Reviews

Wouldn't it be refreshing to read a review of a Twilight film that was written by neither fans nor "haters"? You've come to the right place. I have read all 4 books to see what the hype was all about, and have seen all 5 films when they got to second-run theaters. In general, I thought they were watchable enough, improvements in fact over the source material -- but not worth owning or seeing again. This last film, however, took on a different tone which I found refreshing.

If you haven't kept up with the previous films, you should definitely see them first -- this one isn't a stand-alone. Story picks up with Bella just turned into a newborn vampire and learning how to deal with her new strengths and hungers. She has to hunt wildlife and keep from killing every non-vampire that wanders into her territory, and she rocks her new, pale look with smokey eyeliner and red lips. The half-vampire daughter she gave birth to is already out of the newborn phase and growing at an alarming rate; but no worries, the other Cullens and Jacob Black have taken over all those inconvenient childcare duties so that Bella and Edward can carry on being newlyweds without distraction in their new guest house at the Cullen mansion. Ah, if only everything had continued down this merry course, there could have been the perfect -- albeit boring -- fairytale ending to the Saga. But of course, a twist of fate puts Bella, the Cullens, and their new child all at risk: the Volturi (evil mafia-like vampire clan in Europe) get word of Bella's kid, and assume she is a threat to their existence.

Now, thank goodness, a more exciting story arc is set into motion for the rest of the film. The Cullens rally all their friends and "relatives" (non human-feeding vampires)from around the globe to stand as witness for the Cullen baby Renesmee. We get to see a little bit of the cultures of other vampires, new characters are introduced, interesting powers are revealed, and tension builds. The Cullens are rightly worried that the Volturi won't be reasoned with, and that they'll easily slaughter the Cullens and their allies. When the film's climax comes, it's all action, and IMO it should have earned BD part 2 an R rating for violence and gore (which is quite uncharacteristic of the previous Twilight installments).

Finally, the Twilight story is concluding on an exciting, Action/Horror turn of events, instead of the faintly nauseating romance that dominated up until now! Bella also seems to come into her own as a mature character and a grownup for the first time. She displays self-discipline, starts considering the world outside of her town of Forks, and shows concern for others apart from herself and the Cullen family: the annoying Emo Bella is gone. She also abandons the role of "damsel in distress" and takes on a bit of toughness. Some of these improvements are long overdue for her character, and it's interesting that they all coincide with her turning into a vampire. Don't the rest of us have to grow up without the help of supernatural powers and immortality? Oh well, better late than never I suppose.

Now if only the entire "Saga" could be rebooted with this director at the helm, I think the ratings would have jumped considerably. The previous Twilight movies were watchable but in my opinion, only merited 4 and 5 stars out of 10 at best: this last film is a six because it did away with angsty vampires and showed us a whole society of supernatural characters, and they weren't all just props to further a love triangle plot. Good pacing and better editing also helped BD part 2 along tremendously.

I just might see this one again on cable!

Here's an example of Don't Let This Happen to You for Directors: hire competent actors, scout out a great location, spend a hefty budget on productions values, and then set about filming one of the most mediocre "horror" scripts ever written. I mean seriously man, did you even see Jeffries' resume of flotsam before you signed on for this? It reads like a homage to underachievement. At least, that's consistent with the plot for this film: A family moves away from the big city to a house in the countryside, bought at a fantastic bargain price. At first the mansion-like building seems like a dream come true, and they set out to restore it. But as each of them explores the house's obscure history, disturbing family secrets of the original owners are revealed, and the father begins to suspect that something sinister happened at Cold Creek Manor. Suspense starts to build as strange incidents happen with increasing frequency, and then... not much. The answer to the mystery turns out to be the most conspicuous and easily-guessed villain, whom we met and instantly suspected quite early in the film. Thank you, Captain Obvious Scriptwriter! Cold Creek Manor could be called Gothic "horror" in a sense -- the desolate landscapes, dilapidated old building, hidden secrets, and creepy atmosphere are all staples of Gothic-style horror. However, there is also supposed to be an element of supernatural in Gothic stories, which Cold Creek Manor lacks. It hints and teases us aplenty, but never delivers on phantoms or magical evil; and when there is opportunity for an intense climax of horror, it's as if the director shrinks back from the threshold. The end result is a letdown.

