerous side, as well as being a big softy.

John Q is not ground breaking, but it's a film that spoke to me. Most of the film is unrealistic and narrow minded in it's message, but I dig it enough to recommend it to people. Hopefully people will put political views aside and watch a film about a father and his love for his dying son.

6.5/10

Day 101: August 9th, 2010

Eight Legged Freaks



Giant spiders eating people? It has to be fun right?

Eight Legged Freaks, how I wanted to like you so much more than I did. I wanted to have a good fun b-horror movie time, yet I was left with a film that doesn't really know what it wants to be. You have a poor lead actor and comedic scenes that fall flat. I thought an attack from giant spiders would be more entertaining than this.

For a movie down right that involves a town overrun by some kind of monster see Slither. It was funny, well directed and had Nathan Fillion. David Arquette needs to stick to supporting roles. He doesn't have the comedic timing, nor the charisma to lead a film like this. The supporting characters need to be more characteristic. The town sheriff was as close as this film got.

I suppose if you go into this film simply wanting people to get attacked by spiders then you'll like it. I don't really know what I wanted out of it, I just know that I didn't really get anything from it. It had some elements rights, but the whole package left me feeling empty inside. I was never cheering, never laughing or seeming to care about what happens to people.

4/10

Day 100: August 8th, 2010

Gangs of New York



America was born in the streets.

Martin Scorsese is probably my favourite director, he has the utmost respect for the art behind film, it's history and its future. He loves it to death and the man makes damn fine cinema. Not every picture he does is great, but every Scorsese film has something to say. The problem with filmmakers today, is they have nothing to say.

Gangs of New York was Scorsese's dream project and the film is grand, the set designs, the costumes, everything is detailed to the last drop. Scorsese's dream has come to life in this period piece that brings a legend out of the shadows and begins a director - actor relationship with another.

The film is full of great performances lead by DiCaprio but it's Day Lewis who steals the show as the scene chewing over the top performance of Bill the Butcher. He does the role with a delicious side of crazy and respect. The man is insane with violent rage. DiCaprio has moments of trouble where he loses sight of the role and is just Leonardo DiCaprio on screen, but for the most part he goes a formidable job playing against Lewis. Diaz does an alright job of not becoming annoying or dopey, which she usually does.

The violence is raw and restrained. We are thrown into a bloodshed in the opening act and the film plays out leading up to a bloody revenge. The climax is actually anti-climactic. Scorsese did this on purpose and it frustrated me when I first saw the film. I wanted the big grand fight. This viewing it didn't bother me too much and it made the cat and mouse style fight more heightened.

Gangs of New York went home empty handed on Oscar night, which is a disappointment because the set design is beautiful. Scorsese has a great film here that many people seem to dismiss. It's length is something to endure, but the revenge story could have been a huge disaster, if it weren't for that man behind the camera.

7.5/10

Day 99: August 7th, 2010

Leon: The Professional



If you want a job done well hire a professional.

Now, I've seen Leon a dozen times before, so why does it make it on this list? Well, it was the director's cut, which I have never seen before. Something like 20 minutes was added to the film which dives deeper into the creepy relationship between Leon and Mathilda.

The problem is that the film seriously halts to a drag during these scenes. It was interesting to see what I hadn't before and to see him take her on some 'practice' missions, but it all was seriously not really needed. The relationship between the two of them plays out nicely in the theatrical film, her getting drunk and professing her love to him was apparently too much for American audiences and it was cut. No real loss, you still feel uneasy about the relationship when she calls him her lover to the hotel manager. The other scenes are a little too much for this film and puts a driving stall in the narrative pace.

Oldman is fantastic as the antagonist, his over the top performance really lends itself to the evil that is his corrupted character. Reno is still as bad ass today as he was when I first saw the film. Leon is truly a professional who takes on a fatherly role to a kid who has no family. His love for her is merely that of a father looking after his daughter, even if there was no blood relation. Her love for him is pure crush. She has a strong man in her life now, one that invokes positive messages to her, even though he does evil things.

Besson directs the film nicely, he moves the story at a good pace. The added scenes in this directors cut were nice to see, but I would rather watch the theatrical film. Usually I do prefer director's cuts over the theatrical one, but here I find that is just slows everything down too much. It adds nothing really new, we know he teaches her, we know she loves him. It's just more of the same.

Highly recommend this film, the theatrical one of course. It's story of love is unusual of course, but it works because the child doesn't really know what she wants in life. The action is great, specifically the final stand off and the performances are better than most action oriented films. The Professional is a winner.

Theatrical : 8.5/10
Director's Cut 7/10

Day 98: August 6th, 2010

She's Out Of My League



How can a 10 go for a 5?

Kirk works at an airport and is a 5. Molly is boarding a plane and she is a 10. She accidentally leaves her cell phone back in the terminal and he picks it up. As a thank you, she asks him out, sparks fly. But how can a 10 go for a 5?

Well, I wouldn't call Jay Baruchel a 5 nor would I call Alice Eve a 10, but the characters in the film do, so let's go with it. She's Out Of My League is a date movie, not a raunchy comedy that some people expect. Except, there are two out of the ordinary scenes that seem to actually belong in a raunchy comedy film. Our lead ejaculates in his pants and a dog licks it, second he decides to shave his testicles, but gets a friend to do it. These bits seem straight out of an American Pie film and while they are funny, seem out of place here.

Kirk's own insecurities are his downfall and that is what the antagonist is. Not the guy who tries to win her back, which is the way the film is advertised. This character is almost useless, he should have been more of a wedge between the two characters and create more conflict than what he did. The film suffers from no real conflict. The disputes they have in the film are easily fixable and seem way too minimal to really be used as a conflict in the relationship.

The writing is funny at times, it mostly plays things safe. Which is why those two scenes still stick out like a sore thumb. Of course there is something that splits them up and then they have to race against time to get back together. He works at an airport, so I'll give you one guess as to what they are racing for.

T.J. Miller, an unknown until that little film called Cloverfield came along, is the funniest part of this film. The guy has been in so many things since then and he really does have nice timing for comedy. He plays the friend of Kirk, one of three. The other two have smaller roles, but use their spotlighted time efficiently.

She's Out Of My League is a mediocrely funny film. I didn't love it, nor did I really hate it. It's the kind of film that you have a good time while watching it, then almost forget about it the next day.

5.5/10

Day 97: August 5th, 2010

The Glass House



Be Careful Who You Trust.

A house made out of glass...ooooo, so scary. Actually, the only thing scary about the film is the fact that it was made into a movie. The Glass House is devoid of any tension, something that thrillers are apparently suppose to have. Instead we are stuck with two kids we couldn't give two craps about and a climactic scene that doesn't even involve our protagonists. Pretty lame.

So Leelee Sobieski and her little brother are orphaned when their parents car drives off a cliff. It was an accident. In their will it is stated that the kids be taken care of by their friends, Terry and Erin Glass, who just so happen to live in a glass house. But things suddenly go bad when the two taking care of them become a little less than helpful.

