'Extraordinary Measures' - enjoyable actors save this made for TV movie

Extraordinary Measures is not going to do well in the theaters. Not that it doesn’t try, but there was only me and two other people in the entire theater and that was a Friday Night!! I can honestly say that marketing was not where it should have been for this movie. It was actually better than I expected due mainly in part to the leads, Brandon Fraser and Harrison Ford. I couldn’t shake the feeling that this movie could just as well be on lifetime or some cable network, but I still liked it, despite how uninspiring it was.

The film follows a father (Fraser) of two children with a fatal disease that cajoles a cankerous university research doctor (Ford) into pursuing his theories into finding a cure for the disease. Now, from this description I have pretty much told you the entire movie, and I can bet most of you know exactly what happens in the movie and how it all ends. And you would be right. There is nothing special here, slick production, good lighting, quick pacing, OK dialog…but that merely makes this movie average.

What saves the film is the cast. Harrison Ford is far from charming as a dis-likable business partner. Think more ‘What Lied Beneath’ than ‘Indiana Jones’. Fraser does a good turn as a doughy executive and leaves his action persona and yelling from his action flicks to actually portray a desperate, yet very flawed friend. What really save the film are the secondary characters. I don’t know if the kids that were cast do indeed have some disease, but kudos to their very believable portrayal, quick dialog and enduring rough edges. Keri Russell as the wife and especially Courtney Vance as a father of some likewise sick kids does wonders with the five lines he was given in the film.

The film comes complete with trite music (really, have you no imagination), basic conversations and very predictable plot…yet there was nothing that actually bothered me about this movie. Usually, there is something about a film that really gets to me and distracts me from the experience I am having in the theater, but here, everything seems to work despite how boring it is. It will try to manipulate you to cry, though not nearly as shamelessly as well as ‘My Sisters Keeper’. It will also expect you to take everything for fact since it was based on a true story, but despite all its flaws, I actually enjoyed the movie, even if I should have been watching it at night on TV.

Final Consensus:
See it now!!!!
See it in theaters!!!
Rent it on DVD/BluRay!!
Wait for it on TV!
Don’t Bother.

Share

'The Lovely Bones' - some suspense, but mostly weird

I have to start out by saying that a grown man should never go alone to see a movie about a grown man stalking and killing teen girls in a movie theater filled with teen girls. It’s just creepy. I unfortunately forgot my notebook, which would have been some protection, as the audience would have assumed I was writing about the movie or at the very least not that into it. Since I did not have that shield, as the movie progressed I became more aware off the odd and very uncomfortable looks I was getting from some of the other audience members. Walking out of the theater after the film, I overheard a conversation that sums up this film pretty succinctly. The guy said to his date, ‘Sorry hun, it sounded OK reading about it, but it was just weird.’

What a weird movie, and believe me, I’ve seen a lot of weird movies. It’s like nothing really gelled here. Which is too bad since I had somewhat high expectations from the director of the ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogy Peter Jackson. The movie was a drama/thriller/fantasy/love story/ whatever other genre he could cram in there and almost none of it worked. It’s as if the film couldn’t decide what it wanted to be and so it threw in the whole kitchen sink. This method however, left the movie feeling disjointed and odd. The music was really distracting as well. Why would we want to see images of mourning backed by Jazz music? Weird.

‘The Lovely Bones’ is a film about a girl (played by Saoirse Ronan) who is murdered and must watch how her family deals with the grieving process from a place in between death and heaven. I had assumed that her mission would be for her to aid her family in their grief, or lead them to her killer or perhaps grow in some way she never had a chance to in life (that last can be debated). Unfortunately, all she does is walk around weird set pieces, amazing visual effects and stand in a gazebo looking at everything going on. It’s pretty anti-climatic. She does an OK acting job, but did little to dispel the urge I had to kick her in the throat after watching her annoying turn in ‘Atonement’.

