Oldies:
8/25- -Peter O’Toole as Anton Ego My Most Anticipated Summer Films My Most Anticipated Films for Spring
Winter 06,
Summer 06
Brief Review: The Lookout
It certainly isn’t the biggest or best known film of the year, but The Lookout pleases the psychological thriller need of ours.
The film is entertaining for its modern day heist and provoking for its conflicting situations. Great performances come from Gordon-Levitt, Matthew Goode, and most notably Jeff Daniels who gives it everything he gave in The Squid and the Whale. Those who like Memento and other films that combine realistic action with handicaps will enjoy this. It’s not the best film of its type but a respectable one.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Supporting Actor Jeff Daniels, Original Screenplay
Brief Review: Zodiac
Director David Fincher’s latest murder thriller is classic Fincher, but gets a little too caught up in the real-life details.
The film succeeds where previous Fincher films like Se7en and Fight Club did by bringing fast paced scenes and unpredictable suspense. However, being based on a real situation is the problem. Too many scenes are wasted to include various details which simply slow down the enjoyment. But for the bulk of it, the performances are great and the mystery remains ominous and intriguing.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Adpated Screenplay, Cinematography, Editing
Review: 300
Combining two of my favorite action films from the last few years, Troy and Sin City, this epic battle of 300 combines large-scale warfare action with stylized graphic novel translation.
Right away, what makes the film unique is the imagery. Like how Robert Rodriguez made every attempt to replicate exact imagery from the graphic novel into his film Sin City, director Zach Snyder does the same here by filming mostly in front of green screens, limiting the color palette, and duplicating exact camera angles. If you want to be intrigued, see the online image comparisons between the film and the graphic novel and you’ll find the duplication is remarkable.
But of course, if you’re seeing this film, it must be because you enjoy stylized violence of Quentin Tarantino nature. That such violence will not disappoint. The beautifully choreographed sword fighting makes me more wish the Oscars had a category for it. Anybody can recognize the superior fighting ability given to the Spartans and how they unleash fury with every stroke as if they expect every move. What also enhances the action is the variable-speed editing. During action sequences, the footage repeatedly speeds up or slows down at just the right times. This allows the viewer to experience the high speed intensity of warfare, but slow down to enjoy the smooth moves and severed limbs.
The only setbacks are the fact that this is a relatively short story stretched over two hours. More detail could have easily been written. Also, because this is loosely based on history, I would have liked to know more of the historical background, at least provided through a text epilogue. And I am somewhat disappointed it was neither as violent nor uniquely stylized as Sin City. Nonetheless, 300 is an artistic masterpiece for future action films to live up to. Fanboys will enjoy the stylized violence while everyone else might enjoy iconic image artwork. But this remains only for those who can withstand the violence.
Stars: 3.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Costumes, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound, Sound Editing
Review: The Simpsons Movie
In one of the few occasions in my life in which I felt compelled to attend a midnight premiere film screening, I ended up being completely blown away at what my all-time favorite show has become: a superbly hilarious film. Praise Jebus!
Everything about the film is fantastic. All the best supplementary Springfield characters get the spotlight at some point. From Burns to Milhouse, from Hibbert to Cletus, from Lenny to Carl, everybody gets the spotlight, except for some reason Edna Krabappel, Disco Stu, Patty and Selma, and one of my favorite characters: Groundskeeper Willie. Yet I'll bet each of these characters were given speaking parts which ended up on the cutting room floor because they were not funny enough. And let’s not forget the main family themselves. The team of sixteen writers came up with a great storyline for each member. Bart undergoes a period of seeking a better father; Marge again suffers detachment from her selfish Homer; Lisa leads an environmental crusade and falls in love; and Homer learns to care for others, even when it means saving the town. The frequent voice actors of Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Nancy Cartwright, Yeardley Smith, Hank Azaria, Harry Shearer, and as a government super-villain Albert Brooks bring more effort and emotion than any past episode.
Yet what I find most interesting is the attention to perfection. Looking back at the trailers I noticed a lot of scenes that were not in the final cut. This goes to show that the writers spent considerable time changing and dropping scenes so that all that was left was the most hilarious and entertaining stuff. Fortunately, this also means that there will likely be several deleted scenes on the DVD. I do believe the writers achieved the perfection they were going for. The emotional scenes were taken seriously, and every joke got a big laugh. And as is typical with many episodes, the best joke comes from the adolescent random mind of Ralph “Me Fail English” Wiggum.
Longtime fans of The Simpsons, including those who stopped watching after season eleven, will rejoice in the film’s classic Simpson style with physical comedy, social satire, familial heart, and lots and lots of donuts. Those unfamiliar with the Simpsons will pick up on it easily and be equally entertained by the action, as well as the improved and more detailed animation style. Like many, I have patiently waited eighteen long years for those beer-chugging, slingshot-shooting, blue hair-sporting, child-choking ambassadors to America to appear on the big screen. After worry and anticipation, I rest assured that no adaptation could have been done better.
