  There's one scene early on where 2 children escape a quarantined safe zone that's constantly being watched by armed guards. It's no great spoiler that this eventually leads to disaster. There's another scene where a janitor walks feely into a heavily guarded laboratory that is known to have an infected inside. It's these sort of writing mistakes that kept me from soaking up much enjoyment from this terrible sequel to one of the best zombie films ever made. I don't know the story behind why writer/director Alex and Danny didn't want to team up again for this one, but the lack of their excellent craftmanship definitely left this IP in a bad spot (at least for a long time). The sequel has a bigger budget, more explosions, more deaths, and much less heart. I'll admit there's a few decent action sequences that were fun to watch but that's really all this has going for it. However, there's a light at the end of this zombie infested tunnel, finally here in 2025. 28 Years Later... which I am very excited about.
0 Comments
  There's one scene early on where a survivor named Mark recounts the story of how he lost his family during the outbreak to Jim (Cillian Murphy), who moments before discovered his parents corpses. Mark was explaining how his parents brutally died so that Jim could comprehend the peace his own parents experienced in death - committing suicide peacefully in bed at home. You see, Jim was lucky enough to have been in a coma the first 28 days as the rage infection spread across London and beyond. But he's no Rick Grimes... and these infected are no walking dead. They are all runners! What I love about this movie is it's ability to capture both the insanity and ferocity of the infected along with the human experience of surviving the days after outbreak. A lot changes in just 28 days and I think that's an excellent theme this story explores - just how far has humanity gone in this time? How many people are left? Why does the soundtrack go so hard? As all great apocalypse stories seem to stress, it's the humans who you really have to look out for in these dark times. This films 3rd act might be the most blood curdling depiction of that theme yet. Writer Alex Garland and director Danny Boyle explore this and much more in this grounded zombie experience - both gory and profound, and even today manages to be one of the best of it's genre.
  It had been nearly a decade since I last visited City of God. I described this to my friend as a brutal and hard to watch film about kids with guns dealing drugs. To my surprise, the experience was not hard to watch at all and in fact it was very entertaining. I think you can contribute this to the film's soundtrack, which has a heartbeat of funky samba dance music. So despite what you're watching being violent and terrible, the music makes it go down easy. There are a few moments where the music stops and it lets the emotion hit you. For instance, this one sobering scene where a man buries his cheating wife alive in the floor of their home. The music stops so you can hear his whimpering sorrow. But then it turns right back on! We mainly follow 3 characters Rocket, L'il Dice, and Benny. All of them grew up together and somehow get wrapped up in the drug trade in Rio De Janeiro. It's a heartbreaking true story that demands to be watched and you should. This has held it's place in the top 25 highest rated movies on IMDB for a long time, and in my opinion it's earned that spot. The young actors are phenomenal, the cinematography matches the energy of the score, and it doesn't shy away from the brutality of this real place in time. Its a movie that feels alive. When you turn it on you are no longer a viewer but a participant. Be careful.
  "Can you wrangle me up some Ding-Dongs, darlin'?"
The unnamed President (cough, Bush, cough) delivers the funniest line in the film. Only dropped in one scene to somewhat explain why the secretary of defense (Jon Voight) is running his country - because he's too busy eating ding dongs. There's apparently some low-key political satire going on in this film that side tracks from the namesake Auto-Bots getting their deserved screen time. Just like Bush orders ding dongs, I think Michael Bay created a film that very much represents those ding dongs. A barely digestible snack with no real substance. I liked two things about this movie; first off I recognize that Shia LaBeouf is a great talent. He brings a ton of charisma to an unremarkable script. Secondly, the last 30 minutes worth of action. If this movie was 90 minutes I probably would have liked it much better. However, just like those ding dongs, it's stuffed full of shit. Did we need Transformers to be a political satire? Did we need a GI-Joe side cast? If that was the direction why was this not an actual Transformers + GI-Joe mash up? Hasbro certainly had the rights to do that. I had a hard time revisiting this movie and I'm opting out of continuing the series re-watch. I know it doesn't get much better from here. If I've offended you, I am sorry. Let me end by saying I was never a fan of transformers as a child. In middle school I thought these movies were fun, but I was never in love with them. So it's very possible that these are just not for me, and if you enjoy them than I am glad they serve some audience. Some people really do love Ding Dongs.   "You see, my momma was banging the milk man."