Basically they are bad people looking to get a lot of money out of this whole ordeal. Oh, and it wasn't an accident, but I guess you could already tell that. The Glass family is played by Dian Lane and Stellan Skarsgård. Obviously these two actors have more talent than anyone else in this film and are the only saving grace for a film that is a complete bore.

Leelee Sobieski is annoying, she mopes around and is a bitch all the time. It's hard to connect to someone like this. It doesn't help that she can't really carry the film, we look to the two antagonists for anything remotely good to see on screen. Her little brother has too little screen time to really mention anything about him.

The Glass House is a completely forgettable 'thriller'. I put that word in quotations because it's anything but. Skip it and watch something else, anything else really.

4/10

Day 96: August 4th, 2010

Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith



The saga is complete...hopefully.

The final Star Wars film to hit theatres (or at least we thought). The one that showed us the fall of the Jedi, the rise of the Empire and the creation of Darth Vader. It had a lot to deliver, people had high expectations, even after two lackluster and disappointing films before it. Revenge of the Sith is the best of the prequels, but just how much does that say about the films in general?

Revenge of the Sith has the best visual effects, the best story and the best acting of the three films. It has the most emotion, the more impressive fight sequences and a lot more connection with the original trilogy than the others. That's not to say that the film has some pretty cringe worthy moments. The introduction of the useless character General Grievous was a waste of time. His four lightsaber dual was not exciting in the least. Vader's Frankenstein like scream and movements after hearing the about the death of Padme is more humourous than anything.

Anakin and Obi-Wan's final fight is impressive and the most emotionally fueled battle any of the prequels have, it lived up to the expectations of those waiting to see the two duke it out. It's interesting to see Episode I play delightfully to the kids and then have Episode III be so dark and brooding.

Sith has it's problems, it far from perfect. Yet finally it's assets outweigh the problems. Christensen is still wooden, but this time he shows that he has some bit of emotion in him. The role called for something he couldn't really deliver, but here he tries more than ever. Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith delivers to the fans.

7/10

Day 95: August 3rd, 2010

Star Wars: Attack of the Clones



A Jedi Shall Not Know Anger. Nor Hatred. Nor Love.

Can Mr. Lucas redeem himself from the horrid attempt at re-starting a trilogy that should have been left alone? The answer is awkwardly yes and no. Attack of the Clones is better than The Phantom Menace, but it has some of the worst written dialogue I have ever heard, even for a Star Wars film.

Attack of the Clones first suffers from a lame title and it hypes itself up to be the big battle film. Well, the battle sequence are really on the gentle side and never really engage the viewer in any sense of danger for the characters. We see more jedi use their weapon of choice and it's exciting at first, but it quickly fades away.

Anakin has transformed from an annoying Jake Lloyd, to a wooden Hayden Christensen. He of course looks totally different, but Portman of course appears the same. smile gripe but one I always had. Ewan McGregor seems more confident in his role, it helps that he is no longer the Padawan and instead has taken Anakin under his wing. The troubled dynamic between the two of them isn't that troubled. Anakin just acts like a whiney little brat.

The apparent love between Anakin and Padme is totally forced. Lucas tries to take his time in exploring the relationship that is forbidden, but it strains the viewer in useless scenes of wanting to kiss but not. The biggest problem with this film is the poorly written complicated relationship between Anakin and Padme.

Dooku versus Yoda was something that many people wanted to see. Yoda finally in a fight scene? That's awesome and it pleased the dreams of many fans. I still dig it to this day as I did in the theatre. AOTC has few highlights and many detractors. It gave some people hopes that the series could get better, but crushed others as their favourite little film series was slowly dying.

6/10

Day 94: August 2nd, 2010

Star Wars: The Phantom Menace



The Saga Begins....Again.

The most anticipated film of our generation? Before the release of what is now considered the worst film out of all six Star Wars films, everyone was going mad over Star Wars. I was in elementary school, grade 5 or 6 when this came out and even I knew that after watching it in the theatres that I could have directed a better Episode I. Why is it that so many people hated this film when it first came out, then came to simply dislike it years later?

The biggest problem I have with this film is that it's too complicated for it's own good. What the original had was a plot that was easy to follow, good guys versus bad guys. The Phantom Menace has Trade Federations, Tax Talk and they inexcusably try to explain the force.

When I was a kid I loved the pod racing scene, now it bores me to death. George Lucas seems to have forfeited any sense of a good story with characters we like and try to create a film that would be marketable for toys and kids. The Phantom Menace out of all three films is the most kid friendly one, despite the plot that would normally go over their heads.

Darth Maul is one of my favourite characters in the series and it was disappointing to see him die at the end of this film. Other than Palpatine, this film needed a more central villain. Darth Maul should have filled this role. His light saber duel with Obi-Wan is one of the best in the series, it's fast paced and well choreographed. How many people had a smile on their face when the double edged light saber came out? I did. That's when the film became entertaining, the Duel of Fates. The rest of it is a jumbled mess of ideas that go nowhere.

Han Solo, that is what this film and all three prequels needed. Not that character, but a Han Solo type. Instead we got Qui Gon Jinn, who is more boring than a plank of wood. Jake Lloyd is just as annoying, if not more, than Jar Jar Binks. A character that created such controversy that he was excessively trimmed down for the two films to follow. Darth Vader is this little kid? No, it's not a harrowing story of a child deluded and brought to the dark side, it's a sad pathetic attempt to give more humanity to one of the greatest villain ever. He got that in Jedi, here he is annoying. As far as I'm concerned, Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are not related in anyway what so ever.

The Phantom Menace is more fancy than fun, more colourful than bright and boring than entertaining. It's a weak and slow start to some prequels that (to some) ruined a great trilogy.

5/10

Day 93: August 1st, 2010

XII



Interesting premise is ruined by filmmakers cutting corners.

A man gets out of prison and goes on a killing rampage of those who were on the jury. 12 jury members, 12 people to kill.

I was really intrigued by the premise of this film. I think if done right, it would make for a very good thriller/horror film. A killer killing off those who put him away. Those 12 jury members. I'm sure it was probably done before since the idea isn't original, but I haven't seen any films based on that idea. So when I saw XII was about just that, I thought why not, let's give it a chance. It's a shame though because this film lacks anything that would make it interesting or entertaining.

The killer is in prison for apparently having sexual relations with a minor. There is only one bit of dialogue that supports this. Other than that, we have no idea who this guy is, why he went to prison or anything else. The film doesn't really set events up well, the opening credit sequence is horribly shot and edited that you don't really know what you're watching until the 5 years later text pops up.

All of the cast are bland and boring with the exception of Mercedes McNab of Buffy The Vampire Slayer fame. She played Harmony. She seems like the only one who knows that she is in a horror film. She plays the blonde bitchy type friend of the supposed heroine well enough to make this not an entire travesty.

