A Mid-Summer Night's Update

I know some of you have been wondering (all 6 of you) where I have been over the past few weeks.  Well, best news of this post, I am still alive.  As good of news, I will still keep blogging.  During my absence, I have been looking to change my career path in the field of accounting.  Two weeks ago, I was let go from my job at a small CPA firm.  I have been looking for work almost non-stop for 3 weeks.  While I look, I have put movies on the back burner.  That is about to change.  I am still looking for work but movies are helping me get though these times.  So, while I am not seeing new movies for right now, I am still a Netflix subscriber. 

I am continuing my Deconstructing Sandler series.  My thoughts on "Billy Madison" is about 80-85% finished and I just watched "Happy Gilmore" two nights ago plus I will have "Bulletproof" in the mail tomorrow.

I will also start two new series.  The first is "Best Picture, Backwards".  To simplify, I will be watching all 84 Best Picture Oscar winners in reverse order starting with "The Artist" through "Wings".  Two notes: First, I will be watching "The Godfather" before "The Godfather Part II" and both after I watch "The Sting".  Second, Netflix doesn't have 5 or 6 of the movies available as of right now.  I may skip them or find another means to watch them.

I am also working on "I Can't Believe I've Missed This".  I am making lists of the most glaring omissions to my viewing history.  The list will be from the 2000s, 1990s, 1980s and pre-1979.  The 2000s list will be 10 movies long and the other three will probably be 20 movies long.  I will not list the movies beforehand so you will be surprised.

Thank you for reading my blog!  I am having a blast writing when I get the chance.  Please feel free to leave comments, questions and suggestions.  And please follow me on Twitter: @almostflmcritic (there is no "i" in film)

Double Dose of Bad This Weekend

That’s My Boy

                Famous for fathering a child with a teacher at age 13, Donny (Sandler) is deep in IRS debt and needs to track down his son “Todd” (Samberg) for a made-for-TV event to get the money to get out of debt.

                This is a Sandler movie that is actually funny for a long stretch of time but still has all the little Sandler ticks.  Like the trend these days, the humor veers into the raunchy realm, especially in the very funny second act.  The second act, obviously inspired by The Hangover, revolves around “Todd’s” (there is a reason for the quotation marks) bachelor party with guests including Will Forte, Nick Swardson & Vanilla Ice.  Yes, that Vanilla Ice.

                Unfortunately, the movie isn’t 40 minutes long.  There are another 75 minutes buffering it that range from insomnia-curing to nearly offensive.  Most of Sandler’s trademarks are there: his annoying voice, this time for the entire movie; the deliberate commercialism (count the Budweiser cans & signs); old ladies saying or doing un-ladylike things; the sentimental story with a fake moral; and cringeworthy moments waiting for a laugh.  Add in more cameos than usual plus making the plot a MacGuffin, That’s My Boy is a slightly funnier version of every Sandler movie thus far.

** (out of 5 stars)

Rock of Ages

                Set in an alternative universe where most hair-bands don’t (technically) exist, an aspiring young singer (Hough) meets and falls for and aspiring rocker (Boneta) in 1987 L.A.  They work at a bar run by best friends (Brand & Baldwin).  Meanwhile, the wife of the mayor of L.A. (Zeta-Jones) leads a group of concerned mothers looking to end the evils of rock ‘n roll.  Finally, Arsenal, the biggest band in the world, is playing their last gig at the club before Stacee Jaxx (Cruise) goes solo.

                Director Adam Shankman, most famous for the surprising remake of Hairspray five summers ago, tries with this material, adapted by Justin Theroux, who continues to show me he isn’t funny, but fails miserably.  Shankman tries to go campy but isn’t talented enough on a technical level to do so.  The leads are totally uninteresting and the story is a laboring mess.

                The big names, however, do their best to save this as much as they can.  Balwin & Brand are solid with one fantastic sequence to start the third act.  But the real star is Tom Cruise as the (undiagnosed) legally insane rocker.  There are times where you’d swear Cruise was born to play Jaxx.  Cruise & Malin Akerman, who is wonderful in her small role as well, share one of the most wonderful and steamy scenes you will see in this or any summer.

                Regardless, Rock of Ages is a disaster with the boring leads and messy musical numbers despite the flashes of awesome.  In the end, to quote the closing number, “Oh the movie never ends/it goes on and on and on and on.”

*1/2 (out of 5 stars)

Snow White & the Huntsman

 I do not own the above image.  For entertainment purposes only.  Copyright Universal Pictures.  All Rights Reserved.

In today’s Hollywood environment, you need to be able to do two things: take an idea that has already been done before and put your own spin on it.  How much you change can make or break your project.  You can go the J.J. Abrams’ “Star Trek” path and change one detail that causes a ripple through the backstory but is still effective & interesting.  Or you can rewrite anything that you hate about a few mythical creatures’ identity into your liking and throw a boring love story inside.  That’s right, “Twilight”.

