Prince of Persia: Movie Review

SPOILER ALERT!!

There are stories here and there that use what we could call the ‘cop-out’. You know the ones. The protagonist suddenly wakes up in his bed to realize the whole thing is a dream. The kids finally get rid of the killer but he’s really not dead. You know. These are the films and stories I honestly believe one of two things happened. The original writer was fired and the finished the movie without a script, or the original writer died and a studio executive finished it for them. In either case, no self-respecting writer would ever do that to his or her own book, script, and screenplay what-have-you…until recently. I have seen way too many movies this year that ruin a perfectly enjoyable experience at the theater by killing the ending. They set it up for another sequel, they wrap it up to quickly or, as in the case of Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time…they just pretend it never happened.

OK, sorry, now that I’ve ruined the movie for you…feel free to sit back and enjoy a movie that is actually a lot of fun and really light popcorn fare. Jake Gyllenhaal plays the title character that was plucked as a homeless beggar from the streets to become an adopted son of the king. All grown up, he and his brothers are on conquest and make a fateful decision to attack a holy city who’s princess is charged with protecting a certain dagger. Of course by now you know the price falls for the princess and there is some backstabbing along the way. Believe you me; it is definitely not the plot that makes this movie enjoyable. Rather, it is the cast that seems to have a blast and we just go right along with it.

Jake Gyllenhaal has always been a conundrum to me playing in quirky 'indies' as well as spectacle pictures. But rarely has he seemed so alive and confident in this picture. And Gemma Arterton can actually act if she is given something other to do than be eye candy like in Clash of the Titans or Quantum of Solace. The real scene-stealer in the movie is Alfred Molina as the thief Nizam who throws himself with reckless abandon into the con artist ostrich-loving quasi bad-guy. Everyone else in the film is serviceable being led by Ben Kingsley doing his best Ben Kingsly impersonation and a slew of other characters that takes their roles a little to seriously for a movie based on an old Nintendo game.

The special effects could be amped up a bit, but it didn’t bother me too much since the best parts of the film had little or no effects in them. It’s a good thing the film is called Sands of Time because there is a lot of sand…I mean a LOT. So much so I started getting itchy thinking about how much sand poor Jake had to roll around in. Of course this movie is in no way a great film. I bet there are a few of you who would argue that this is an adequate film at best, but compared to some of the really agonizing stupidity that has come out this past year, Prince of Persia dares to be all out and does so with a healthy dose of tongue in cheek. Now if only we could get Hollywood to stop firing or killing of any descent writer, we might have a winning combination sooner or later.

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

Robin Hood: Movie Review

Word of mouth (or of finger) has the ability to make or break a movie after its released. Take for instance How to Train Your Dragon (still my #1 of 2010), which kept doing well in the theaters week after week because people told other people how good it was. On the other hand you have Clash of the Titans, which did menial box office despite it being one of the studios larger releases of the summer. Another caveat to the word of mouth phenomenon is the critics’ score. As regular people we like to think we don’t care about what all those hoity-toity critics write, but believe me, we are all eventually influence by them. And that was the very reason I was apprehensive about seeing Robin Hood. The critics trashed it so much, I didn’t even go see it opening weekend.

But there is a silver lining to such advice. Every now and then you are pleasantly surprised because your expectations are so low. I was really expecting this movie to suck…and here’s the kicker, it doesn’t. Could it be the critics are wrong? Heaven forbid! But in this case, I can honestly say they were. Robin Hood is an adventure movie pure and simple. It has your requisite corny lines, bad guy, good guy, love interest, totally unbelievable plot points and I though it was great. What dooms the movie however is that its lead actor/director tandem don’t live up to anywhere close to their previous Gladiator. Russell Crowe as Robin Hood is just as gloomy in this film as in Gladiator, but he really doesn’t have a reason to be. And poor Ridley Scott can’t seem to decide if he wants to be the man who directed Matchstick Men or the one directing Alien.

That aside, the movie is an escapist period piece that serves for very passable entertainment. We follow Robin Longstride as he assumes another’s identity to make it in a post-war England where he has no family. His antics win him the admiration of The Loxley patriarch played by a superb Max von Sydow and the ire of the widowed wife Maid Marion (Cate Blanchet). Of course throw in the merry men and Friar Tuck and we have a good time. This plot only brings us up to the moment where Robin becomes the outlaw…and doesn’t really delve into the legend. This irked me, as it seemed the ending of the movie was quickly wrapped up, re-edited and closed down for the sole purpose of making a sequel. It was done in such a rushed way that the pace totally threw me off.

