Author: Stan

Today’s quick review: Finding Nemo. When Nemo (Alexander Gould), a young clownfish, is captured by a human, his overprotective father Marlin (Albert Brooks) must leave the shelter of his home to rescue his son. His journey takes him into deep waters, past sharks and sea turtles, and far from his home. Along the way he befriends Dory (Ellen DeGeneres), a forgetful fish with an optimistic outlook on life. Together they set about the difficult task of finding one fish in an ocean.

Finding Nemo is an animated family film from Disney and Pixar. Colorful CGI coupled with lively characters, light humor, and a sweet story make it a modern classic. Finding Nemo is a road movie of sorts. Marlin and Dory embark on an underwater journey to reach where they believe Nemo was taken. The two personalities play well off each other, with Marlin as the overly cautious straight man and Dory as the airheaded optimist. Nemo’s plight, the dangers that Marlin and Dory face, and the vastness of the ocean lend a bit of gravity to the film. For all that Marlin worries too much, his fears are at least partially justified: the ocean is a dangerous place for a small fish. These heavier themes are deployed well, never dragging the movie too far down while still conveying a sense of drama.

Finding Nemo takes a cute premise and delivers on it with rock-solid execution. The animation is gorgeous, the world rich, the story well-paced, and the quotes memorable. Watch it if you enjoy Disney films or are in the mood for something light or well-crafted. Skip it if you dislike the genre.

8.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for solid execution.

Today’s quick review: Fantastic Mr. Fox. Mr. Fox (George Clooney), a chicken-thief-turned-writer, lives in a burrow with his wife Mrs. Fox (Meryl Streep), his grumpy teenage son Ash (Jason Schwartzman), and his athletic nephew Kristofferson (Eric Anderson). When his old life calls to him, Mr. Fox moves his family into a tree with a strategic view of three ripe farms and resumes thievery with the help of his new landlord, an opossum named Kylie (Wallace Wolodarsky). But the farmers are not to be trifled with, and Mr. Fox’s exploits soon threaten the safety of his family.

Fantastic Mr. Fox is a stop-motion family comedy based on the book by Roald Dahl and directed by Wes Anderson. Wes Anderson brings some of his hallmarks to the film, including straight camera shots, quirky dialogue, and an energetic score by Alexandre Desplat. But unlike his live action films, where the actors under-perform for the sake of tone, the voice actors in Fantastic Mr. Fox are given reign to bring their characters to life. The result is a film that is more lively and accessible than Wes Anderson’s other works while still retaining his quirky charm.

The film’s art style is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it gives the characters free reign to move in peculiar ways, easily pulling off shots that would be impossible in live action. On the other hand, the visual style of the film takes a lot of getting used to. The lanky characters, peculiar facial features, and simplified landscapes all feel off, as though they were the representation of a world rather than a world of their own. The effect wears off after about half an hour, just leaving a sense of energy behind, but be sure to stick with it until then.

Fantastic Mr. Fox is a light, quirky comedy with a peculiar art style, good characters, and bits of directorial flair throughout. Watch it if you are a Wes Anderson fan, you enjoy stylized films, or you are in the mood for a quaint, fast-paced family film. Skip it if you prefer films that are more normal than experimental, or if you are looking for a hilarious comedy rather than an amusing one. The level of craftsmanship is high, and while parts of the world are off-putting, Fantastic Mr. Fox succeeds in telling a pleasant tale with energy and style.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for quality, creativity, and strong voice acting.

Today’s quick review: Hot Shots! Part Deux. Topper Harley (Charlie Sheen), one of the Navy’s finest, returns from his self-imposed exile at the behest of U.S. President Tug Benson (Lloyd Bridges), his former admiral. His mission is to rescue the American hostages being held in Iraq, as well as the previous rescue teams sent in after them. Together with a sultry liaison (Brenda Bakke) and a team of crack commandos, Topper carves a path through the jungles of Iraq to Saddam Hussein’s compound. But when Ramada (Valeria Golino), his old flame, shows up on the mission, old heartbreak stirs again, putting the mission in jeopardy.

