Movie Reviews

Scary Movie 4

  • Title: Scary Movie 4
  • IMDb: link

Scary Movie 4

Okay, I went to see the first Scary Movie back in 2000 and I laughed, groaned, and winced my way through.  In the end I had a fine time but didn’t feel the need to see the next two sequels.  In watching the fourth film of the “trilogy,” which hits theaters today, I experienced a very strong deja vu reaction.  The parts that work still work and the parts that don’t…. well, still don’t.  Even with it’s flaws, the film does have just enough to offer for me to recommend it.  What, you ask?  Well…

Scary Movie 4 Read More »

The Mild

This movie helps you understand the Disney purchase of Pixar.  When Disney is stealing story, characters, plot, settings, and basically everything from Dreamworks… well, you know they’ve hit rock bottom.  The film is almost a carbon copy of last years Madagascar and despite the fact it steals everything but the kitchen sink it still took six writers to come up with this script.  Really?  Six writers?  For this? 

Is it worth seeing?  Did you like Madagascar?  Would you have liked it without Ben Stiller, Chris Rock, David Schwimer and Jada Pinkett Smiith?  If the answer is yes than this summer’s good dumb fun flick for the whole family is just waiting for you.

The Wild
2 & 1/2 Stars

If you missed seeing Madagascar (check out Aaron’s review here) on the big screen here’s you chance!  Wow folks, Disney animation is in such a state of decline that it’s now stealing plot, character, scenes, dialogue, and story from Dreamworks.  Maybe Mickey Mouse needs to get a second job.

A group of animals leave the zoo and travel around New York then make their way on a boat to a beach and into the jungles of “the wild.”  There they are met by a tribe of strange singing and dancing creatures with a wacky ruler who puts one of the group in charge. 

Any of this sound familiar?  Well it should because it’s the exact plot to last year’s Madagascar but somehow it also turns out to be the plot to The Wild with only a few minor differences.  This time there is a lion (Kiefer Sutherland) and a giraffe (Jeneane Garofalo) but the zebra and hippo have been replaced by a squirrel (James Belushi), a snake (Richard Kind), and a koala bear (Eddie Izzard).  And the wacky but cute lemurs who sing and dance are replaced by the wacky but creepy wildebeasts who sing and dance (the leaders played here by William Shatner and Patrick Warburton in roles they could, and seemingly did, do in thier sleep).  The main structure of the story stays the same except this time the group leaves to rescue the lion’s son (Greg Cipes) rather than the zebra.

Along the way there’s some nice music, tons and tons of (rather pointless and monotonous) dialogue, and a few clever jokes.  Kids will probably enjoy the film and it’s the type of nice dumb summer comedy that seems to play well with families.  But, aside from the similarities with the superior Madagascar, which itself is only so-so, there are a few problems.

First off there are some mind-numbing inexcusable missteps and miscues.  One such example: the group of animals escape the New York Zoo and drive around the city in a dump truck.  Aside from how lame that sounds the computer animation people didn’t create a single car (parked or moving) or a single person walking around the city as they drive through the completely empty and spotless streets of New York including Times Square.  Did I fall asleep?  Are they doing an animated version of Vanilla Sky?  Or did they just run out of money in the animation budget?  I would rather except those excuses than the more obvious one that the creators saw this as a meaningless kids film that didn’t need the level of detail and realism you would get in a Powerpuff Girls episode.  There are quite a few such problems in the film though this is one of the most glaring.

The acting is fine but only Izzard’s koala bear is given any interesting dialogue (and you can tell most of his funny bits were all ad-libbed).  Shatner and Walburton are pretty good as the villains (aside from being so far over-the-top they make Bobcat Goldthwait look sedated).  But when the most interesting characters of a movie are villains who still aren’t that compelling you know you’ve run into a disasterous dud of a Disney film (yeah, I like my alliteration).

The animation is the computer style that tries to add a bit of realism with showing you every hair or scail on the animals.  While interesting to look at I prefer the older style of animation than this new look that hasn’t yet been perfected.  And even if it is pretty to look at and does give you a couple chuckles that’s not saying much for a feature length animated film from Disney.  A big miss here for the house that Mickey built.  Hopefully the Pixar deal will breathe some much needed life into what used to be the best animated studio around because all its doing right now is making Dreamworks look much better by comparision.

The Mild Read More »

Unlucky Slevin Lacks Bang

  • Title: Lucky Number Slevin
  • IMDb: link

Lucky Number Slevin

I’m not a big Josh Hartnett fan; I’ve seen to many of his movies.  I know that sounds harsh but anybody else remember Hollywood Homicide, 40 Days and 40 Nights, Blow Dry, and Pearl HarborSlevin takes a rather simple plot and twists it up in a maze-like formula of so many thrillers these days.  While it’s better than something like Taking Lives in the end that’s not saying much.  It’s not bad, it’s got a good cast and a few memorable moments, and a 70’s style set designer for some reason.  But in the end it’s just okay.  Still, any film where Josh Hartnett gets punched repeatedly in the face I’m all for.

