Bye summer! September went as planned and I saw both of my must-sees in theaters. It Chapter Two wasn't as great as Chapter One, but didn't leave me disappointed either (review) and Ad Astra rocketed itself up to be one of my favorites of the year -- and probably a permanent favorite of rich science fiction. It was everything I wanted it to be! (Review!)
Besides those I did some catching up from August. Ready or Not was a fun horror flick though not exceptionally so (review). It had a breath of fresh air quality to it. State like Sleep from January was interesting but unfulfilling though pleasantly noirish in tone (review). And, Body at Brighton Rock from April was a severe and incompetent disappointment (review).
Finally, there was the rollercoaster ride that In the Shadow of the Moon gave me. A September Netflix release that I missed in the roundup, I was briefly extremely excited for it, as it starred one of my favorite actors, and was solidly in the scifi noir genre, but after a few days of excitedly anticipating it, it was the biggest disappointment of the year. A maddening waste. I panned it as hard as I could in my review.
Now, October has a ton of big releases, and many that I feel like I should see, but not too many that I'm genuinely excited for. Here's hoping there's some surprises! What looks good to you this fine fall month?
Joker
In theaters October 4th; R
My only real worry concerning this movie is that it'll simply be too dark and intense for me to enjoy. I know there's a lot of controversy around it now, but I don't think it's possible to weigh in on the discussion until you've seen it. I'd like to see it, but I'm also scared to. Even Heather Ledger's PG-13 turn as the Joker unsettled me in ways that I didn't care for, and Joaquin Phoenix seems to have turned it up to 11, and then way past that. He's a fantastic actor and I feel like this will be one of those films that make an impact on the culture and become a must-see. I'm just not sure I'll get to the theaters for it.
Lucy in the Sky
In theaters October 4th; R
This one's getting panned in such a way that I can't figure out if it means I'd be less or more likely to enjoy it. I'm not a Natalie Portman fan, nor does it seem super exciting to watch a movie in which a person wants to go to space the whole time but little screen time is spent there, but -- I am a scifi and space movie fan, so I suspect I'll watch this someday whether I hate it or not.
Sometimes Always Never
Limited release on October 4th; PG-13
I think there's no hypothetical scenario in which Bill Nighy plays Sam Riley's dad in a movie and I wouldn't be interested in seeing it. This one is also about Scrabble, and Nighy's character looking for his other grown son who stormed out and disappeared after a bad game. The trailer has a sweet and sad yet comical tone to it that works so well with British films. I'll definitely give this one a chance!
Low Tide
Limited Release on October 4th: R
The guy from Alita: Battle Angel and Jaeden Martell as brothers in what looks like a slick southern gothic story involving gold coins and running from the law. Reminds me of Mud but in a more extreme, unrealistic way. Unrealistic isn't a bad or good thing, it just depends on if it's good and entertaining and has real meaning attached to it. I tend to like movies like this, but this one seems like it could be particularly good if it plays right. Looking forward to seeing if it does!
The Addams Family
In theaters October 11th; PG
Here's the cast on this thing: Oscar Isaac, Charlize Theron, Chloe Grace Moretz, Finn Wolfhard, Nick Kroll, Bette Midler, and Allison Janney. And yet. If you were to watch the trailer, you would realize -- this movie would be pure torture to sit through.
Gemini Man
In theaters October 11th; PG-13
If the de-aging Will Smith CGI is that noticeable in the trailer, just think how bad it'll look in the actual movie, where the screen is bigger and they can't mine the best shots to show off. But don't get me wrong -- I'm quite willing to watch this. Provided it's at home so I can laugh without bothering anyone.
Parasite
Limited release on October 11th; R
Everyone's talking about this and I know nothing about it, so I'm not anticipating it and probably won't go and try to see it in theaters, but I'll definitely keep it in mind for streaming days. The trailer is intriguing to say the least!
Zombieland: Double Tap
In theaters October 18th; R
Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin are all back. I liked the first Zombieland; I like zombie comedies; I like the cast -- I'll see the movie! Barring the possibility that it stinks and I lose interest, anyway. I'm not dead set on it but it does look like a fine fun time even if it isn't at the level of the original. And even if they steal jokes from Shaun of the Dead and overplay them.
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil
In theaters October 18th; PG-13
So Maleficent back to being evil? Classic cheap sequel, reverting the characters back to their original state and giving them the exact same character arc again. I did not like the first one of this, but I didn't like it in a way that I really enjoyed -- thinking about why and what could have been better, and for that reason I actually am curious to see this sequel. Also Sam Riley is back and there's a NEW and improved (?) actor playing Prince Phillip, so maybe we'll get some good romance this time! (Unlikely, but I can wish.) Ugh, this looks so bad, I actually feel bad for wanting to see it anyway.
The Lighthouse
Limited release on October 18th; R
Another that everyone's talking about. This one I'd probably be interested in on my own, for a few reasons. After Robert Pattinson was cast as the next Batman I've been a little more interested to check out a range of his work. That is probably why most people want to see this too, now that I think of it. Also I'm always intrigued by black and white movies. You can't be a good film fan unless you at least pay attention to A24 releases, and finally, stories set at lighthouses get my attention easily. Still, I kinda doubt I'll like it when it's all said and done. Hard to tell for sure, that's just my impression. I'll certainly give it a chance, and hope it's not too scary.
Jojo Rabbit
Limited release on October 18th; PG-13
When all is said and done, I WILL watch this movie, because Sam Rockwell is in it. As for the rest, I have loved Taika Waititi's work (What We Do in the Shadows) liked it (Hunt for the Wilderpeople) and... not... liked it (Thor: Ragnarok). This looks closest in style to the one I loved so that's a good sign. I'm also not offended by people making fun of Hitler and Nazis through satire. The trailer makes me laugh, which is the best sign of all -- I think I may be even excited for this one!
Black and Blue
In theaters October 25th; NR
I've been on a kick of watching a lot of police body-cam videos recently, some for entertainment, some for educational purposes, so I imagine this movie would annoy me by having the footage be so "movie." It also seems too far-fetched that she can't find one single good cop to help her out. Still I do like one person vs the world kind of movies and I really like Naomie Harris, so I'll keep an eye on this. If it turns out cheap, or nothing but political propaganda, I won't bother.
