Movie Review-Crazy Heart

 Movie Review-Crazy Heart

Charles Bukowski morphs into Dewey Cox in this denunciation of the evils of paralyzing drunkenness
It was announced last Tuesday that four time Oscar nominee Jeff Bridges has copped a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actor for his work in first time director Scott Cooper’s latest comedy/drama “Crazy Heart.”  Bridges plays bad Blake, the country singer with a heart full of soul and a belly full of Jack Daniels.  Trying to destroy himself with drink before the public forgets about him entirely, Blake has the peddle to the metal on a dead end road when he runs into the one person who just might turn him around.
Have we seen this before?  Rather, have we seen this before more than a thousand times?  Yes we have, but Jeff Bridges does a pretty good job at putting a new face on a very old character stereotype.  On the other hand this is the second film about the marginal redemption of washed up old men after his recent “The Men Who Stare at Goats” with George Clooney.  It would be a pity if he made this kind of maudlin self image a habit.
The person who enters his life and turns him around is one Jean Craddock played with grace and style by Maggie Gyllenhaal.  Her performance in this film is consistent with her previous work that garnered her two Golden Globes, “SherryBaby’ in 2006 and “Secretary” in 2002.  On the other hand she doesn’t have a lot to do.  She plays the understanding, stunningly beautiful girl next door who falls in love with the purified alcoholic old enough to be her father.  What else is new?  After she summoned up the courage to go through with the character the acting must have been simple.
Colin Farrell has a small but well played part as Tommy Sweet, the successful country rock star who was once Blake’s protégé.  Sweet has passed up Blake on the road to success because Blake is a drunken incompetent slob and Sweet is a rational person.  So if viewers know any drunken incompetent slobs who are losing out to rational persons this would be a good film to recommend.
The Jeff Bridges fans out there will se him whenever they can.  Few of us will forget him in the “The Big Lebowski” which continues to show up on the “best performances” lists and will for years to come.  Having said that, this film is no Lebowski.  The character of Bad Blake is supposed to embody the soul and pathos of Matt Dillon’s Henry Chinaski (“Factotum,” 2005) which channels the drunken legend Charles Bukowski, the gold standard of the modern American who truly, deeply and sincerely does not give a shit.  Unfortunately, we can’t get the memory of John C. Reilly in “Walk Hard” out of our minds and Dewey Cox keeps creeping in where Bukowski is supposed to be.
So far there are only two good drunk performances in film, Lemmon in “Days of Wine and Roses” and Milland in “Lost Weekend.”  The key is the sense of dirty secrecy about the addiction; it is not necessary for the actor to vomit onto the camera.  Whether it’s the screenplay, the direction, or the fact that Jeff Bridges is just too cool a guy, this film doesn’t pull it off.  The result is a flick about a reforming alcoholic instead of a film about a person.
As hard as one tries to get into the chemistry between Maggie Gyllenhaal and Bridges, it isn’t there.  There is nothing in the screenplay to support a knockout like her going for a guy like him.  Great to see Robert Duvall again but he is wasted in this film; seeing him just makes one want to rent “Great Santini” or “Lonesome Dove” again.  There is no such thing as a bad Jeff Bridges movie, but this is not his shining hour.
Directed by: Scott Cooper
Written by: Scott Cooper (screenplay) Thomas Cobb (novel)
Starring: Jeff Bridges and Maggie Gyllenhaal
Release: December 16, 2009
MPAA: Rated R for language and brief sexuality
Runtime: 111 minutes
Country: USA
Language: English
Color: Color

Movie Review: Crazy Heart (2009) – RopeofSilicon.com Movie News, Trai..

Movie Review: Crazy Heart - OK4me2

Crazy Heart Movie Review

Movie Review: Crazy Heart  « Lobo’s Rants

Movie Review: CRAZY HEART-n:zone magazine

Film Review Online  » Blog Archive   » Crazy Heart – Prod..

The Allmovie Blog   » Crazy Heart: The AMG Review

Crazy Heart Review - "Moving" | Movie Moron

Crazy Heart – English Movie Review | Cinefundas.com - One Stop Cinema..

Quick Movie Review: “Crazy Heart” « THE BLARG

gordonandthewhale.com  » Blog Archive   » Theatrical Review: CR..

Movie review: Bridges is brilliant in “Crazy Heart” – Fal..

Watch Crazy Heart Online Free English Music Movie Trailer Preview « M..

Online free Crazy Heart Watch English movie free trailer Hollywood … ..

Movie review: Up in the Air

Movie review: Up in the Air

Starring: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick, Jason Bateman
Opens Friday at: AMC cinema.
Parents’ guide: language.

Beware the elevated expectations that may accompany Up in the Air.
The collaboration between hot writer-director Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You for Smoking) and George Clooney (of George Clooney fame) has been highly anticipated and praised to the skies in early reviews.
But this very contemporary dramatic comedy is both more and less than the sum of its raves.
Clooney is Ryan Bingham, a man who works for a firm that fires people so their own companies won’t have to face the ugly truth of what they’re doing to human lives.

