Month: December 2016

Today’s quick review: The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain. Reginald Anson (Hugh Grant) is an English surveyor who is remeasuring all the mountains in Wales for an official update to the maps. He arrives with his grumpy colleague in a small Welsh village which prides itself on being home to “the first mountain in Wales”. But when their survey measures the hill at just below the height requirement for a mountain, the villagers are outraged. Led by Morgan the Goat (Colm Meaney), they rally together to keep the surveyors from leaving town while they scramble for a way to restore the hill to a mountain. During the delay, Reginald finds love with a local woman named Elizabeth (Tara Fitzgerald), and the villagers find a common cause to set apart their rivalries.

The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain is a subdued romantic comedy set in a Welsh village during World War I. The main draws of the film are its low-stakes drama, its satisfying if predictable love story, and its rustic charm. The villagers are a colorful and wryly humorous lot, and their schemes and contentions set the plot in motion. Hugh Grant and Tara Fitzgerald have good chemistry together; their romance develops quite naturally from Elizabeth’s attempts to distract Reginald and successfully keeps him occupied while the villagers go about their business.

Make no mistake: the film is slow and quiet. The stakes never rise above the pride of a small village, there is no violence, and nearly all the jokes are delivered in British deadpan. The payoff is small coin for those more used to lavish cinematic productions: one romance, the honest charm of Welsh country folk, and an unusual fight over cartography. The realistic target audience is quite narrow, limited to those willing to invest their time and attention to catch the simple joys and nuanced humor that the movie delivers. Those who fall into this category will find the film charming; all others will find it dry.

Put another way, you should watch The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain only if you are a sap. The romance, the humor, and the characters are all rewarding for those who have wholesome tastes and wish to be pleased, with no violence, crudity, or excessive drama to ruin the atmosphere. Anyone else should steer clear. The movie is a clean execution of a concept with limited appeal.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for quaintness and charm; anyone outside of the optimal audience will find it closer to 6.0.

Today’s quick review: Catch Me If You Can. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Frank Abagnale, Jr., a young man with a talent for forgery and deception. He discovers that he can get anything he wants just by lying about it in the right way. Altering a few digits on a fraudulent check can fool the system long enough to take the money and skip town. Stealing a pilot’s uniform and assuming a fake identity can get him free flights to anywhere in the world. Abagnale travels the world in luxury, taking on new identities as it pleases him. But the FBI catches onto his fraud and sends Carl Hanratty, played by Tom Hanks, on a years-long hunt to find Abagnale and arrest him. With Hanratty on his trail and the novelty of the con wearing thin, Abagnale struggles to stay ahead of the feds and find meaning in a life of lies.

Catch Me If You Can is a gripping con story that is based on the memoirs of real-life con artist Frank Abagnale, Jr. The story is faithful to the book, albeit with some abridging, but even without embellishment, Abagnale’s exploits are as incredible as any fiction. At various points in his career, Abagnale poses as a pilot, a con artist, and a lawyer. He is frequently out of his depth, and much of the charm of the movie comes from seeing the tricks he uses to cover for his lack of genuine qualification. The tension between his nomadic life as a con artist and his growing desire to put down roots makes for some nice drama. The relationship between Abagnale and Hanratty mostly plays out over a distance, but the grudging respect between them is satisfying nonetheless.

Catch Me If You Can is a well-constructed drama with good acting, an interesting story, and a surface layer of charm and mischief that comes from the con lifestyle. Its adherence to real events gives it the flavor of memoirs: less a plot than a sequence of events with convenient starting and stopping points. Watch Catch Me If You Can when you’re in the mood for a real-life con story with good drama and a touch of humor. Skip it if you prefer a larger cast or a more structured story, or if true stories, no matter how incredible, hold little interest for you.

8.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for high quality within the confines of a true story; the IMDB score may be more reliable here.