Hot Shots! Part Deux is a goofy Rambo parody that serves as a loose sequel to the original Hot Shots!. Its style of humor is identical to its predecessor, with sight gags, faux seriousness, slapstick, light political satire, and parodies of scenes from popular movies. But it lacks some of the polish of its predecessor: the plot is less coherent, the soundtrack is less memorable, and the world feels less authentic. If Hot Shots! is Top Gun seen through a comedic lens, its sequel is merely jokes about Rambo, Apocalypse Now, and a host of other movies.

These shortcomings are merely the difference between funny and impressively funny, and Hot Shots! Part Deux is still a side-splitter for those with the right sense of humor. The individual gags are hilarious, from the celibate monks who rush to impress the first woman they have ever seen to the team’s pitiful attempts to look like fishermen when an Iraqi patrol comes to inspect their boat. The comedy is silly, plentiful, and slightly surreal. The jokes are brought together by a cast that knows how to make absurd behavior seem like the most natural thing in the world.

Hot Shots! Part Deux is a good choice for anyone with a silly sense of humor and a bit of time to kill. Fans of Airplane! and the Naked Gun series will appreciate another fine movie in the same style, while Monty Python fans are encouraged to make the leap to something less British but spiritually quite similar. Those who prefer comedy that is less absurd, more intelligent, or wrapped around a stronger plot should look elsewhere. Thought not a perfect sequel, Hot Shots! Part Deux delivers on what it promises: laughter, and plenty of it.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for good gags held back by a mediocre core.

Today’s quick review: Mission: Impossible II. Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise), one of the IMF’s top agents, cuts his vacation short for a mission that could save the world. Sean Ambrose (Dougray Scott), a rogue IMF agent, has stolen the antidote to the Chimera virus from the scientist who developed it. With the virus itself, Ambrose will be able to trigger an epidemic that only he has the ability to cure. To get close to Ambrose, Ethan must recruit Nyah Nordoff-Hall (Thandie Newton), a high-class thief who was once Ambrose’s lover. Ethan is joined once again by Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames), an IMF agent with a knack for computers and one of Ethan’s closest friends.

Mission: Impossible II is a spy action thriller and the second film in the Mission: Impossible franchise. Although an enjoyable watch, it is the weakest entry in the series so far. It lacks the intrigue of the first film or the strong character interactions of the later films, leaving only big stunts and Ethan’s spy antics to draw the audience in. The spy parts of the film are a touch more cartoonish than usual, with high-speed chases down winding mountain roads and slow motion martial arts showdowns. But the film has plenty of action, the action has plenty of flash, and Tom Cruise has the twinkle in his eye that makes him such an effective protagonist.

Watch Mission: Impossible II if you are in the mood for a light action film with little in the way of story. Fans of the series will not be impressed by the movie, but those who are in it for the action will be satisfied. Mission: Impossible II has less going on than its siblings, but that still makes it an enjoyable watch with impressive stunts, shocking reversals, and reasonable plot by action movie standards. For a popcorn flick, Mission: Impossible II is a very good choice.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for big stunts and a thrilling if shallow plot.

Today’s quick review: Suicide Kings. A group of young men led by Avery (Henry Thomas) get more than they bargained for when they kidnap Charlie Barret (Christopher Walken), a wealthy man who is reputed to have contacts with some very dangerous people. Their plan is to pressure Barret into giving them the money needed to pay the ransom on Avery’s sister, who has been kidnapped by a pair of thugs. But in spite of his friendly exterior, Barret has a will of iron. Through a combination of threats and charm, he begins to exert control over his captors and leads them to believe that one of them might be a traitor. Meanwhile, his man on the outside (Denis Leary) embarks on a violent search across the city to look for the kidnapped sister on Barret’s behalf.

