Them Bones

THE LOVELY BONES ****1/2 (4.5 stars out of 5)
2nd Run - 5 stars out of 5.
DVD - 5 stars out of 5.
Cable - 2 stars out of 5. (they'll chop it up)

I continually have to applaud a director who, while I appreciate what he had done with the Hobbit movies, I really wasn't much a fan of. But in the last year he has brought about two incredible movies. First was bringing to live the amazing DISTRICT 9. Second, bringing The Lovely Bones into being. Bones has a strange and ephemeral reality to it, not unlike WHAT DREAMS MAY COME, a junky 1998 movie with Robin Williams and Cuba Gooding Jr. In The Lovely Bones the dreamlike filming, special effects and approach to it all actually works very well.

While intertwining a horrifying murder of a little girl, the pain of her family, the creepiness of the murderer, and all the other aspects of the movie, Peter Jackson manages to give it an overall, light, other worldly fantasy feeling. It works out amazingly well, and by the end you feel a fair amount of uplift in your feelings when the movie closes. Saoirse Ronan is shiny and marvelous playing a dead Susie Salmon. Mark Wahlberg is a great dad for her, Rachel Weisz is phenomenal (as always), and let me just say Susan Sarandon as Grandma Lynn takes the cake. She absolutely kills every scene she is in. Then there is Stanley Tucci, who I have never had that strong of a feeling for. Not sure if it's the types of movies he chooses, or just something about his nature, he really hasn't been a someone I cared for in movies much. This character is definitely a very different kind for him, and let me say, amazing. He did such a fantastic job embodying George Harvey.

Of the movies out in the theaters presently, this is the one anyone looking to go to the movies should see. A remarkable story and achievement. I understand, if the book was as good as the movie (suspect it was at least as good, if not better), why so many people read it and loved it.

Bravo Mr. Jackson, bring us more of this I say, and less Hobbits.

The Lovely Bones a solid 4.5 stars (out of 5).

Avatar'ed

AVATAR  * (one star out of 5)

The world has been overtaken by Avatars. Everyone's brain has been uploaded by the machine. Hollywood has officially crossed the threshold and jacked our brains into the matrix.

It is of little consequence that the movie has a pathetic storyline. It has pathetic acting. It is just an over the top directorial Orgasm by an already over popular director. Oh, and 2 plus hours of watching a gaggle of JAR-JAR Binks clones.

With all that said, it is unbelievable that a movie of this kind can be well on it's way to being the highest grossing movie of all time. TITANIC again was a  James Cameron flick, but it has intrigue and good dialogue and a great story. It was deserving of all the praise. JAR JAR AVATAR has none of this. It has finally shown that the American public (as well as the rest of the world) only needs to have a digital lullaby to relieve them of their money. Again, all I can see are huge swathes of fat, shopping, gluttonous, mindless sheep who will do what everyone else wants them to and spend money on what everyone else spends on.

By the way, I HAVEN"T SEEN IT. Nor will I. The preview was inexplicably atrocious and boring, and all the fake blue people drove me insane, and that was for all of 3 minutes in a trailer. I think I would have more fun having SHOCK THERAPY than watching bouncing JAR JAR  BINKS' for 3 hours.

I give it a Riot Review of *1 Star! BAD Hollywood, BAD!

My New Year's Day: It's Complicated

It's Complicated ** two stars (two stars out of 5)


we need better romantic comedies  we need better romantic comedies  we need better romantic comedies  we need better romantic comedies

You might ask yourself: "Why is life so complicated"? Well on a New Years day, circa 2009, I took myself to see It's Complicated, possibly to see if it could explain. Also with not much out there in the theater to see or clamor for, and wanting to take in something light and funny, and the fact that Steve Martin hasn't been in anything for a long time. All these are good reasons, though, not good enough to justify this movie.

It's Complicated never does end up answering the question, unless it is to point out that with the right table settings, and the perfect clean house, everything in your life is bound to go right. Keep shopping and perfection is near.

I have to say I hated director Nancy Meyers' last -perfect kitchen and house and trimmings - movie something fierce. Something's Gotta Give was appallingly bad. With both movies she somehow found a great group of actors to fill the parts. Something's Gotta Give was weak, over the top smarmy, and just plain garbage.

Enter It's Complicated at the end of 2009. After giving us a few years break from her brand of humor, Nancy comes back with another Romance fest. From the outside it looks like it could be fun. From the inside, in the theater, it was a selfish, over-indulged, exaggerated wanna be Martha Stewart, designer movie.

