Month: April 2018

Today’s quick review: Major League II. One year after a miraculous season, the Cleveland Indians have lost their edge. It’s up to their coach Lou Brown (James Gammon), veteran catcher Jake Taylor (Tom Berenger), and the team’s new owner Roger Dorn (Corbin Bernsen) to whip the team back into shape. But the Indians face stiff competition from the Chicago White Sox, particularly with ace pitcher Ricky Vaughn (Charlie Sheen) going through an identity crisis.

Major League II is a sports comedy that pits a team of oddballs against fearsome rivals, fickle fans, and their own success. The sequel sees most of the original cast return, with a few colorful newcomers to round out the team. Major League II has good comedic actors, charming moments, and a light, fun tone. However, the film is held back by a halfhearted script and recycled jokes, keeping it from matching its predecessor.

Major League II follows the same formula as the original Major League. The Cleveland Indians are thrust back into their underdog role by their own lack of focus. The script puts in less effort than the original, coasting on reused gimmicks without innovating much. The sequel does have its moments, but in general it lacks the heart of the original. The odds are not as long, the victories are not as hard-won, and the jokes are not as memorable.

Watch Major League II if you enjoyed the first film and don’t mind a dip in quality. Though not as novel or as cleanly executed as the original, Major League II remains a light and fairly entertaining watch. Those looking for more bang for their buck should check out the original Major League. For a more ridiculous sports comedy, try Dodgeball.

5.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for decent fun and a good cast, but without the heart of the original.

Today’s quick review: Blame!. In the distant future, the remnants of humanity live in an enormous, self-replicating city ruled by a hostile machine intelligence. While out scavenging for food, Zuru, a girl from a small village of survivors, encounters Killy, a strange man on a mission to free the city from machine control. Pressured by dwindling resources, the hunters from Zuru’s village embark on a risky mission to help Killy acquire the device he needs.

Blame! is a Japanese animated science fiction film set in a distant future where humanity has all but died out. Information about the past is scarce, and the few survivors have barely enough resources to get by. The only hope of taking back the city lies in the Net Terminal Gene, which humanity once possessed, and Killy, the stranger who seeks it. Blame! is a tense, atmospheric movie that tells one tale from humanity’s long decline.

Blame! is noteworthy for its excellent setting, intriguing science fiction concepts, and strong character designs. The city is a boundless expanse of abandoned buildings, technological superstructures, and defunct machinery that mankind lacks the knowledge to operate. It is patrolled by fearsome mechanical beasts, while enormous Builders gradually reshape and extend the city for some unknown purpose. The sense of scale and mystery is impressive.

However, Blame! has shortcomings that keep it from making the most of its good ideas. The characters are not fleshed out all that well, with flat personalities and little depth. The visual style of CGI done up to look like traditional anime works well for the machines and environments, but it comes across as stiff and bland for the characters themselves. The plot also fails to follow up on the setting’s most potent mysteries, with only a mediocre payoff.

Watch Blame! if you are interested in dystopian science fiction with a great sense of mystery. The concepts alone make Blame! worth a watch for fans of the genre, but those looking for a full package will be let down by the writing and characters. For a more violent movie with a similar element of mystery, check out Gantz: O.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for great ideas and decent execution.

“Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable? Or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?” —Rob Gordon

Today’s quick review: High Fidelity. While going through a messy breakup with his longtime girlfriend Laura (Iben Hjejle), Rob Gordon (John Cusack), a Chicago record store owner, recounts his troubled romantic history in search of answers. Helping him through his rough patch are Dick (Todd Louiso) and Barry (Jack Black), a pair of dysfunctional clerks at his record store.

High Fidelity is a romantic comedy with a great script and an expansive soundtrack. High Fidelity follows Rob Gordon as he takes stock of his love life during a particularly nasty breakup. The humor comes from Rob’s witty observations on love, the odd personalities of his friends, and his persistent inability to get over Laura. The story is punctuated by a wide selection of pop hits that underscore Rob’s one constant love in life: the world of music.

Rob spends much of his time either talking to himself or to the camera: reviewing his love life, venting his frustrations, and compiling Top 5 lists. For all that he blames others, it is clear that his troubles are at least partially self-inflicted. He is petty, self-centered, and hypocritical, but sympathetic enough to be likable even at his worst. John Cusack’s strong performance is what holds the film together and gives it its distinctive tone.

Watch High Fidelity when you are in the mood for a romantic comedy with an tinge of bitterness and plenty of awkward moments. The characters charm, the romance satisfies without being too sappy, and the script remains interesting throughout. For a similar comedy with more conventional presentation, check out Grosse Pointe Blank. For an action fantasy take on a similar premise, check out Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

7.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for strong characters and narration.