Scott is at his best filming the fight scenes here. Reminiscent of Gladiator, they none-the less pull a few punches to keep the PG-13 rating. There are great action scenes but none that rival the wow factor of the adrenaline pumping 300 or Gladiator. What Robin Hood does try to do is present the story of the man with all the requisite entertainment required. In one aspect I do agree with the critics, it does take itself too seriously at times, but it’s nowhere near as brow-furrowed as Clash of the Titans. This is by no means a great movie, but I am very glad the critics were so off on this to lead me into enjoying it so much; and after Blade Runner..I have to forgive Scott of everything.

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

Shrek Forever After: Movie Review

My wife is constantly amazed that I seem to know plot points or at least memorable sequences to almost every movie I have ever seen. This has served me well, especially when categorizing my favorite films or deciding if I want to watch one film over another. Sometimes a movie comes along that I don’t really remember. Such is the case with the Shrek films. Whenever I remember anything about the Shrek movies, for some reason it always comes from the first one. Other than that, the rest all kind of run together and there is nothing really special or memorable about any of them. Unfortunately such is the case with Shrek Forever After. After a whole week has gone by, there is very little I remember about the film at all.

According to my notes, this Shrek finds our title hero giving up a day in his life so he can be an Ogre again. I know that this is a made up animated movie, but I can’t for the life of me remember or figure out how this worked or what the reason was behind it. Shrek supposedly wanted to be mean again, but I never remember him being all that scary to begin with. Anyway, Rumplestilskin is the guy who performs this deed and gives him a day, but something-something happens and Shrek has to do something before the day is through or he’ll never go back to the way it was. Now its never hard to suspend disbelief in a Shek movie, but even my fantastical suspension couldn’t get over this horrid plot which is basically It’s a Wonderful Life, with ogres.

There were some great parts for the kids. I went with my son who laughed out loud at some parts and even repeated some lines. Unfortunately, I don’t even remember chuckling that much. That was kind of a let down considering Shrek has always been good at eliciting laughs. I really wanted to see a comedy. What did happen though was totally unexpected. The movie was actually fairly moving. I wasn’t expecting to feel so proud of being a dad or so lucky to have the family I do. Granted, It’s a Wonderful Life does a much better job of this, but when it sneaks out of know where, it kind of gets you.

As far as the animation goes…. it’s adequate. It looks exactly the same as the first Shrek, which came out almost 10 years ago. I’m glad they kept the look consistent but c’mon guys; there is a decades worth of technological advances you could have used here. We did see this version in 3-D and other than a few gimmicks, I’m not sure it actually added anything to the visual experience for me. The Voices were adequate as well and the directing…well, adequate. I guess that is the best way to describe Shrek Forever After, adequate. Unfortunately, adequate won’t pull you out of the forgetful hole that Shrek 2 and 3 sunk into. Luckily, there is a little bit of emotion to go with this one.

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

Share

Iron Man 2: Movie Review

For some reason we Americans love rooting for the big brash super hero, aka cowboy, aka chosen one in our entertainment (and I guess political) choices. If the said hero is also a narcissistic smart mouth we seem to love him even more. If this indeed hold true then you will have a blast with Iron Man 2. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) returns as Iron Man but unlike most superhero movies and cliché’s we’re used too, he doesn’t have an alter ego and isn’t in hiding. On the contary contrary, as a matter of fact, Tony Stark is louder, more childish, more irresponsible (for good reason) than ever and we love him for it. I’m not saying that these are redeeming qualities, but is nice to see a superhero with some actual character flaws beyond just a tortured past.

The film does a wonderful job pleasing both the fan-boy and the regular theater-go'er alike. As for me, I’m an avowed comic book nerd, so to see parts or at least homage paid to War Machine, Whiplash, Black Widow, Nick Fury, S.H.I.E.L.D., Hammer, Captain America, The Avengers and Thor sure tickled my nerdy-bone. But for all you people who have not a clue what those things are…no worries. Less than two of them are actually named and the character development shows you how each superhero/villain came to be…or at least how they are tied in with Iron Man. I actually find that a rare feat to please both the comic nerds and the general audience.