It's as if she can't quite figure out what she really wants to do. Be a home decorator, or make a movie. She does like to point out two things she consistently feels strongly about though, and believes we should all agree:

A. You are a loser old bag if you are a single woman and aren't agonizing over some man who doesn't treat you right, but one day will, if only you do and say the right thing. You may have to beat him into submission with your overflowing enthusiasm, physchoticness, neediness, and utter lack of self esteem, while forcing him to tip toe through your sanitized and trimmed house. Eventually, if you do it all just right, he will Love You!

B. That the world is ok, even if you don't feel like it right now, as long as you have spent a small kings fortune on making your house, yard, kids, and business (which also should just happen to be a FABULOUS hip bakery) absolutely perfect. If you have every correct plate, silverware, all the perfect do dads to fill your house, your children have just right clothes, etc, then the rest of your life must be great. I felt like I was stuck watching 2 hours of a Dramedy HGTV show, without having someone to tell us how they did it all (we can wait for that to be explained on the DVD special features). It really is one of those things that drives me bonkers. America is so obsessed with having their house, and clothes, and yard and cars and CHILDREN be so perfect and tidy, that onlookers will gush at your spectaculourness. Ugh. What is lost is a sense of things being alive. Everything is plastic, magazine clean, mirages of reality.

Sadly, Steve Martin seemed to be just standing in for his part. Almost as if someone had dropped out and they asked him to fill in on that day. No Martin zeal or humor. Almost drugged.

Meryl Streep was great, though she overplayed some of it. Alec Baldwin was fantastic, and the kids dutifully did their parts.

It was a mishmash of not much. A few funnies, a few heavies, but in the end, none of it memorable enough to conjure up in my head two days later.

I am the worlds biggest Romantic Comedy fan, and I keep trying them out, hoping for good things. I consistently end up screaming: Where oh where is another WHEN HARRY MET SALLY when you need one! It's been over 10 years now,  and Nothing. Not a single movie has come close. When Harry met Sally is the perfect Rom-Com. SAY ANYTHING was fantastic, but it came out the same year too. That's ten years of dull.

All things considered, this movie was a lazy ** two stars out of five.
Rental: still ** two stars
Redbox: still ** two stars

2009 was the year of dreck. I hope 2010 can start the good vibe movie engines again. Here's hopin'.

Testing, Testing....Up In The Air

Up In The Air  ***1/2 (3.5 out of 5 stars)

Another highly anticipated movie for me. It finally came out and I jumped to see it. Up in the Air has been getting great reviews, however, I haven't found a movie critic I agree with anywhere yet (I know, I see the irony). With this one, I mostly agree with many of them though.

Up In the Air feels like a small, compact, well orchestrated ride. Wonderful pacing. It's character centered, with good story carrying it along nicely. All the actors involved did a fabulous job for each of their respective parts. George Clooney played his bit quite well, as did Vera Farmiga. The standout of the show ends up being Anna Kendrick as a trainee under Clooney's Ryan Bingham. She is a fireball and has a great story arc throughout.

As a whole Up In The Air does a great job of keeping your interest and enjoyment. There was a slight something it seemed to miss though. Ryan Bingham is very happy being alone and only interacting in work situations. Aside from that he pretty much stays away from any and all interpersonal interaction. He loathes having to be attached to any commitments whatsoever. So, by showing many images of him alone going through airports, eating, and just living, the point is brought across to us spectacularly. The down side to setting up this type of life for us on film is, well, it can be too much celluloid time of odd, slow, boredom. We understand his ways and his life early on, but some of the execution of it tends to come across as slow. That being said, the rest of the show, especially when Anna Kendrick's Natalie Keener comes on the scene, perks up nicely.

If you enjoy Indie's, Romances, and drama's, this has it all. The romance is somewhat different, it wouldn't be called your typical date movie. If anything it is too real in how it plays out to be a date movie. Enjoyable, though, thoroughly.

Theater: A good 3.5 stars out of 5. Nice Christmas movie.
Rental: 4 stars out of 5.

Movie Reviews via a Shotgun Drive By.....

Hmmm...I am going to blaze through a bunch of the last movies I have seen. I got behind on my movie reviews.