Today’s quick review: Spirited Away. On their way to their new home, Chihiro and her family stop to explore the long-abandoned fairgrounds they find deep in the woods. Her parents discover a sumptuous feast in one of the booths, and, seeing no one around to accept payment, dig into it without asking. When Chihiro returns, they have been turned into pigs, and the setting sun brings out the many spirits that reside in the place. With the timely help of a young prince named Haku, Chihiro escapes the notice of the spirits and flees to a nearby bathhouse. The bathhouse is run by the cruel witch Yubaba, whom Chihiro asks for a job so she can work off her parents’ debt. Trapped all alone in a strange world of spirits and magic, Chihiro must use all of her bravery and cunning to free her parents and return to the life she once knew.

Spirited Away is an animated wonder and director Hayao Miyazaki’s masterpiece. The setting is a world of unbridled creativity, peopled with memorable characters and filled with beautiful imagery. The spirits run the gamut from nearly human to bizarre and grotesque, but each is stamped with creativity and insight into the human spirit. As always, Miyazaki’s animation is a delight to watch. The tiniest details come vividly to life, right down to the extra half-step needed for a child to walk alongside her father. Chihiro’s growth is plausible and subtle. The challenges before her require her to put away her fear, own up to her mistakes, and repay the kindness that is shown her.

Although it is a brilliant movie, Spirited Away can be somewhat inaccessible, especially during a first watch. The rules of magic are explained only as they come up, and it is often unclear what courses of action are available to Chihiro. The setting also draws heavily on Japanese culture and folklore, so aspects of the story and the setting that may be familiar to Japanese viewers can come across as strange or confusing to Western viewers. The path of the story is unpredictable and can feel arbitrary. Certain parts of the film are also rather disturbing, especially for a nominal family movie.

But the reward for taking the setting and story on their own terms is a movie that is a work of art. The beauty, creativity, and detail of the film are hard to overstate. Watch it when you are in the mood for a charming, rich, and haunting story of fantasy and personal growth. Do not pass up the chance to see it if you are at all curious about it.

8.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.5 to 9.0 for outstanding quality.

Today’s quick review: Sherlock Holmes. When Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and his partner John Watson (Jude Law) break up a murderous London cult, Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) is arrested and hanged. But when his grave is found empty, apparently blown open from the inside, Holmes and Watson must reopen the case to find out how the self-proclaimed sorcerer rose from the dead and stop him before his plans to throw London into chaos are complete. Beguiling the duo along the way is the irresistible Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), the one criminal Holmes cannot bring himself to catch. Their investigation takes them across London and deep into its government, unearthing occult secrets that just might be magic.

Sherlock Holmes is a lively, creative adaptation of the classic detective stories. Robert Downey, Jr. portrays Holmes as a bored genius, endlessly experimenting with chemicals, tinkering with gadgets, and boxing to stave off the boredom that sets in between cases. These facets of the character were present in the original stories to varying degrees, but they are played up in the film, producing a unique take on Holmes that complements both Downey, Jr.’s mischievous sense of humor and Guy Ritchie’s lively direction. Jude Law plays Doctor Watson, the straight man to the eccentric Holmes, skillfully walking the line between reluctant companion and willing accomplice. The duo are a delight to watch, clearly old and dear friends in spite of their differences. Holmes and Watson are nuanced characters with a complex relationship in addition to being an entertaining comedy duo.

The plot is well-constructed, full of intrigue and action. The central mystery is elaborate and satisfying, but its clues are difficult to interpret and its answers are back-loaded toward the end of the movie. As such, the mystery does a good job of taking the audience on an adventure and a poor job of taking the audience on an investigation. Director Guy Ritchie adapts well to his first big-budget film, adding polish and a sense of scope to his characteristic energy. Hans Zimmer scores the quirky soundtrack, giving the film a character that blends well with its acting, direction, and visual tone.

Sherlock Holmes is a fun adventure with a healthy mixture of action, mystery, and comedy. The Sherlock Holmes connoisseur may dislike this adaptation for the liberties it takes with the character, while mystery aficionados might sniff at the plot, but anyone who is willing to relax and have a good time will enjoy this movie. Give it a shot if you’re in the mood for a stylish film laced with mystery and humor.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for fun and style.