In the end of the movie, Will's kid is swimming in the pool and retelling his grandfathers stories to his friends. His grandfather's legend lives on. As the credits rolled I couldn't help but feel a slight bit of jealousy. I don't have any great stories of my grand parents, who are both deceased. I then started thinking about how things have changed since this movie released. Stories aren't told as much anymore, at least not real (or not so real) stories from families or friends. There's too many distractions in our time. I would tell Will, the son of our protagonist Edward, to relish those stories. Even when he's heard them a thousand times, because I wish I had those to cherish. Tim Burton's film is an easy watch with gorgeous visuals and lots of fantasy, which you'd expect from a Burton film. Ewan McGregor leads a colorful cast starring Steve Buscemi, Danny DeVito, Helena Bonham Carter, and even a young Miley Cyrus. Everyone plays their part in recreating the bigger than life memories that Edward tirelessly shares with everyone he meets. The script is amusing and funnier than I remembered, but ultimately it's a bit hollow. The best parts of this movie are the stories being played out and the spectacle of it all. When it comes time to wrap up the story there isn't much of an emotional punch. Like Will, we never really come to understand the heart Edward outside of the things he's done. Still I found enjoyment in this film and it's a reminder to listen extra closely next time a relative or loved one tells a story. In the end that's how we all live on.   I'll never forget being twelve years old and watching this movie. It was a groundbreaking experience. The oracle's breasts were one of the first pairs of boobies I'd ever seen (I was very sheltered). I spent months dreaming of that scene and fantasying about this dreamlike movie. More than a decade later and revisiting this movie is a lot less dreamlike, except Snyder's visual style which manages to maintain that description. Otherwise, I was frustrated. It wasn't as awesome as I remembered. There was a lot more talking this time and boring exposition at that. The scenes that fake politics could have been discarded completely and nothing would be lost. Half of this film has the energy of George Miller's Mad Max. It's intoxicating - fueled by blood and sweat. If only Snyder had the balls to do what Miller has and let the experience be singularly driven by the chaos of battle. There's also an over abundance of voice over. While David Wenham's performance is fantastic, it is a lazy tactic used to explain moments instead of allowing the audience to simply experience the moment. I know that sounds nick picky but it really becomes annoying during the movie. If you're like me and you remember this movie being super duper awesome. Do yourself a favor and stick with the nostalgia.
  About 45 minutes into the film dentist and bounty hunter Dr. King Shultz tells a German fairy tale to a recently freed slave Django. This fairy tale is about a brave warrior recusing a princess from a dangerous castle guarded by a dragon. This fairy tale sets up the rest of our story as Django prepares to venture into Candy Land, the 4th biggest cotton plantation in Mississippi, to rescue his wife Broomhilda. Embodying the spirit of that brave warrior from the tale. More than that, Tarantino is tipping his hat at the nature of this odd script. "Django Unchained" is a fairy tale. In the beginning of the movie Dr. Shultz finds Django in a deep dark forest. How does he know where to find Django? Are we to believe it's simply coincidence? If you're like me you never questioned that fateful meet up. Reviewer Roger Ebert challenged my perspective of this film by posing that question. Dr. Shultz is the fairy God mother of this fairy tale. Being exactly where he needs to be at all times and always knowing where his targets are without explanation. Even more importantly, he keeps us entertained until the real plot starts and the fairy tale meets it's bloody climax. Django is a film meant to entertain. It's a dark comedy about a slave rising up and becoming the fastest gun in the south. The violence and brutality towards slaves only makes the revenge sweeter. The acting, soundtrack, and visuals are expertly crafted by talented individuals. Christopher Waltz being a standout as the charismatic Dr. Shultz.