I can't fault the actors, for the most part, who do their job well enough. It's just that they're given some horrible dialog, and look at what they have to work with. Dennis Quaid (our main protagonist, unfortunately)is either playing a stupid, wimpy character quite brilliantly, or he's managed to bungle a decently relatable character into something annoying. Sharon stone is alright as the wife who catches on too late to the danger they're all facing. Kristen Stewart interprets the role of the daughter as her usual hostile, sullen, emo persona-- gee, what a surprise.

Tweaked a bit, daring a bit more, and perhaps rewritten, this story had so much potential to be good! Oh well, we'll never know...

Beasts of the Southern Wild is a film that I shouldn't have liked at all. The story is about poverty, grime, and survival. There are scenes that portray violent behavior which borders on child abuse. It is about how alcoholism intrudes on what could have been a paradisaical lifestyle, killing and tainting all that is good. It portrays a lot of ignorant, filthy people living in squalor and neglect. These are the elements that practically slap you in the face from the first frame.

And yet, slowly, the deeper layers of the lives of these derelict residents of the Bathtub (a southern delta island community, off the grid) are peeled back. Hushpuppy is a bright, fearless 6-year-old girl being raised by her hot-tempered, alcoholic father, Wink. He has been training her from the day she was born to be "the man", and he takes this mission quite seriously. Wink teaches his daughter continuously to fish and live off of the Bayou. The girl has her own "house" of sorts, separate from her father's shack across a field, and their daily interactions consist of one household "feed time" signaled by a bell on a rope. No tears are allowed. Hushpuppy's mother abandoned them when she was an infant, and Wink foreshadows on some level that his daughter must become both mother and father to herself.

It would be easy for this story to fall into the cliché of maudlin, except for Hushpuppy's astonishing resolve and resilience. Indeed, none of the island folk seem to realize that they are poor; they believe they are the luckiest people in the world. They relish their joie de vivre fiercely and often with parties and fireworks. Freedom and independence are cherished. Strength is displayed in odd moments. There is nobility here, and compassion. It was surprising to realize how happy they were, living in conditions that would crush the spirits of First World suburbanites.

Seamlessly woven into Hushpuppy's narrative was the magical realism of her world. The girl's inquisitive mind found meaning and symbolism in Nature surrounding her. She said she could understand what the animals were telling her of their needs. When the village's teacher explained the food chain and the world ecosystem to the children, Hushpuppy immediately made the connection between herself and the bigger picture of the universe -- she simply Got It, and this understanding became a source of great strength and comfort during the trials ahead of her. Although it was barely touched upon, Hushpuppy was a true mystic.

This was, perhaps, what touched me the most about the weird dysfunctionality of the Bathtub: the people came together almost as a tribe in the face of a natural disaster. The saying "it takes a village to raise a child" could have been coined here; orphaned children are parented by everybody. Food was shared generously. They bunked in the one structure left intact after the big storm and celebrated. The Bathtub takes care of its own.

The themes of love, survival, interdependence and independence,and triumph overpowered the surface appearances of TBOTSW which I had found initially to be so distasteful. This film had the biggest heart of any in 2012, perhaps even the last decade. What a unique, wonderful testament to the human spirit!

If you aren't familiar with Tom Cruise by now, you've been living under a dumpster for the last 25 years or so. Probably eating out of it as well. So when I say Jack Reacher is another vehicle for Tom Cruise to play another variation on his usual smooth badass persona, you should know to what I am referring. If you don't, I'm sure that half eaten enchilada sprinkled with coffee grounds won't repeat on you, so go ahead.