Today’s quick review: I Am Legend. Will Smith plays Robert Neville, the last man living in a zombie-ravaged New York. During the day, he scavenges for supplies, hunts the wildlife that now live in the city, and traps zombies to experiment on in the hope of finding a cure. After dark, he bunkers in an armored townhouse while the zombies roam the streets. He keeps his sanity through a mixture of diligent routine, various hobbies, and the company of his dog, his only companion.

I Am Legend is a lonely survival film set after the zombie apocalypse. The tone is bleak and sorrowful, but with a deeply buried core of hope. Will Smith delivers a moving performance as effectively the last man on Earth, full of loneliness, resilience, and humanity. The minimalistic cast is the greatest strength of the film and its greatest weakness. The activities of Neville’s day-to-day survival are interesting to watch but limited in story potential by the fact that he is just one man. The movie lingers on his tricks to find food, trap zombies, and keep himself safe, but these are more a part of the setting than the plot. The zombies are suitably terrifying, dangerous, and cunning.

I Am Legend is worth a watch if you are looking for a moody zombie survival film with a powerful emotional core. The character, setting, and execution of the film are all strong, but its plot progression is skewed by all the time spent on typical day-to-day life. I Am Legend is a depressing and occasionally scary watch. Watch if you’re interested in its skillful, if bleak, tone. Skip it if you prefer a bit more plot, a bit more optimism, or a larger cast.

7.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for strong tone and acting but a weak plot.

Today’s quick review: Muppet Treasure Island. Jim Hawkins (Kevin Bishop) is a young orphan who dreams of adventure, rather than his own dreary life working at an inn. He gets his chance when Billy Bones (Billy Connolly), a retired pirate and long-time patron of the inn, bequeaths him a treasure map. Fleeing the bloodthirsty pirates who are after the map, Jim and his friends Gonzo and Rizzo journey to London, where they convince the rich but half-witted Fozzie Bear to finance a voyage to find the treasure. The ship sets sail with Kermit the Frog as captain, Sam Eagle as first mate, and Jim, Gonzo, and Rizzo as cabin boys. But the crew themselves may not be trustworthy, and Long John Silver (Tim Curry), the ship’s one-legged cook, is keeping secrets from Jim.

Muppet Treasure Island is an adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic novel and one of the best Muppet movies ever made. The classic Muppet sense of humor blends well with the backbone provided by Treasure Island, and the film succeeds as both a comedy and a child-oriented adventure. The musical numbers are frequent and catchy, with excellent performances by Kevin Bishop, Tim Curry, and the entire Muppet cast. Tim Curry steals the show as Long John Silver, handling the character’s charm and menace with real talent. The tone of the film is predominantly comedy but dips into the adventure genre as needed to flesh out its characters and keep the plot moving.

Muppet Treasure Island is an excellent combination of comedy, music, and adventure. Any fan of the Muppets, light comedy, or well-written kids’ films will enjoy it. Those who find the genre immature or cheesy should skip it.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 9.0 for sentimental reasons, but I consider it at least an 8.0 on quality alone.

Today’s quick review: Crank: High Voltage. Jason Statham returns as Chev Chelios, who wakes up in a hospital bed months after the events of Crank. Chelios finds that he has heart has been surgically removed for transplant into an ailing mobster, and a battery-powered artificial heart is the only thing keeping him alive. He breaks out of captivity and goes on a city-spanning rampage in search of his stolen heart. His hunt takes him through gang hideouts, strip clubs, and the streets of Los Angeles and reunites him with his ex-girlfriend Eve (Amy Smart) and his doctor from the first movie (Dwight Yoakam). But the catch is that Chelios’s artificial heart can only hold an hour’s worth of charge, a number that decreases with exertion. To keep his heart charged, Chelios must shock himself with electricity, drawing power from tasers, car batteries, static electricity, and more to keep himself alive long enough to retrieve his heart.