The kills are non existent. The film starts off with a kill near Vegas where one guy gets his head blown off with a shot gun. Then it is all downhill from there. The killer rips the skin off of his victims face, sometimes while they are still alive. This should make for some gruesome scenes but non of it scares, excites or interests the viewer. The killer is a lame Ed Gein wannabe who wears the skin of his victims as well.

Low rent horror this is, but not even the good kind. I can't help but feel what I could have done with this story and budget. Or anyone else for that matter. The guy who directed this played Jim Morrison in Wayne's World 2. Yeah...you read that correctly.

Oh, and it is only an hour and fifteen minutes long.

2/10

Day 92: July 31st, 2010

Deep Rising



If the cash is there, then we do not care. What kinda philosophy is that?

When I decided to do this little thing again I did it to broaden my film watching experience. To watch movies I haven't seen like Raging Bull (it's coming) and Rear Window (I loved it). Yet every so often you find yourself watching crap, crap can be bad crap or guilty crap. Deep Rising is somewhere confusingly in the middle. I know it's crap, I know it's bad bad bad crap, yet I can find the humour in it. Intentional or not.

It stars Treat "I'm a badass" Williams in the lead role with Famke Janssen as the female we all like to oogle over. A military unit hires Williams to take them to a location, what is at that location? A giant cruise ship, but he doesn't know that. On that cruise ship are a bunch of wealthy people having a fun time. Cue monster attack, dead bodies, blood and some murky CGI. The crew arrives, everyone is dead and now they are fighting for their lives.

The director of this little gem is Stephen Sommers, of The Mummy and G.I. Joe fame. So you know it's loud and makes no sense what so ever. All the subplots involving the owner wanting to sink the ship to collect the insurance is laughable. Character actions are bizarre and the action sequences are off and on. I only really watched it because I remember watching it as a kid. I tend to do that to see if what I remember is actually true to the film and to see if it still holds up.

The monster is a mutation of some sorts. It's tentacles have their own mouths and sensory. Think an Octopus/Doc Ock/Anaconda/ Predator hybrid. How these tentacles can move around the ship at such ease is beyond me, especially since we see the full creature at the end of the film.

Kevin J. O'Connor is the comedic sidekick. He seems to be in every Sommer's film now. He gets a few laughs at his own expense. What made this film memorable was not the spoiler ending on the cover, but the final few minutes in which they arrive on an island and have to face off with another giant mutation creature. Is it King Kong? Is it the Black Smoke Monster from Lost? Who knows. I still want a sequel. Ha.

5.5/10

Day 91: July 30th, 2010

Antitrust




Truth can be dangerous... Trust can be deadly.

This was one of those random 90's flick that no one ever saw (well I did) and there was a reason for it. It's not that great. The film stars a bunch of good looking people who are computer nerds (yeah right). Ryan Phillippe leads this tech savvy flick that tried to capitalize on the fast rising usage of computers and the internet and so on.

Phillippe plays a computer programmer and he gets his dream job at a successful Portland-based firm. It turns into a nightmare when he discovers his boss (Tim Robbins in his Bill Gates outfit) has a secret and deadly way of dealing with competition or anti-trust problems.

Rachel Leigh Cook and the beautiful Claire Forlani, it's her eyes, also star. The film has a few suspenseful set pieces, but the overall product is a forgettable thriller that tries to capitalize on technology that most of it's audience would not understand. Robbins doesn't do much in the villain role, he plays nice when he's really naughty.

Antitrust has a lot of neat ideas, but it doesn't all come together in the end. It's kind of a mess. I wish I could like it more, but it is honestly a forgettable film. It killed Rachel Leigh Cook and Claire Forlani's career and almost took out Phillipe's. In my opinion of course.

5/10

Day 90: July 29th, 2010

Insomnia



Days never end. Nightmares are real. No one is innocent.

Well, I've seen every Nolan film (even his student film) with the exception of The Prestige (expect to see that one pop up sometime on this list) and until now this one. Insomnia a remake with Pacino, Swank and Robbins. Most people view it as that other movie where Robin Williams is serious. Of course the other film is One Hour Photo. Here Robin Williams is not a creepy guy like his character in Photo, he's a normal joe.

Anyways, there is a murder in Alaska and two L.A. detectives are brought in to find the killer, in a town where the sun never goes down. Hence the title, our lead character gets insomnia. Pacino in his older years doesn't really need to look too tired, that's his natural essence now. He plays this role with a little less extravagance as we have seen before. He's suppose to be tired after all.

Nolan does a good job at keeping us interested in the case and the pace of the film works for this mystery thriller. The twist here is that the killer and Pacino have more things in common then they think. The film has to deal with more than one murder and the audience has to look at the cover up of one and the solution of the other.

While Insomnia is not one of his better known films it is still a well written and directed mystery. It doesn't necessarily pull you into the story that well nor do we get involved with the town folk. Insomnia has it's problems, but it still works on a level that most films don't. It was also made more Hollywood friendly compared to the Norwegian original.

7/10

Day 89: July 28th, 2010

Apocalypse Now: Redux



Stick with the original, Redux Bores.

I decided to give the Redux another try and yet I still find myself being bored to death every single time everything he added in comes in. The French Plantation sequence is what puts me to sleep because the film comes to a stalling pace of death. I would strongly suggest to stick to the original version over the Redux.

It's no secret that the tiresome road to get this film made is that of cinema legends. I applaud Coppola to no end, this film is without a doubt an achievement. Yet I still find myself not loving it as much as I probably should. There are moments of greatness yes, but the overall effect is not one that makes me want to talk about it to other people.

It is a flawed film that with the added scenes makes it even more flawed, severely with it's pacing. The redux doesn't ruin a classic film it simply makes it longer and boring. The cast all work well, even to the small roles given to Brando and Ford. Hopper stands out as the photojournalist is genius and is one of his more memorable roles in a list of eccentric characters.

Coppola is far from a favourite director of mine. I find his films overly long and tedious. He is talented, no doubt about that and deserves his place in the legends of filmmakers, but to me he should have left Apocalypse Now alone and not George Lucas it up. Pretentious or not, you decide.

6/10

Day 88: July 27th, 2010

Jurassic Park III



Evolve or Die.

Jurassic Park 3 is the one in the series that is not directed by Spielberg. It gets a lot of flack and deservedly so, the film is a poor excuse to get another film in the theatres to make money. Let's look at the reason they go back to the island. A couple trick the poor Dr. Grant into going back to the island. He thinks they are flying over it, when in reality they land on the island to look for their son who has disappeared on it. Start the dino attacks.

This film is famous for two things, one is the Spinosaurus, the so called new king of the jungle. We are given a small useless fight scene between the Spinosaurus and the T-Rex to prove this point. Ram it down out throats, we get it a new dinosaur that is more dangerous. The second would be the Pterodons stuck in their bird cage. An exciting sequence yes, but something small that is stuck in a ridiculous film.