Stars: 4 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Animated Film, Adapted Screenplay, Sound Mixing, Score, Song
Review: Hairspray
In yet another recent ongoing attempt to repeat the awards success of Chicago, Hairspray is brought from stage to screen in a rather satisfying and stylish transition.
Comparing to other recent musicals, it beats The Producers since there was change to it instead of simply putting a camera in the theater audience. It’s no Phantom of the Opera since it doesn’t have such stylized camera work and drama. But I’d say it’s on par with Dreamgirls for transitioning to a point where it is faithful, but original. Songs were catchy, but none too memorable. The dances were very well choreographed, which makes me continue to question the Academy’s decision to not instigate my proposed choreography category. I was also worried that with the inclusion of some big names like Michelle Pfeiffer, Amanda Bynes and James Marsden, singing ability would be questioned, but I was proven wrong for they all have excellent vocals. Yet what I would have liked to see was more dialogue time between songs to give some more drama to the situations, and to bring it up to a two hour running time. And the whole race issue, while a good message, seemed to cross the line a few times with what some characters were saying.
Yet the standouts are the performances of those curvaceous girls: Nikki Blonsky and John Travolta. Despite being her first film role, Blonsky really gives it everything she has in her excitement and energy, similar to what Jennifer Hudson gave last year, thus raising serious Oscar consideration for her. And it’s good to see Travolta back in musicals again, even if it is in drag. Though you could clearly hear his manly voice underneath, Travolta gets all the movements and mannerisms of a weighty mother making him a contender as well.
For those who can enjoy musicals, even if they are somewhat on the corny and predictable side, Hairspray is a delight of entertainment, and surprisingly funny at times. Not for everybody, but those who think they will like it will love it.
Stars: 3.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Picture, Director, Actress Nikki Blonsky, Supporting Actor (or is it Actress?) John Travolta, Adapted Screenplay, Art Direction, Cinematography, Editing, Costumes, Makeup, Sound Mixing, Song
Brief Review: Ghost Rider
Yet another Marvel Comics hero makes his big leap to the screen. Yet it is clear that effort was made merely to get it over with rather than make it something special.
The film delivers exactly what you expect and not much more. The villains are killed too easily. The romantic subplot really intrudes. And the inclusion of narration by Sam Elliott makes it a little too reminiscent of The Big Lebowski. You would only want to see this film if you are interested in what another comic hero looks like on screen, or if you want to see Peter Fonda’s scene-stealing performance as the devil. Otherwise, you’ll be seeing an attempt at an action movie without well-choreographed action and a disappointment of superhero proportions on par with Superman Returns.
Stars: 1.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Visual Effects
Review: Transformers
Every so often, a movie comes out that isn’t necessarily dramatic or thought provoking, but succeeds in the prestigious field of “awesomeness.” As if there were no better word to describe it, Transformers is certainly the most awesome film of the year.
The backdrop to this far-out topic involves an ongoing intergalactic robotic war between the noble Autobots and the tyrannical Decepticons, both searching for the Allspark, a small cube that can create robotic life. The search takes them to Earth, and specifically to a sixteen year old boy named Sam (Shia LaBeouf, in one great breakout performance), who holds the key to the location of the Allspark. Therefore, Sam gets thrown into the war while dealing with the pressures on teenage life, which includes buying a Camero to impress hot chick Mikaela (Megan Fox). The Camero turns out to be the Autobot Bumblebee who protects Sam as the Decepticons try to kill him. Then all robotic characters are introduced. The big rig Optimus Prime leads the Autobots consisting of an emergency use Hummer called Ratchet, a smooth-talking Pontiac called Jazz, and a brute GMC Topkick called Ironhide. Megatron, a towering menace and alien vehicle leads the Decepticons, an army of robots who transform mostly into military vehicles. Several bot battles ensue, each one more spectacular than the last.
Transformers delivers exactly what you expect: action spectacle. I would have paid full price just to see what visual effects can do for a transformation. But for the cost of your ticket, you get many detailed shots of cars, jets and helicopters transforming into giant kung-fu robots. The shear adrenaline rush is enough to excite anybody. As is characteristic with Michael Bay films, everything moves totally fast, sometimes too fast to get a good glimpse. I would have liked to see a few more dramatic slow motion shots of the action. Visual effects don’t get better than this, neither does roaring sound, all the more reason to see this in theaters rather than waiting for the DVD.