Though his outfit is based in Omaha and he nominally lives there himself, Bingham spends 322 days a year travelling and “43 miserable days at home” – if the soulless apartment he rents could possibly be called home.
Bingham travels for a living. His most prized possession is his frequent-flyer card, his ultimate goal being 10 million miles and membership in an exclusive club.

Up in the Air was shot in the early, dire economic months of this year, and it is to Reitman’s credit that he chose real, recently terminated people to react to Bingham’s news they’d just been let go. The job market is bad for them, but good for Bingham and his amoral boss, Jason Bateman’s Craig Gregory. It’s the “worst time,” he says cheerily. “This is our moment.”

Bingham lives for his perks, and the hotels and airports he negotiates so well while others fume. So it’s only fitting he meet his female professional equivalent over drinks in a hotel bar. Her name is Alex (Vera Farmiga, so good in Breaking and Entering, and The Departed). What she does for a living is not stated, but it involves travel, itineraries, computers and cellphones. When they hook up, they plot their next assignation by comparing skeds on laptops.

Taking their paperless universe one step further, Gregory wants Bingham to meet Natalie (Anna Kendrick), a crackerjack new employee who’s come up with a way to streamline the business. Why waste time and money travelling when you can climb on a teleconferencing system and can people over the phone?
Bingham responds like a man defending his life, which is no distance from the truth. He loves his rootless, privileged existence. He also holds some old-school credence to wrecking lives in person. So he takes Natalie along to show her what it is he really does.

Up in the Air is the curious hybrid of modern cautionary tale and shimmery Hollywood comedy. It is well-written, well-acted, by turns funny, rueful and a kick in the head. It gives Clooney an opportunity to show the full range of the substantial talents he has displayed in movies from Ocean’s Eleven to Syriana, and has the good sense to make Alex both a real woman and Bingham’s rootless mirror image.

But in the end, as he looks at the departure board in another nameless airport, an earlier reference to him comes to mind. “It was just somebody who’s lost.” Can an audience’s hopes hang by such a slim existential thread?

Movie Review: Up In The Air

Movie Review: Up In the Air (2009) – RopeofSilicon.com Movie News, Tr..

The Rumpus Review Of Up In The Air - The Rumpus.net

Review:  Up in the Air (2009) «  The Entertainment Blur

"Up In the Air" Review: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick star..

Review St. Louis |   “Up in the Air” Scores 6 Golden Globe Nomi..

Movie Review: Up in the Air « The Culture Beat

REVIEW: Reitman’s ‘Up in the Air’ Built With Award Season In Mind, No..

Movie Review: ‘Up In The Air’

UP IN THE AIR (2009): A Review at Blast-O-Rama

Up In the Air | The Life and Art of Vern

Movie Review: UP IN THE AIR | GeekTyrant

Review: Up in the Air «  Gone Elsewhere

Movie Review:  Up in the Air (2009) | The Critical Critics Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Up In the Air « Lobo’s Rants

Golden Globes 2010! Movie Review

Review: UP IN THE AIR | We Are Movie Geeks

Movie Review: UP IN THE AIR, with Notes from Q & A with Jason Reitman a..

Mileopoly  » Blog Archive   » Up in the Air (movie review by a ..

Movie Review: Up in the Air | Tobacco Facts.

UP IN THE AIR movie review - TFC Journal

Entertainment News Blog - Celebrity Movies Music Television »        ..

Quick Movie Review: “Up in the Air” « THE BLARG

My Votes on the Best Movies, Actors, Etc. in 2009

Once underdog, director Jason Reitman adjusts to role of Oscar favorite wit..

Up in the Air Review - Watch this Charmer; Screw the Bachcha-ns

New Movie Releases Movie Trailers New Movies on DVD Movies Online

Up in the Air, Brothers, Armored – Movie Reviews

Up in the Air Movie Review | Movie Reviews - Judge By Reviews

Up in the Air – English Movie Review | Cinefundas.com - One Stop Cine..

How to Give “Air,” “Nine” Some Globes Love « ..

Movie Review:-Everybody’s Fine

Movie Review:-Everybody’s Fine

Everybody’s Fine stars Robert De Niro as a retired gentleman in his 60’s who recently lost his wife. He is expecting his four adult children to spend the weekend at his house. He cuts his lawn, cleans the house, buys a new bbq to grill the big steaks he bought to go along with an expensive bottle of wine he purchased. Then he checks the answering machine – his two daughters have called to confirm that they and their two brothers were all too busy to go to his house that weekend. So Frank Goode, against the wishes of his doctor, sets out on a cross-country journey to visit his diverse and successful children and get the update as to what is going on in their lives.

He begins in New York, where David is an artist living in an apartment above the gallery that displays his art. Then there is the beautiful Amy (Kate Beckinsale), an advertising executive who lives in a beautiful house in a Chicago suburb with her husband and young son. Robert (Sam Rockwell) is a musician in an orchestra and lives in Denver. Finally, Frank makes his way to Las Vegas where Rosie (Drew Barrymore) is a professional dancer living in a beautiful apartment that overlooks Sin City.

As Frank’s journey unfolds, he learns more about his children and probably about himself. I get the feeling the kids learned a bit about their pops too. It is certainly an eye-opening and emotional experience for everyone involved.