The film wasn’t all-bad. Props to Stanly Tucci for making the bad guy seem extra smarmy, and for Susan Sarandon for trying her hardest to inject some sort of fun and humor into the joyless movie. The strongest parts were the thriller parts. There was some actual tension there and you could tell the director knew what he was doing building scenes of ‘will he/won’t she get caught’. The most successful part can be attributed more to Hitchcock than Peter Jackson. As the investigation and the family searched for the girls Murderer, there are a few scenes where the killer comes ever so close to being caught, and we as an audience hold our breaths because we know he may actually get caught. I really wanted him to be caught but it was shot in such a suspenseful way that we almost feel sympathy for the criminal in that he ‘made a mistake’

That aside, those two or three tense scenes are not enough to redeem a film, which is ultimately about a girl standing around in the afterlife. I have never read the book, and hear it is great, but from this picture, I probably won’t be picking it up anytime soon. Hopefully Peter Jackson can do much better as a producer for ‘The Hobbit’ that he did as a director of ‘The Lovely Bones’. Until then, we’ll have to lament the corpse of a movie that could have been…cue the Jazz music.

Final Consensus:
See it now!!!!
See it in theaters!!!
See it in BluRay!!
Rent it on DVD!
Don’t Bother.

***UPDATE***
As proof that this should not be a movie that single older men should go see, Box Office Mojo sent out this article highlighting the Audience for the film:

"Distributor Paramount Pictures' marketing targeted young females, selling the picture as a supernatural thriller, emotionally charged with its father-daughter relationship. The studio's research showed an audience composition of 72 percent female and 40 percent 20 years old and younger."

Wish I would have known this before I went to the theater by myself. I'm such a loser.

'Leap Year' - Just OK

The thing I remember most about ‘Leap Year’ starring Amy Adams was getting there. I got a nasty piece of dust in my eye and had to pull over the car and do a bit of contact wrangling so I could see clearly enough to drive to the theater. Now, don’t get me wrong…I didn’t hate the movie, I just though it was merely adequate. I’m not saying this because I hate chick flicks either. Give me a ‘Mean Girls’, ‘Clueless’ or ‘Notting Hill’ any day of the week and I would prefer them to most movies. It’s just that this romantic comedy never showed any, well, comedy.

I have to admit that I love Amy Adams. She was completely adorable in ‘Enchanted’ and the only thing that saved ‘Night at the Museum 2’ with her spitfire portrayal of Amelia Earhart. But one thing that ‘Julie and Julia’ showed and this film proves is that she can’t play anal and bwitchy, she’s just too cute and good-natured. As an uptight apartment stager Anna from Boston, I didn’t buy it for a second, which kind of ruins the whole story about a girl learning to let her hair down. Her love interest played by Matthew Goode does so well at playing an exasperated grouch that you never really believe any type of fondness can come from him, which unfortunately messes up their chemistry.

That being said, most of the films problems don’t lie with the actors. A major issue was the pacing of this film. There are many potentially funny and awkward situations that could be played for screwball comedy or pratfalls, but end up loosing their momentum because of the slow scene. Speeding up the editing and word exchange between the two main characters would have led to funnier surprises and smart, crackling dialogue. The dismal Disney channel like sound effects and score were distracting and the predictable plot left nothing to chance.

Not everything was bad. On the contrary, most of the movie gives you exactly what the previews show. John Lithgow was a breath of fresh air as Anna’s father, too bad he only had about 6 lines. The locations and cinematography were incredible and even used some original ideas like a midnight conversation done completely in silhouette in front of moonbeams reflecting off a lake. In the end however, this movie ranks slightly below average and didn’t have enough spark, speed, or originality to make it worthwhile for a movie theater. As my mom put it, its for people who like 'no-brainer romantic comedies'.

Final Consensus:
See it now!!!!
See it in theaters!!!
See it in BluRay!!
Rent it on DVD!
Don’t Bother.

Share

New Years Resolution - Watch More Movies

So this year my resolution is to watch more movies. 1 per week to be exact so that I see a new movie in the theaters every week. Crazy yes, I know. But I am passing the benefits of this obsession onto you. Each movie I watch will be reviewed by yours truly for you to make a more informed decision on your movie going excursions. I'm no professional journalist or art house geek so my reviews will be real, twanged with a bit of humor and made for the masses. True, I may review a film here or there that nobody has heard of or might even pan a movie that everyone else loves (that's for you chipmunks) but I hope you enjoy my exercise in making me feel like I'm contributing, and bringing a more cerebral experience to the brain rotting activity of sitting in front of a screen for hours at a time. Hope you enjoy!