An Education  **** (Four Stars out of 5)
A gem of  an Indie movie. If this one happens to be playing in your town it is well worth the shillings. Newcomer Carey Mulligan is absolutely amazing in her starring roll. I was fantastically impressed by her. Peter Sarsgaard was perfect as always too. He has been a longtime favorite of mine and he always does an incredible job. A story of elder guy creepiness, young girl longing for love, and attaching to the wrong guy, and dastardly deeds abound. The family tales and dialogue are everything we hope for in movies. Not surprising, it was written by Nick Hornby of High Fidelity and About a Boy fame, two tremendous films.

The Blind Side ***.5 (3 1/2 Stars out of 5)
Sandra Bullock, a great screenplay, a feelgood story, great supporting cast. This was a solid movie. Go see it if you are looking for a strong, redemption tale.

New Moon: The Twilight Sucka  * (1 star out of 5)
Saw the first one for some reason, was very unimpressed. Saw the second one, and wow, teenagers love the damndest things. Not at all sure what the infatuation is. I have always liked Kristen Stewart. I first noticed her in Zathura, but she came into her own in In The Land of Women, Into The Wild, and Adventureland. She is a wonderful actress. The rest of the people in the movie are just props. A love triangle, Vampire drama, how spooky and original. New Moon dragged on and on with exposition, and rediculous storylines that were so empty. Luckily I snuck into this movie after seeing The Blind Side, as I was not going to pay for it. It isn't where I was going to put my hard earned money. Hollywood didn't need more money to prove they should make more crap like this.

Brothers  *** (3 stars out of 5)
Natalie Portman was quite strong in a serious, heavier roll than I have ever seen her in. I wish I could erase her roll in the new Star Wars movies forever. (And erase the new Star Wars movies too). Of course Jake Gyllenhal and Toby Maguire are stellar in their rolls. The movie packed a lot of emotional punch. It navigated the waters of war, love, and loss quite well. I would recommend this one if you are feeling a need for melancholy.

Sorry to be short and to the point, but figured a quick and dirty spattering of coverage would be better than none for my viewers.

Fall's Teethless Films

PSYCLOPSROBOT Says: The Insanity has finally arrived. Even a couple years ago, Fall was THE time to hit the theater. A large majority of the quality films, the Oscar contenders, the indie movies and such, hit the metroplex. This was a GLORIOUS time for the movie lover in me. So many to choose from, so many spectacular new stories.

That time has ended.

Holly "Greed is Good" Wood eliminated the use of good ideas and stories in their weird-land. Dramas have been removed from their regular offerings, as have Romances. Indie movies haven't seen this poor of a showing from Hollywood since before SEX, LIES, AND VIDEOTAPE (SLaV) changed the course of Independent Films across the globe. It sold for big bucks at Sundance back in 1989. The landscape of Hollywood would change forever. Or so we thought.

Twenty years later, Hollywood has caught on to the notion that Indie movies, movies with heart, and quirky movies, don't sell bucks at the box. A movie like SLaV would never be bought, pushed, and prodded on the public like it once was. Now, only movies with multiple tie ins are paraded out to the public. Turning a plastic army man into GI JOE and slapping a story around it makes sense to them. The little green men have been in the minds of boys (and some girls) for fifty years. Now that has legs.

Breakout movies like PARANORMAL ACTIVITY aren't missed by Hollywood Producers either. Every Producer out in Hollywood hopes and prays they can find the next Blair Witch Project and capitalize on it. Paranormal cost $15,000 to make, and at last check, brought in $84 Million! I have to agree, that is quite a feat. Much like Blair Witch though, it is a horror movie (the only kind so far to make big bucks with no to low money invested). For every Blair Witch though, there are a couple thousand unknowns and unworthy movies trying to cash in on the one in a million chance of hitting box office big.

Hollywood decided to slim down the amount of Oscar contenders it will be releasing this year. In exchange they increased the number of Horror movies, Kids movies, and Blockbuster CGI spectacle movies. They do not believe other movie varieties are worth creating anymore.

When it comes to Dollars and the subsequent GREED involved, small artistic, interesting movies are pathetic. So my question becomes:

Why on earth aren't Americans going to, interested in, excited by, and willing to spend money on some of the greatest pieces of filmmaking ever made? Why is everyone willing to spend enormous amounts of money on pitiful, artless, uninteresting movies like GI JOE or HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL, or TRANSFORMERS : THE RISE OF THE TWO THOUSAND PERSON SCREENWRITTEN FILM?