Suicide Kings is a crime drama that mixes tension with snatches of humor. The film hinges on a very strong performance by Christopher Walken as Charlie Barret, who is quite reasonable until he is pushed too far. His treatment of the boys is an exercise in manipulation, and Walken switches between the charismatic and dominant sides of his character with ease. Each boy is harboring secrets that come to light as Barret tests the boundaries of his captivity. But their acting is noticeably weaker than Walken’s, so what should be an interesting dynamic comes off as one-sided.

The film’s tone is peculiar, never quite reaching the level of comedy yet relying too much on humor for a pure drama. The alternation between the two leaves an uneasy feeling in the viewer’s stomach. A couple of violent shocks put a damper on the light tone that builds up when Barret is left to his own devices, while that light tone is at odds with the overall tone of the movie. Embracing the humor a little more and easing up on the film’s darker aspects would have broadened its appeal, while taking the opposite approach would have yielded a very credible drama. As it is, Suicide Kings delivers tension disrupted by moments of levity in a way that is not quite masterful.

Suicide Kings is an enjoyable crime flick with a good plot and a great main character. The film’s twists are not all winners, but there are enough of them to keep the tension high until the end. Christopher Walken pulls of a rare blend of good humor and derision, and his subtle manipulations of the boys are interesting to watch. Skip Suicide Kings if you are looking for a superlative film, a perfect drama, or a light watch. Watch it if you are interested in mysteries, good character interactions, and tension cut with a bit of humor.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I also give it a 7.0 for a strong performance by Walken, a good plot, and nice humor, held back by its hybrid tone and a weak supporting cast.

Today’s quick review: Reservoir Dogs. When their heist goes wrong, six men (Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Michael Madsen, Steve Buscemi, Edward Bunker, and Quentin Tarantino) flee to a warehouse to lick their wounds and plot their next move. Looking back on what happened, the criminals quickly conclude that one of them had to have been a traitor, and they set about pooling the limited information they know about each other. Tempers flare, threats fly, and lies abound as the men try to figure out which of them should pay with his life.

Reservoir Dogs is a crime drama from writer and director Quentin Tarantino. Despite a premise suitable for an action movie or a heist film, Reservoir Dogs focuses not on the crime but the aftermath. The warehouse setting with its characters that come and go gives the film a stage play quality, and it is a testament to Tarantino’s skill as a director that the brutality of his world shines through even when much of it is off-camera. The film’s tension is an ample substitute for overt violence, though, and the snatches of violence that are present are scarring enough to make the threat of further violence all the more credible.

Quentin Tarantino brings his signature style to the film. Long musings on trivialities contribute much to the tone and little to the plot. Gruesome violence is juxtaposed with cheerful music. None of the character are good people, and their volatile personalities cause them to clash in interesting ways. The details of the crime are glossed over in favor of the characters’ attempts to find the traitor. Even the characters’ names are secondary, both to the audience and to each other. Reservoir Dogs is a sickeningly tense film, where any slip can spell disaster and violence is always around the corner.

Reservoir Dogs is a well-crafted minimalistic thriller. It is a must-see for Quentin Tarantino fans and highly recommended for anyone who enjoys tense, violent movies, even if there is little actual action. Its characters are mere sketches, yet they are placed in such a powerful situation that they come vividly to life. The mystery surrounding the identity of the traitor is a strong one, but even stronger than its solution is the unnerving tone it generates. Watch Reservoir Dogs if you are looking for a tense crime drama with a dark tone. Skip it if you are squeamish or you are looking for a proper heist or action flick.

8.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for incredible tension and solid execution.

Today’s quick review: Predator. Dutch (Arnold Schwarzenegger) leads a team of commandos into the jungle on a dangerous mission to rescue the victims of a helicopter crash. The mission runs into unexpected complications, but eventually the team wraps up its mission and heads to its extraction point. Before they can be picked up, however, they encounter an unexpected foe: an invisible stalker who is using alien technology to pick them off one by one. Their mission turns into a primal struggle for survival as the team looks for a way to fight an enemy that could be anywhere at any time.