This film has something for everyone. Intense action, comedic effects, and a teen love story are what make this more than a brainless explosion film. There are some faults however. Some robot characters seemed to die too quickly, and some action scenes should have been longer. Like I would have rather seen a long version of Optimus taking on Bonecrusher, a monstrous roller-skating Buffalo vehicle, than two fight scenes with an annoying little E.T.-sized bot called Frenzy. And the dialogue for the robots seemed somewhat too cheesy for an advanced technological civilization. And if Spielberg was involved as a producer, I would have thought he could have given the robots more of a mysterious teaser introduction like in War of the Worlds rather than having them just pop up.
In the end, you are bound to come out of the theater out of breath and with a strong desire to see Transformers again to relive the intense action that only Michael Bay and a team of effects wizards can deliver. For now, the best movie of the summer.
Stars: 3.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Editing, Visual Effects, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Score
Review: Ratatouille
Unlike other reviews of this film, I will spare you the cooking clichés and just say that this is a great film, thus proving that the Disney/Pixar combination doesn’t know how to fail.
In the realm of Disney/Pixar films, it’s not the best, but not the worst. What I like about Disney/Pixar is how each film is strong for a different reason. Toy Story had comedy, Finding Nemo had heart, and The Incredibles had action. What Ratatouille offers more than any other Disney/Pixar film is style. This is accomplished through some of the best cinematography ever in an animated film. There are several long tracking shots following the hero place to place, almost as if it were an animated version of Children of Men. Dramatic stylized backdrops of the city of lights made for a romantically visual picture. This even plays out in small detail, such as the crane shot above the lair of food critic Anton Ego, which clearly depicts a room shaped like a coffin. Little details like these are rare for animated films, and make it all the more appreciative. But the real artistic masterpiece is the delectable French cuisine shown throughout the film which made me wish the theater provided “scratch and sniff” cards for the film, similar to the John Waters film Polyester. Seeing such well made food also made me further resent the bucket of fried chicken I ate after the movie.
Yet what I possibly appreciate most of this film is its decision to cast actors based on voice quality rather than name recognition. Our two heroes are played by little known stand up comic Patten Oswalt and art director Lou Romano. All too often are big stars cast in animated films simply to earn more money, but detracts from the enjoyment. The only exception in this film was casting legendary Peter O’Toole as morbid food critic Aton Ego, and actually giving a better performance than he did in Venus. But no other actor could have provided such a Shakespearian delivery of a concluding speech about concoction, and critiquing. As an amateur film critic myself, I took this speech to heart, and would now like to provide an excerpt from it:
“In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. Last night, I experienced something new, an extraordinary meal from a singularly unexpected source. To say that both the meal and its maker have challenged my preconceptions is a gross understatement. They have rocked me to my core.”
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Animated Film, Original Screenplay, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Score
After three weeks of waiting, I finally got a response letter from Bruce Davis, Executive Director of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, speaking on behalf of President Sid Ganis. Apparently, my proposal for the Academy to introduce a category for the recognition of choreography has been rejected. I'm not surprised nor distraught. I am just glad I made an effort.
In the response letter, Davis stated that the rejection is because, "anything that adds to the length of the show drives away viewers rather than increasing them." Also because, "it would move us a disquieting step toward MTV-style awards." I respect the Academy's decision.
Well, this has been a long and tough journey without success. But I enjoyed it. If you read the proposal, please email me and let me know what you think.
Review: Ocean’s Thirteen
This will be the fourth “threequel” that I have reviewed this summer, but it is the first to be superior to the second film. Ocean’s Thirteen takes the heist back to its roots of simplicity and comic timing.
Now this was a significant improvement over the confusing and time-bending Ocean’s Twelve. A linear story is kept and no drastically unexpected turns occur. Therefore, it is more like the original Ocean’s Eleven, but not quite as good. There’s no romantic subplot with Julia Roberts. In fact, there are no subplots at all. It’s just a straight up heist movie, which therefore could have used a few tangents. I do appreciate making it as simple of story as the first film, but the heist didn’t seem as complicated and thus not as entertaining. And even though I appreciate giving nearly equal screen time to all eleven team members, I would have liked to see more of them doing what it is they are known for. We didn’t see Linus (Matt Damon) pickpocket anybody. We didn’t see Virgil (Casey Affleck) use any robotics. And we didn’t see Bash (Don Cheadle) blow anything up. What is the point of having these characters if you are not using their special skills?
It was also a little frustrating to not pick up on everything on the first viewing. Like what was the purpose of Saul’s (Carl Reiner) task, or why are they making David Paymer sick? After consulting friends, I figured it out. Also, like the first film, certain steps felt unnecessary. And it appears like any actor who asked for a scene with Al Pacino got one. But the film gets its strength from the cleverness of the complicated heist and the great comic delivery between actors. The suave joint-mind between George Clooney and Brad Pitt was clever. The hot age gap magnetism between Matt Damon and Ellen Barkin as Bank’s assistant was interesting. And the constant realistic bickering between Affleck and Scott Caan as the Malloy brothers is always a treat. But I think the most credit should go to Carl Reiner for still putting in a great performance at the ripe age of 85.