That is the basic story of Everybody’s Fine. I have to say the first 45 minutes of the movie moved at a slow pace and I was really wondering where this film was going. I didn’t know much about the story and the trailer seemed to indicate that it was going to be a comedy. Based on some of De Niro’s past endeavors – the Focker movies, Analyze This and That, Showtime, Stardust – that is what I was expecting. However, Everybody’s Fine ended up being a rather serious and heartfelt tearjerker. I felt quite emotional at the end of the movie

as De Niro’s character tried to connect with his children and showed them that the old man had a thing or two up his sleeve. I absolutely loved the last 30 minutes. His analysis of each of his children kind of came out of left field. It was a very heart-warming moment.

With that being said, I am pretty sure that Everybody’s Fine is not a movie everyone will enjoy. The “New Moon” crowd and the “Ninja Assassin” group are sure to see it as nothing more than an excessively sentimental melodrama. For me, I really liked how the family and family values came to a head at the end of the movie. I liked how Frank Goode accepted his children despite any shortcomings he might have discovered. This movie made me smile despite the fact that it had no humans falling in love with vampires and then cheating on them with werewolves. Maybe it would have been nice if there were a ninja or two. Nevertheless, it was a nice change for De Niro to play what I thought was a pretty suitable and subtle role for him. Like everybody in the movie, my summary of this movie is it’s just fine. (8 out of 10)

Theatrical Review:-New Moon

Theatrical Review:-New Moon
New Moon is one of those movies for which the plot is almost superfluous. If you are a fan of Twilight, you more or less know it. If you are not, you probably do not care.  However, for form's sake, I will sum it up.

New Moon comes in as the second installment in the Twilight, the Stephanie Meyer series. It is about a love affair between a vampire, Edward Cullen, played by Robert Pattinson and a human high school student, Bella, Kristen Stewart.  In the first movie, she discovered Cullen's secret that he is a vampire; and they fell in love.  In this installment, after she gets a paper cut at a birthday party and Cullen's vampire-family almost kills her, he goes into self-imposed exile, breaks her heart, and leaves her with the super-built-up Jacob Black, Taylor Lautner, with 26 added pounds of muscle that he put on trying to reprise his role from the first movie. He turns out to be a werewolf -- the natural enemy of the vampire.

As Bella pines for Edward, she keeps the love-struck Jacob around because, (a) he is totally into her, and (b) she has discovered that adrenaline rushes give her a psychic connection to Edwards. She likes doing dangerous things like cliff diving and racing dirt-bikes.  In the meantime, angry vampress, Victoria (from the first movie) makes recurring raids on the town trying to find and kill Bella. She is chased by the werewolf pack while Cullen decides that if she dies he will kill himself.

Finally something happens to make him think she died, and she actually almost does. Things come to a head as she tries to stop him from killing himself like Romen as he does not want to live without her.  It is meant to be very romantic in a decidedly gothic sort of way, and I suppose it is.

So how is it?  Well, it delivers the male cheesecake.  It delivers the pining heroine.  It delivers the moody, rainy Washington State.  It delivers bear-sized werewolves who chase down super-fast vampires.  It delivers product placement when, again, Cullen drives a domestic Volvo instead of a bad-boy's hot-rod.  Judging from its numbers, it satisfied the legions of Twilight fans and who am I to tell them they are wrong?

Before we get to spoiler territory and commentary, let me weigh in with this.  It appears that the problem with Twilight and New Moon (in particular) is not that it is bad.  It is not stupid or artless.  There is a scene where the super fast wolves are chasing the vampire, who is also super fast). We see them moving at normal sprinting speeds at the same time a bird seen from overhead moves with a wing-flap every few seconds.  Then it speeds up to 'real-time' with a kinetic blur of motion.  This is very good stuff, but there is a battle at the end where two super-fast vampires fight each other; we get sort of a into-and-out-of-bullet-time battle in which Cullen (who is a tough, if average vampire) gets to fight a bad-ass personal guardian of vampire aristocracy who, rightly, dominates him. The movie also gets that right; and after watching a lot of these types of things, that is not necessarily an easy thing to do.

If you are a fan, the problem with Twilight is that it is hugely self-indulgent. Bella mistreats her friends, but they all still love her.  The vampires, rather than being dark and dangerous, are all sparkly.  The love affair is painfully chaste with each of them pining for the other in a whirlwind of angst. Is it coincidence that the class lecture is Romeo and Juliet -- of course not.  How far does the movie have to go in order to ensure that two sets of monsters will battle over Bella's heart -- even as both vie for the right to stand guard over her -- not very far at all.  So far, this is a series that caters lovingly to its protagonist -- who, it is alleged, is a stand-in for author, Stephanie Meyer; and to my eye, seems like one.