Countdown
In theaters October 25th; NR
What if an app could tell you how long you have until you DIE??? This looks silly. I'll watch it at home with my brothers and it'll be a good time.
Showing posts with label Emma Stone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Emma Stone. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Monday, January 23, 2017
La La Land
Spoiler-free.
Oh my heart.
Mia, a struggling actress (Emma Stone) and Sebastian, a cynical jazz pianist (Ryan Gosling) help each other navigate their way through a turbulent sea of hopes and dreams in Los Angeles, California.
Written and directed by the ever-stunning Damien Chazelle, this little film is most popularly notable as a classically-styled musical in a day when original musical films have all but been degraded into teenybopper TV movies on the Disney Channel. But La La Land is almost as far away from classics of the 50's as it is from Teen Beach Movie. "Almost," because it was obviously inspired to evoke that unattainable former glory from those oldies that are still so magical -- but that's not where it stops. It's also an indie film; it's a romance, and a comedy, and a drama; modern in many ways, old-fashioned in others; and it presents us with just as many moments that are achingly, heart-on-the-sleeve real as it does moments of whimsy and daydreaming.
Artistically, I have nothing to complain about. Artistically, I am having trouble finding the proper words of extolment. Chazelle is gifted with an incredible way of looking at the world and an equally incredible ability to make beautiful movies out of it all. His films are, I admit without shame, beyond me. He goes so deep and details so intricately that I watch his movies and feel as though I've only scratched the surface in understanding his full vision. In the case of this film, however far I was able to comprehend beneath the surface, floored me. It seemed to me, an open letter of encouragement and admiration to the Artist in the world. As an artist, and as a dreamer, it moved me deeply.
But, in relation to the movie, I am the barista. To the frustrated but working jazz pianists of the world, the film might mean something different, and to the successful movie star, something else entirely. Some people may simply find its whimsical charm entertaining. What the film is is what it means to Chazelle, but the beauty of it is that its language is practically universal, without having to simplify or cut corners in the storytelling. That is the common thing to do these days -- in order to relate and appeal to a wide crowd, make the story more shallow; more broad; more meaningless. La La Land does the opposite: it is so focused, and it digs so deep, unwavering and determined, that it touches upon a base desire that can resonate with anyone.
And then it's made up to look like this. My favorite thing about Chazelle's visual style is definitely his use of color, and here the color palette has been kicked up three or four notches from his last, Whiplash, but it all still feels just as intentional. I loved the very basic color scheme and the simplistic costumes made in it. Colorful lighting then adds another layer. The choreography for the dancing was lovely, and the fluid, heavily structured long-take style of the filming was as impressive as it was unique. As I said, an effort was made to recapture a magic thought to have died; it's alive and well in the dance scenes of this film. Most notably present in the sunset piece, and the planetarium.
Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling give it their all -- singing, dancing, playing the piano or acting their heart out, and were a big part of clinching the punch of the movie. Without their dedication to the performances, it probably would've been hard to accept all whimsy, and fantastic elements of the film. As it was, even the weird "randomly breaking out in song and dance" stuff didn't pull me out of the immersion one bit. It was also an unexpectedly neat touch to make Mia and Sebastian not be proficient singers. Besides adding realism, it enhanced the impact of their singing when they get into it beautifully. Gosling I have never liked or been more impressed with. "Impressive" doesn't quite cover it for Stone, though. She was more spell-binding, incredible, and heart-breaking than simply impressive. The audition scene was shredding -- in the most wonderful way possible. And she with Gosling, they oozed charm together, and achieved delightful comedy and realistic drama alike.
Leave it to Damien Chazelle to rearrange your brain and deftly shatter your heart into a thousand little pieces, yet leave you feeling nothing but unequivocal encouragement. Through his eyes, the promise of a bittersweet life seems like the best promise that can be made.
Oh my heart.
Mia, a struggling actress (Emma Stone) and Sebastian, a cynical jazz pianist (Ryan Gosling) help each other navigate their way through a turbulent sea of hopes and dreams in Los Angeles, California.
 |
| Some singing and dancing required. |
Written and directed by the ever-stunning Damien Chazelle, this little film is most popularly notable as a classically-styled musical in a day when original musical films have all but been degraded into teenybopper TV movies on the Disney Channel. But La La Land is almost as far away from classics of the 50's as it is from Teen Beach Movie. "Almost," because it was obviously inspired to evoke that unattainable former glory from those oldies that are still so magical -- but that's not where it stops. It's also an indie film; it's a romance, and a comedy, and a drama; modern in many ways, old-fashioned in others; and it presents us with just as many moments that are achingly, heart-on-the-sleeve real as it does moments of whimsy and daydreaming.
Artistically, I have nothing to complain about. Artistically, I am having trouble finding the proper words of extolment. Chazelle is gifted with an incredible way of looking at the world and an equally incredible ability to make beautiful movies out of it all. His films are, I admit without shame, beyond me. He goes so deep and details so intricately that I watch his movies and feel as though I've only scratched the surface in understanding his full vision. In the case of this film, however far I was able to comprehend beneath the surface, floored me. It seemed to me, an open letter of encouragement and admiration to the Artist in the world. As an artist, and as a dreamer, it moved me deeply.
 |
| "Here's to the ones who dream, foolish as they may seem..." |
But, in relation to the movie, I am the barista. To the frustrated but working jazz pianists of the world, the film might mean something different, and to the successful movie star, something else entirely. Some people may simply find its whimsical charm entertaining. What the film is is what it means to Chazelle, but the beauty of it is that its language is practically universal, without having to simplify or cut corners in the storytelling. That is the common thing to do these days -- in order to relate and appeal to a wide crowd, make the story more shallow; more broad; more meaningless. La La Land does the opposite: it is so focused, and it digs so deep, unwavering and determined, that it touches upon a base desire that can resonate with anyone.