  Miyazaki has never presented a boring world on screen. His legendary skills and the work of the amazing team at Studio Ghibli are reason enough to experience all of their animation. Spirited Away and Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind are two titles I'll always remember and revisit often. Howl's Moving Castle also has such notoriety and in some ways it's deserved. The work of the English dub cast was incredible. Howl's castle is a memorable sight that I almost felt wasn't explored enough. I was excited for every twist and new character. There's so much to take in and then it ended, without ever really grasping my emotions. I believe this has a lot to do with Sophie's character and how her story plays into this amazing world. Sophie is cursed at the beginning of the film and immediately leaves her home out of shame. She is then swept into Howl's story by chance. Howl is a powerful wizard during a time when powerful wizards are being called to battle. However, Howl doesn't want to fight. We're given snippets of lore but ultimately Sophie is the main character and we only witness what she does. There seemed to be so much more ambition beyond the scope of Sophie's plot line, which was the weakest aspect for me. I'm not saying the film is a disappointment because I did enjoy it and I do recommend it. I just wanted so much more than I was given. Almost like I was cheated out of the real story that we only see develop in the background. It's just that Sophie isn't interested in war.   Don't let the missing half a star bother you at all. If I'd had the pleasure of watching this film as a child I'm sure this delightfully dark tale of wizards would live rent free in my head with a five star rating. Harry Potter wasn't a story I was allowed to watch as kid. I'm 24 and just now watching it with my family over the holidays. Yes, I've seen it before one or twice but it hit home this time around. Even a room of grown adults still had a blast with this classic. It's such a fun world to exist in and it's presentation is flawless. It's like a Lord of the Rings kids meal. It's dark and scary, but only enough to keep all ages curious without scaring the children (to death). Potter is a character you can't help but root for. He's a clever twist on the chosen one trope fantasy loves to abide by. We know he's special, has strong magic, and his parents were famous (and left him tons of money). We just don't know what his place in the story is yet. The mystery is welcome as the plot dips into the story of the Sorcerer's Stone, which keeps the mystery alive while providing more questions than answers. When the film ended it was hard not to put the next disc in and keep the marathon going all night.
  Growing up I played enough 007 games featuring Pierce Brosnan's James Bond to consider him the one and only. Even though I was only 10 years old for the release of Casino Royale, I somehow felt like they were ruining something sacred to me. So I avoided the series, as my love for classics grew with my age, and I never got around to watching them until now. I'm now 24 and can admit I was missing out as a teenager. I could have learned a lot from Daniel Craig's Bond, who's cool and suave but more importantly human and emotional. I'm not a fan of blockbluster action flicks or narcissistic assholes. I expected this to be both of those things and to my surprise this embodied neither. The pieces of action are fun and well choreographed and the finer moments are acted with sincerity and beautiful landscapes in the background. I'm very excited to continue watching the anthology, which I'm now glad I purchased!   My favorite scene in this film features high schooler Frank (DiCaprio) who takes advantage of a fellow bully by pretending to be the substitute French teacher at his very own school. It's his first day so no one knows any better. He forces the dumb jock bully, who pushed him in the hallway, to read in front of the class. It's a funny moment. That is until the actual substitute shows up and is also fooled by this gig. She's an older lady who traveled across the city to make a small check and now she's leaving empty handed. Frank and his gig are good, but someone else has to pay the cost. Just like all the other people Frank Abagnale Jr. will fool in his next few years of life as a real fake. Frank Jr is the reason we have tight regulation in banking, air travel, and even in the medical field. He smartly found his way through the loopholes that allowed him to benefit from these professional careers without ever being trained. Unfortunately, this overly long film doesn't make forging checks any more interesting than it sounds. At it's heart it plays out like a PG-13 Wolf of Wall Street. Frank finds his loopholes, he gets tons of cash, has sex with a few beautiful ladies, and then the chase begins. Only this story highlights the life of the honest and hard working FBI agent played by Tom Hanks as a stark contrast with the life of a poser. I just didn't think Hank's character is very interesting. He has one good knock-knock joke and that's it. Otherwise, his character feels like the plot device he really is. He simply helps move Frank to the next part of his sometimes interesting story. My biggest issue with this film however is how it treats women. They have absolutely no strength in this story at all. By the time Amy Adams pathetic character is introduced I was sick of the portrayal of weak women. In this way, this film really shows it's age. I revisited this film because I had fond memories of DiCaprio and Hanks working against each other and they have a few great moments together. After this visit though, I think I may be able to put this one to the side for good. It's not a bad film but it's not an especially good one either.