Bella is the luckiest girl in the world. Her father is bewildered by her angst and depression, but never loses his patience with her. When she demands no presents for her birthday, of course she is showered with gifts.  When she decides after a lengthy exile to sit at the lunch table with the un-cool kids -- the uber-cool kids, the Cullens, have left town -- they immediately accept her back; and she gets a date instantly, although she does not necessarily want one. The poor kid who asked her out gets taken to an action flick since she wants an adrenaline rush and winds up throwing up in the bathroom ... before being almost mauled by Jacob.
The movie plays like a drama-laden, 14-year-old's dream relationship and seems to me as all desert and no dinner.  In my mind, it does nothing to earn any loyalty to its protagonist.  She has everything, and yet she is perpetually miserable -- so let's talk about spoilers.

Spoilers
The movie sets up a love triangle between Jacob who wants Bella and Bella, who wants Cullen. Cullen, wants Bella but is afraid he or his family will kill her -- after all, she is full of tasty blood.  Jacob and Cullen, also being mortal vampire/werewolf enemies, hate each other on the principal of ... I guess ... racism.  Or, possibly Jacob hates the Cullens because vegetarian vampires or not, their kind kill people, and presumably even the noble Cullen-clan has slipped up once in a while.

On the other hand, the movie tells us that sometimes werewolves accidentally kill people too; so maybe we are just back to monsterism.  I can not be sure.

The key thing is that Bella uses Jacob.  It is true that eventually she does tell him there is no chance, but she doesn't want him to stop wanting her because she is selfish. In one sense, this discussion has integrity; she lays out for him that she plans to string him along, and if he is okay with that, she likes it because, let's face it, he doesn't have a chance -- her true love is Edwards.

However, on the other hand, I think we, as the audience, are expected to identify with Bella over this decision. After all, she's the heroine. The movie doesn't seem to find her Edwards-left-me nightmares overly dramatic. When Jacob stops returning her calls, not because he's had it with her--but because he's afraid he might hurt her in his wolf form--and she goes looking for him--I think we as the audience are expected to want to see them together.

Instead, this dynamic, confession made Bella the predator in the relationship. She knows he is infatuated with her; knows that she can use him to dull the pain of Edwards having left; knows it will eventually hurt him more and seeks him out relentlessly. Having her acknowledge that she is selfish is one thing, but having her perspective on being selfish be, essentially, validated by the movie is something else.  For me, it was one step of self-indulgence too far.  If the author, and director, and so on, actually does have contempt for the behavior of the protagonist, they certainly do not show it. I believe, since the appeal of Twilight is predicated on the protagonist being wanted and loved by all and the headaches that brings, I simply believe the various authorial voices find this situation to be due Bella.

This left a bad taste in my mouth.
End Spoilers
I have a hard time rating this movie because I didn't very much like its take on the subject matter of vampires and werewolves, but I did like how it brought it to us.  I did not like the main character, but I appreciated her performance.  I haven't read the books, but it seems that the creators of the film did a good job with the material.  However, in the end, despite a somewhat slow middle, it held my attention all the way through.  For that, I think I have to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Movie Review: 'Paranormal Activity'

 Movie Review: 'Paranormal Activity' 

Paranormal Activity arrives with a hail of hype the likes of which hasn’t been seen since The Blair Witch Project. Released in limited cinemas over a month ago in the States, the camcorder phenomenon stirred up such a scare that expectant audiences around the country demanded it be shown in their city through an innovative online voting system.

Of course the question you have to ask yourself is whether this is all just creative marketing or justified praise for a genuinely scary cinema sensation. Well let’s answer it this way: if Jaws made people frightened of the water and Blair Witch put people off rambling in the woods, then Paranormal Activity will make you terrified of what’s happening in your own home after you’ve gone to sleep. In other words: be afraid, be very afraid.

The simple premise sees “engaged to be engaged” couple Katie and Micah (movie debutantes Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat) move into a plush new home only to become increasingly convinced there may be an otherworldly presence already there. In order to prove their suspicions, Micah buys a high-def video camera and sets it up at the foot of their bed to document the strange nightly goings-on. But this only seems to trigger an escalation in the paranormal activity and things soon go from bad to worse for the unfortunate pair.

An exercise in edge-of-your-seat tension and escalating terror, Paranormal’s zippy 85-minute runtime starts with an overwhelming sense of foreboding and constantly keeps building its scares from there until it reaches a gasp-inducing, fingers-over-the-eyes, blood-chilling conclusion. Employing old-school, simplistic spook house tricks (you know what they say, the old ones are the best), savvy creator and first-time feature-filmer Oren Peli keeps this sense of expectant dread growing by carefully intensifying the night hauntings. He keeps you guessing as to when the big concluding night will come to release us – you’ve got to endure through fear to earn the cathartic release. Even then, it might not be the ending you were hoping for.

Deserving of the hype and praise that is being heaped on it, Paranormal Activity only lets itself down in its last dying generic moments (shave off literally 10 seconds and you have the perfect open-to-discussion ending. Exactly like The Bourne Ultimatum actually…). This tiny misstep aside though, it is undoubtedly the type of “proper” scary movie (as in it will stay with you long after the film has finished, no doubt affecting your own sleep pattern) that delivers 100 per cent on an audience level and demands to be viscerally experienced in a darkened room alongside a peer group of equally scared strangers.