A lot of that pleasing comes from the acting. Robert Downy Jr. steals the show of course as stark, but Sam Rockwell as Hammer does an equally dis-likable and smarmy arms dealing nemesis Hammer. Vanko is the real villain here; creating electric whips to take down Tony Stark after previous injustices he perceives Stark enterprises put his family through. Unfortunately, Mickey Rourke seems like a Shakespearean actor stuck in a freewheeling roller coaster ride. Maybe it was just that I couldn’t get over his horrible Russian (I couldn’t understand what he was saying…thank goodness for subtitles) or the fact that a man who lives for revenge, never gets angry.

Other actors did adequate. If it weren’t for the Oceans movies, I would have thought that Don Cheadle (Rhodes) hasn’t a funny bone in his body. I’ve never been one to like Scarlett Johansson’s inability to act, but she did OK as Natasha, Stark's new assistant, mainly because she is supposed to be full of mystery and psychologically unreadable. Perfect for an actress with the emotional range of toast. Don’t worry everyone; Gwyneth Paltro (Pepper Pots) is still on Tony’s radar, even though she has a new position that misses some of the senior/jr. employee love interest dynamic. The love triangle story is about as anemic as the first one, but does have some excellent tension and a sizable payoff…with whom, I won’t say.

Now the real question, was the movie as good as the first. The truthful answer is, yes…but the actual answer may be different to different viewers. There’s not anything totally amazing that we did not see in the first film. The requisite explosions, fast cars, cool special effects and bad guy suits but I couldn’t help but think this movie wasn’t as spectacular as the first. There are some slow parts to explain some things (a dude was snoring behind me in the theater at one point, honest to goodness), and even parts that were a little belabored (the audience figured out where the secret was before the master mind Tony Stark). But those didn’t affect the film. I think where the film suffers is in comparison to its fist incantation. When we all saw the first film, we enjoyed the humor, the over the top acting, the awesome special effects and the happy ending. The second has nothing new or different to share and so therefore doesn’t pack the same wow punch we all experienced when watching the first with fresh eyes. But I promise you; this will be no less enjoyable.

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

Share

Date Night: Movie Review

Date Night is not the type of movie that you want to see as a single person by yourself in the theater for a few reasons.
1. It’s called Date Night – nuf’ said
2. It has some racy parts where people may think you’re a little bit twisted to be watching by yourself.
3. The jokes are funny enough that you laugh, but not funny enough that the entire crowd laughs together. Hence, you feel really awkward quelling your own chuckles down to nervous grunts.

That being said, two of my favorite TV shows, 30 Rock and The Office seemed to have teamed up here in the forms of Tina Fey and Steve Carroll (sorry, I have no clue who their characters names are, the price you pay for fame). The only problem is they really haven’t teamed up. Fey does play a version of her self deprecating awkward humor she brings to Liz Lemon in 30 Rock, but Date Night asks us to believe that Steve Carroll is a normal boring dad and not a completely embarrassing, uncoordinated, awkward buffoon that we have come to love from The Office. The result is you expect him to be a lot funnier and zany. I guess that means that people who have never seen his TV show have the upper hand here.

The film does touch on some pretty touching stuff. Fey and Carroll play a married couple stuck in a rut and decide one night to spice things up. The originality here stems from a couple that truly love each other despite their seemingly dull lives. Borrowing a page from Hitchcock, they are mistaken for the wrong couple involved with the cities biggest crime boss and go on the lam looking to clear their names before the bad guys/cops can bring them in. Yes, it is a very boring premise. No, it is not a very boring movie, just predictable. I almost wish there was more outlandishness here to make it into a sort of Adventures in Babysitting. Instead, they director and writers try grounding the movie in too much reality making for some awkward and uncomfortable moments in scenes that could be completely crazy.

I am glad the film pulls a few punches. I’m not one for the gross out R rated comedies that have been popping up recently and this one flirts with some of that humor, but Fey and Carroll are able to carry the humor, conversation and yes, even the action through some pretty stupid scenes and horrible plot contrivances. I wish the director would have let them riff a little more and come up with their own stuff and keep that in the film rather than pack it into the end credits (funniest part of the movie) So, have fun with the movie, don’t expect too much and make sure you bring a date if you decide to watch it in the theater. Otherwise, watch Fey's and Carroll's TV shows instead.

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

Share