The story of Snow White, for the second time in 2 months, is twisted for our palates.  This time, director Rupert Sanders (first motion picture, per IMDb) and a trio of solo writers ending with Evan Daugherty (first full-length motion picture) take the fairy tale in a darker direction.  Snow White (Stewart) is held prisoner for about a decade by Ravenna, the Evil Queen (Theron).  Before she is to be raped by the queen’s brother Finn, she escapes and runs off to the Dark Forest.  The Evil Queen sends a small army led by the hired Huntsman (Hemsworth) to go retrieve her.

I want to preface this by saying I have never liked Charlize Theron in anything, even Arrested Development.  So to watch her try to impersonate Al Pacino in “The Devil’s Advocate”, which she saw firsthand 15 years ago, was infuriating.  She either enunciated every syllable or screamed at the top of her lungs.  Theron makes the opening 20 minutes nearly impossible to watch.  Kristen Stewart, to her credit, isn’t as terrible as she usually is.  She isn’t helped by the fact that the screenplay has her Snow White play hopscotch with the fine line between heroine & damsel in distress.

There are two fantastic elements to the movie that make it worth attending a matinee.  First, there is a 75 minute sequence after Snow White escapes the castle.  There are sequences involving a troll, a village of intentionally battered women and, best of all, the dwarves.  A special treat awaits for true movie fans with the dwarves.  Second, and best of all, Chris Hemsworth can act.  His character is the most amusing & enjoyable to watch, even if he is only called The Huntsman.  Even with all the visual effects & action sequences in the movie, Hemsworth’s monologue towards the end of the second act gave me the biggest smile.

“SWATH” is better than it has any right to be.  With an Oscar winner & a MTV Movie Award winner who aren’t very effective at all at the center of this movie, this could have been a complete disaster.  But with a fascinating middle, an adequate third act and an actor-making turn by Hemsworth, “SWATH” is a minor surprise.  Now, Hollywood, build a movie around Chris Hemsworth.  And I’m not talking about “Thor 2”.  Maybe something Ryan Gosling said no to?

***1/2 (out of five)

Deconstructing Sandler: Airheads

I do not own the above image.  For entertainment purposes only.  Copyright 20th Century Fox Film Corporation.  All Rights Reserved.

Guitarist/singer Chazz (Brendan Fraser), bassist Rex (Steve Buscemi), & drummer Pip (Adam Sandler) make up The Lone Rangers, the oxymoronically-named band at the center of Airheads.  Chazz spends his days breaking into poorly guarded record labels hoping to catch an exec in a good enough mood to sign trespassing musicians.  Rex works at a toy store terrorizing customers and bosses.  Pip is a less-than-hunky pool boy whose van doubles as the Rangers transportation.  In an act of desperation, the trio decides to break into a radio station to try to finally break through.  Within minutes they have five hostages, including DJ Ian (Joe Mantegna) & station manager Milo (Michael McKean).

Best joke: I laughed once and chuckled three times at the same thing: Michael Richards’ prat falls.  Richards plays the accountant or business manager or something like that trapped in the station.  He has to navigate through an air conditioning crawlspace.  The looks on Richards’ face are priceless, at first.

Worst joke: Well, being a movie this boring, some jokes had to be terrible.  Well, none were memorably terrible, except one speech that can be considered laughably bad.  The assertion by Frasier’s character that non-grunge late ‘80s/early 90s rock is somehow better than The Beatles would have been the funniest joke if he didn’t have a straighter face than in any shot of The Mummy.

Sandler’s character: Sandler is Pip, the drummer.  Pip is third fiddle not only in the band but also in the script.  He is given little to do except for a minor sub-plot explained later.  Also, other than the description above, little is known or explored of Pip.  Sandler actually excels in this, if only because he is relegated to the background.

Love interest: A totally & completely ditzy secretary, Suzzi, played by Nina Siemaszko, who recently had a bit part in Best Picture winner “The Artist”.  Sandler plays dumb, more like complete moron, and gets the girl.  Pet peeve: Why did nearly every early-to-mid 90’s comedy play it safe when it came to sex?  Case in point: Sandler & Suzzi sneak off to bang.  They are caught a few minutes later.  Suzzi is in her bra & skirt.  Sandler is dressed like Flea.  How good could the sex have been?  Lasted five minutes and she was mostly clothed.

Message: If you are a rock band, don’t sell out.   But if you can’t get attention from anyone, invade and hold-up a radio station!  Actually, this movie, unlike most of Sandler’s stuff, doesn’t really have one.  Kinda refreshing, huh?

Overall Impression: Every once in a blue moon, I see a movie that plays before my eyes, affects me in no visible or measurable fashion and then the credits roll.  “Airheads” is just that.  Nothing happening on screen, except the Richards gags above, caused a feeling other than boredom.  I cared for no one.  The conflict that arises in the third act involving Chaz is totally non-dramatic and non-confrontational for anyone who has seen a movie before.  Of course, what do you expect from the director of “Heathers”?

*(out of five)

Deconstructing Sandler: An Introduction

 

                For years I have been wondering: “Why are hard-working American putting down $9 to see Adam Sandler as the same lame character, with the same stupid jokes, with the beautiful actress who is looking for a big paycheck?”  Well, for the next few months I am going to try to examine why.