“Welcome to Earth!” —Captain Steve Hiller

Today’s quick review: Independence Day. When aliens attack Earth’s major cities, President Thomas Whitmore (Bill Pullman) must coordinate the United States’ response to the unprecedented threat. His unlikely allies are David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum), a talented signals expert from a New York TV station, and Captain Steve Hiller (Will Smith), a Marine Corps pilot who is one of the first people to interact with the aliens up close.

Independence Day is a science fiction action movie with a good script and strong execution. The story follows the three main characters, their families, and several other survivors as the Earth scrambles to fend off a devastating alien invasion. Between a charismatic lead trio and a sympathetic supporting cast, Independence Day does an excellent job of giving the viewer something to root for. It’s a straightforward premise: defeat the aliens or be destroyed.

Independence Day is an action movie with an unusual amount of meat on its bones. The story is well-paced, and each new development is given proper emphasis. At the same time, the story has enough content that it never feels padded, in spite of its length. The special effects hold up quite well two decades after the film’s release. The action comes from the movie’s large-scale destruction and frantic dogfights, but even the minor scenes feel purposeful.

Independence Day is also a remarkably honest movie. The film delivers exactly what it promises: an alien invasion of massive proportions, big special effects, and a bright ray of hope through the middle of it all. The devastation is awe-inspiring, the sad moments hit the mark, and the victories are triumphant. There’s nothing deep about it, just likable characters, a well-structured plot, and a steady stream of great moments.

Watch Independence Day when you are in the mood for a straightforward but well-executed action movie with an impressive sense of scale. To enjoy Independence Day, you have to be able to take it at face value and get engrossed in the universe. Those who prefer more nuanced films may want to check out Arrival instead as a cerebral take on first contact. Those who enjoy Independence Day’s defiant tone and clear emotions should also give Armageddon a watch as well.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for likable characters, good visuals, and a well-paced plot.

Today’s quick review: Beowulf. When the demon Grendel (Crispin Glover) attacks the domain of King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins), the legendary hero Beowulf (Ray Winstone) travels from afar to slay the monster. His heroics earn him the praise of the king, the adoration of his wife (Robin Wright-Penn), and the grudging respect of his advisor (John Malkovich). But in defeating Grendel, Beowulf sets loose an even greater demon on the land: the beast’s mother (Angelina Jolie).

Beowulf is a fantasy action adventure movie loosely based on the classic epic poem. With a talented cast, violent action, and a touch of attitude, Beowulf aims to bring epic fantasy to a modern audience. In this it is only partially successful: the film’s experimental visual style does not quite pay off for it, the script is competent but not iconic, and the tone is an unusual mixture of defiant heroism, action horror, and faded glory.

Beowulf sports visuals done almost entirely in realistic CGI. As a result, the film is free to indulge in elaborate action sequences, sweeping camera shots, and impossible camera angles. However, the character models have an unnatural look to them that is difficult to get used to. Movements are just a bit too exaggerated, while everything from the film’s physics to its sense of perspective feels distorted. The visual style is a bold experiment with mixed results.

Perhaps the movie’s best feature is its action. Here the imagination runs wild, with Beowulf’s almost superhuman prowess pitted against the grotesque monsters stalking Denmark. Though the choreography is not outstanding, the action does feel suitably grand in scope. However, there is an edge of horror to it that some viewers may find unappealing. Between the unsightly monsters, the occasional scare, and a few brutal kills, Beowulf is not a tame movie.

Watch Beowulf only if you are drawn to the visceral side of fantasy action. Beowulf is an unusually ambitious action movie whose gambles do not all pay off. Most viewers would be better off watching something like Clash of the Titans instead, which has the same type of monster-slaying action, but with cleaner presentation and a purer heroic tone.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent action, an odd aesthetic, and a not entirely satsifying tone.

Today’s quick review: Traffic. In Washington, D.C., Judge Bob Wakefield (Michael Douglas) accepts an appointment as drug czar, but his own daughter’s drug abuse makes him question his mission. In Tijuana, Javier Rodriguez (Benicio Del Toro), an honest cop, works with a general to take down a drug cartel. In San Diego, DEA agent Montel Gordon’s (Don Cheadle) investigation of her husband throws the life of Helena Ayala (Catherine Zeta-Jones) into chaos.

Traffic is a crime drama with a gritty tone and deliberate storytelling. Traffic follows several interwoven stories linked to the drug trade. Each story is presented with care, with the same considered writing, high-caliber cast, and tense, moody direction. The result is a well-crafted but emotionally heavy drama that achieves what it sets out to do: offer a sobering, multifaceted look at the War on Drugs.