Jack Reacher's plot is pretty tight: what seems at first to be a slam dunk mass murder case is thrown for a loop when the prime suspect asks the DA for Jack Reacher. And what do you know, Jack Reacher appears almost instantly to take up the investigation; nobody was able to contact him, but dangit, Jack just KNEW (a common side effect of his extreme smartiness which shows the audience that he's on top of everything already). Then, brushing aside multiple advances from every living female in the film , our hero proceeds to systematically take apart the perfect case against the suspect to reveal a much deeper motive behind the shooting: but now powerful villains are aware of Reacher's digging, and Helen, the plucky young female lawyer who hired him, is in danger as well. It's gonna take a whole lot of fistfighting and shootin' to bring the real villains to justice, and to showcase Tom's- er, Jack's, legendariness.

JR was done well, action hero clichés aside. There was a plot twist or two that kept me guessing 'til the end, reasonable acting, and some nicely drawn out suspense. The most impressive scene was the car chase at the climax -- I do believe that one set a new bar for movie car chases. Of course the gentlemen in the audience will not be immune to Helen's flaunted cleavage any more than the ladies will ignore Jack's gratuitous bare chest. And so the checklist of watchableness is complete.

One more thing: if you crossed James Bond with Joe Friday, could he beat Chuck Norris? Let's put it this way; Chuck Norris is the only living person who can punch a living cyclops between the eyes. Yeah, I didn't think so.

When I first saw GPB in the '90s I was impressed enough to buy the soundtrack.

Now, after having watched it about a ten times in as many years on cable, I realized how stupid it was not to have bought the DVD already. The upside to that is that now there's blu-ray and hopefully, a few extras included..? Well it will be a real sin if that turns out not to be the case!

Sorry, I can't help myself. This film is fantastic, in my Top 5 list of '90s films for certain. John Cusack reportedly co-wrote the script, and that makes sense because it's clever and built on witty dialog -- playing perfectly to his strengths. His electrifying chemistry with Minnie Driver, Dan Ackroyd and what the heck, the entire supporting cast, demonstrates pure casting genius and ensures GPB will remain fresh and memorable upon many repeat viewings.

The plot reads like an understated Quentin Tarrantino joint. Martin Blank is a professional assassin who is invited to his 10 year High School reunion in Grosse Pointe, MI. Urged by his therapist on the premise that it might be good for him, he decides to attend. Martin contacts old buddies, attempts to reconnect with his long-lost love, reminisces a bit about his childhood, visits his ailing mom in her nursing home, and what the heck--decides to complete an "assignment" while he's there. He runs into a few glitches on his journey of the soul, but exploding convenience stores and murderous rival assassins can't deflect Martin' growing moral conscience and his determination to win back the girl he stood up on Prom night.

Grosse Pointe Blank is hard to pin down. This is a black comedy, but strangely uplifting at the same time. It has plenty of shooting action, martial arts and a dash of James Bond coolness, but it's not about that, really; it asks deeper philosophical questions of the sanctity of life and the power of love and forgiveness. And of course at the heart of it all, there's the relatable conundrum of those torturous High School Reunions.

GPB is John Cusack, Minnie Driver, Dan Ackroyd and Joan Cusack at the top of their forms. It also features some of the best tracks from the musical talent of the '80s. If you are a fan of any of theirs, it is a must-see.

"What has been will be again,

what has been done will be done again;

there is nothing new under the sun."--Ecclesiastes 1:9

So the most important question is, was it done well? I think that's a general Yes.

And the second most important question is, does it pass the Bruce test? (i.e., both interesting ideas and good Kung Fu?) Again, Yes.

The plot is lifted straight from Karate Kid, mixed in a little with Dragon, and reinterpreted with a Turkish teenaged girl as the lead-- not a problem for me. Hey, if the story is good, the actors are competent, and the fight scenes well-choreographed, then that's all I need from my martial arts dramas. But just to be clear, this film is primarily a drama, not an action movie, nor a true martial arts movie: the focus is mainly on the lead, her personal problems, and her relationships with family; the Kung Fu serves almost as a poetic metaphor for her inner struggles.