Fans of the original Ocean picture should not be disappointed in this similar sequel, unless they are looking for a good romantic subplot. Ocean’s Thirteen provides laughs, insightfulness, and a great message about friendship between criminals.
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: none
Review: Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
Jack Sparrow has sailed the seas, battled the undead, and awakened at the end of the world. He does everything you could possibly ask for in a movie, except explain it.
Now really, I loved all three Pirates films, but to a small margin this one is the weakest. It faces the same problem that faced Spider-Man 3 and Shrek the Third. Too big is too much. With a cast of fourteen key characters, each one receives little time to develop despite the near three hour running time. Most characters are just there because they need to be. This is likely why a couple of key characters are killed off early on so that they wouldn’t take up too much time in the conclusion. And I’m not so sure films two and three work well concurrently. Why kill off Jack at the end of Dead Man’s Chest when he is brought back right at the beginning of At World’s End? In the big picture of the story, it just seems unnecessary.
But the main complaint is the mere confusion of the plot. The first two films were just barely within first-viewing comprehension, but in this film I had no idea what was going on during the middle act. Several characters are running their own agendas and make deals with the enemy only to break them. It was really difficult to keep track of who was on what side and why. Several actions also occur that really also go without explanation. Like how did the Kraken die? Or what was up with Bootstrap Bill’s memory? Or why was Sao Feng calling Elizabeth Calypso. Questions like these become irritating. There are also several repeated references that seemed unnecessary to include in all three films, like Jack being slapped by the Tortuga women, the dog with the keys, and repeated inquires as to why the rum is gone.
However, the saving grace of the film is the pure pirate action enjoyment of the third act. The epic battle between the Black Pearl and the Flying Dutchman in a giant whirlpool is the best action sequence from any of these three films. And I like the ending given to the Will and Elizabeth relationship which isn’t exactly “happily ever after” but is unique and settling. And the performances of Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush are once again top notch. Depp’s Keith Richards impersonation doesn’t grow tiring since each film finds a new way for Depp to do it. In this film, Sparrow has developed a hallucinogenic schizophrenia. Imagine what fun Depp had with that.
I said it with the first Pirates, then I said it again for the second, but now I’m saying it for the third: This is the closest thing Disney has ever done to an R-rated film. Some parts are certainly not for small children, both graphic violence and some surprising sexual stuff at the end. But I would say that this is an entertaining piece for all audiences. You’ll have to try hard to understand the details, but even if you can’t just sit back and enjoy the sights. Though it could have been done in a less confusing way, At World’s End concludes the epic Pirates trilogy in a manner as beautiful as the sea. Savvy?
Stars: 3 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Art Direction, Costumes, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound, Sound Editing, Score
Review: Shrek the Third
In our second “threequel” of the month, the jolly green giant known as Shrek, returns to the kingdom of Far Far Away. Only he didn’t go that far from the first two adventures.
Now I enjoyed the first two Shrek films. The first one was entertaining for its simple comedy surrounding a lovely tale of friendship. The second one was great simply for its numerous film references. In fact, I recall counting over twenty film references in the last one, and only one in this film: a clichéd redoing of the baby carriage scene in Rosemary’s Baby. And what has made the series successful thus far is the design of a film that can be entertaining for all demographics and age groups. That is where the third film is a big exception. Despite the campaigning as a film for all ages, Shrek the Third is simply a kids film. Physical comedy bits as well as gross-out puke and poop humor simply make this an eye-roller for anybody over twelve. This can likely be blamed on the decision for director Andrew Adamson to leave the series to direct the next Chronicles of Narnia film.
There is also complete lack of character development, aside from the newbie character Artie. All other characters serve only to go places and perform lame gags. The bit involving Eric Idle as a senile old Merlin was mildly amusing, but the rest was simply repetitive. The gags involving taking modern day phrases and icons and making them sound medieval has been done. The girl power montage involving several princesses has been done. And the climax is almost identical to that of the last film, only with a pointless public service announcement about being yourself.
Shrek the Third is another case of a franchise that should have stopped while it was ahead. It feels like the producers realized this franchise would earn enough money no matter what, therefore they could churn out a new film every three years without effort. The result: the film feels more like "a very special episode" from Shrek the television series. The freshness, comedic references, effortful performances, and adult enjoyment that came with the first two films is completely abandoned in this film in favor of seeing assisted butt scratching and baby ogres vomit like fire hoses. Kids and immature adults may enjoy the humor, but I’m sure all will find a significant drop in quality from the first two films.
