Ya know, everyone gives Mel a hard time. Maybe it's the hate-on he's got for one particular group of people. It's okay if you don't like Mel Gibson for that reason. That's just fine. There's one thing you've got to remember about good ol' Mel, though: when someone fucks with his proverbial shit, he won't stand for it. When he gets the word "revenge" in his head, he doesn't rest until he's got a scumbag's decapitated head mounted on his mantel. So to speak.
What I mean to say is that despite all of his shortcomings, Mel Gibson doesn't fuck up when it comes to his fictional characters getting what's coming to them. He proved this in the 90s (Ahem...), and is proving it again in 2010. Caught a midnight screening of "Edge of Darkness," tonight, and all I can say is that I honestly forgot that it was titled as such. I had convinced myself that it was called "Brutal Justice," because that's what this movie was. Everyone gets shot or run over or punched. And while there are parts (and conspiracies) that are mildly hokey (and utilize the hot words "turrrrr" and "turrrist"), the movie is incredibly entertaining. It's really just another movie about how corporations are awful and will do anything for money, but most other movies don't utilize brutal justice to the degree that Mel Gibson does.
Verdict: Brutally Stoked.A friend told me he couldn't wait to see this because he thought it was going to be comedy of the year. Certainly there's a fair amount of unintentional humor, but it's really only the result of failed attempts at one-liners. In actuality, this was by far one of the better thrillers I've seen in the last few years. I could have gone without "terrorist" and "threat to America" business, but that seems to be what movies use these days and it's not going to stop anytime soon. Mel doles out brutal justice with ease throughout the course of the movie, but nothing is as satisfying as his use of dairy products in the final showdown. Great revenge flick.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
Youth In Revolt
I loved Michael Cera in "Superbad (2007)". I think he, Jonah Hill, and every other cast and crew member of that film worked together to make one of the best comedies I've ever seen. And then Cera played the same character that year in "Juno". Then last year that same character had long hair in "Year One". He seemed to have found a niche in playing awkward teenagers, but after he knocked up Juno, I felt the character was a little played out. So you can understand my nervousness when making the trip to see "Youth in Revolt (2009)". But my fears were for nothing. Turns out Michael Cera can play more than one character, quite literally. While "Revolt" wasn't the best comedy I've seen (and it certainly was no "Superbad"), it had moments that left me in hysterics.
From the beginning of the film, Cera's character Nick Twisp speaks in a much more calm, certain, and intellectual manner, though he certainly lacks what could qualify him for maturity. His interaction with his less-than-gifted peers and family members is great, but where the movie really picks up is when he creates the supplemental persona in "Francois Dillinger" so that he may better cater to his lady's desire for danger. The character is fantastic, doing all of the things Nick's subconscious demands, rudely shunning his mother and burning down half of Nick's town to impress Sheeni. While often an actor portraying two roles is campy and boring as shit (and generally just the same character with two different sets of clothing), Cera's portrayal is hilarious. Nick and Francois play off of each other in such a way that one needs constant reminder that they are both part of the same person. Cera plays a cocky, risk-taking asshole so well that I hope he continues to do so in later roles.
Mostly, though, I'm just glad to see that such a funny guy isn't a one-trick pony.
Verdict: Just Stoked. I will absolutely see this movie again. It's been a while since my friends and I saw a movie that we quoted immediately after leaving the theater. Maybe so long ago as "Inlgourious Basterds (2009)." While out of context the quotes are fairly nonsensical, they are wonderful and funny, nonetheless. Like "Basterds," it ends with a line that sums up the previous celluloid perfectly.