                Adam Sandler started as a regular cast member on SNL then graduated to feature films, if that is what you want to call them.  Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore made him a star to my generation.  Poop & fart jokes and relatively safe dialogue galore.  While most stars somewhat evolve over time, Sandler believes that an occasional “art” picture is to appease critics and educated audiences.  Sure, Sandler has wonderful Punch Drunk Love but he also has the unbelievably offensive I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry.

                That said, I have decided to watch all of Sandler’s movies.  From Airheads (1993) to this year’s That’s My Son, I will analyze each movie based on not just quality.  I will also look at:

Best Joke: Simple, what joke made me laugh the most.

Worst Joke: Not that simple.  I look for the joke that makes me either cringe or visually angry.

Love Interest: Is this someone who could possibly be attracted to Sandler’s character, physically or emotionally?

Character: Is Sandler’s character lovable, hateful or even really a character at all?

Message: Sandler’s movies are known for their messages.  Is the message relevant and/or earned?

Wish me luck!  Thoughts and prayers would help too!

In Defense of...My Criticism of "The Hunger Games"

I do not own the above image.  For entertainment purposes only.  Copyright (c) Lionsgate Entertainment.  All Right Reserved.

Note #1: I would like to warn you or set everyone reading at ease, I have not read “The Hunger Games”.  I am on about line 100 on my Kindle.  From conversations I have had with those that have, I understand that a majority of my criticism is for the movie only and not specifically for the novel.

Note #2: I go in graphic detail about the final 15-20 minutes of the movie so…SPOILER ALERT!!!  If you haven’t seen it, stop reading, buy a ticket, watch it, then come back.  Then after reading, go see 21 Jump Street.  Seriously.

            Before I begin my lashing of Gary Ross’ adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ “The Hunger Games”, I just want to say that the first hour and a half or so are fantastic.  Ross, using Collins’ own script, is able to show a world and characters full of inequality but not total despair.  Jennifer Lawrence is her usual fantastic self as the heroine Katniss.  Ross showed wonderful attention to detail in his previous live-action films Pleasantville & Seabiscuit and he doesn’t fail here.  The total and complete opposite color schemes of the two completely different yet connected worlds are striking.

Best of all, though, is Ross’ subtle but completely effective and powerful sequence in the immediate prelude and beginning to the Games.  The scoreless sequence allows the audience to reflect on what has happened up to this point and allow the audience to make their own decision as to how to go about these Games and the dire consequences of bad decisions.  Unfortunately, that is where the relating to the characters ends.

From that point on, “The Hunger Games” slowly falters until it ends with a resounding thud.  A thud so loud I think to the bored people in the American Reunion showing heard loud and clear.  How Gary Ross, who helped us love spoiled kids thrown into a 1950’s TV show and three different Depression-era people & a horse, was unable to allow the audience care about a starving teenager and her secret admirer in a game played to the death is relatively simple.

The first problem is the inability to convey that the Games are nothing more than a twisted punishment by the Capitol on the twelve Districts instead of the television extravaganza that the second act perceives it to be.  Think about every time during the Games a scene takes place outside the arena.  There are three types of scenes: the President & the director talking, the director in the control room and Woody Harrelson negotiating with “sponsors”.  What is missing are shots of the audience.  All that is needed are a few scenes of recurring characters, just regular people like the bar patrons or security guards or the guy in the tub like in The Truman Show, just watching the Games and commenting or complaining about the lack of action.

The second problem is the rules to the Games.  I see that the Games over time have become the annual event for the Capitol and its uniquely dressed citizens and the government runs the whole operation.  But, why the rush to end the Games?  Who wants the Games to end a quickly as possible?  The audience?  Since we don’t see them whining and complaining at all, just let the Games continue.  You don’t need to create a super-panther, who kills the “4^th place finisher” off-screen (who has one extraordinarily important role in one critical scene but is never seen in the flesh in almost every other shot of the movie) and can survive an arrow through the neck at point blank range.  And worse yet, they end the Games.

Which leads to my final issue: who is the true enemy of the story?  Is it the Capitol, who oppresses the Districts and commands them to sacrifice two young lives each for entertainment?  Or is it the kids from Districts 1, 2 or 4, who train for the Games and are the most formidable opponents?  Well, it appears to be the latter.  But then why are they not developed?  At all?  We see the final adversary early scowl or something at Peeta but then is given nothing to do until the end when he appears to beg for mercy before being fed to the super-panthers.  He is trained to win or at least survive but he wants out at the end?  This is where I feel character development is most severely lacking: the other 22 competitors are rarely heard from, except Rue of course.

In the end, The Hunger Games succeeds in giving girls someone who they can look up to without having to be stone-faced and emotionless and pathetic.  But what it also does is show what is wrong with Hollywood: bring out the big potential franchises, show a few moments of greatness or perceived greatness then phone the rest of it in.  But, at least with The Hunger Games, there are plenty of things to love, if you can remember them an hour or so later.