Stars: 1.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Animated Film, Song
Review: Spider-Man 3
The third installment of the highly and somewhat undeservingly successful Spider-Man series still packs some predictable excitement and spectacle, but is an uninspired attempt to cram thirty years worth of comic books into a two hour film.
To make things worse for our hero, some weird black goo from space clings to Spidey and gives him a new black suit that makes him both angry and horny. This leads to personal troubles with failing singer girlfriend Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) when he takes interest in an attractive classmate and Spider-Man rescuee Gwen Stacey (unrecognizably blond Bryce Dallas Howard). Eventually, Spidey frees himself from the “symbiote” which then binds itself to Eddie Brock (Topher Grace as the least threatening villain ever), a photographer and Peter Parker rival. The result is Venom, every fanboy’s favorite villain from the comics, but only ends up with about ten minutes of screentime. So the cast is large and therefore each actor receives little screentime in favor of six big action sequences.
Of course, comparisons must be made to the first two Spidey flicks, but I’m finding that challenging since this one is so different. I found the first picture to be thrilling but not spectacular, mostly being held back by its cartoonishness. The second film was about as good as the first, but only because it was the exact same film. I’m glad that the third one was significantly different to make it its own film and not a repeat, but change isn’t always a good thing. It certainly improved on the action sequences, even if I don’t consider them to be that great in the first place. However, those sequences are joined with overly sentimental situations with some corn on the side. This corniness repeats the same issues I had with the first two films, making it cartoon-like despite being live-action, as opposed to the X-Men movies which brought the comic into the real world. But the major problems with this film are simply a lot of small details that are likely the result of several script rewrites.
One problem is including several new characters, none of which have time to show any development, particularly Bryce Dallas Howard’s character, which is pretty much just there to look pretty. But, the main problem is choosing to include three main villains. While I am glad to see that two of them teamed up at the end to make things extra challenging, the increased number made the plot too complicated and without any significance or direction. It also makes each villain seem unimportant and weak. And I really do not approve of Topher Grace as Venom. When I heard of this casting choice, I knew it was a big mistake. Eddie Brock is meant to be a big tough New Yorker, not some scrawny weak kid. Venom is possibly the greatest villain in the Spider-Man comic series, and yet director Sam Raimi decided to just make him one of three villains in this film, and give him only one scene near the end. Venom would have been better done if he had his own film to develop and rule, like the Green Goblin or Doc Ock had. Next, after putting in a great performance in Sideways, I was expecting a better performance from Thomas Haden Church. He’s given a few pointless emotional scenes, but he doesn’t take advantage of it.
Speaking of acting, I think Tobey Maguire is a pretty good actor, but only when he is playing the young Woody Allen character than he has played in practically all of his films. The suave playboy type that he takes on for part of the film, complete with hair that makes him look like Jared Leto, could not be more poorly done. Tobey simply doesn’t know how to shake off his geekiness. His totally lame sequences of strutting, smirking and dancing were more irritating that Kirsten Dunst’s singing. And why do they have to do an opening montage summarizing the first two films AND have several flashbacks AND references to those films? Do they think the audience has forgotten everything? And don’t you hate it when characters repeatedly come back from supposedly being dead? And will somebody please tell me why nine out of ten people walking down the streets of New York are attractive twenty-something women walking by themselves?
However, a major flaw didn’t come from the film, but from how it was publicized. Pay attention, film executives. Before this film was released, there were five trailers, a dozen webisodes, a ten minute clip shown on NBC, and more. So much footage had been shown, much of it revealing footage, that I practically had the entire plot figured out going in, and I think others did too. This made the film very predictable and I was surprised by nothing. Therefore, publicists must remember that the point of trailers is to give a preview, not a summary, otherwise the film is ruined.
Despite the lack of focus and development, and a few too many corny and emotional scenes aided by clichéd dialogue, the film packs the goods in the action. Particularly, I liked what they did with the Sandman action in some sequences. Spider-Man 3 is not the entertaining opening piece as the first film, but it ranks on par with the second film as being exciting, but corny. So the picture would be worth seeing if you are interested in the fun of seeing some classic Spidey action. Otherwise, you will just be looking at your watch repeatedly for two and a half hours.
Stars: 2.5 (out of 4)
Oscar Contention: Editing, Makeup, Visual Effects, Sound, Sound Editing
Note: This year, I’m including ten films instead of five since there are so many great candidates.
10. I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry: July 20th, Trailer
I haven’t been that interested in the last few Adam Sandler films. But this one looks pretty clever, and might have a good message to it.
9. Rush Hour 3: Aug 10th, Trailer
With Jackie Chan and Christ Tucker, the first two Rush Hours were the right blend of action and culture clash comedy. I hope this will do the same.
8. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer: June 15th, Trailer
Unlike most, I enjoyed the first Fantastic adventure and found it to be a good Marvel Comics adaptation. I don’t think the sequel will be quite as good, but it might still have some excitement.
7. Ratatouille: June 29th, Trailer
This might be the overdue flop that Disney/Pixar has been waiting for. But it’s written and directed by Brad Bird who did my favorite Disney/Pixar film, The Incredibles, so that’s a good sign. I just hope it doesn’t get hung up on all the French stereotypes.
6. Shrek the Third: May 18th, Trailer
With a different director and the abandonment of cultural reference comedy, I’m thinking that this will significantly underwhelm compared to the first two Shrek movies. It just doesn’t look as funny. Then again, that’s what I originally said about the second one, and I was proven wrong. Let’s just wait and see.
5. Ocean’s Thirteen
The comically well-cast team of criminals returns for a third big score. George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon and everybody (minus Julia Roberts) form an unlikely alliance with Terry Benedict (Andy Garcia) to take down the newest capitalistic ruler of Vegas: Willie Banks (Al Pacino). A key difference this time is that the team isn’t trying to steal the money for themselves, they are trying to rig every game in Banks’ casino, so that all gamers win and Banks goes broke. Off the top of my head, I have no idea how to do it, so it should be interesting.
I wasn’t that entertained with Ocean’s Eleven since it didn’t seem that funny, and the heist seemed more complicated than it needed to be. Ocean’s Twelve did about the same for me. It was funny, but the confusing nonlinear storyline left me with a big question mark. Therefore, if Thirteen combines the complicated but comprehendible plot of the first, with the delivery-dependent comedy routine of the second, this just might work well. And let me also say, it’s great to see Carl Reiner still doing great work at 85 years old.
Ocean’s Thirteen will be in theaters June 8. Watch the new trailer here.
4. Spider-Man 3
Here we have the third and hopefully final chapter in the overly-popular Spider-Man series. I don’t think you need to know where the second one left off, just know that Mary-Jane knows who Peter is, and Harry wants to kill him. This film seems to follow much of the “black suit” saga from the comics. Spidey gets some black goo from space wrapped around him and it somehow makes him angry. Meanwhile, he faces three new villains, each of which appear to come at him one at a time which doesn’t make it as challenging as it could be. I would have rather seen an alliance between villians. Harry steps into his father’s shoes as the Green Goblin. Thomas Haden Church plays Sandman, and apparently Uncle Ben’s real killer in a plot twist that seems unnecessary and disloyal to the comics. And Topher Grace plays Venom, the new bearer of the black goo.
First, I have one question. Why are the villains cast right after contention for a supporting actor Oscar? Willem Dafoe was cast as the Green Goblin shortly after his supporting nomination for Shadow of the Vampire. Alfred Molina was cast as Dr. Octopus shortly after his near nomination for Frida. Now, Thomas Haden Church was cast as Sandman right after his supporting nomination for Sideways. By this pattern, I’m betting the next film will have either Mark Wahlberg as Hydro-Man or Jackie Earle Haley as the Chameleon.
Anyway, I’m a little worried for this film. So far most internet pundits including myself have seen practically the entire movie. There have been five trailers, six webisodes, and a ten minute sequence from the film that appeared on NBC. I think I have the entire plot figured out by now, and I bet a lot of others do too. Therefore, I’m worried that there won’t be any surprise at all and everybody will leave the theater disappointed because they were not given anything new. And that action sequence between Peter and Harry on NBC wasn’t that exciting. And I wasn’t that big on the first two Spider-Man films to begin with, especially since the second one had basically the exact same plot as the first one. But I’m going to try to remain optimistic that the third Spidey adventure will be different than the first two, and still pack plenty of surprise and significance for the audience.
Spider-Man 3 hits theaters May 4th. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
3. Transformers
Define “awesomeness.” Definition: this film!!! From the moment I saw the first teaser trailer, I knew this was simply going to be awesome, as if there’s no better word. Though I’ve seen the first few episodes of the Transformers television show that premiered in 1984, I couldn’t get that attached to it since there were too many characters to keep track of, and without much development. But this retooling of the concept should do better. The basis is still about alien robots that come to Earth to fight an ongoing war between the peaceful Autobots lead by heroic Optimus Prime and the conquering Decepticons lead by the tyrannical Megatron. But the number of robot characters is kept to a total of thirteen, and the perspective is from the humans’ point of view to give it a more personal feel (a la War of the Worlds). Breakout young actor Shia LaBeouf stars as Sam Witwicky, the teen who buys his first car, a Camero, only to find out it is the Autobot Bumblebee, who thus gets Sam involved in the impending robot war. Yes, the concept is pretty far-fetched, but I don't care. At least they're making it more realistic than the show was.