Predator is a tight sci-fi survival film that makes use of the best aspects of the serious action movies of the 80s. Arnold Schwarzenegger makes for a capable protagonist, with guts and resourcefulness to spare. His compatriots are no slouches either, although the pressure of the situation tests even their steely resolve. While the team has its internal drama, much of it is shelved in favor of survival when the Predator appears, paving the way for a film of gunfire, traps, and desperate gambits with just enough character drama to make the stakes clear.

Predator is a classic that any fans of the action or sci-fi genres should watch. The film delivers on an interesting premise and wastes little time on fluff. The plot is typical for a survival film, with the main characters getting picked off or surviving according their luck and skill, but the quality of premise and execution set it apart. The Predator itself has an interesting design, and while the special effects are dated, they still manage to be effective. The film does have plenty of blood and a few moments of anticipation, so those looking for a light action film should look elsewhere. Predator is a film that does one thing and does it well. Watch it when you are in the mood for a tense action flick.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for a strong, straightforward premise and tight execution.

Today’s quick review: V for Vendetta. Decades in the future, England is ruled by the draconian police state of the Norsefire Party. Opposing the regime is V (Hugo Weaving), a theatrical terrorist in a Guy Fawkes mask who has a penchant for verbosity, explosives, fine art, and the letter “V”. One night, he saves Evey (Natalie Portman) from a cruel fate at the hands of the police. Over the following months, he takes her into his confidence, and she becomes one of the only people to understand his motives. But with the whole government after him, it is only a time before V’s revolution comes to a head.

V for Vendetta is a film adaptation of the graphic novel by Alan Moore. Hugo Weaving stars as V, the man in the mask. His refined tones and theatrical mannerisms are a strong fit to the peculiar character. Natalie plays opposite him as Evey, who is gradually drawn from her sheltered life by V. The film has a healthy amount of action, though it is limited to V’s explosives and his prowess with a knife against rooms full of enemies. His schemes are entertaining, although they stop one step short of elaborate. The film is technically dystopian science fiction, and though its glimpse of the future is more political than scientific, it fits nicely with its dystopian sci-fi brethren Equilibrium and Aeon Flux.

Despite a strong premise, V for Vendetta falls flat. V’s opponents are cardboard cutouts that rob the moral conflict of much of its nuance. The plot comes across as linear, just a string of ever-greater acts of terrorism leading up to the finale. The combat is adequate but could have been given a bit more flair to go with V’s dramatic character. Evey’s arc is not entirely convincing, and the lack of meaningful supporting cast stunts the characters and the plot. The mystery surrounding V’s identity is handled well, but the rest of the movie does not provide enough reason to care.

Fans of dystopian sci-fi with a bit of action should give V for Vendetta a watch. It is a decent film with good ideas and a few iconic moments. But the film is notable more for its main character than its plot or execution. While it makes for a good popcorn film when you are in the mood for an action movie that is a little on the dark side, skipping it would be no real loss. However, your valuation of its strengths and weaknesses will vary, so give it a watch if you have any interest in the premise.

8.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for decent execution with some missed potential.

Today’s quick review: Fight Club. An insomniac white collar worker (Edward Norton) struggles to cope with his meaningless life until he meets Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt), a charismatic, iconoclastic soap salesman. Tyler’s hypothesis is that many of life’s problems come from living in a world without violence, a world of consumerism and emasculation. Their solution is Fight Club, an underground fighting ring that gives its participants a new outlook on life. But as the Club begins to grow in size and intensity, it morphs into a movement driven by Tyler’s anarchistic view of the world. And caught up in it all is Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter), Tyler’s crude, damaged girlfriend.