Movie Review: Old Dogs

Movie Review: Old Dogs

Old Dogs, a new fish-out-of-water pseudo family-friendly comedy is the type of film that audiences will lap up over the holiday weekend like so much spilled gravy. But, they’ll be hard pressed to care about the movie once it’s finished (or possibly during it). The movie begins with the tired one-joke premise of a couple of fifty-something, somewhat happily single men being forced to baby sit children and expects hilarity to ensue. It does occasionally. Mostly, Old Dogs is a series of painfully unfunny bits of physical comedy loosely held together by a paint-by-numbers plot.  

Boring, safe, reliable, but lovelorn Dan (Robin Williams) and ladies man Charlie (John Travolta) run a sports marketing firm. As the film opens, the two middle-aged men are on the verge of taking their company global. Everything seems to be moving along smoothly until Vicki (Kelly Preston), the lost-love that Dan had a one-night fling with (well, they were actually married during a drunken night partying in Florida, so I guess that makes the kids legitimate or something, but I’m getting ahead of myself), shows up with Dan’s offspring – seven-year-old twins Emily (Ella Bleu Travolta) and Zach (Conner Rayburn). Naturally, Vicki and Dan decide to give their relationship another shot but there’s a catch (didn’t see that coming did you?). Vicki is scheduled to serve a couple of weeks in jail after being arrested at a protest or something noble like that (that’s so you know she’s a good mother) and ultimately it’s up to Dan to look after the kids while Vicki is away. As you could probably guess, he’s not very kid-savvy so he enlists his good buddy Charlie and the fun begins.

Sadly, there really isn’t too much that’s fun in this movie. The dads-out-of-water joke is overused so much that it actually gets tiring during the first go around – a delightful little scene where the new family goes camping and the dads manage to offend everyone involved, destroy a monument, and play a game of “ultimate Frisbee” that results in a lot of body related humor and a general feeling of disappointment for the two children – maybe for the the audience too. This scene is then repeated in a different location and repeated and repeated and … until the film comes puttering to a predictable ending wherein Dan (and Charlie to a certain extent) figures out what exactly he wants out of life (here’s a spoiler, its Vicki and the kids).


I don’t want to give the impression that the film is a complete mess. For the most part, it is. It’s not a good film by any stretch, but it’s actually better than it deserves to be. I say this not because of any brilliant acting performances hidden away in the film – there’s an abundance of legitimately funny people like Seth Green, Dax Shepard, and Bernie Mac (in his last role) that are totally wasted and used mostly as weak plot devices to get Williams and Travolta to the next wacky shtick portion of the film. Nor do I say the film is special because of any unique contribution that writers David Diamond or David Weissman made to the story (this is the team that gave us Evolution after all). And I certainly don’t think director Walt Becker does anything more than recycle a tired formula (something he actually did a bit better in Wild Hogs). However, I do think the family-friendly message beneath all of the other garbage is actually a fairly decent one that showcases some nice moments between Williams and his kids – but it’s really hard to appreciate as it only accounts for about 5 to 10 minutes of screen time. Perhaps that’s giving Old Dogs too much credit, but those bits, such as when Williams promises to always protect his daughter are just fantastic.

There was a time when Robin Williams was a good name to have above a title. Remember Good Will Hunting or Dead Poet’s Society? Even this year’s World’s Greatest Dad showcased the talent that he still possesses. However, he seems more content these days to produce awful uninspired comedies like RV, License to Wed, and now, Old Dogs. But, the worst part about the whole affair is that there might actually have been a pretty decent new father story hidden under all of the other junk. Had Old Dogs been constructed as more of a romantic family comedy it might have avoided being the lackluster and just plain bad hodge podge of slapstick that it is.

Movie Review:-THE ROAD

Movie Review:-THE ROAD

THE ROAD (4 out of 5 stars)

I just got back from watching The Road which stars Viggo Mortensen and Kodi Smit-McPhee as a father and son trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world. Well let me tell you, this is a not a movie you want to go see if you're down, because it will depress the hell out of you. But if you think you can handle it, then the movie takes you on quite a journey.
I haven't read Cormac McCarthy's book that the movie is based on, but it's on my to reading list now.
The story focuses on the relationship between the father and his son and how the world they live in affects their humanity. There is a very well illustrated contrast between the father dealing with the harsh reality and seeing the world through adult eyes, and the son, who even though has seen so many horrific things, still retains his innocence.
The whole film relies on Viggo Mortensen and Kodi Smit-McPhee's performance and the on-screen relationship they created, and let me tell you, it works. That kid is so unbelievably good and made me shed a tear more than once. AndViggo Mortensen is of course brilliant, like he always is.
It must have been a real emotional movie to shoot for the actors to remain in such a state of mind. The Road touches on a darker side of humanity and what people are driven to in desperate times. While watching it, I was in a constant state of anxiety as to what was going to happen to the characters. The mere sound of someone near would send the characters in a state of panic, and that fear was translated to the audience very well. They made you feel like you were there with them, and it is clear that this has a lot to do with what the actors brought to the screen.
John Hillcoat, the director, must also be praised for capturing this post-apocalyptic world and showing what monsters people can become, while at the same time contrasting it with this precious and beautiful love between a father and his son trying to survive.
The only thing that I did not enjoy as much were some of the flashbacks that the father had of a time before all the horror. We find out about what happened to his wife who is played by Charlize Theron, but some of them felt more like a distraction, and I just didn't connect with the wife.
Overall, The Road left me feeling very sad that this could represent a possibility for our future, should such a disaster hit the world, and it really makes you wonder how you would react.
In such a case though, the one tip that I did hear from cast interviews is to keep a dog around because they can not only feel danger and hear better than you can, but they can find food for you. So there you have it.
___________________________________________________________
Title: The Road
Director: John Hillcoat
Cast: Viggo Mortensen, Charlize Theron, Guy Pearce, Robert Duvall, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Garret Dillahunt
Synopsis: A father and his son walk alone through burned America. Nothing moves in the ravaged landscape save the ash on the wind. It is cold enough to crack stones, and, when the snow falls it is gray. The sky is dark. Their destination is the coast, although they don't know what, if anything, awaits them there. They have nothing: just a pistol to defend themselves against the lawless bands that stalkthe road, the clothes they are wearing, a cart of scavenged food--and each other.
Release Date: November 25, 2009