And then it's made up to look like this. My favorite thing about Chazelle's visual style is definitely his use of color, and here the color palette has been kicked up three or four notches from his last, Whiplash, but it all still feels just as intentional. I loved the very basic color scheme and the simplistic costumes made in it. Colorful lighting then adds another layer. The choreography for the dancing was lovely, and the fluid, heavily structured long-take style of the filming was as impressive as it was unique. As I said, an effort was made to recapture a magic thought to have died; it's alive and well in the dance scenes of this film. Most notably present in the sunset piece, and the planetarium.
 |
| I often find it hard to believe successful actors in roles of struggling artists... not so here. They were perfect for their roles. |
Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling give it their all -- singing, dancing, playing the piano or acting their heart out, and were a big part of clinching the punch of the movie. Without their dedication to the performances, it probably would've been hard to accept all whimsy, and fantastic elements of the film. As it was, even the weird "randomly breaking out in song and dance" stuff didn't pull me out of the immersion one bit. It was also an unexpectedly neat touch to make Mia and Sebastian not be proficient singers. Besides adding realism, it enhanced the impact of their singing when they get into it beautifully. Gosling I have never liked or been more impressed with. "Impressive" doesn't quite cover it for Stone, though. She was more spell-binding, incredible, and heart-breaking than simply impressive. The audition scene was shredding -- in the most wonderful way possible. And she with Gosling, they oozed charm together, and achieved delightful comedy and realistic drama alike.
Leave it to Damien Chazelle to rearrange your brain and deftly shatter your heart into a thousand little pieces, yet leave you feeling nothing but unequivocal encouragement. Through his eyes, the promise of a bittersweet life seems like the best promise that can be made.
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Upcoming Movie Roundup - December
In November I went to see Doctor Strange, and it was everything I didn't know how to hope it would be! A wonderful surprise, and a fun and original origin film from Marvel. And then in an unexpected turn of events, I also went to see Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them with some friends. And I thoroughly enjoyed it, in spite of a handful of less-than-great aspects. I said in November that I didn't want to invest in a new long series, but I'm afraid I might have done accidentally.
And now -- December. The end of 2016! So tell me, what is your favorite film of the year so far? And are there any movies releasing in December that you think might displace it?
Here's what's interesting me...
La La Land
Dec 8th; PG-13
Honestly, all I need to know concerning this film is that it's from Damien Chazelle, the writer and director of Whiplash. And, equally as honestly, if I didn't know it was from him, and watched this trailer, then THAT would be all I need to know. So, at this point, I already know too much. I even know that it stars Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone. I have a lot of questions, like is it a legit musical, or is the "musical" moments just fantasy? Or daydreams? Cause you know -- La La Land. And there's some weird stuff going on in the trailer, but I kinda want it all to be real. But anyway, that doesn't really effect that fact that I want to see this movie! It looks so beautiful, in every sense of the word. I seriously doubt this could be anything but excellent.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
Dec 15th; PG-13
It's hard to put my finger on what exactly excites me about this movie. First, it's Star Wars, so I have to see it. There's no way I won't. But also, it's a smaller scale story. It's not about the Jedi, with their chosen ones and prophesies and such, it's just average people caught up in the rebellion. It's a neat opportunity to be different. Like, they go undercover in the Death Star, so is it going to be more of a spy film? A Mission: Impossible kind of thing? And then there's the cast. I've always liked Felicity Jones, so I'm ready to love her character, and I can already feel a little crush developing on Diego Luna's character, just from the trailer. (I just realized I've seen him before, in Elysium! He was the dude with the pigtails. No wonder I like him.) There's also Mads Mikkelsen, and Forest Whitaker, and Alan Tudyk voicing the robot! And then, there's the look of it. I mean, good grief, you could play the trailer, pause it anywhere randomly, have it printed and it'd be the most gorgeous piece of art. If the entire movie looks like that, I might be so distracted that I don't even notice the story. And that seems like that is the only thing that's up in the air right now. But seriously, if Episode 7 could be so fantastic just by copying Episode 4's plot, there's not much to be worried about. All they have to do is come up with something original that fits inside the preexisting narrative, and I'm there. Well, I'm there anyway, but there you go.
Assassin's Creed
Dec 20th; PG-13
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION! Ahem. So, I'm not a big video game person, and the only reason I even knew about this movie is because everyone else does. My brother has lots to say on the subject of this movie, but for me, it boils down to this: It's an action movie, so is the story there, and, are the visuals there? From the trailer the story is ambiguous. That could be a good thing, if they're just trying to not reveal too much, or it could simply mean the story is not there. Same thing with the visuals. It seems to promise good things, but if what we see here is the very best they have, the movie won't be able to stand on visuals alone. Personally, I'd really like it to end up on the positive side. I like Michael Fassbender, he can handle action well, and the sci-fi side of it is interesting to me. But honestly, it'd be the bigger surprise if it wound up being truly good.
Passengers
Dec 20th; PG-13
From the moment I saw that Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence were going to star in a space sci-fi movie together I was on board. And, well, I still am, but my expectations have slowly been diminishing since the original announcement. Like, I'm all for a little romance with my sci-fi, but this is more "a little sci-fi with the romance." The only news I've seen concerning the film is about the sex scene. Not a great sign, even if it is PG-13. And something I'd opt to cut out completely -- I like the actors too much. Maybe it'll surprise me and wind up being a great sci-fi story as well after all, but I'm not confident. The premise is very neat, and the look of it is great -- just my kind of thing. I love how as the trailer goes on they slowly morph from clean and pristine to panicked and dirty. It one of those times where I'll just have to wait and see, but man, I'm really hoping here.
Sing
Dec 20th; PG
This animated movie as about a singing competition with animals, and is stuffed full of big names. Too full, I think. I saw a couple different trailers for this, and the one I have here made me pretty interested to see the movie, but the other one tried very hard to cancel that out. The first trailer gave the impression that the movie was focusing mainly on one story -- that of the kid gorilla voiced by Taron Egerton -- and letting all the other characters be more in the background. But it's clear now that all the characters will be basically equal. It's a kid's version of Love Actually with animals! So now I bet that a lot less than average effort is going to be put into each story. It's a kid's movie, so for them that hardly matters, but for me the only appeal left is hearing the actors sing. And we don't even get to see them sing.
Silence
Dec 22nd; R
The latest from Martin Scorsese is based on a novel, and about two missionaries -- Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver -- who go dangerously and illegally into Japan in search of one of their own, Liam Neeson. It's getting a bit of Oscar talk, and looks serious and intense but also highly artistic, and I just hope that it isn't only existing to be Oscar bait, but actually existing to tell its story. It's definitely a different story that we haven't seen before, and I'd love to see it find success if it's as good as it looks even without the help of the Academy.