Given that the point of this film is really useless, I like to look at it as a simple popcorn flick that serves no purpose other than to give the viewer a decent time at the theatre. The first two were at least based on books. The film does give decent chase sequences but we don't care for the characters other than Grant, from the first one. How the kid survived is a brain teaser. He'd be dead in reality, also how the boat they were parasailing on was destroyed and the crew killed is a plot hole to me. There are theories, but to me it's just lazy writing.

Jurassic Park 3 is a short film too, they basically arrive on the island, find the kid, then leave. The sense of adventure is lessened in this one than the previous two. The stakes aren't as high and the new dinosaur is pretty much a yawn. This is the obvious weakest entry in the series which I guess makes me appreciate even the weaker Spielberg films even more.

5/10

Day 87: July 26th, 2010

The Lost World: Jurassic Park



Something has survived.

Think we saw the last of those pesky dinosaurs from the original Jurassic Park? Think again. This time around we are going to another island, called Site B. It's here where the dinosaurs actually run free, no cages. Which means that the filmmakers have up the ante a bit. Our humans are stuck on this island while another group of humans decide to go hunting. For some strange reason the film finishes with the T-REX running around San Diego.

How can a film live up to the original? The first was such a huge moment in blockbuster history. Well we are giving no Sam Neil and more Jeff Goldblum. The sequel, is a little too ambitious that it loses itself in all of its grandeur. How could they raise the stakes in this film? Well, for one they thrown the characters into a world that they have absolutely no control over. No cages, no wires or buildings. This is a natural and free environment, this is the dino-environment. Second, we have a freaking T-REX run around San Diego. Yup, to raise the stakes they needed to bring one of those guys back. In a way it feels like a failed King Kong experiment.

The Lost World gives fans what they wanted, more raptors. Yet these raptors are different, more deadly apparently. Velociraptors, yippie, yet they can be taken out by a little girl because she is also a gymnast. Yes, people still moan about that scene and there is a good reason for it. It is utterly ridiculous. I can forgive a character being scared of a snake and getting killed by the Rex, but not that damn gymnastic scene.

Vince Vaughn is in this flick and I think after this and Psycho, he decided that comedy was his one and only place to be. Sure he tried again with The Cell and Domestic Disturbance, but both films failed. He's not bad here, but he also seems out of his element. I wouldn't mind seeing him in another film like this though, give him another chance, but his strong elements are clearly comedy.

Lost World is not as great as the original, but it's also not the travesty people make it out to be. There are many parts in the film that don't live up to the expectations it sets out for itself. The San Diego sequence is insane and you either love it or hate it. I remember seeing this film in the theatres when I was a kid, my opinion of it has lessened since then. I was 10 then, I'm 22 now. It almost feels like the Temple of Doom of the series. It's something kids love but adults seem to roll their eyes at. But that would have to make Jurassic Park III good, when it's just like this one, mediocre.

6/10

Day 86: July 25th, 2010

Jurassic Park



Classic Filmmaking And Entertainment.

What? Dinosaurs are cloned and are running amok in an amusement park? Well, that can't be good. Something must go wrong. Well, something does go wrong, thanks a lot Newman. Know the guests who are at the park before it opens to the public are fresh meat for the so called extinct species.

Spielberg in his hey day, cranking out a film that defined a generation and changed the way special effects are used in films. Jurassic Park is a nail biting, amazement that dazzles and makes you smile with glee. If Superman made you believe a man can fly, then Jurassic Park made you believe we can re-create dinosaurs. Never before have dinosaurs looked so life like and realistic on the screen. Say whatever you want about the special effects today, I still like them, in 1993 it gave audiences and Hollywood something to gawk at.

Three doctors are invited to the preview tour of the park. Sam Neil, Laura Dern and of course the one guy you want to play a doctor/scientist, Jeff Glodblum. While on the tour, a major storm hits and the power goes down. It doesn't help that Wayne Knight is trying to steal the embryos to make some ca-ching. Well, those dinosaurs who eat meat eventually escape and we are in for a thrilling ride. Our first introduction to the T-REX stands as one of the best introductions and visual film achievements to this day.

The cast do well together and the kids aren't AS ANNOYING as they use to be. They still make me grind my teeth though. As a kid, this film was all about the raptor chase sequence. Others seemed to like everything with the T-REX. Either or, every scene that has a dinosaurs is indeed spectacular. A giant leap forward in filmmaking, from a technical standpoint.

A great theme song to tie things up and we have ourself a blockbuster film that doesn't disappoint on repeat viewings. It is still today, as good as it was back in the day. It might seem a bit dated when our little heroine decides to use the computer and we see how freaking basic everything is, but Jurassic Park is a flick that should be seen by everyone looking for a good time at the movies.

8.5/10

Day 85: July 24th, 2010

The Score



There are no partners in crime.

DeNiro is a thief and a very good one at that. He gets jobs thrown his way from Marlon Brando, but he wants out. Isn't that always the case? Brando says he has one more job for him, DeNiro agrees to do one last job. Again, isn't that always the case? Ed Norton is also in on the plan, much to the dislike of DeNiro. They have to steal a scepter that is worth a lot of money. But can they trust each other?

The Score was an interesting film because it brought together 4 generations of actors. Brando, DeNiro and Norton. All three very talented and gifted actors in one film? Must be a recipe for success. Frank Oz, most famous for his business with the Muppets was directing. Now, the film isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The biggest problem is that the film doesn't try to be anything more than a simple crime caper flick.

Again, it has 3 great actors from different generations. All of them are pretty intense and serious about their craft, yet non of them are used to their full potential. Brando sits around and shows up to chat up with DeNiro here and there and DeNiro himself doesn't make a very believable thief. He has that no nonsense attitude down, but we've seen that before when he was on the run from Pacino in Heat. Norton is given a little bit to work with as he plays two roles, the other is one of a mentally challenged cover act who works the place they plan to steal the scepter from. Norton is the one out of the three given the most interesting character with the biggest struggle.

Frank Oz directs it with no special flare. It could have been anyone behind that lens and I wouldn't have cared. There was no stamp of originality or sense of ownership. It was pretty much like Deniro's character traits. Safe and simple. Nothing fancy, nothing risky. The scenes with suspense seem to be mildly interesting and you never feel the threat of danger. Oz was able to handle to 3 actors fine, but again, could have done so much more. I can't fault the script because that was the story going into it. He had the chance to make it special and beef it up, but chose not to.

The Score is decent and as far as heist films go, it was manageable. The film basically no violence in it whatsoever, which was interesting to see, specifically in this era. It tried to rely on character, performance and story to intrigue. It works to a certain point, but when you have so much going for you, it's hard to live up to that expectation. The Score fails to dazzle and it decides to work on a more moderate level.

6/10

Day 84: July 23rd, 2010

2012



We Were Warned.....About How Crappy This Movie Is.

2012 is a jumbled mess of a film. Roland Emmerich stated that for his last disaster flick he wanted to make it so that no other disaster flick could come after it. Well, mission accomplished because I don't want to see anymore. Upping the disaster scale to the entire world might do well for the special effects guys, buy not the paying viewer.