MOVIE REVIEW: Law Abiding Citizen

 MOVIE REVIEW: Law Abiding Citizen

SCOTTISH beefcake Gerard Butler has had enough of being the housewife’s bit of rough.
The 300 star is desperate to show he can stretch his acting muscles just as much as his biceps with his latest film Law Abiding Citizen.
But despite being an enjoyable action thriller, the film falls disappointingly short of being the slick, polished suspense movie it wants to be and Butler plays the same cheeky, loveable rogue he starred as in recent rom-com duds such as The Ugly Truth and PS. I Love You.

 Clyde Shelton (Butler) is an honest, upstanding family man and Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) is an ambitious young prosecutor working for a safer Philadelphia.
When Clyde’s wife and young daughter are brutally murdered, Nick is assigned to the case.
On the verge of sentencing, Nick sensationally cuts a deal with one of the killers, sparing him from death row.

A decade later, the man who got away with murder is found dead.
 Clyde coolly admits his guilt before issuing a warning to Nick - either fix the flawed justice system that failed his family or key players in the trial will pay the price.
Nick now finds himself in a desperate race against time as a series of elaborate assassinations target the ranks of the city’s criminal justice system.

Only he can stop the killings and to do so, he must outwit a brilliant adversary who always seems to be one step ahead.
The tension is kept cranked up high as one by one legal professionals fall like flies in unexpected, and unncessarily messy, ways.

 All the blood soaked signs point to the imprisoned Clyde, but with our anti-hero locked in solitary confinement and no communication allowed with the outside world, any evidence suggesting his guilt remains fatally flawed.
The film undeniably has its fair share of thrills, but I couldn’t help feeling like Alice falling through the gaping great holes in the plot.

So many questions are either unanswered or underdeveloped. Why is Clyde such a master assassin? How did he manage to carry out the killings without being noticed?
By the end of the film we know nothing more about the vigilante prisoner than when it started, leaving you feeling numb and underwhelmed by the final silly twist in the tale.

The audience is expected to take too much for granted and some ludicrous philosophy about good guys turning psycho if they are pushed hard enough is far-fetched and frankly trite.
Oscar-winning Foxx holds his own but looks slightly uncomfortable as the flash lawyer, even bored, while Butler relishes getting his hands bloody and steals the best lines.
However, neither A-listers play to their full potential and what could have been an explosive stick of cinematic dynamite, ends up being a rather damp, soggy squib.

Good for a night in with a pizza and a DVD, but I suggest wasting your credit crunched cash on watching something with a little more bite.
 

Law Abiding Citizen (18) is released in cinemas on Friday.

MOVIE REVIEW: Law Abiding Citizen 

Movie Review: The Blind Side

Movie Review: The Blind Side

Though much attention was given to the latest installment of the Twilight series this weekend at the box office, John Lee Hankcock’s “The Blind Side” was another stellar choice for movie-goers. At the theatre I chose, “The Blind Side” was playing on two screens, to “New Moon” on three, and it was money well spent. The movie is based on the non-fiction football book of similar title by author Michael Lewis. It is the story of NFL player, Michael Oher’s difficult upbringing and surprising twist of fate, as he is taken in by a wealthy white family, who scoops him out of the hand of poverty and a bad neighborhood, to root him on to football stardom and success in life.

But all this kid needed was a little help; he was no charity case, he had a heart of gold and the protection instincts of a mother lion, and he was built to be a football star, from birth.
Sandra Bullock plays his adoptive mother, LeAnn Touhy, in what will arguably be called the best performance of her career, thus far. She is a force to be reckoned with on-screen, laced with Southern charm and Christian hospitality.

Tim McGraw also co-stars as Mr. Touhy, and serves his role well; the couple is enjoyable to watch go through their (privileged) daily lives. In what certainly could have taken a nose dive into greeting-card-sappy sentimentality, this film takes the high road; and every viewer benefits from that choice. Michael is played by actor Quinton Aaron, and he brings a surprising amount of depth to the role of a teenaged formerly-homeless student-athlete. However, beyond the love felt in this well-to-do family, and the obvious goodness of Michael Oher, the real treat of the film is the lessons the Touhy family learns from the addition of this kid to their clan. “The Blind Side” is an uplifting film that finds just the right balance between raw emotion and predictable football-hero movie. Two thumbs way up from this reviewer.