A Monster Calls
Dec 22nd; PG-13
A fantasy coming of age story that has Felicity Jones, Toby Kebbell, Liam Neeson and Sigourney Weaver surrounding the newcomer in the lead. From the trailer, this doesn't look super interesting to me, though it does look neat and uniquely dark for a movie where the lead is twelve years old. The critics seem to think it's worth our time, so I'll definitely be keeping an eye on it.
Paterson
Dec 27th; R
Just this trailer leaves me feeling so relaxed and happy. I love the tone. And it's got Adam Driver in it, and that's pretty much all I need to know! Definitely need to see this one. It's limited release only leaves the question of "when?"
And now -- December. The end of 2016! So tell me, what is your favorite film of the year so far? And are there any movies releasing in December that you think might displace it?
Here's what's interesting me...
La La Land
Dec 8th; PG-13
Honestly, all I need to know concerning this film is that it's from Damien Chazelle, the writer and director of Whiplash. And, equally as honestly, if I didn't know it was from him, and watched this trailer, then THAT would be all I need to know. So, at this point, I already know too much. I even know that it stars Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone. I have a lot of questions, like is it a legit musical, or is the "musical" moments just fantasy? Or daydreams? Cause you know -- La La Land. And there's some weird stuff going on in the trailer, but I kinda want it all to be real. But anyway, that doesn't really effect that fact that I want to see this movie! It looks so beautiful, in every sense of the word. I seriously doubt this could be anything but excellent.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
Dec 15th; PG-13
It's hard to put my finger on what exactly excites me about this movie. First, it's Star Wars, so I have to see it. There's no way I won't. But also, it's a smaller scale story. It's not about the Jedi, with their chosen ones and prophesies and such, it's just average people caught up in the rebellion. It's a neat opportunity to be different. Like, they go undercover in the Death Star, so is it going to be more of a spy film? A Mission: Impossible kind of thing? And then there's the cast. I've always liked Felicity Jones, so I'm ready to love her character, and I can already feel a little crush developing on Diego Luna's character, just from the trailer. (I just realized I've seen him before, in Elysium! He was the dude with the pigtails. No wonder I like him.) There's also Mads Mikkelsen, and Forest Whitaker, and Alan Tudyk voicing the robot! And then, there's the look of it. I mean, good grief, you could play the trailer, pause it anywhere randomly, have it printed and it'd be the most gorgeous piece of art. If the entire movie looks like that, I might be so distracted that I don't even notice the story. And that seems like that is the only thing that's up in the air right now. But seriously, if Episode 7 could be so fantastic just by copying Episode 4's plot, there's not much to be worried about. All they have to do is come up with something original that fits inside the preexisting narrative, and I'm there. Well, I'm there anyway, but there you go.
Assassin's Creed
Dec 20th; PG-13
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION! Ahem. So, I'm not a big video game person, and the only reason I even knew about this movie is because everyone else does. My brother has lots to say on the subject of this movie, but for me, it boils down to this: It's an action movie, so is the story there, and, are the visuals there? From the trailer the story is ambiguous. That could be a good thing, if they're just trying to not reveal too much, or it could simply mean the story is not there. Same thing with the visuals. It seems to promise good things, but if what we see here is the very best they have, the movie won't be able to stand on visuals alone. Personally, I'd really like it to end up on the positive side. I like Michael Fassbender, he can handle action well, and the sci-fi side of it is interesting to me. But honestly, it'd be the bigger surprise if it wound up being truly good.
Passengers
Dec 20th; PG-13
From the moment I saw that Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence were going to star in a space sci-fi movie together I was on board. And, well, I still am, but my expectations have slowly been diminishing since the original announcement. Like, I'm all for a little romance with my sci-fi, but this is more "a little sci-fi with the romance." The only news I've seen concerning the film is about the sex scene. Not a great sign, even if it is PG-13. And something I'd opt to cut out completely -- I like the actors too much. Maybe it'll surprise me and wind up being a great sci-fi story as well after all, but I'm not confident. The premise is very neat, and the look of it is great -- just my kind of thing. I love how as the trailer goes on they slowly morph from clean and pristine to panicked and dirty. It one of those times where I'll just have to wait and see, but man, I'm really hoping here.
Sing
Dec 20th; PG
This animated movie as about a singing competition with animals, and is stuffed full of big names. Too full, I think. I saw a couple different trailers for this, and the one I have here made me pretty interested to see the movie, but the other one tried very hard to cancel that out. The first trailer gave the impression that the movie was focusing mainly on one story -- that of the kid gorilla voiced by Taron Egerton -- and letting all the other characters be more in the background. But it's clear now that all the characters will be basically equal. It's a kid's version of Love Actually with animals! So now I bet that a lot less than average effort is going to be put into each story. It's a kid's movie, so for them that hardly matters, but for me the only appeal left is hearing the actors sing. And we don't even get to see them sing.
Silence
Dec 22nd; R
The latest from Martin Scorsese is based on a novel, and about two missionaries -- Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver -- who go dangerously and illegally into Japan in search of one of their own, Liam Neeson. It's getting a bit of Oscar talk, and looks serious and intense but also highly artistic, and I just hope that it isn't only existing to be Oscar bait, but actually existing to tell its story. It's definitely a different story that we haven't seen before, and I'd love to see it find success if it's as good as it looks even without the help of the Academy.
A Monster Calls
Dec 22nd; PG-13
A fantasy coming of age story that has Felicity Jones, Toby Kebbell, Liam Neeson and Sigourney Weaver surrounding the newcomer in the lead. From the trailer, this doesn't look super interesting to me, though it does look neat and uniquely dark for a movie where the lead is twelve years old. The critics seem to think it's worth our time, so I'll definitely be keeping an eye on it.
Paterson
Dec 27th; R
Just this trailer leaves me feeling so relaxed and happy. I love the tone. And it's got Adam Driver in it, and that's pretty much all I need to know! Definitely need to see this one. It's limited release only leaves the question of "when?"