Fighter's strengths: good cinematography, especially the fight scenes and the fantasy sequences; entertaining Kung Fu scenes; solid coming-of-age story; interesting exploration of culture clash between the Muslim immigrants and the native population of Sweden; sympathetic and charismatic lead actor Semra Turan in her debut role as Aicha--in fact, everybody in the cast was effective and believable.

Fighter's weaknesses: genre confusion -- did it want to be fantasy or realism? because some pretty unrealistic fighting powers suddenly materialize in the middle of even the non-fantasy fight sequences (come on, she did a back flip over her *standing* opponent?); some questionable writing lapses, such as how did she pay for her elite new Kung Fu club, and why did her stodgy father even let her train in martial arts for 3 years in the first place?; an over-reliance on ready-made martial arts movie clichés such as the tournament held at night in some obscure "underground" venue, dramatically lit by flaming tin barrels. My eyes rolled more than once during that one.

It's far from perfect -- nonetheless, Fighter was a heartfelt story which kept me engaged to the very end. Come to think of it, that reminds me of something else about this film that I liked very much; without giving away any details (I am determined that this review will need no spoiler alerts!), Fighter left a few side conflicts unresolved. The film didn't try to wrap up each and every story arc in a neat little bow. I believe this is intentional, because for a long time afterward the dangling story threads provoked me to consider the issues Fighter presented a little more deeply. Basically, this film respects the viewer enough to depart from the expected resolutions. I would have awarded it 7 stars, but that earned it one extra.

I think Bruce would have approved.

The curse of our modern times is that everything seems to reference something else...very few films are truly original any more. That being said, A Cat In Paris is nicely done and a pleasant way to pass about one hour with your kids (realistically engaging for ages 6 to 10). Certainly, it will do you all some good to see old-fashioned animation once in a while in our computer-generated world.

Plot: Girl gets kidnapped by crime boss who wants to use her to steal something valuable. Some animal friends set out to rescue her, leading to some spectacular chase scenes and heartwarming moments. Along the way, a few more animal friends help them..will they manage to save the girl? Will the criminals be brought to justice? Grownup's view: Once I realized where I'd seen this story before, everything fell into place; change the two mice to one cat and his cat burglar friend, and A Cat In Paris is basically The Rescuers with a few minor differences in plot elements and a major location change. But what a change! I'll take a wild chase or two among the midnight rooftops of Paris over the Bayou any day. Those "Hunchback of Notre Dame" moments were definitely the best sequences of this film.

Visual: The really original thing about A Cat In Paris was the animation style, which is...well okay, it's somewhat a homage to the art of Pablo Picasso. It's a bold choice, and since I can't recall the last animated film that paid tribute to Picasso, I'm calling this "original". The movements of the characters do seem uniquely sinuous here and there, and it is an especially fitting way to animate cats and cat burglars.

Cynic's angle: Honestly though, the critical acclaim and the awards for ACIP baffle me. Are we so starved for something different from the last decade of wisecracking, slickly-dressed "kids" films, that we pounce on anything that doesn't smack of Disney and proclaim it great? (only to find that indeed, it was much like Disney's old formula anyway..)Yeah, I feel that way myself all too often.

Conclusion: A the end of the movie, we had all enjoyed it, but not enough to watch it again. If I'd bought this at current retail I'd have been a little annoyed because it was so short..recommended for an on-demand viewing.

So if I'm going to write a review, it's for the parents' sake, right? Well at least for the good parents' sake, who actually care to know what's in a movie before taking their kids. Kids don't read reviews. Mostly...

Frankenweenie is a stop motion animated tale that lovingly parodies the classic old Frankenstein movies (actually, all the B&W horror films get a shout or two somewhere in the plot). The characters are all kids in modern American suburban town New Holland, with the dog Sparky, aka Frankenweenie, as Victor Frankenstein's best and only real friend. It's understandable therefore that when Sparky is killed by a car, science nerd Victor is heartbroken enough to try to use science to fix him. For a wonder, it actually works! Sparky is alive again, and now Victor has to hide him from the world...at least before unveiling him to the science fair.