Want posters  click here on this below...

Butler: Best Brit in Hollywood

Butler: Best Brit in Hollywood 

Gerard Butler has been voted the best British actor in Hollywood.
The Scottish hunk - who is best known for playing King Leonidas in 300 - beat a host of stars, including Christian Bale and double-Oscar winner Daniel Day Lewis to win the title in a poll of more than 1000 UK film fans by the DVD rental service LoveFilm.
Revolutionary Road actress Kate Winslet - who managed to land fourth place - was one of only two women to feature in the top ten.
Twilight actor Robert Pattinson came seventh despite the huge popularity of the vampire franchise.
Helen Cowley, the editor at LoveFilm, believes the poll shows 40-year-old Butler had got "some real bite in Hollywood".
She said: "And even though Robert Pattinson is getting some deserved attention, it's the older generation of actors that still have sway in Hollywood."
Butler has previously spoken about how he walked away from his career as a solicitor when he was just weeks away from qualifying to pursue his acting dream.
He said: "You have to understand that I was completely out of control. If I hadn't been so lost and insane, I'd still be a lawyer."

DVD Review: Seventh Moon (2008)

Moon Demons Are Creepy Yet Cool. This Ghost House Underground flick features a young engaged couple named Yul and Melissa (Tim Chiou and Amy Smart, respectively). The two have traveled to China to visit Yul’s family. Before heading for Yul’s ancestral home the couple do some sightseeing and souvenir gathering. After days of partying they crash in the back of their tour guide’s (Dennis Chan) vehicle as he drives them to their destination.

After a long drive through the dark roads of rural farmland the tour guide confesses that he is lost and stops by a village to ask for directions. A few hours pass by and a concerned Melissa wakes Yul and they search the eerily quiet town for him. What they discover is that this is the night of the Seventh Moon when the dead are free to roam among mortals.

In this case, the dead (known as moon demons) run away looking to feed on human flesh. The only way to keep the moon demons from snacking on you is to offer a live animal sacrifice. Since Yul nor Melissa have any chickens or cats to offer they have no choice but to run through the darkness of the countryside as they try to flee the clutches of the moon demons.
Seventh Moon is a pretty decent ghoul movie. Not totally scary but it has some redeeming qualities. First up are the moon demons themselves clad in ashen skin, bloodshot eyes and really violent tempers. They rend flesh with their gnarly nails and they’re hard to put down since they’re already dead.

I definitely felt bad for Yul and Melissa because they are trapped in the middle of nowhere. If they’re lucky enough to find another person they can barely communicate with him or her since neither can speak fluent English. Yul speaks a little, though, so it comes in handy but for the most part the couple is kept in the dark literally and figuratively.

The atmosphere is fertile ground for moments of terror. The couple runs through the grass and the trees in the dark with no weapons and no police station nearby. Of course the cell phone can’t pick up a signal and even when they have access to a car it’s still futile because they don’t even know where to drive to. Since there aren’t a lot of movies about moon demons Yul and Melissa have no idea what they’re dealing with. Their desperation and bewilderment is very palpable.

The plot is based on Chinese folklore so it’s a blast to see a ghost story told through the myths of another culture.
Yes, I know about Japanese horror but thankfully there are no whitewashed girls popping out of dark corners and strangling people with their long, black tresses. I love the sense of an undying ritual; a historic tradition that has passed from generation to generation.

What’s funny is that while watching the film I was hoping it would stay frantic and wild. I liked feeling that same confusion that the characters were feeling. And I made a mental note while watching that it would really kill the mood if the writers stuck some guy in there that would just explain everything taking away all the mystery that made the movie so intriguing. Of course, that’s exactly what happens. The couple eventually end up someplace where everything is spelled out and all the answers are laid before them. What starts as a chillingly unpredictable thriller  later becomes an uninspiring climax that lets out most of the scary air out of the balloon. I was grooving to the "less is more" concept and then they went and added more. Ugh.

Eduardo Sanchez directed Seventh Moon. If you check his credits your eye will probably be drawn towards The Blair Witch Project. The co-creator of that horror classic uses some of the same techniques in Seventh Moon limited light sources in the form of headlights, candles and a cell phone in one particularly tense scene.

Both the DVD and Blu Ray versions of Seventh Moon have a healthy assortment of special features. The featurettes cover the general making of the film, the creation of the moon demons, the mythology that the film was based on and more. Plus there’s a director’s commentary and trailers of other Ghost House Underground films.

The Damn Dirty DVD Review: Bruno

The Damn Dirty DVD Review: Bruno
I had high hopes for Bruno. I loved Borat. I thought it was unique, hilarious and creative. It was something we weren’t used to from Hollywood

. I thought Sacha Baron Cohen was the next coming of Andy Kauffman. What was he going to give us next? The answer to that is Bruno, the story of an overtly gay Austrian fashion reporter coming to America to become a huge celebrity. On his journey, Bruno tries an American celebrity talk show, to become an actor, to start a celebrity charity event, modeling, create peace in the Middle East, seducing US Senators and ultimately become straight.