From the beginning of the film, Cera's character Nick Twisp speaks in a much more calm, certain, and intellectual manner, though he certainly lacks what could qualify him for maturity. His interaction with his less-than-gifted peers and family members is great, but where the movie really picks up is when he creates the supplemental persona in "Francois Dillinger" so that he may better cater to his lady's desire for danger. The character is fantastic, doing all of the things Nick's subconscious demands, rudely shunning his mother and burning down half of Nick's town to impress Sheeni. While often an actor portraying two roles is campy and boring as shit (and generally just the same character with two different sets of clothing), Cera's portrayal is hilarious. Nick and Francois play off of each other in such a way that one needs constant reminder that they are both part of the same person. Cera plays a cocky, risk-taking asshole so well that I hope he continues to do so in later roles.
Mostly, though, I'm just glad to see that such a funny guy isn't a one-trick pony.
Verdict: Just Stoked. I will absolutely see this movie again. It's been a while since my friends and I saw a movie that we quoted immediately after leaving the theater. Maybe so long ago as "Inlgourious Basterds (2009)." While out of context the quotes are fairly nonsensical, they are wonderful and funny, nonetheless. Like "Basterds," it ends with a line that sums up the previous celluloid perfectly.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Double Feature
Saw two movies tonight, "The Book of Eli (2010)" and "Youth In Revolt (2009)". Had to drive twenty miles to see the latter, and caught a midnight screening of the former. Neither were the movie I expected to see, but I don't have time to write about either of them. So I promise you I'll do them tomorrow.
As always, though, don't listen to anything I have to say and go see the movies for yourself.
As always, though, don't listen to anything I have to say and go see the movies for yourself.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Non-sparkly Vampires
Got a chance to see "Daybreakers (2009)" last night and as a result of sheer hatred for the other work I have to do, I'm writing a review instead. The trailers and tv spots expose the premise very well, and I wasn't shocked when the movie started. The set up involves a strange virus that's transformed humanity into a bunch of blood sucking bastards. But whereas with most vampire flicks, the creatures are the "others," they are the norm in this world. One large corporation for which the protagonist, Edward, works specializes in farming the last remaining humans for their blood. But, oh no! The supply is running thin, and it's up to some crafty vampire scientists to find a blood substitute. The acting and not-horrible script produce a movie that is less like its Vampire-flick counterparts of today and more like classic (and totally awesome) Vampire-flicks of another decade entirely (Ahem...)
While there's certainly a little extra cheese than necessary, it certainly doesn't use melodrama as a plot device like every other fanged release in the past few years. This movie's full of old-school Vampires with no reflections and self-destruct buttons implanted in places that only stakes can reach. Sure, there's the sex appeal, but it doesn't cause sexual tension that can never be resolved because the Vampires are 14. It even pushes the genre forward by suggesting a cure that has always only been the cause of destruction in the past.
Verdict: Fairly Stoked. I would see this again, but it's nothing to rave about. A little social commentary is tossed in for flavor, but it's almost too overt; everybody knows that corporations are evil. The message is a little played out dramatically. Go see it if you still have a chance but don't wear your Team Edward shirt and boots and hairband and gloves and eyeliner.
While there's certainly a little extra cheese than necessary, it certainly doesn't use melodrama as a plot device like every other fanged release in the past few years. This movie's full of old-school Vampires with no reflections and self-destruct buttons implanted in places that only stakes can reach. Sure, there's the sex appeal, but it doesn't cause sexual tension that can never be resolved because the Vampires are 14. It even pushes the genre forward by suggesting a cure that has always only been the cause of destruction in the past.
Verdict: Fairly Stoked. I would see this again, but it's nothing to rave about. A little social commentary is tossed in for flavor, but it's almost too overt; everybody knows that corporations are evil. The message is a little played out dramatically. Go see it if you still have a chance but don't wear your Team Edward shirt and boots and hairband and gloves and eyeliner.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Whoa!
Where have I been?! I don't know. But I haven't had internet for a few weeks, that's for sure. So I apologize wholeheartedly for my absence. I'll hopefully be able to get back to writing these blogs soon; I've got a lot of catching up to do. Saw quite a few movies (some more than once) over the break, and now I'm ready to praise and/or tear them apart. Stay tuned but don't hold your breath for the next review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)