Well one answer is in. People no longer consider Movies an art form. Something worthy of their hard earned money. Adults would rather spend $70 a month on Cable TV and watch a thousand channels every night. A thousand channels of brain dead, Reality TV offerings. One study has been released announcing: Girls don't go to movies (especially between the ages of 14 and 40), Boys ARE the movie goers (between 14 and 20), Women rarely go to the movies (Over 40), and Men DO go to some movies (Over 20) just not nearly as much as teenage boys. Lastly, any Parents, with children under 14, go to movies. Kid movies that is. So, when it comes to dollars which are acceptable to let go of at the movie theaters, only teenage boys, and mom's with little tykes find it an ok "Dollars for Entertainment" trade.

Sadly, (for me) the numbers don't lie. It makes sense for Tinseltown to approach movie making strictly by the numbers to produce the most revenue. I believe, eventually, the producers in charge will see the error of their ways when people start limiting how much they go to movies overall. The lack of choice, that lack of intelligent writing and poor creativity, will eventually wear the public down. Even the 14 year old boys. Suddenly, Hollywood will discover that they have put a noose around their own neck.

It would be like being offered one of three things you can eat for the next 20 years: Liver and Onions, Big Macs, or Rice and Veggies. Many Americans would jump at the chance to eat Big Macs without end. What they don't realize is, any of the meals above would have their interest to different people, for a period of time. Eventually though, every morning, afternoon and evening of eating the same thing would drive people mad. People would be so bored they could literally go insane.

I know I would. Well, I already have. Lack of oxygen, and variety, and creativity, and a good story....makes....me.....crazy....

Wet Noodle Whip It!

WHIP IT!  (Ellen Page, Drew Barrymore (Dir.)
First Run * (1 stars out of 5) (So Sad!)
Second Run ** (2 stars out of 5) (Still So Sad!)
Rental  ** (2 stars out of 5) (Less Sad!) (Get it at REDBOX for $1 and it becomes a 3 star!)

Cable ***** (5 stars out of 5) (HOT! Cable is so lame, almost anything deserves 5 stars!) 

WHIP IT! I was looking forward to this movie. It had all the best possibilities: Wonderful actors, A cheesy, campy backdrop, eighties retrofitting, and girls sweating and pummeling each other.

The problem is, it completely missed capitalizing on all these aspects. I give Drew Barrymore props for attacking a non mainstream project. I just wish she would have done it better. While Whip It! aims to be a funky, cool, chick sports flick, it never raises it's standards above a lukewarm, tepid glass of water you don't want to drink. The ACTION concerned is dismal and repetitive. While Ellen Page is alternative and quirky for this roll, it is the first time I have seen her miscast. While trying to come across as small, fragile, dorky, and quiet, she can't, and it just isn't believable. Her performance seems so stilted as she holds herself back. Even though she is slight and small, she has a unique intensity. Maybe I am typecasting her, maybe because of her previous movies. I really don't think so though. She first came to my attention as an evil, vengeful, scary 14 year old, wreaking havok on a creepy 30 something photographer guy, in HARD CANDY. She was much younger then, but intense! And of course JUNO was a perfect fit for her style. A little softer yet, but still strong and intense.

Also to Ms. Barrymore, I would say: "EDIT, EDIT, EDIT".

So much of the movie would have, or could have worked, if only someone had come into the editing room, thrown all the spools of film on the floor, and completely changed the editing pace of the movie. It could have given many sequences more life. Never have I seen a sports movie, with what is supposed to be non-stop movement and action scenes, be so implausibly slow and clunky. If you watch close, sometimes when the girls are supposed to be rocketing around the Rollerderby oval, the actors are just standing there, watching as Ellen Page is rollering by. I guess in a lame way to make her seem to FLY by them at breakneck speeds. You can tell this whole movie was made as a girls "fun time" get together, everyone laughing and goofing off, and then stitched together as a movie. I'm sure Drew thought the humor would carry over into the final product, the fun and laughter in tact. It really, really did not. Watching others laugh and goof off does not automatically make onlookers laugh. It is a truth that seems to be missed by most people.

Maybe the rest of the world who didn't see it will luck out and the whole movie will be re-edited for video release. One can always hope, for all your sakes. I was a guinea pig, and this is my roar.

In the end, the story had an overall cliched, average, limpy ring to it. Not much to go away with and remember it with. Had I gotten a WHIP IT! T-shirt with the retro '80's look on it, now that would have been RAD! (For anyone born in the late 80's and after, RAD was a SWEET word brought about in the era of BREAKDANCING, Weird Al Yankovic, BMX Bikes, and the 32 ounce 7-11 slurpee (way before the 44 ounce was ever introduced). RAD was short for RADICAL!, as in "Far out Dude, that was a RAD face plant in the mud!").