Tim Burton has come back in classic style doing what he does best: creating fantastic visual style with a Gothic flavor, humorous and macabre all at once. But is this really a "kid's" film? It does say PG, which most parents will interpret automatically to mean "yes, take all your kids to see it, nothing inappropriate here." Okay, but before you take your tender Under-Tens, you should be aware of the following scenes (Bug Duh Spoiler Alert for the Dull-Witted who didn't see it in the title): Victor stitching up his dead dog with needle and thread, then screws in bolts to its neck so that he can have something to attach the jumper cables for the reanimation experiment. No actual blood and gore is shown, but it makes for a little wince-y moment if you have a tot sitting next to you.

After Sparky is reanimated, various body parts fall off throughout the film. Once again, no actual blood or gore is shown, but...hmmm. This should make for fun conversations about decomposition and its role on a dead body, eh? Hopefully not during the film, however: some of us are trying to watch.

A cat holding a bat in its mouth gets accidentally electrified by his owner's science fair experiment, and somehow the two merge into a gruesome cat/bat monster. The transformation is graphic and on the scary side for the little ones to my way of thinking.

Victor's classmates learn of his success with reanimating Sparky and so they raid the cemetery for the bodies of their own deceased pets. One of them digs a dead rat out of a trashcan. Then they all attempt to repeat the experiment with lightening to bring the animals back to life. One of the reanimations goes horribly wrong, turning a turtle into a giant mutant with a mouthful of wicked teeth; of course, it goes on a rampage Godzilla-style to crush/eat the town fair. I thought this sequence was funny as an adult, but probably a little disturbing for younger viewers.I mean, it's a Giant Turtle, With Fangs, that steps on living beings and tries to eat them. And for the record, it's not cute and cartoony like the TMNTs.

In the climax of the film, the cat/bat mutant is attacking Sparky, then a beam falls from the ceiling and skewers the creature through the abdomen. Once again, no actual blood or gore, but this was a very intense scene...in a children's film? Really? And so, that's my final point: it isn't really for younger kids. The ratings board was off their game here. Would any of them GET the many references to classic B-horror films that makes this such a gem for us, the (presumably) more sophisticated viewers? More to the point, do under-tens really need to see a film--no matter how clever or funny it is to their parents -- about reanimating corpses? Would they understand the gallows-humor, cynical, chaotic, violent, and death-fixated Burtonverse? I say No, No, and No. Sorry to be the voice of sanity in this otherwise delightful and long-overdue Burton comeback.

Let this great little film remain a singular pleasure for all of us big kids who've had the chance to love cheesy and glorious old movies about mad scientists, vampires, and monsters --we've earned the privilege. Let the little kids stay little kids a little while longer without the scary goth man giving them fodder for their nightmares. There's plenty of time for that sort of thing later in Jr. High School.

Heathers has to be one of the darkest, most sharply written films of the 20th Century. The fact that its humor and horror holds up so well today is astonishing, and perhaps an indictment to how gutless Hollywood has become in the years since it was made. There will never be another teen satire so bold, so mean, and so dang funny.

So we have this smart teen girl who's depressed, trying to break into the popular clique at her school known as the Heathers. Veronica hates her so-called best friends but submits to being treated like a lackey to do their bidding--we never really find out why exactly, or what she is getting in return. She seethes in her diary about murder fantasies but of course, as the protagonist, she would never...oh wait, what's that? A handsome and mysterious new guy who looks like a young Jack Nicholson? It takes about 20 minutes of film time to turn her around so that we the audience now question if there ARE any "good guys" left here.

The buildup of horror mirrors the buildup of quotable hilarity as the body count for the "suicides" at Westerberg High climbs.