Friday, May 1, 2015
Upcoming Movie Roundup - May
Avengers, assemble! Things went according to plan again, and April became the Avenger month for me. My theater does it's movie premieres the night before, so by the time this lovely month of May had rolled around I was already deep into the fangirling about how great Age of Ultron was. It was pretty darned fantastic, in fact, and if you expect to see a review of it popping up within the next few days you will not be disappointed. (You also won't be disappointed with the film itself.)
So now I can focus my May movie attention to all these other movies that Ultron had before overshadowed. Turns out, it's looking like a pretty fantastic month, with quite a few very interesting releases.
Have you seen Age of Ultron yet/when will you be seeing it? And what other May movies have your attention?
Here are the ones who have mine:
Far From the Madding Crowd
May 1st(limited); PG-13
The appeal of this one is that it's a period drama with Carey Mulligan. It's an adaptation of the novel by Thomas Hardy, (SPOILERS) and normally, that would make me very wary, since he typically has his stories end in tragedy, but I heard that this one doesn't, and that makes me very interested. (END)
Ride
May 1st(limited); R
This is a comedy about an uptight mother (Helen Hunt) who follows her oppressed son (Brenton Thwaites) to LA to nag him about going to college and instead gets her life changed. It doesn't really look like it'll be ground-breaking or anything -- I mean, the trailer practically gives away the whole movie -- but it does have a nice cast (Luke Wilson is also in it) and it looks funny enough, and rather sweet and if I ever watch it, that'll be all I expect from it.
Mad Max: Fury Road
May 15th; R
I've only seen parts of the Mel Gibson original Mad Max movies, so I don't really feel like I have any right be be super interested in this remake. And I'm not really. Certainly the cast of Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, and Nicholas Hoult is interesting, and it all looks very stylishly crazy, and of course super-duper violent, and visually quite impressive. And orange. I'll be surprised if it turns out to be not as good as it promises to be, but it may be a while before I see for myself.
Tomorrowland
May 22nd; PG
Well -- it's an adventure flick, I can see that much. And sci-fi too. And George Clooney is in it, and that girl from The Longest Ride, Brittany Robertson. Brad Bird is directing, so that's a huge plus. But what's it about? I couldn't begin to explain. Every time I watch a new trailer it get weirder and more ambiguous about anything to do with plot. It's based on a Disney theme park "land" so maybe that explains the ambiguous-ness, or maybe they're just trying to be secretive about it. Either way, I'm intrigued.
Aloha
May 29th; PG-13
Simply put, this is a rom-com with Bradley Cooper and Emma Stone, so count me in. It has a few more pluses on a technical level; it's directed by Cameron Crowe, it co-stars Rachel McAdams, John Krasinski, Bill Murray and Alec Baldwin, and it's set in Hawaii. But honestly, my interest comes down to the the fact that this trailer just makes it look like a great romantic comedy with Bradley Cooper and Emma Stone. Yep, I'm basing my opinions off a trailer -- and I fully expect to be right.
San Andreas
May 29th; PG-13
I'll keep it short here: this movie is the new disaster movie that I will be laughing over with my brothers come whenever we can watch it for free.
So now I can focus my May movie attention to all these other movies that Ultron had before overshadowed. Turns out, it's looking like a pretty fantastic month, with quite a few very interesting releases.
Have you seen Age of Ultron yet/when will you be seeing it? And what other May movies have your attention?
Here are the ones who have mine:
Far From the Madding Crowd
May 1st(limited); PG-13
The appeal of this one is that it's a period drama with Carey Mulligan. It's an adaptation of the novel by Thomas Hardy, (SPOILERS) and normally, that would make me very wary, since he typically has his stories end in tragedy, but I heard that this one doesn't, and that makes me very interested. (END)
Ride
May 1st(limited); R
This is a comedy about an uptight mother (Helen Hunt) who follows her oppressed son (Brenton Thwaites) to LA to nag him about going to college and instead gets her life changed. It doesn't really look like it'll be ground-breaking or anything -- I mean, the trailer practically gives away the whole movie -- but it does have a nice cast (Luke Wilson is also in it) and it looks funny enough, and rather sweet and if I ever watch it, that'll be all I expect from it.
Mad Max: Fury Road
May 15th; R
I've only seen parts of the Mel Gibson original Mad Max movies, so I don't really feel like I have any right be be super interested in this remake. And I'm not really. Certainly the cast of Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, and Nicholas Hoult is interesting, and it all looks very stylishly crazy, and of course super-duper violent, and visually quite impressive. And orange. I'll be surprised if it turns out to be not as good as it promises to be, but it may be a while before I see for myself.
Tomorrowland
May 22nd; PG
Well -- it's an adventure flick, I can see that much. And sci-fi too. And George Clooney is in it, and that girl from The Longest Ride, Brittany Robertson. Brad Bird is directing, so that's a huge plus. But what's it about? I couldn't begin to explain. Every time I watch a new trailer it get weirder and more ambiguous about anything to do with plot. It's based on a Disney theme park "land" so maybe that explains the ambiguous-ness, or maybe they're just trying to be secretive about it. Either way, I'm intrigued.
Aloha
May 29th; PG-13
Simply put, this is a rom-com with Bradley Cooper and Emma Stone, so count me in. It has a few more pluses on a technical level; it's directed by Cameron Crowe, it co-stars Rachel McAdams, John Krasinski, Bill Murray and Alec Baldwin, and it's set in Hawaii. But honestly, my interest comes down to the the fact that this trailer just makes it look like a great romantic comedy with Bradley Cooper and Emma Stone. Yep, I'm basing my opinions off a trailer -- and I fully expect to be right.
San Andreas
May 29th; PG-13
I'll keep it short here: this movie is the new disaster movie that I will be laughing over with my brothers come whenever we can watch it for free.
Saturday, May 17, 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Minor spoilers throughout. Major spoilers have a warning.
Here we go again. This sequel to a reboot not unexpectedly feels very familiar; a different version of a story we've seen many times before. Parts from our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man's last movie are even reiterated just in case you're clueless as to the origin story of Spider-Man (as if!) rendering the last movie all but unnecessary. And we are subjected yet again to Spidey's worries that the people of NYC don't appreciate him, that he is constantly putting his girl in danger, and that he won't be able to keep his secret. However, the fact that we've seen it before is the only thing making it slightly tiresome, because it is done with more grace than ever. And there's more here than just reiteration, and a lot of it is unexpected. Unexpected and good.
Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker's energy, charm and likability continue to be unending. He is what makes these movies worthwhile. Snarky and hip, yet understanding, and his heroism is fully fledged. He's just as likely to help a kid being pestered by bullies as he is to do something to garner fame and attention. I realize the kid was little more than a ploy to make us see how sweet Spidey is, but come on; he was adorable, introducing himself like that. He knows he's needed and can no more resist lending a helping-web than he can resist his beautiful, sassy girl, Gwen. He and Emma Stone are so natural together that during some of their scenes of playful, intimate banter, I got a distinct impression of being a third wheel and thought that I should probably leave them alone.
Ever since I saw him in the trailer I knew Dane DeHaan's Harry would be the highlight of this movie, and I was right. DeHaan's fantastic, detailed style of acting is one you'd usually find in indie films, and it sets him apart. His intricate performance was bursting -- begging for more screen-time, and not only made him perfectly believable as the bitter, neglected son of an extremely cold and even more wealthy man, but makes us understand his conflict, and be involved in his development. All without being bashed over the head with the information via the script -- simply paying attention reveals it naturally.
Then he abruptly becomes the Green Goblin, and from there the comic style of the movie worked against him. The villain side would work better as a more subtly and darkly crazy, rather than a cackling villain typical of cheesy superhero flicks and episodes of Phineas and Ferb. Fortunately, his time spent cackling was limited, giving plenty of opportunity for the character to be molded to DeHaan's better abilities for later. (I hope I'm not assuming too much thinking he'll return? Obviously he needs to.)
Then there's the big villain, Electro. Jamie Foxx's performance is of course great, before and after being superpowered. But the after is the real him; the before is just teasing us for the main event, and when it comes, then he is complete. He rocks the villainous monologues, the maniacal cackle -- or crackle in his case -- and the glowing blue skin, and is over-the-top and out-of-this world. But his origin story and motivations are as cliche as cliche gets, and therefore I hardly cared one way or another about him once he made the unbelievable leap from mild mannered and invisible to fantastic, vengeful and electric.
Other fun but less involved additions to the cast include Chris Cooper as Norman Osbourne, Paul Giamatti obviously having fun as a crazy Russian who loves crashing into things, Felicity Jones as a sly young lady named Felicia. And I happily assume the latter will be showing her face again. And apparently B.J. Novak's small part was a comic villain as well. I wonder if number three will be even more baddie-packed than this one. They might just be able to get away with it; they managed the number in this one unexpectedly well.
(Major Spoilers!)
A certain person's dying was sadly not very sad, even though I didn't expect it to really happen. I'm mostly just surprised because of the great chemistry Gwen and Peter had, and I wonder how the void will fill with her gone. (Maybe they'll let Shailene Woodley be Mary Jane after all.) The foreshadowing was so obvious that I figured it was just a big bluff to mess with us, so the whole scene went by before I believed it, and by then it was too late to be moved. So it was my bad, not the film's. A sucker punch would've perhaps been more effective at manipulating emotions, but honestly the better way was the way we witnessed -- contrived, but the considerate, tasteful way.
(End spoilers)
The movie pops and sparkles (sometimes literally when Electro's on screen) with superpowered effects as Spidey swings and fights and saves people at the last second with the flashiest style we've seen yet. If any movies should be in 3D, it's these ones. And the way they show off the Spidey-sense -- with slow-motion, showing us what he sees in a split second, then going back and letting us see how he handles it -- I enjoyed that very much, particularly the first time it happens.
It was pretty jumbled at times, like debris was flying around and falling into random scenes trying to pull it all together, but really it didn't bother me. It was fun that way; it felt upbeat that way; and even though it was too long, it didn't feel too long. And I have to think to remember flaws instead of them sticking out obviously. It stands alone capably, has enough heart for a superhero movie, is full of talented, entertaining performances, and does what it's meant to do. I'm surprised to say this, but it is more its own, and therefore better than the first one. Color me... pleasantly shocked. So, when's the third one coming?
Here we go again. This sequel to a reboot not unexpectedly feels very familiar; a different version of a story we've seen many times before. Parts from our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man's last movie are even reiterated just in case you're clueless as to the origin story of Spider-Man (as if!) rendering the last movie all but unnecessary. And we are subjected yet again to Spidey's worries that the people of NYC don't appreciate him, that he is constantly putting his girl in danger, and that he won't be able to keep his secret. However, the fact that we've seen it before is the only thing making it slightly tiresome, because it is done with more grace than ever. And there's more here than just reiteration, and a lot of it is unexpected. Unexpected and good.
 |
| Nice view. But I'd still be worried about falling without my web-shooters. |
Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker's energy, charm and likability continue to be unending. He is what makes these movies worthwhile. Snarky and hip, yet understanding, and his heroism is fully fledged. He's just as likely to help a kid being pestered by bullies as he is to do something to garner fame and attention. I realize the kid was little more than a ploy to make us see how sweet Spidey is, but come on; he was adorable, introducing himself like that. He knows he's needed and can no more resist lending a helping-web than he can resist his beautiful, sassy girl, Gwen. He and Emma Stone are so natural together that during some of their scenes of playful, intimate banter, I got a distinct impression of being a third wheel and thought that I should probably leave them alone.
 |
| I wonder if they banter like that in real life... |
Ever since I saw him in the trailer I knew Dane DeHaan's Harry would be the highlight of this movie, and I was right. DeHaan's fantastic, detailed style of acting is one you'd usually find in indie films, and it sets him apart. His intricate performance was bursting -- begging for more screen-time, and not only made him perfectly believable as the bitter, neglected son of an extremely cold and even more wealthy man, but makes us understand his conflict, and be involved in his development. All without being bashed over the head with the information via the script -- simply paying attention reveals it naturally.