Fight Club is a psychological drama that doubles as a scathing commentary on modern life. Edward Norton stars as a man whose insomnia and lack of purpose are causing him to detach from the world. He attempts to paper over the void in his life through consumerism and support groups, but it is only through raw aggression that he finds meaning. Brad Pitt plays Tyler Durden, the only person he truly connects with and the inspiration for his newfound confidence. The dynamic between the two actors gives the film much of its kick, with Brad Pitt taking on the role of cocky best friend to Edward Norton’s nervous, overly cautious slave to society. Helena Bonham Carter rounds out the main cast as Marla, a wonderfully perverse acquaintance of Norton’s who takes an interest in Pitt.

Fight Club has a unique tone that combines a pessimistic outlook on modern living with black humor and mind games. Edward Norton serves as protagonist and narrator. His insomnia is reflected in abrupt time jumps, omitted information, and subtle background details that speak to his mental state. Brad Pitt takes a crack at narration once or twice, and the ease with which the characters slip across the Fourth Wall and back gives the film an engrossing, surreal quality to it. The writing is superb, if somewhat crass. Its imagery is vivid, its pacing is snappy, and it offsets its bleak outlook with gallows humor. Though its philosophy is destructive, Fight Club is the best exemplar of a certain type of nihilism that has ever been put to film. That alone makes it a classic.

Fight Club is a must-watch for its overall quality, its unusual storytelling, and its cultural notoriety. Sensitive audiences should stay away from its frank depiction of the seamier sides of life. While its humor and stylized storytelling keep it from getting too bleak, neither its philosophy nor its content are for the easily disturbed. Those who will benefit most from the film are young men, as it perfectly captures the aggression of youth. While its world is not one the viewer will want to stay in, Fight Club manages to weave quality writing, unconventional storytelling, and philosophy together into one compelling package.

8.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.5 for being an engrossing watch and a unique film.

Today’s quick review: Kung Pow: Enter the Fist. The Chosen One (Steve Oedekerk) has spent his life wandering the countryside, honing his martial arts skills. He seems to be the subject of a vague prophecy, and he is pursued by a nameless organization for unknown reasons. Finally his journeying comes to an end when he encounters the evil Betty, the invincible martial artist who killed The Chosen One’s family years ago. With the help of a clueless girlfriend, a peculiar mentor, a cryptic ninja, and an incompetent rival, The Chosen One must put a stop to Betty’s schemes and get revenge for the murder of his family.

Kung Pow!: Enter the Fist is a ridiculous and unique martial arts comedy. The plot is utter nonsense, full of meaningless foreshadowing and dangling plot threads. The martial arts are more silly than compelling, a flurry of hit-or-miss gags replacing normal fight choreography. The acting is hard to talk about with a straight face due to the characters’ preposterous voices and bizarre dialogue. Half the film’s footage is taken from an older martial arts film, digitally edited to include the new actors’ faces. Every line in the film is dubbed, down to the dog’s barking, serving the triple purpose of providing consistency with the dubbed older footage, parodying the often-poor dubs of the martial arts genre, and offering the opportunity for a number of gags involving bad lip-syncing. Many of the voices are provided by Steve Oedekerk, the film’s director, writer, and star, a fact that explains the characters’ unusual voices.

Toss in a couple of gratuitous CGI shots, overly literal narration, and a couple of bad plot twists, and you have one of the strangest comedies around. The humor is low-brow and often misses its mark completely, but the sheer volume of ridiculousness will eventually cause the viewer to crack up. Those who only like intelligent comedies, who want their movies to make sense, or who find any of these creative decisions disturbing should stay far away. Those with a silly, almost childish sense of humor, who don’t mind a bit of randomness, and who are willing to be entertained should definitely give Kung Pow: Enter the Fist a watch. Kung Pow is a hilarious, endlessly quotable mess of a movie that is well worth seeing.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.0 for production quality and a 7.5 for hilarity.