Crank: High Voltage is a fast-paced, low-budget, and ridiculous action movie. Whereas the original Crank adhered more strongly to the tone and conventions of a typical action film, Crank: High Voltage shamelessly embraces its over-the-top nature. The result is an entertaining if nonsensical thrill ride full of violence, crude jokes, and nudity. Chelios’s second rampage is powered by electricity rather than the adrenaline of the first film, so every scene or two, Chelios must find a new way to electrocute himself. The plot is shoehorned into the aftermath of the first film, adding a brother to its crime family and weaving in revenge as a motivation for some characters. The film is heavily stylized, with a brief pixel art segment, a montage of characters shouting “Chelios!”, and a fight scene done in the style of a Japanese giant monster battle.

The main draw of Crank: High Voltage is its absurdity. Most of the combat takes the form of fairly standard run-and-gun shootouts, but the stylization, the reckless treatment of settings and characters, and the use of electricity give the action an extra edge. The character development is even more shallow than the first film, which is actually an advantage due to the unlikable nature of the characters. The sensibilities of the film are purely juvenile: there are shootouts in or around three different brothels or strip clubs in the first 20 minutes of the movie, the violence is gratuitous, and nearly all the characters are walking incarnations of rage and lust.

Those who are looking for a fast-paced and utterly shameless action film should give Crank: High Voltage a shot. It has very little going for it aside from its ridiculous premise, frenetic action, and heavy stylization, but these are enough to make it an enjoyable popcorn movie for those who don’t mind its sensibilities. Those who are sensitive to violence or nudity, who prefer action films with plots and characters, or who prefer their movies to make sense should skip Crank: High Voltage. You won’t get anything out of the movie if you can’t enjoy it for the ride.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for its absurdness and enjoyability.

Today’s quick review: Gamer. In the future, death row inmates are given a second chance at freedom through a lethal game called Slayers, where their bodies are used as player characters in a live-action version of a shooter video game. Injected with nanobots and controlled remotely by players, the inmates win their freedom if they survive thirty death matches. At the top of the charts is Kable (Gerard Butler), a man who wants his freedom so he can reunite with his family, and his controller Simon (Logan Lerman), a teenage gamer with dreams of wealth and glory. With only a few matches left until Kable goes free, Ken Castle (Michael C. Hall), the wealthy and sociopathic creator of Slayers, pulls out all the stops to ensure that Kable dies in a ratings-boosting blaze of glory.

Gamer is a violent sci-fi thriller that explores the question of what happens when humans turn their bodies over to external control. While the main emphasis of the film is on the action of Slayers and Kable’s attempts to escape it, Gamer actually manages to deliver on some of the speculative aspects of its premise. The decadence and perversion of the Internet are extrapolated to the real world through Society, a Sims-like game where players control real people who rent out their bodies for the purpose. Gladiatorial combat makes a comeback through Slayers under the fig leaf that death row inmates are given a chance at freedom. There are valid points here about the inhumanity of our entertainment, rooted in violence and freedom from consequence, or perhaps about the necessary boundary between fiction and reality to prevent the entertainment from becoming inhumane.

But for the most part, Gamer uses its far-fetched premise as an excuse for a death game. Slayers is a fairly generic FPS-style urban warfare game, mostly a vehicle for gun-toting action sequences, gory deaths, and shock value. Apart from one or two clever moments, the combat is unremarkable box-checking, mostly there to satisfy the action requirement and acquaint the viewer with Slayers. Gamer does earn style points for its music choice: the film has two or three standout tracks that add a lot to the atmosphere of the world. The acting similarly supports the tone of the movie: Gerard Butler plays one of the only normal characters in the film, Terry Crews plays a menacing and psychotic rival to Kable, and Michael C. Hall plays a sadistic billionaire who has the world fooled. Everything from the camera work to the characters to the violence contributes to the surreal sensation of a world gone amok.

Gamer suffers from a number of problems that act as barriers to enjoyment. The premise is geared heavily towards an action movie, but the action in Gamer is merely adequate, not outstanding. The premise also works as a social commentary and area for sci-fi speculation, but the purposeful distastefulness of the world directly impacts its plausibility. Gamer has the tone of a critique and the back story of an action movie, and neither of these are enough to support Gamer as serious speculation. Its entertainment value as an action movie is damaged by its mediocre combat and emphasis on an inhuman future. The film is left to coast on its style and its dark but consistent view on humanity.