Michael Bay, the director of Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and The Island is the guy everybody either loves or hates. I actually like his work. Sure, say what you want about his story-telling, but you’ve got to admit that few directors know how deliver the goods when it comes to extreme action. And one of the things I like about Michael Bay as a director is his realism method. Lots of action directors will put their actors in front of green screens and tell them that they are surrounded by explosions and monsters. Whereas Bay will actually put his actors in dangerous situations just to get the right reaction out of them, which includes using real explosions, real car crashes and some actual-size robot models.
With Bay directing and Steven Spielberg producing, I really don’t see how that combination could fail. Frankly, this is the kind of movie where I really don’t care if it has a good story or not. The mere sight of cars, tanks and jets transforming into giant fighting robots will be enough of a thrill to get my money’s worth. And if it does have a good story, all the better.
Transformers hits theaters July 4th. Watch the teaser trailer here.
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
Here is yet another third episode in a trilogy coming out in an over-packed summer, and particularly over-packed May. But I’ll put my money on it as the biggest earner of the year. The story picks up right where it left off, in the grimmest of situations. Jack Sparrow (the always amusing Johnny Depp) went down with the Black Pearl. Norrington (Jack Davenport) delivered the heart of Davey Jones (Bill Nighy) to Cutler Beckett (Tom Hollander). Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) lost the chance to save his father Bootstrap Bill (Stellan Skarsgård) and questions the intentions of his fiancé Elizabeth (Keira Knightly). And Tia Dalma (Naomie Harris) proposes rescuing Jack with the help of the miraculously living Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush, in twist that I hope will be explained). With all of these cliff-hangers, it is only natural to assume they will get resolved in the third Pirates installment. Therefore, Barbossa leads the crew to the end of the world to rescue Jack and form an alliance with the pirate lords from all over the world to battle the East India Company which now controls the Flying Dutchman and the sea. So like the conclusion of most trilogies, this will feature the epic battle, and probably several characters will be killed off.
However, I still have my worries about this project. First of all, with the return of Geoffrey Rush, and the introduction of Chow Yun-Fat as Captain Sao Feng, the large cast means limited screen-time for our heroes and the scene-stealing Depp. I also worry that this will not offer much anything different than the first two Pirate films gave. And the whole oriental culture thing, I’m not really big on.
Nonetheless, I’m sure this will have excellent entertainment, spectacle, comedy, and a cameo by Keith Richards. If the conclusion is wrapped in an unexpected plot, this could join X-Men, Lord of the Rings, and Star Wars as among my favorite trilogies.
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End hits theaters May 25th. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
1. The Simpsons Movie
I remember back in 1992 when I was six years old and my sister and I would eagerly await every Thursday night for a new episode of The Simpsons. I was a big fan then, and I’m still a big fan now. And for the nearly 18 seasons that the show has been on, millions of fans including myself have eagerly awaited the day when our beloved yellow Springfieldians would appear on the big screen. After much patience, our prayers have been answered.
I know a lot of people have been skeptical of the quality of The Simpsons for the last few seasons. I admit seasons 13 through 17 were a little underwhelming, but this year has been outstanding. I’m convinced that the show has returned to the quality that it had in the 90’s. That also gives me good hopes for how the movie will be, which brought back all of the best Simpsons writers from the 90’s including Matt Groening, James L. Brooks, Al Jean, and John Swartzwelder. This team should give the movie the cultural satire and off the wall humor that made the show famous. The entire cast from the show is onboard to voice Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and everyone we love. Kelsey Grammer will also once again play Sideshow Bob, and Albert Brooks returns, hopefully voicing one of my favorite guest characters, Hank Scorpio.
Normally, I would tell you a little bit about the plot, but honestly I don’t know. The plot for this movie has been the best kept secret since the endings of M. Night Shymalan's increasingly cruddy films. Keeping such a secret under wrap is quite impressive in this internet age where a rumor can become fact in seconds. But the trailer has made the film appear epic in scale and include all well-known characters from the show. All I can gather is that Homer does something that turns the town against him, and a lot of stuff goes wrong. Really, that’s all I know, which only means that the movie is going to be full of surprise. Great!
For as long as I can remember, I have loved this franchise, and am confident the movie will deliver the same magic that made the whole world fall in love with the Simpsons. This might actually be the first time where I’ll be compelled to attend the midnight opening screening. And because of the show's worldwide following, I believe that this could become the highest worldwide grosser ever!
The Simpsons Movie hits theaters July 27th. Watch the theatrical trailer here.