Then he abruptly becomes the Green Goblin, and from there the comic style of the movie worked against him. The villain side would work better as a more subtly and darkly crazy, rather than a cackling villain typical of cheesy superhero flicks and episodes of Phineas and Ferb. Fortunately, his time spent cackling was limited, giving plenty of opportunity for the character to be molded to DeHaan's better abilities for later. (I hope I'm not assuming too much thinking he'll return? Obviously he needs to.)
 |
| "Isn't that the question of the day." |
Then there's the big villain, Electro. Jamie Foxx's performance is of course great, before and after being superpowered. But the after is the real him; the before is just teasing us for the main event, and when it comes, then he is complete. He rocks the villainous monologues, the maniacal cackle -- or crackle in his case -- and the glowing blue skin, and is over-the-top and out-of-this world. But his origin story and motivations are as cliche as cliche gets, and therefore I hardly cared one way or another about him once he made the unbelievable leap from mild mannered and invisible to fantastic, vengeful and electric.
 |
| Electro and Harry both have what the other lacks. It was all motivation and development for Harry, (up to a point) and it was brilliant, but he wasn't able to cut loose; for Electro, his ability to cut loose and embrace the insanity so confidently was his storyline's saving grace. |
Other fun but less involved additions to the cast include Chris Cooper as Norman Osbourne, Paul Giamatti obviously having fun as a crazy Russian who loves crashing into things, Felicity Jones as a sly young lady named Felicia. And I happily assume the latter will be showing her face again. And apparently B.J. Novak's small part was a comic villain as well. I wonder if number three will be even more baddie-packed than this one. They might just be able to get away with it; they managed the number in this one unexpectedly well.
(Major Spoilers!)
A certain person's dying was sadly not very sad, even though I didn't expect it to really happen. I'm mostly just surprised because of the great chemistry Gwen and Peter had, and I wonder how the void will fill with her gone. (Maybe they'll let Shailene Woodley be Mary Jane after all.) The foreshadowing was so obvious that I figured it was just a big bluff to mess with us, so the whole scene went by before I believed it, and by then it was too late to be moved. So it was my bad, not the film's. A sucker punch would've perhaps been more effective at manipulating emotions, but honestly the better way was the way we witnessed -- contrived, but the considerate, tasteful way.
(End spoilers)
 |
| Wow, I haven't put any pics of the suit yet. So here we go. |
The movie pops and sparkles (sometimes literally when Electro's on screen) with superpowered effects as Spidey swings and fights and saves people at the last second with the flashiest style we've seen yet. If any movies should be in 3D, it's these ones. And the way they show off the Spidey-sense -- with slow-motion, showing us what he sees in a split second, then going back and letting us see how he handles it -- I enjoyed that very much, particularly the first time it happens.
It was pretty jumbled at times, like debris was flying around and falling into random scenes trying to pull it all together, but really it didn't bother me. It was fun that way; it felt upbeat that way; and even though it was too long, it didn't feel too long. And I have to think to remember flaws instead of them sticking out obviously. It stands alone capably, has enough heart for a superhero movie, is full of talented, entertaining performances, and does what it's meant to do. I'm surprised to say this, but it is more its own, and therefore better than the first one. Color me... pleasantly shocked. So, when's the third one coming?
 |
| One more for good measure, and because it's a fun one. |
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Upcoming Movie Roundup - May
Look out: here come the first round of the summer blockbusters!
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
May 2nd: PG-13
I admit: I'm a little worried about the villain count in this movie. Did no one learn anything from Maguire's Spider-Man 3? Well, hopefully they learned a lot, and the overwhelming amount of baddies is the only thing being repeated. This one has so much more potential anyway because I actually like Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. Plus more bad guys and other characters means more cool actors to play them, like Jamie Foxx, who appears to be the main villain, and Paul Giamatti, and Dane DeHaan, who I've never watched before, but already love his version of Harry, and Felicity Jones, B.J. Novak, and Celeborn; Marton Csokas. Yep, by the reviews I've seen so far this doesn't live up to what we've come to expect from our superhero movies, but I doubt I'll have a hard time finding a few things to enjoy.
Godzilla
May 16th; PG-13
I feel like I've seen this before... Well, the monster looks impressive, but it doesn't look like there's a guarantee of anything more than that that the version with Matthew Broderick didn't give besides being newer and therefore cooler and more expensive. Or maybe I'm missing the appeal. The main appeal for me is that Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen are starring -- it's kinda like a preview for Age of Ultron!
X-Men: Days of Future Past
May 23rd; PG-13
Well obviously this is a must-see. X-Men and the young X-Men "reboot" come together in a complicated, the-fate-of-the-earth-in-the-balance plot? Sounds a lot like Doctor Who meets superheroes, so count me in! Plus, with the best of the two casts added together, I don't think I've ever seen the likes of these huge names together before: Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy AND Patrick Stewart, and Michael Fassbender AND Ian McKellen. And then of course Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, and lots and lots of recognizable faces. And I did mention Jennifer Lawrence, right? Yeah. It would take a lot to makes this not be an awesome success.
Maleficent
May 30th; PG-13
Sleeping Beauty gets the "Wicked" treatment? The trailer implies that the baddie, played by Anelina Jolie, isn't so bad after all, which isn't exactly something I'm super interested to see. It looks epic and pretty (or awesome) and promises a deeper plot with conspiracies, and lots at steak. And they obviously had a great time updating the possibly-not-evil-after-all lady. But in too many ways I'm reminded of Snow White and the Hunstman. Will this be the new take on a classic fairytale that finally meets with success? The most drawing thing for me is the talented Elle Fanning as Aurora.
The summer movie season begins! So what is first on your to-see list?
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
May 2nd: PG-13
I admit: I'm a little worried about the villain count in this movie. Did no one learn anything from Maguire's Spider-Man 3? Well, hopefully they learned a lot, and the overwhelming amount of baddies is the only thing being repeated. This one has so much more potential anyway because I actually like Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. Plus more bad guys and other characters means more cool actors to play them, like Jamie Foxx, who appears to be the main villain, and Paul Giamatti, and Dane DeHaan, who I've never watched before, but already love his version of Harry, and Felicity Jones, B.J. Novak, and Celeborn; Marton Csokas. Yep, by the reviews I've seen so far this doesn't live up to what we've come to expect from our superhero movies, but I doubt I'll have a hard time finding a few things to enjoy.