Much has been written about the cultural satire of Heathers: writer Daniel Waters takes aim at John Hughes-type teen films, life in high school, political correctness invading the teaching system (via aging hippies), religious hypocrisy, clichés of detached parenting, and homophobia. It's a deadly and accurate aim, and the slaughter of pop culture is widespread.

Each lead actor is right on target. Winona Rider plays Veronica to the hilt as the witty and likable anti-hero, and there could have been no better actress for the role. Christian Slater is the wry and charming Bad Boy, J.D.--the agent of chaos you can't help but agree with even as you have a nagging feeling that you shouldn't. Kim Walker is an amazing Heather #1, Shannen Doherty knocks it out of the park with her power-hungry performance as the next Heather who yearns to be the alpha of the pack. They all turned in what I consider to be the best performances of their careers in Heathers.

It's not for the faint of heart, nonetheless; I urge you to see this movie. Look past the '80s fashions and you have a film that could have been made about high schoolers today, or in any era...except that it isn't going to happen, ever again. We've grown into such wimps we don't dare like this anymore, for fear of offending perhaps, or for fear of (gasp) making people uncomfortable about some of the truths of our own hypocrisy. Where's the Michael Lehman/Daniel Waters of this generation? We need him more than ever.

Having heard about this movie for years, I finally rented it last week and got to watch it for the first time. I'm still not sure what to think about The Last American Virgin, because it seems like two different films duking it out for dominance. I got the impression that the writer wasn't sure which story to tell, so he just mashed them up and told them both. The basic story threads are:

Main plot #1. Averagehigh schooler Gary and his two friends are typical horny teenagers whowant nothing more than to "get laid". They start the film trying topick up other high school girls and bring them back to Gary's house while his parents are out. Highjinks ensue, with every bad boob-jiggling cliché in the book. The three friends get involved in other sexcapades that include more clichéd moments, such as the nymphomaniac older lady who seduces the pizza delivery boy's friends and a disastrous first visit to a prostitute. Let's just say they have mixed success accomplishing their goal.

Main Plot #2. Gary sees the new girl Karen one night and instantly falls in love. He plots continually to get her to notice him so that he can ask her out. This is the more serious underlying thread to this film in an otherwise raunchy comedy; Gary portrays the insecure and awkward adolescent perfectly and honestly. Karen (portrayed by the ever-charming but one-note actress Diane Franklin)is like the ultimate model of purity and teenage loveliness, and she's totally out of Gary's league. Not surprisingly, she doesn't seem to notice average "nice guy" Gary, but instantly latches on to his jock friend Rick. Eventually this plot point takes a darker turn that I won't spoil for you, but involves a real-world consequence of being sexually active that's totally at odds with Movie Plot #1.

In its favor, TLAV is also a decent nostalgia trip back to early '80s fashions and pop culture. Regardless of what is happening at any given time in the film, the soundtrack is popping away loudly over all the action with peppy hits from Devo and other '80s icons..at times completely in keeping with the light tone of Movie Plot #1, and weirdly jarring when playing alongside scenes from Movie Plot #2. It is this that makes me wonder if there isn't some kind of pop culture satire at work in the director's twisted mind...? Or maybe that's ascribing too much intelligence to this film? Hmmmm.

None of these teen actors went on to do much after this film, except Diane Franklin; frankly, none of them (aside from maybe Gary) are very good actors. Opinion seems divided on the meaning of the ending, and I say that the final expressions on the faces of these actors says it all: blank and wooden, in what should have been a powerful, dramatic moment. You can easily interpret the motives and feelings of the characters in any way you wish because the actors playing Karen and Rick are just that awful! It's such low standards as this in the acting, directing, and writing that has created what is now this confusing mess of a film that doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up.

This movie is too stupid to be truly funny and the more serious subplot ruins the raunchy fun. I would have given this film 4 stars but I'm adding in one more for the music; IMO, the soundtrack is the best part of TLAV. You could save yourself some time and just buy the music... Otherwise, I don't see the point to watching TLAV at all.