2012 has a very thin plot. People must survive. Is that a plot? It's more of a story. John Cusack is one of those people and he is with his ex-wife, his two kids and their step father, whom he hates. He gets the word that disaster is going to strike when a crazy old hippie guy, Woody Harrelson (big stretch) tells him about the world crumbling beneath our feet. This happens and the poop hits the fan. It seems that every single person in California dies, except for this one group. Why might you ask? Apparently Cusack, who is not only a writer, but a limo driver, has the skills and the vehicle power (a limo) to outrun global destruction.

Emmerich is not that bad of a director. He is often compared to Michael Bay for choosing big scale productions and not caring about story or characters. 2012 is the perfect example of this. In his earlier film, Independence Day, he gave us big explosions and aliens to shoot. Characters were lacking but the charisma of Will Smith, the character actor of Jeff Goldblum and Randy Frickin Quaid gave us something to smile at. John Cusack is wooden, Amanda Peet cries and a big Russian guy speaks with a thick accent. We are given zero, nadda, not even an inch of anything interesting to care about these characters. Why do I care if they live? Why do I want to spend the next 90 plus minutes with them. The answer is you don't. I wanted to spend my time with Woody I'm higher than a kite right now Harrelson.

The film is really just an excuse for the special effects guys to do their thing. Yet this is also a hit or miss. Sometimes it's actually entertaining and interesting to see the world fall beneath your feet. Other times it's painfully obvious how fake everything is. Check out the grocery store scene when the entire store literally splits in half. It's like the green screen was done in the 80's. The big event happens while Cusack and co and driving through the thick of it. They drive through buildings, jump obstacles, get covered in human feces. You read that right.

The children cry and are annoying. The older son doesn't seem to respect his dad, he calls him by his first name and not dad. Yet of course, because the world is about to end, he re- evaluates his outlook on his flawed hero of a father and calls him dad. He even risks his life to be with him. The daughter just tries to not wet her bed. The step father is a nice guy, yet for some reason who are told to hate him. The conclusion of his character is sad and a pathetic excuse to get the torn family back together. Am I really ruining anything for you?

Danny Glover is the president...remember the last time Hollywood had a black president, I think there was a giant asteroid heading towards the earth. Is Hollywood trying to tell us that we are doomed the day a black man becomes president. I wonder when that day will come...oops.

A side plot involving rich people being the ones who will be saved is tiresome. The film tries to villainize a rational man. 2012 tries to make you believe that it's a small world, all these people who meet at one point will meet again. This is suppose to be WORLD DESTRUCTION. There is another problem, too many characters to not care about. Are we really suppose to care about George Segal and the conflict with his son that lasts all about 3 minutes?

2012 is a blunder, a disaster of a disaster film. Bigger is not always better. It lacks the science, logic and intelligence it needs to be taken with any credibility. Universal Soldier, Stargate and Independence Day are all entertaining flicks in my mind. Everything since has been crap, let's just name those films off shall we? Godzilla? The Patriot? The Day After Tomorrow? 10,000 B.C. God, I forgot that film even existed. 2012 was a film to see in the theatres for the loud sound and big screen special effects. Now that the theatre time has passed, there is no point in seeing it.

3/10

Day 83: July 22nd, 2010

Rear Window



So Simple and Yet So Effective.

Bart Simpson breaks his leg when the family gets a new swimming pool. He is stuck in his room with a cast on his leg and he is bored out of his mind....oops wrong synopsis. Sub Jimmy Stewart for Bart Simpson and you have your story of Rear Window. L.B. 'Jeff' Jeffries suspects his neighbour has killed his own wife and tries to solve the mystery while stuck in his wheelchair. The premise is pretty simple, yet Hitchcock gives us something more with this film, he gives us exactly what our society craves voyeurism. Even to this day we can't go by without thinking or wanting or actually trying to peak into the lives of others.

Rear Window marks my fourth Hitchcock film I've seen, yet it sneaks into my favourite spot. Is it boring for someone to say that one of the more popular Hitchcock films is currently his favourite? I don't care, I know a good film when I see one and Rear Window is just that. More than 50 years later this film manages to still be relevant today and hold up successfully well in the suspense department. The recent Shia LaBeouf remake Distrubia, while a good thriller, suffers from the technology syndrome. Years from now the film will be dated with that ankle bracelet technology holding Shia in, just like the giant cell phone Zack Morris carries with him everywhere. Rear Window doesn't feel dated and this is credited to Hitchcock and his attention to detail.

I absolutely love, adore and cherish the art direction in this film. How beautiful is the set design? Knowing that they used the basement as part of the set design only heightens my enjoyment of it. The second floor of the apartments was actually the stage floor. Stunning in my opinion. The opening scene giving us a glimpse into the lives of the people who live in the apartments around Stewart is marvelous. We never go into their lives, we just see it from Stewarts (and our) viewpoint. We never leave his room, save for the ending and a scene that involves the death of a dog. Those close ups of the people listening to the lady yelling seem out of place because we immediately jump out of Stewart's room and into the open area. It's alarmingly jarring and seems out of place for no apparent reason.

Hitchcock ones again proves us that a good story (he most certainly had his hand in crafting the story) trumps everything else. How suspenseful can a film be when our hero never leaves his room, hell he never really leaves his wheelchair. Hitchcock manages to pull it off gracefully. It's nice to see where films today get their inspiration from. When the lights in the hallway go out at Stewart's apartment, I thought of No Country For Old Men. Hitchcock truly was the master of suspense.

Grace Kelly is absolutely stunning. I never really cared for the looks of the actresses of the old 50's or 60's. None of them caught my eye, Grace Kelly think is the first one to do so. I don't even think Marilyn Monroe did. Her introduction shot is graceful and most certainly memorable. I can't finish this review without mentioning Thelma Ritter. She was hilarious and everything she did felt so natural. I absolutely loved her character.

Rear Window is more suspenseful today than most thrillers that come to theatres. The little glimpses into the lives of the people around the setting is what really drew me in though, the song writer, Miss Torso, Miss Hearing Aid, and the balcony couple. These are nice little addition from the master himself, Alfred Hitchcock.

8.5/10

Day 82: July 21st, 2010

The Aviator



For some men, the sky was the limit. For him, it was just the beginning.

The Aviator is in one word "Fantastic". It details the life of Howard Hughes, his bizarre obsessions and his love for planes. Leonardo DiCaprio gives a great performances in one of his roles that told us how dedicated he was to his craft. It's when I really started to take notice of him and what he will be giving us in the future. The second film in which Scorsese has used him, and the most dedicated to the role.

Cate Blanchett earns herself a much deserved Academy Award for her performance and the rest of the supporting cast is fleshed out by the likes of John C. Reilly, Kate Beckinsale, Alec Baldwin, Alan Alda, Jude Law and Ian Holm. Just to name a few. Scorsese directs the film with confidence and skill. The film is very ambitious and an interesting film to complete after Gang of New York, probably his most ambitious film to date.