Traffic’s skillful execution comes with a price. Thanks to the film’s weighty themes and criminal elements, the tone wallows in the bleaker range of the emotional spectrum, offering little in the way of catharsis or resolution. The uncertain development of the movie’s substories do give it a productive sense of tension, but none of the main characters are sympathetic enough to invest strongly in, in spite of their good acting and interesting predicaments.

The presentation is also hit or miss. Traffic makes heavy use of colored filters, close shots, and spacy music to establish its ambience. These elements work almost too well, saturating the film with its intended tone. Similarly, the writing has a documentary tinge to it, with stories calculated to provide a cross-section of the drug trade, lines dedicated to statistics and observations, and abridged versions of key events.

Whether these choices come across as fine filmmaking or unpalatable quirks will depend on your taste in movies. Those who like their crime dramas meaty and realistic will appreciate Traffic for its direction, acting, and choice of themes. Those who prefer cohesive, fictionalized crime dramas will not get as much out of it.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for good craftsmanship, somewhat unlikable characters, and a grim tone; your score will be higher if you enjoy its themes, its realism, and its particular brand of presentation.

Today’s quick review: Dragonball: Evolution. When the alien conquerer Lord Piccolo (James Marsters) returns after two thousand years of imprisonment, Goku (Justin Chatwin), a teenager given special martial arts training by his grandfather, must collect the seven mystic Dragonballs to stop Piccolo from freeing his minion Oozaru and destroying the Earth. His guide on his quest is Master Roshi (Chow Yun-Fat), an eccentric expert who trains Goku to harness his qi.

Dragonball: Evolution is a fantasy action adventure movie loosely based on the Dragonball manga and cartoon. The popular series makes a rocky transition to the big screen in a movie hampered by poor acting, an awkward script, and mediocre fight scenes. Dragonball: Evolution follows a dedicated kids’ movie formula, but it lacks the quality needed to hit even that target. What little charm is to be found is buried too deeply to make much of a difference.

Dragonball: Evolution’s troubles begin with its writing. The plot is straightforward enough, but not without holes. Lord Piccolo’s escape and return are never properly explained, the exact mechanics of his plan are unclear, and new characters join the story abruptly and without much reason. The dialogue is uninspired, verging on awkward at several key moments. The writing also has a knack for robbing pivotal events of their impact.

The acting is little better. Chow Yun-Fat has a glimmer of potential as the mischievous Master Roshi, but little of value is done with the character. Justin Chatwin makes for a disappointing Goku, a dorky teenager with modest fighting abilities and an unconvincing character arc. Lord Piccolo and his henchman Mai (Eriko) are almost entirely without character, while supporting cast members Bulma (Emmy Rossum) and Yamcha (Joon Park) are quirky but not entertaining.

Dragonball: Evolution shows a little more potential with its fighting. The acrobatic, martial arts combat could have been the basis of innovative action scenes in the right hands, but again the movie fails to deliver. Quick cuts are used to mask the choreography’s weaknesses, the physics are unconvincing in away that goes beyond the usual strangenss of wire fu, and the energy attacks, when they come, are flat and unimpressive.

Watch Dragonball: Evolution only if you are interested in failed adaptations. Though not entirely irredeemable as a kids’ movie, Dragonball: Evolution has enough glaring flaws to keep it from impressing any but the most forgiving fans. For a similarly flawed adaptation of a beloved cartoon, check out The Last Airbender. For a more mature flop with an oddly similar plot, check out Dragon Wars: D-War.

2.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 4.0 for a poor setup and worse delivery.

Today’s quick review: How to Steal a Million. Charles Bonnet (Hugh Griffith), a master art forger, presses his luck by loaning a fake sculpture valued at $1 million to a museum for public display. But when the museum prepares to test the piece’s authenticity, his daughter Nicole (Audrey Hepburn) and Simon Dermott (Peter O’Toole), an unusual art thief, must come up with a plan to steal the statue before it can be revealed as a fake.

How to Steal a Million is a heist film and romantic comedy set in Paris in the 1960s. How to Steal a Million is a generally well-crafted movie that does well with its writing, acting, and tone. The dialogue has plenty of humor tucked away in it, while the story nicely balances plausibility and serendipity. The romance is slow to develop: the movie lets Nicole and Simon butt heads for a while before giving them any reason to like each other.