Unlike it’s predecessor, Bruno just completely falls flat. Unlike Borat, Bruno is one joke pulled out across 80 minutes. You know when you watch a one joke Saturday Night Live skit that runs about 5 minutes too long? Try 70 minutes too long for this one. Not that there isn’t anything funny in this film. There are a couple of chuckles here and there, but nothing fall down, laugh out loud funny. It’s an 80 minute gay joke.
Think of every place you would feel uncomfortable watching a supergay person interact with others and you’ve got this movie. Racists? Check. Government officials? Check. The Middle East? Check. With a group of hunters? Check. Religious Officials? Check. In Middle America during an MMA fight? Check. In the middle of a Gay Hate Parade? Check. That’s pretty much it. Sacha Baron Cohen went from the master of innovative thinking to the master of the gay cock joke.

There are some flashes of the brilliance that lies somewhere inside of Cohen. The entire sequence with the African baby is disturbing, ballsy and funny all at the same time. This is the kind of humor that Borat excelled at, but is completely lacking in most of Bruno. What is really depressing is that there is a really funny movie here, it was just left on the cutting room floor. The deleted scenes focus mostly on Bruno’s interaction with the fashion industry and Hollywood moms and is hilarious. Instead of going for the satire of a fashion model telling us how much therapy she had to have because she is so beautiful, Cohen thought we needed a scene with Bruno in the army, yet another place an obvious homosexual might have some issues.
 
   Another area Bruno lacks is believability. With Borat, we knew he was making a documentary so there was a reason for the camera to be there when he was filming his interaction with Americans. Though many scenes in Bruno were played off as a documentary to the participants, there are no such implications within the film itself. Several of those getting documented are aware of the camera and were paid for their appearances.

That brings us to another topic. With Borat everything seemed genuine, which was its charm. With Bruno, too much is set up. Case in point, Bruno pulls off in a scooter with his black baby just as a car pulls out and skids to a stop sideways just in time. Are we really supposed to believe that Cohen (or a stunt guy) would risk that chance that some random pedestrian would be quick enough on the brakes? I know there’s nothing wrong with a little stunt action in a Hollywood film, but when the basis of the film is real people and their reactions, I shouldn’t have to come away from each scene wondering if it was set up or not.

In the end, I think this film fails mostly because Bruno is just not that likeable. I found myself rooting for the other guy in the scene all too often. He’s goofy, he’s offensive but lacks sympathy. This is a movie that sounds cool when you try to explain scenes to your friends, but in the end it plays like the little publicity stunt between Cohen and Eminem at the MTV Movie Awards – just not that well.

Video
Video is in anamorphic widescreen, your standard 1.85:1 fair.

Audio
Dolby Digital 5.1 English Surround complementing by German dance music.

Special Features

Commentary: “Enhanced” commentary features Cohen and director Larry Charles. The enhanced part comes when film is actually stopped and/or picture within a picture technology is used. The commentary has good insight into the making of the film.

Additional Scenes: Scenes that didn’t make it into the movies including Pete Rose walking out on an interview from Bruno where Pete fights on behalf of the Mexicans he is using as furniture. Other additional scenes include a compilation of former government employees that got the same treatment as Ron Paul in the film proper with about the same response.


Deleted Scenes: More of the same. This includes the infamous LaToya Jackson scene where Bruno talks her out of her phone and gives his assistant Michael Jackson’s phone number in German. This was pulled from the film after Michael’s untimely death. The rest of the scenes here make the film so frustrating. There is really good stuff here, especially that involving the fashion industry. If Bruno has focused his attention on this more satirical and understated comedy, this film would have been tons better. Instead we get the same joke over and over.

Extended Scenes: Admittedly, the swinger party stuff is pretty funny.

An interview with Lloyd Robinson: An interview with Bruno’s Hollywood agent after he finally gets the joke. He seems okay with it.

Best Buy to let users stream purchased DVD movies

   Best buy today struck a deal with Roxio to create a unique online and DVD hybrid movie service for the big-box retailer. The unnamed project hopes to give users buy once, play anywhere privileges: those who buy a DVD in-store will then have access to a CinemaNow-based portal for watching movies both on computers as well as on smartphones and Internet-aware Blu-ray players. Many of the movies will be new releases instead of reprints or old titles.
Most details aren't yet public, but Best Buy plans to launch the initiative in early 2010. Studios are considered the primary obstacle as they are often hesitant to provide new movies through online services, but the necessity of buying a hard copy is expected to assuage some of these fears. Some studios still remain hesitant about providing movies to online-only services like iTunes and often limit the ability to purchase or rent for the first few weeks.

The effort is an acknowledged attempt to brace Best Buy for a transition to a primarily Internet-only video era. Linking Internet viewing to existing DVD sales will theoretically expose customers to a Best Buy-controlled video platform that they can eventually rely on exclusively when physical media is no longer a feasible option in stores. Best Buy has also remained partly service-independent and just last month added

 Netflix to its Insignia players to extend their longevity beyond Blu-ray.