The music, the cinematography, everything is on a grand scale. A very solid effort from everyone involved and Scorsese's attention to detail and his dedication to the craft is marvelous. The film is a little on the long side and seems to go through predictable stages in Hughes life, even for those unfamiliar with him. The Aviator is indeed a great film, but seems to be in the shadows of Scorsese's greater films.

9/10

Day 81: July 20th, 2010

Inception



Your mind is the scene of the crime.

In trying not to give too many plot details away, I'll sum up the story of Inception with this. A team of people use a device to go into another person's dream. While there they can do things such as extract information, or even plant ideas. That's about as far as I will go; it's the basic plot of the film that most people already know. Much like District 9 and Avatar (at least for me) the less you know about the film, the better.

Christopher Nolan, with Inception, has created a masterpiece. It's hard for me to heap such praise on the guy who has a small film resume under his name, but he has, in my opinion, 3 films that will never be forgotten. Memento, The Dark Knight and now Inception are all films that I hold in high regard. It's funny, right after The Dark Knight, I heard Nolan was planning on making Inception, instead of a third Batman film, I was a little ticked off. I wanted another Batman film, not some side project. It's ironic that I enjoyed Inception more than The Dark Knight.

Inception is a multi-layered film that has so much going on that it might seem intimidating. Yet, you never lose sense of where you are. Nolan is able to pull off this feat remarkably. People go into multiple dreams and different levels and the viewer never loses a sense of where. Nolan shows nothing but confidence and creativity in this film. It's not afraid to challenge you a little bit. I'm not saying it dives into deep philosophical issues here, but it is enough juice to get people thinking.

Inception had me giddy and smiling all the way through. It's very hard for a film to do that. There was one scene in particular, where I was not only in amazement in how utterly and ridiculously awesome it was, but how simple it was to achieve. The scene is the hallway fight sequence in which gravity no loner seems to be an issue. The simplest form is used, moving and twisting the set, and Nolan makes it look ten times better than anything else we've seen in recent years.

Nolan creates films that people really need to wrap their heads around. He is the next big thing. Hell, he is the big thing. He is the hottest director right now that has yet misstep. Nolan and his brother have created an original piece of art here, a crime caper if you will, that involves going into the subconscious. The creativity is off limits, as seen by the section of the city overlapping itself. I loved how they have taken things that you feel and think about while dreaming and incorporated it in to the film. In order to wake up you need a kick, that feeling that you're falling. I've felt it and I love that they have incorporated things like that.

There is a lot to talk about with Inception, even the ending, which in my mind was Nolan having a little bit of fun. Obviously that question would pop up sometime in the film, but Nolan knows not to go that route. I think it's there simply to get people talking while he laughs at his own little joke. In any event, I'll through my two cents in by simply saying I'm an optimist.

I hear that people aren't that big a fan of Ellen Page. I think she did fine holding her own against DiCaprio, who shines yet again much like his tortured role in Shutter Island. My one complaint about her is that she was a bit intrusive of characters and their dreams. The film feels a little bit like a Batman reunion. Michael Cain has a small role, but Cillian Murphy and Ken Watanabe both have integral parts to the story. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who I couldn't stand on 3rd Rock From The Sun, is quickly becoming a favourite of mine. Marion Cotillard has an interesting role and her performance, other than DiCaprio, has the most emotional depth to it. Every single addition to the cast is a perfect mold for this world.

I really loved this film, for it's running time, it never drags. It's always interesting and engaging the viewer. It doesn't slow down to explain things, and doesn't really need to. It might seem confusing at first, but like Ellen Page's character, the viewer is a quick learner. Inception is the best film of this year and another achievement that Nolan can be extremely proud of. I like that it's an original idea and it seems to be doing well, we need more films like Inception.

9.5/10

Day 80: July 19th, 2010

Who Framed Roger Rabbit.



It's the story of a man, a woman, and a rabbit in a triangle of trouble.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit mixes the world of animation and live action effortlessly, what makes it even more respectable is how well it holds up compared to recent flicks like Looney Tunes: Back in Action.

Zemeckis pushes the envelope and continues to today, or at least tries to. His films seem to lack the heart and soul of his earlier works. With Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Zemeckis blends old school film noir detective stories with a looney stylized world in which the character live.

Bob Hoskins is the alcoholic detective who must solve the case of....who framed roger rabbit. He does a wonderful job in the role and acts opposite an imaginary character with ease. Roger Rabbit himself is a zany character that is in love with Jessica Rabbit, a busty bombshell of a character with flowing red hair. She is of course the femme fatale. What's a film without a villain? Christopher Lloyd as Judge Doom is creepy and effective. Without a doubt he will give chills to your bones. His distaste for toons is about as villainous as you can get.

Their are numerous winks and nods to old school cartoon characters. What other film can you see Daffy and Donald duck battle each other? The toon world is a great way to show creativity and the crew make sure they use their opportunity to do so. This film is great for both kids and adults and is to this day, a classic.

I highly recommend Who Framed Roger Rabbit to anyone looking for a good story, interesting characters and great entertainment. The film is not only funny, but a great mystery waiting to be unraveled. Check it out.

8/10

Day 79: July 18th, 2010

Unrivaled.



The best fighter in the world works two jobs. The only problem... he doesn't know he's the best

Wait, what? That's the tagline?

If no one here has heard of this film, I don't blame you. It's a direct to dvd flick that scrapes the bottom of the barrel. There is not one shred of originality in this crap and it's sad. Why is it sad? Why did I watch it? These questions can be answered with these three words. I'm In It.

Oh sweet Matt, you're in this movie? Yes I am, but don't go out rushing to rent or buy this film. First of all, it's not worth the price tag and second, I'm only an extra in the background of the main fight. You see me when you see a cut away to the crowd. If you didn't know me, you wouldn't notice. If I were to point myself out to you, you'd see me in glimpses here and there because of my white shirt and sunglasses on my head.

I would honestly rather tell you about my time there then try to review this film. So I will. It was shot in my hometown, we got free pizza and a t-shirt that we were suppose to return and no, we did not get paid. I would honestly point you to view the trailer before I ever say see the film. I'm in the trailer too. In fact, if that is too much, I'll post a screen cap of it. Save everyone the headache.



So I'm the guy in the light shirt on the far left side of the picture. My right arm in a slight, pumping of the fist motion. Brilliant right?

So the film, yeah, unrivaled. It's crap. The director's other film that I have seen Ham & Cheese, is barely watchable as well. That film only got noticed because of the comedians attached. This one has UFC fighters, who cannot act for the life of them. The lead male and the lead bad guy are the two stand outs who should stick to being beaten in the head rather than mugging for the camera.