Watch Gamer if you are willing to spend some time with the seamy side of humanity for the sake of violence, style, and intellectual bubblegum. Gamer does not stand out as an action movie, a sci-fi movie, or a social commentary, but the combination of elements makes for an interesting watch. Those who find the tone or style enjoyable will get something out of this movie, but most others will not. The ideal viewer is desensitized to violence, attracted to spectacle, and willing to chew on what speculation and commentary Gamer has to offer. Those who are sensitive to violence, have an optimistic view of humanity, or prefer their action unadulterated and guilt-free should skip the film entirely.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for interesting concepts and stylization, but others will find it closer to 6.0 or 6.5 according to their tastes.

Today’s quick review: The Tournament. Every seven years, a tournament is held between thirty of the greatest assassins in the world. A small town is sealed off and equipped with surveillance cameras, and the assassins engage in a fight to the death, with the last survivor earning a huge cash prize. The tournament is organized and sponsored by a cabal of wealthy gamblers who use the contest for their own twisted amusement. Father MacAvoy (Robert Carlyle), a civilian priest with a drinking problem, gets dragged into the tournament when a competitor plants his tracker on him, effectively dropping off the grid while Father MacAvoy unwittingly takes his place. An assassin by the name of Lai Lai Zhen (Kelly Hu) comes to his aid, and together they brave the death game, hoping to survive long enough to get MacAvoy out of the competition. Their greatest obstacle along the way is Joshua Harlow (Ving Rhames), the legendary assassin who won the previous tournament, now back to take revenge on one of the contestants.

The Tournament is a low-budget action movie centered around a brutal death game between assassins. The premise, even if not entirely original, has good potential for an action movie, and The Tournament lives up to this potential quite well for a movie on a budget. While as shallow as one would expect from the premise, the plot has a few good twists to keep the action moving and the stakes in flux. The characters are not particularly strong or memorable, but they get the job done, with just enough depth to set up their motivations and prepare for plot twists. The action is surprisingly fun and serves as the main draw of the movie. The combat is fast-paced and violent, given variety by the various fighting styles of the assassins. Everything from parkour to brute-force shootouts makes an appearance among the fighters, and the film does a good job balancing its stunts’ cost and their impact.

The Tournament is a surprisingly enjoyable popcorn film when you’re in the mood for a bit of action. Watch it if you enjoy violent action movies with little in the way of plot or character depth. Skip it if you dislike violence or you are looking for recognizable actors, deep characters, or a meaningful plot.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7 for solid action, if not much else.

Today’s quick review: Bandits. Joe Blake (Bruce Willis) and Terry Collins (Billy Bob Thornton) are a pair of bank robbers with a novel approach to robbing banks. Rather than trying to beat the banks’ security systems directly, they go to the bank manager’s house the night before the robbery, hold the manager and his family hostage until the morning, then take the manager to get them the money when the bank opens. Their crime spree hits a snag when Terry inadvertently kidnaps Kate Wheeler (Cate Blanchett) during a bungled carjacking. Kate is a housewife in a dying relationship who finally finds the excitement she craves with Joe and Terry. But the feelings she develops for both men threaten to split the duo apart.

Bandits is a crime comedy with a romantic plot. Bruce Willis plays the confident, dangerous Joe, who sweeps Kate off her feet. Billy Bob Thornton plays his best friend and partner in crime, the neurotic Terry, whose sensitivity endears him to Kate. This love triangle is standard enough fare and forms the heart of the movie. The characters are moderately entertaining but not particularly deep or interesting. The plot is similarly straightforward: the duo pulls off a string of heists until the public cottons to their technique, leading to greater challenges from without even as the love triangle is tearing them apart from within. The comedy is amusing in places but not particularly memorable.

Watch Bandits only if you’re in the mood for a light, romcom-esque crime comedy and don’t care too much about quality. The film manages to be amusing in places, and it has a couple of good ideas that it does not properly capitalize on, but ultimately it is not satisfying as either a romance or a comedy. Skip it if you prefer a film with a bit more meat on its bones.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for having mild charm but ultimately being a forgettable watch.