Audrey Hepburn pulls off a surprisingly nuanced Nicole Bonnet. Though Nicole is not all that deep a character, the tension between her scruples and her father’s career, Simon’s peculiar behavior, and the heist itself give Hepburn plenty to work with. For his part, Peter O’Toole plays a canny Simon Dermott. The two are only a couple inasmuch as they are forced to be by circumstances, but their exchanges are the movie’s bread and butter.

Watch How to Steal a Million when you are in the mood for a light watch with classic sensibilities. Strong writing and acting, coupled with a tone that has become uncommon, make How to Steal a Million an enjoyable watch. Skip it if you are looking for edge-of-your-seat excitement, you dislike romance, or you prefer your comedy riotous.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for enduring quality.

Today’s quick review: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Lorelei Lee (Marilyn Monroe) and Dorothy Shaw (Jane Russell), a pair of nightclub performers, take a trip to Paris to convince Lorelei’s wealthy fiance, Gus Esmond, Jr. (Tommy Noonan), to marry her. But Gus’s father disapproves of the marriage and sends Ernie Malone (Elliott Reid), a private investigator, to spy on Lorelei, whose flirtatious behavior threatens to sabotage her marriage.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes is a romantic comedy about love and money. With a light tone, smart dialogue, and a pair of charming leads, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes is a breezy watch for fans of classic movies. It is a musical as well, and its songs are upbeat numbers worked in naturally throughout the film. Few of them are memorable, but all of them are pleasant, and “Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend” has achieved fame since the movie’s release.

Jane Russell and Marilyn Monroe make a great duo. Marilyn Monroe plays Lorelei Lee, a ditzy woman with a stated preference for rich men. Jane Russell plays her best friend, Dorothy Shaw, a sharp woman with a good sense of humor. The gentlemen don’t make as much of an impact, but fine performances from Tommy Noonan, Elliott Reid, and Charles Coburn, playing a wealthy older man on the ship, help hold the movie together.

Watch Gentlemen Prefer Blondes when you are in the mood for something light and innocent. The interplay between Lorelei and Dorothy, the film’s unique take on love, and a few good songs make it worth keeping an eye out for if you are a fan of 50s musicals. Those who prefer their comedies with a bit more bite or their romances with a bit more drama may want to pass.

7.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for sweet, entertaining comedy.

“I wonder if the three of us would’ve been friends in real life. Not as brothers, but as people.” —Jack

Today’s quick review: The Darjeeling Limited. After nearly dying in a motorcycle accident, Francis Whitman (Owen Wilson) invites his estranged brothers Peter (Adrien Brody) and Jack (Jason Schwartzman) on a spiritual journey aboard The Darjeeling Limited, a train traveling across India. Along the way, the trio take in the local color, confront challenges both spiritual and logistical, and manage to overcome some of their shared issues.

The Darjeeling Limited is an unconventional comedy from director Wes Anderson. The Darjeeling Limited features a strong artistic vision, a quietly talented cast, and a meticulous directorial style. The film’s understated humor stems from its peculiar characters, their petty conversations, and the utterly dry presentation of absurd situations. As a result, the comedy is more cerebral than emotional, relying more on tone than individual jokes.

The Darjeeling Limited’s style is characteristic of Wes Anderson. The cinematography relies almost exclusively on square shots and simple zooms, with an emphasis on symmetry and framing. The environments are colorful and richly detailed, and the film’s yellow-gold color palette that fits the tone well. The acting is unemotional, with most of the characterization tucked away in minute facial expressions, minor pieces of dialogue, and other subtle clues.

However, The Darjeeling Limited lacks the punch of Wes Anderson’s other work. The story eventually resolves itself into a touching tale about three brothers with a lot of baggage, but it relies on style to keep the viewer engaged for the first two-thirds. The movie accomplishes plenty with the tools at its disposal, but those looking for a punchy comedy like The Grand Budapest Hotel or a masterpiece of stylization like Moonrise Kingdom will be disappointed.

The Darjeeling Limited is worth a watch for anyone who enjoys thoughtful cinematography, quirky writing, and unconventional humor. Though it lacks the overt humor and sharp plot needed to match Wes Anderson’s best work, its craftsmanship is enough to make it a unique and interesting experience. Those looking for cheap laughs should look elsewhere. Those who are new to Wes Anderson may want to check out The Grand Budapest Hotel instead.

As a side note, The Darjeeling Limited was released with a 13-minute short film named Hotel Chevalier. The short film is a well-directed but uneventful scene that sheds light on Jack’s activities before the events of the movie. Its main value is in setting up a few subtle jokes in the main film, but it can be skipped without much loss.

7.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for fine craftsmanship and charming moments, but missing that extra punch.