Likely to be disappointments:
28 Weeks Later, Evan Almighty, Live Free or Die Hard, Underdog
Undecided:
The Bourne Ultimatum, Hairspray, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Surf’s Up
5. Grindhouse
In the tradition of their most recent efforts, Kill Bill and Sin City, directors Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez return to the ultra-violent genre in a unique way. It’s being advertised as two films for the price of one. I’d say that’s worth it. Tarantino directs “Death Proof” which involves Kurt Russell as a scarred killer driving around a renowned vehicle of death. Rodriguez directs “Planet Terror” which finds a team of heroes including Naveen Andrews and Marley Shelton fighting zombies
Both of these segments have the inspiration of ‘70’s B-movies, but include the signature touches of both directors. This includes a highly stylized camera work and color selection, not to mention the violence being creative and blatant to a nearly cartoon-like way. My high hope is for this to succeed in becoming a critically-praised cult film like Sin City and Kill Bill.
Grindhouse will be in theaters April 6. Watch the trailer here.
4. The Number 23
Joel Schumacher, after giving Batman nipples, maintains few fans. However, I for one enjoyed his dynamic presentation of The Phantom of the Opera. But now he’s back to where he started with this small sci-fi thriller starring one of my favorite actors hopefully making a comeback after a few bad roles: Jim Carrey. Jim plays a seemingly normal guy who becomes overly obsessed and paranoid when he discovers that every aspect of his life involves the number 23. If the logic holds up, it just might work.
And I’m glad to see Jim doing another abnormal drama piece in the spirit of The Truman Show and Eternal Sunshine. Perhaps it’s all the best after Carrey’s comedy career hit rough ground with Fun with Dick and Jane. Since he has few other upcoming projects, my main hope for this picture is the idea that it might bring back the Carrey ability we once recognized.
The Number 23 hits theaters February 23. Watch the trailer here.
3. Hannibal Rising
Jonathan Demme gave a new face to terror and insanity in 1991’s Silence of the Lambs. The name was Hannibal Lecter, played with one of the finest performances in history by Anthony Hopkins who wore the mask two more times. The first was Ridley Scott’s Hannibal, while maintaining the lovable terror and torment of Clarice Starling, yet lacked the dramatic backstory. Brett Ratner’s Red Dragon was somewhat worse by pitting Dr. Lector against an unbreakable investigator Edward Norton. However, in this new spin, the audience will finally know how exactly Hannibal began.
The clear distinction with this film separating it from the formers is the lack of Anthony Hopkins in the title role. The mask has been handed down to the Gaspard Ulliel, the young French actor from A Very Long Engagement. I’m sure it will be difficult to accept any other actor wearing the mask, but I say let’s give the little-known actor a chance.
This film also follows the recent trend of prequels that unveil the origins of classic characters. Recent prequels have shown us how Bruce Wayne became Batman, how James Bond became 007, and how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. I’m sure many are eager to find out just how a young man can turn into a brilliantly insane murderer with a passion for eating people. If the psychological details make sense, it just might go for it.
Hannibal Rising hits theaters February 9. Watch the trailer here.
2. Ghost Rider
Unlike DC comics, I’ll see just about any film based on a Marvel comic. This is not meant to be a big-budget franchise like the Spider-Man or X-Men pictures became. This is an example of the darker side of Marvel comics, the same realm visited in Daredevil and The Punisher. Likewise, the reviews are destined to dip, but perhaps it might find a cult following.
Nicolas Cage stars as Johnny Blaze, a motorcycle daredevil who made a pact with the devil to save his life. Consequently, he is cursed in that every night he gets possessed by demons that give him the look of a flaming skull and drive him to ride and do malign justice in the night. It’s a far-fetched concept, but the dark style and violent action could make this the springtime hit. One more thing: Peter Fonda playing the devil? Whatever you say.
Ghost Rider opens February 16. Watch the trailer here.
1. 300
This and Transformers have the two most awesome trailers I’ve seen lately. Combine Frank Miller’s graphic comic-to-screen interpretations from Sin City and combine it with the epic large scale warfare of Troy and you have 300.
300 is another comic adaptation from Frank Miller who wrote the comics and co-directed the picture for Sin City. It takes place in ancient Sparta where an endangered race of Spartans, believed to be descendents of Achilles with all the same fighting power, faces annihilation from the vastly larger Roman empire. Gerard Butler stars as the Spartan King Leonidas who must lead his people to victory, despite having an army of only 300 and facing an enemy of thousands. I don’t know how much of this is based on fact, or even based on Greek mythology for that matter. But I have a feeling Frank Miller isn’t exactly going for accuracy.
The pseudo-violence of Frank Miller’s (similar to Quentin Tanantino’s and Robert Rodriguez’s for that matter) combined with monochromatic artistic renderings and inspired character and set design should bring great artistic as well as entertainment quality to this picture. Yet the highlight, as taken directly from the comics, will be the motivated and clever lines: “Spartans! Tonight, we dine in hell!!!”
300 opens March 9. Watch the trailer here.
Likely to be disappointments:
Pretty much everything else. It is spring after all.