Pointless nudity in the first 20 minutes, left right and centre. For what purpose? Who knows. He works at a strip club. The guy owes money to some dangerous guys, wow, original there. He can't pay and is threatened. Boom, time for opportunity to come up. The champ is giving an unknown fighter the chance to be discovered. Is it his time to rise up and silence all the nay-sayers? Can a nobody defeat a somebody? Have I seen this film before, but with boxing? Unrivaled is a poor mash-up of Rocky and The Wrestler.

The script is amateur, as is everything else that accompanies this film. The film looks like a music video, so it's not all cheap. There are some nice cinematography spots, but as a whole the film never leaps out at you. The best feature this film has going for it is the soundtrack, which is surprisingly good. Yet there is the problem, I don't go to movies to listen to music.

3/10

Day 78: July 17th, 2010

The Rocky Horror Picture Show




Another Kind Of Rocky.

If you'd had said that I would love a film that involved song and dance numbers, a character who cross dresses and Susan Sarandon, I'd call you crazy. Yet here I am, reviewing the Rocky Horror Picture Show. The craziest film that gets you singing along. I had the great opportunity to see this in the theatre once for a midnight showing. It was a blast.

Brad (asshole) and Janet (slut) have car trouble and take refuge in the Frankenstein Castle. While there, they run into some Transylvanians and a mad doctor, Dr. Frank-n-Futer. He is creating his masterpiece, Rocky. The film blends horror, sci/fi, comedy, musical, camp, and thrills in one unforgettable package. The moment those lips appeared on the screen singing the opening number, Science Fiction + Double Feature, I knew I would like this film.

I was wrong, I loved this film.

Riff Raff, my favourite character, is played by Richard O'Brien. Half of the creative team behind this piece. The most iconic character in musical films, in my opinion, is played by Tim Curry. In an unforgettable role as Frank-n-Futer. The film has catchy songs, every single number I seem to like. Of course I have my favourite, but there is not one song that I can't stand. A rare thing for me and musicals.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show is a hard film to sell to people. It might make them uncomfortable to watch, but I love it every time I see it. It's campy for sure and it knows it. People didn't get that back when it was released, but they did once it played to the midnight crowd. It holds the record for longest film release for theatres, because it's still going.

8/10

Day 77: July 16th, 2010

Taxi Driver



On every street in every city, there's a nobody who dreams of being a somebody.

Scorsese has numerous films that I love and adore, Taxi Driver is one of them, not surprisingly. Is there any other lonely psychopathic character quite like Travis Bickle? I don't think so. It's easy to use words like brilliant, powerful and classic for this flick, so let's use those.

Taxi Driver is indeed a classic, it's hard hitting New York underbelly is dirty and raw. The film grabs you by the throat and doesn't let go until the explosive ending. No neat trick here, no special effects to heighten the tension, just like the city it is depicted in, the violence is raw and real. Travis Bickle unleashes terror in the climax and guess what, bullet don't fly off of him. He's not some lone gunman hero that is un-killable. He's no Terminator or Rambo. He's a man.

DeNiro, teaming up with Scorsese, is a powerhouse. This lonely and depressed man has dark thoughts, he is one person in a city of millions. The script paints the picture vividly, so well that Scorsese is easily able to paint that picture onto film. This movie needed to be filmed on film, if it were done today and were done with digital, it would never get the same feeling.

It is indeed an American classic and is still talked about to this day. It's Scorsese most depressing film. It also gave us that memorable line in the mirror that is parodied time and time again. Do yourself a favour, if you love film and want to experience it. Taxi Driver is a good place to start.

9/10

Day 76: July 15th, 2010

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.



Best film of 2004 and a personal favourite of mine.

Yes, I love this film. It grabbed me in such a way that I cannot really describe. For a film about love and loss, it had me from the starts. The fact that it is unconventional makes me smile with glee. Eternal Sunshine is a beautiful and heartfelt film that is depressing as hell and a marvel to watch. I cannot heap enough praise on this film.

After a bad break up, Clementine decides to erase the memory of Joel, completely. This is possible at Lacuna, Inc. Joel finds this out, which is an uncommon thing for the company and he wants to same procedure. They agree to do so and we enter the surreal world of Joel's mind as he lives the good and bad memories of his time with Clementine.

Written by Charlie Kaufman and directed by Michel Gondry, this is a match made in heaven. The filming style of Gondry flows beautifully with the writing and the weird and quirky story here. Very few instances of the use of CGI, Gondry shows us the imagination and creativity are always a way to get things done. The film is an inspiration in ways to look outside the box and find solutions to problems. The indie way he made this film gives it a feel as if you are there with them. As I mentioned before, Kaufman wrote the script, it's a beautiful mess. Joel's memory is being erased, but he finds himself wanting to keep certain ones, the good ones. He fights for his chance to remember and this is where the film gets strange...-r.

Jim Carrey gives his best performance to date and Kate Winslet is on top of her game as the ever changing Clementine. For a film that is emotionally draining at times, I find myself wanting to watch it again as soon as it's over. Don't get me started on the music, it's serene and eerie. A beautifully constructed emotional piece to accompany a strong story and visuals. The film gets me thinking of what I would do if this technology existed, or what my girlfriend would do. I ask her and others exactly what the tagline does....Would you erase me?

10/10

Day 75: July 14th, 2010

Big Trouble In Little China



Feel pretty good. I'm not, uh, I'm not scared at all. I just feel kind of... feel kind of invincible.

...and boy did Kurt Russell feel invincible during that scene. A quick listen to the commentary track on the dvd is a pleasant surprise.

Truck driver Jack Burton, played by long time friend and collaborator of Carpenter, Kurt Russell, arrives in Chinatown and agrees to help out an old friend. But his old friend's fiancee is kidnapped, and this leads the pair down a mythical and dangerous road.

This isn't my favourite John Carpenter film, nor is it my favourite John Carpenter/Kurt Russell collaboration. Yet, it is still one hell of a fun and entertaining film. The film moves at an incredible pace and is never short on action. John Carpenter is responsible for the better half of the cheesy 80's. Mostly in his horror genre, which I am a fan of. After all, he is the master of terror, right? Yet, Big Trouble In Little China is such an odd film for him to take on that it makes a perfect fit. Does that make sense? No? Oh well.

Russell and Carpenter are great together, you can feel the chemistry between the two, even though one is always behind the camera. Russell gives us his wise ass shtick as Burton and the dialogue is great for this character. Russell makes one bad ass character here to go along with his Snake Plissken, another character that involves Carpenter.

Big Trouble In Little China is funny, action packed and is a joy to watch. It's absurdity adds to the level of cheese and awesomeness. Iro threw this on my list to watch when I did this last time, better late than never right?

8/10

Day 74: July 13th, 2010

Mystery Team



There's something fishy going on down at the sardine factory! I think it's fish!

Every so often you'd give a certain film an extra point here or there because you either love the people who do it, or respect the way they did it. Mystery Team gets some extra love from me on both of these accounts. Derrick Comedy is a crude sketch team that I find hilarious. One of them is better known for his role as Troy on Community. He also won an Emmy for writing on the hit show 30 Rock. Now he's taking that little bit of fame and helping to push this film get the recognition it deserves.