Godzilla
May 16th; PG-13
I feel like I've seen this before... Well, the monster looks impressive, but it doesn't look like there's a guarantee of anything more than that that the version with Matthew Broderick didn't give besides being newer and therefore cooler and more expensive. Or maybe I'm missing the appeal. The main appeal for me is that Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen are starring -- it's kinda like a preview for Age of Ultron!
X-Men: Days of Future Past
May 23rd; PG-13
Well obviously this is a must-see. X-Men and the young X-Men "reboot" come together in a complicated, the-fate-of-the-earth-in-the-balance plot? Sounds a lot like Doctor Who meets superheroes, so count me in! Plus, with the best of the two casts added together, I don't think I've ever seen the likes of these huge names together before: Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy AND Patrick Stewart, and Michael Fassbender AND Ian McKellen. And then of course Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, and lots and lots of recognizable faces. And I did mention Jennifer Lawrence, right? Yeah. It would take a lot to makes this not be an awesome success.
Maleficent
May 30th; PG-13
Sleeping Beauty gets the "Wicked" treatment? The trailer implies that the baddie, played by Anelina Jolie, isn't so bad after all, which isn't exactly something I'm super interested to see. It looks epic and pretty (or awesome) and promises a deeper plot with conspiracies, and lots at steak. And they obviously had a great time updating the possibly-not-evil-after-all lady. But in too many ways I'm reminded of Snow White and the Hunstman. Will this be the new take on a classic fairytale that finally meets with success? The most drawing thing for me is the talented Elle Fanning as Aurora.
The summer movie season begins! So what is first on your to-see list?
Monday, July 9, 2012
The Amazing Spider-Man
Ladies and gentlemen, the amazing Spider-Man! – Mark II. Due
to many complications and problems typical of Hollywood, after three movies and
ten years, Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire, and Kristen Dunst and her bright hair are
being tossed to the wind. They had a good run, but now it time for the new; two
of the hottest young actors (in both appearance and skill) Andrew Garfield, and
Emma Stone, and the director with the perfect name, Marc Webb, are all set for
an at least equally long, probably better reboot of everyone’s favorite
web-crawling franchise.
For my sanity, I’m going to try my best not to directly compare
this movie to the 2002 version, but I’m afraid it might be hard, though not
quite as hard as it is to not judge people who say “The reboot is actually a better
film, but since I enjoyed the ’02 version just fine, I’m going to say I didn’t
like it at all!” Ahem.
Andrew Garfield is Peter Parker, a smart, slightly geeky, and
more than slightly troubled, but still hip high school student. He lives with
his Aunt and Uncle ever since his parents unexpectedly left him with them, and disappeared.
His dad was a scientist, who was working on something very secret. One day,
when cleaning out the basement, Peter finds his dad’s old briefcase, and
inside, some equations he doesn’t understand, and a picture of his dad and a
co-worker; Dr. Curt Connors, played by Rhys Ifans. Peter goes to talk to Dr. Connors,
but ends up doing more sneaking around than talking. He ends up in a strange
room full of spiders, where one bites him. No way.
Getting used to his new super powers proves to be hard for
Peter, and while funny, it was a little unbelievable… even for a comic hero. After
that awkward first day though, things start to pick up for Peter. He first uses
his power as we could all assume; to make his own life easier, but it doesn’t
exactly work, and after a tragedy we all knew was coming, he puts himself
toward a more noble cause, more noble, but still his own cause. You get the
super part overnight, but the hero part takes some work. The spider didn’t make
Peter good, but it does jump-start his journey toward heroism, a journey that
takes a long time, and involves the audience in a way only a modern super hero
pic could.
Peter has a crush on a pretty, popular girl at school named
Gwen Stacy played pleasingly by the lovely Emma Stone. Gwen apparently likes
him too, because when Peter finally – and awkwardly – talks to her and asks her
out, things get moving along pretty fast. They have a cute, hilariously awkward
relationship, (and you should know, I don’t often think awkward movie moments
are actually funny, I usually just laugh to keep from crying… not in this case)
and before you know it, he admits to being the “masked vigilante” her police captain
dad has been trying to catch and arrest, immediately eliminating at least half
of the unnecessary melodrama classic to the genre. Another thing I enjoyed was
that Gwen never requires rescuing through the entire film, another refreshing
change from the usual super hero fare, which will also remove that drag-y
repetitive feeling when it inevitably happens in the next film.
This web-slinger is flying in 3D, and if you’re pulling out the
extra money for that ticket, I will not say ye nay. The 3D is quality, and
shows off the action sequences very well. But this action would look good
without it as well, in fact, it would look good anywhere – it is some of the
most stylish and exciting action I’ve ever seen. It has a certain crisp, clean
feeling that really brings out that fun thrill that should be in a comic hero
film, while never throwing away the gravity that makes Spidey’s situations
worth investing in.
I would tell you, as a general rule, to never, ever, ever,
ever put slow motion in a movie unless it was absolutely necessary to show what
happened, or if you were making a ridiculous, stylized movie. I have now
changed my mind. Marc Webb did a great job knowing exactly where to put the
slow-mo to perfectly enhance the visual appeal, and the intensity, and I now believe
he should be the only person ever allowed to use that dreaded gimmick.
Webb also did wonders in the character department. I have
never felt so invested in Spidey’s story before, whether when he was sad and
bitter from being abandoned by his parents, or his sense of duty when it came
to saving the city, his slow journey to being a true hero, to his sweet nervousness
around Gwen, it was all great. (Things totally missing or done painfully wrong
in the ’02 Spidey! (Sorry, I compared them… but I couldn’t help myself, and
hey, I lasted a pretty long time!))
So now we come to the conclusion, and what is there to say? Which
Spidey is better in my opinion? Is it finally time for the comparison? Well, I
say no, because both movies are perfectly good stories of the Spider’s origin
on their own merit, and this review is on The Amazing Spider-Man, so that’s
where I’ll stay. This movie is a
high-flying good time with pizzazz that gives The Avengers a run for its money in
visual flair, but delves in deep, and is emotionally resonant, just how we like
our heroes these days. We all basically knew what the plot for this film was
going to be; there’s only so many ways to do an origin story, so there's nothing really surprising, but it promises there
will be more - much more - and I for one, can hardly wait.
- 4/5 stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)