  John Nash lived until 2015 and his life meant a great deal for both the world of higher education and for those struggling with schizophrenia. Outside of this film I didn't know much about him and I'm grateful for this experience which educates audiences about this man. Unfortunately, I don't think this film does a very good job of relaying what makes him so important. He's a genius. We come to understand this fact early in the film but I still couldn't tell you what he did as a mathematician. Even though it's the primary focus of the first act of this film, or so you think it is. Like many big releases of the 2000s, this film tries to be too many things. It strives to be a drama, romance, and even a thriller with a big twist. I think at the heart it's a fine romance film and those are the scenes I appreciated the most. Jennifer Connelly is the best thing on screen for the first half. Her presence is spectacular. Until the second half of the film when the script slows down finally allowing Russell Crowe a moment to act, then he becomes a fine match for Connelly on screen. Overall, it's the second half of this film that really nails it. The first half is bogged down by mathematical babble that isn't explained and a few scenes that serve no greater purpose than setting up the film's twist. By the end, after Nash's great speech, I became a blubbering mess. Though if this film was about a fictional character I don't think it would be as rewarding. Is that cheating? I'm not sure. There are not many 2000's films I'd want a remake of but this would be one of them. Nash's struggle with schizophrenia is important to remember and I think this story could be told in better ways.
  The biggest injustice of my childhood was missing out on Studio Ghibli films. Surely, my media intake would have went a different direction if I'd witnessed at a young age such imaginative and thought-provoking stories like Spirited Away. This is the very definition of a film for all ages. I'm now twenty-four writing this review after experiencing it for the first time. I've seen many Ghibli films but this one managed to evade me until recently. My expectations have never been so generously met. This must be the most beautiful animation with a hand-drawn foundation that I've ever seen. I was impressed in almost every frame and I fell prey to an overwhelming amount of visual content that I couldn't possibly indulge all in one viewing. This is a masterpiece that will require an annual re-watch. I want to witness every inch of every frame and see what other stories I can find outside of the main one. Though the story of 10 year old Chihiro working in a bathhouse for strange spirits, while trying to rescue her mother & father, is a story I'll cherish each time. What impresses me most though is the amount of love put into this film. All the extra details that artists spent hours upon hours creating and sowing into even the smallest corner of a frame... What magnificent dedication to this artform. I love it.
  Looking back on The Hangover after a decade of comedies failing to achieve what this film did, was honestly a really fun time. 2007-2009 were the golden years for comedies; Superbad, Pineapple Express, Forgetting Sarah Marshall. As a pastors kid unable to watch R rated films, I missed out on more talked about movies those few years than I did my whole childhood. Comedies played by different rules during those times and if we're being honest a lot of these films would be canceled if releasing today. Though I believe appreciation is still due. All the films I named including The Hangover make me laugh a lot. There's a lot of jokes I just didn't get as a teenager that I can now appreciate. Though in this case there's more jokes targeted at 13 year old's than their is intelligent viewers, but that's okay. It keeps me laughing and paying attention for most of it's screen time and that's just about all I'm asking for here. The Hangover may not be my favorite from the golden years but it's awesome to see these 3 guys back together.
  I won't waste time describing this films famous narrative device or even discussing the plot of the film. Chances are you've see it already. There's no great mystery to unravel or intelligent screenplay to analyze here. This film for a lot of people, especially Americans, was an introduction to India. The best thing this film does is bridge the old India and the new India together through Jamal (Dev Patel). Jamal has seen a lot. His life experience helps him become a millionaire. Though the title itself spoils that ending. He lives through the transitioning period in which India developed from a slum into a global business hub. Just as Jamal goes from rags to rajah so does India itself. The performances are great all around, the cinematography captures India through many different lenses, and the pacing is mostly spectacular. There is a few times in the second half of the film where the films energy felt rather insensitive. Displaying tragic violence and splashy entertainment side-by-side is an editing issue and it rubbed me the wrong way. Otherwise, I really enjoyed my revisit to this best picture winner.
|