Mystery Team is a comedy that sends up those old detective film noir style films. It involves three guys who are still young at heart and in mind, solving mysteries. Like who took a bite out of old lady hummings pie, or who stole little lucy's bike. But when one girl comes by their booth and asks for their help, they find themselves way over their heads. She asks them to find out who killed her parents. A much shorter way of putting it would be a bunch of kids try to solve an adult mystery.

The material is well written, some jokes miss here and there, but a lot of it is funny. As I mentioned before, some of their stuff is crude, so expect it here. Having to fish out a ring out of a toilet full of chunky things I don't want to describe because a stripper peed it out in there....is just one scene that pops into mind. Most of the comedy comes from the dialogue interactions of the three main characters. Jason, Duncan and Charlie, all of them writer's of the film as well.

Shot on a low budget, the film looks pretty good for what it's worth. It's obviously no Hollywood fare, but it is professional enough for people to sit through it and not really notice. Again, all done on their own terms, so extra respect points there.

The script itself movies along nicely and if you're a fan of the genre, then you'll appreciate how this one unfolds. They poke fun at themselves numerous times so it is never to be taken seriously and yes, the film is a little predictable. Yet, for me it is forgivable, because they are poking fun at that genre and that genre always has those types of twists in the story.

Give this film a look, it might surprise you a little. If you don't like the trailer, or have no interest after watching it, then I would think the feature is not for you.

7.5/10

Day 73: July 12th, 2010

Election



Reading, Writing, Revenge.

A high school teacher's life spirals out of control when he complicates things for one student by entering another into the presidential election. Ferris Bueller plays the teacher. The legally blonde Elle Woods is Tracy Flick, the overachieving girl running for president and Chris Klein is the one student tricked into running against her. Alexander Payne cleverly uses the high school setting and antics to poke fun at the political system that runs countries today.

Election has many things going for it. For one, it's incredibly funny. Everyone plays their roles seriously that it's hilarious. Witherspoon is Tracy Flick, without a doubt, my favourite role she has done and her best performance to date. Her goodie attitude is just a shell for her willingness to do anything to get ahead.

Broderick is great as the teacher people seem to hate, yet I oddly found myself on his side a lot of times. Sure, he makes some horrible decisions, but you feel sorry for the character because things simply just don't go his way. Finally Klein, an actor I hate because he has no range, here is actually enjoyable. His out of the loop state of mind is fun and he becomes the enemy of Flick without even knowing it.

Election has smart writing and is well directed by Payne. I find no faults in the film from a technical stand point, it flows well, hits the right tones at the right times and I find myself wanting to watch it every time it's on. Election seems to be one of those films that not many people know about or simply think it's not good. But those who have seen it give it praise, well deserved praise. It might not seem like the type of flick you'll enjoy, but give it a chance and I'm sure it will impress.

Pick Flick.

8.5/10

Day 72: July 11th, 2010

The Fifth Element



It Mu5t Be Found.

The Fifth Element is my second favourite Luc Besson film and one of his more ambitious projects. It deals with a taxi driver in the future, one day a package literally falls into the backseat of his cab. This package is a woman, a beautiful woman that he must protect because she is the fifth element. Oh, and the world is going to end.

This film is fun, plain and simple. It's a sci/fi outing that doesn't take itself seriously and has quite the impressive cast. Bruce Willis does his tough guy routine here with bits of comedic relief. Think John McClane in space, that might be how he was sold on the film. Supporting roles go to Ian Holm as Father Vito Cornelius, a man who knows a lot about the fifth element, but doesn't have the brawn to keep it protected. Chris Tucker as Ruby, a celebrity that likes to talk and talk and talk. Something that all Chris Tucker roles have in common is that he has a big mouth. Here, it's not irritating like in Rush Hour 3. Milla Jovovich is the fifth element, an orange haired female ass kicker who looks great while doing it. This role is where she got noticed.

The villain is played by non other than Gary Oldman himself. The guy is a great villain and his take on the evil Zorg is both humourous and sad. He doesn't really strike fear into your heart, but you know the man in dangerous. His outfit is ridiculous, as is almost everyone else's attire in this film, yet it doesn't distract from his evil doings.

The film is almost the complete opposite of what many sci/fi films are like, in terms of presentation and look. This future is bright and colourful, not the neon glows of Blade Runner, but the bright yellows of taxi cabs or the watery blues of opera singing aliens. This is one of the reasons why this film stands out for me, it's so vibrant and cheerful, even in it's violence.

I dig The Fifth Element and it's a great film it sit back and enjoy watching. It juggles both sci/fi and action very well and is quite funny at times. The visual effects, while not stunning by todays standards, fit perfectly well for this type of film. It's effects reflect well on the reality that is created for the film. Oh and one more thing I need to say about this flick...it also stars Luke Perry.

8/10

Day 71: July 10th, 2010

Natural Born Killers



The Media Made Them Superstars.

You can always make a bad movie from a great script and you can always make a good movie from a bad script. Both are hard to do, because...

A: If you have a really great and tightly written script, it should be hard for the director to screw it up.

B: If the script is wooden, full of plot holes and overall poorly written, you have no material to work with.

Natural Born Killers is somewhat of a conundrum to me, personally. I love the script and the idea that Stone wanted to accomplish. So the two should go hand in hand, but the final product is some kind of acid trip that a student filmmaker with a budget would produce. It's got no sense of direction, it weaves in and out of every possible direction and film stock.

Natural Born Killers is in your face and brutal with it's message. Mission accomplished Mr. Stone. Let me ask you this though, even though you've accomplished your goal, does it make it a good/successful film. Successful in your eyes, yes, because you've invoked some kind of emotion out of the viewer. Good? That's highly debatable. Natural Born Killers has the underlining of a good film, the overcoat is what is disturbing.

This film gives me headaches. This is surprisingly, the third time I've seen it. One was for school though, which ignited a hot debate. The class was virtually split down the middle of like/hate it. There was no one in the middle. I think NBK is a perfect example of one of those types of movies whether you love it or hate it. I wouldn't go as far as saying I hate it, but I'm definitely not found of it.

Woods is great and Lewis has her trailer trash look down pat. Her performance is annoying, yet perfect for the character. The film itself starts off really well, sets a tone that I expected to be followed throughout. Stone enters into some dark comedy bits, cartoon animation, documentary/reality television/horror/everything. The film literally gave me a headache the first time I watched it because it is so disjointed. Yet here I am watching it again for a third time. Is Stone secretly a genius? Or am I a glutton for punishment?

The film is something to watch though, at least once. For anyone interested in film, listen to Stone's commentary on this film. Everything he did he had a reason behind it. There is a reason there is close to 18 different film formats present here. Take it as a quick film lesson, for what not to, or to do. Which ever way you look at it. His ideas are good, his presentation is there, but it's all a mess. He tries way too much for a film that doesn't really call for it.

6/10