Slevin (Josh Hartnett) decides to take a trip to New York City to visit his friend Nick Fisher (Sam Jaeger).  From the moment he steps into NY things go wrong.  First he’s mugged getting into town losing his wallet and all identification (and getting his nose broken for the first time) and on arriving at Nick’s apartment is taken by thugs to be the owner of the apartment, his friend Nick, who has fled the city owing money to two competing gangster families and left Slevin holding the bag.  With friends like these…

Unlucky Slevin Lacks Bang Read More »

Bad Instincts

How bad does a film have to be for Joe Eszterhas to refuse to make it?  How silly is it for a 50 year-old woman to strut around in skimpy outfits like a horny teenager?  How untitiliating is it to see a nude 50 year-old woman pretending to be a 20 year-old woman, and how sad is it to watch?  How unnecessary is this sequel?  What does Sharon Stone’s pet project really have to offer?  These questions and more can be answered if you’re willing to watch one of the most ridiculous films in recent memory.  Or you could just read my review.

Basic Instinct 2
1 Star

In 1992 Sharon Stone broke into the big time with the lurid sex-thriller Basic Instinct.  After years of struggle the hit allowed Stone to carve out a niche as the latest slutty tramp vixen (only latter to be dethrowned by the likes of Elizabeth Berkley and Krista Allen).  Finally her career broadened and she moved away from those roles into some fine performances in good films (such as last year’s Broken Flowers).  Sadly however she’s returned to the role that made her a star.  Now at the age of 48 Stone loses both her clothes and dignity and shows us quite plainly that the studios were right to try to abort this baby before it ever saw the light of day.

Author and serial killer Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) is living it up in England seeking thrills, taking chances, and leaving bodies strewn in her wake.  After her bad choice of mixing sex and driving causes the death of her latest one-night stand Catherine is taken in by Scotland Yard Detective Roy Washburn (David Thewlis) who wants nothing more than to nail her to the wall.  He sends Cathrine to his friend Dr. Michael Glass (David Morrissey), who is hiding enough of his own skeletons for an entirely separate movie, for a full evaluation.  Glass of course falls for the femme fatale and his world slowly disolves into crazy-wacko-funland-time.

Stone was guaranteed the right to make a sequel to Basic Instinct (despite the fact no one else wanted one) and over the past few years went as far to sue for the studio to produce this film.  Problem is it took 14 years to get the film done and Stone is now 48 years-old and acting like no time has gone by.  It’s hard not to notice the age of the actress and the rather inappropriate (and unintentionally hilarious at times) storyline for one such as Granny Stone to be starring in.  Stone goes for all the same jokes: “arrest me for smoking?,” trashy outfits, spreading her legs (thankfully this time she straddles the back of a chair), performing various sexual acts in public for an audience, and seducing a troubled guy who actually has the power to stop her at any time but doesn’t because… she’s so sexy??  Problem is we’ve seen this before and the rehash never adds anything new to the stock formula nor works with an actress of Stone’s age.

From beginning to end the film is simply ridiculous.  Nothing believable happens and the officers at Scotland Yard are even more inept at their jobs than the San Francisco cops from the first film.  Seriously folks are you telling me the only competent cops are so mesmerized by her they just can’t stop her either?  Flimsy plot twists involving a tabloid reporter (Hugh Dancy) digging into Dr. Glass’s shady past involving a former patient and Glass’ appoinment to a new position are meant to add some much needed story elements to the film yet they never come together or amount to much.  And as for the sex and thriller aspects, they fail to obscure what is simply dreadful dialogue and writing; unlike the first film, this time when Granny Stone drops her clothes and writhes around it’s not sexy, it’s not titilating or erotic, it’s just plain icky and more than a little sad.

You into GILFs?  If not pass this ridiculous absurdly retarded film by.  It’s so lurid and seedy it makes softcore porn look respectable by comparision.  Miss Stone please keep your legs crossed and your clothes on from now on.  I’ve seen enough to know I’ve seen enough.  The first movie was forgettable enough but this one just oozes all types of badness.  Probles arise because director Michael Caton-Jones is no Paul Verhoven and writers Leora Barish and Henry Bean are no Joe Eszterhas (stop and think about that for a a second, realize I’m not saying this in a good way, and realize the imlications of this statement) and Stone simply isn’t the sexpot she was almost fifteen-years ago.  The film was obvioulsy an attempt by Stone to recapture the glory of her most profitable years but the actuality of it will make you yearn for The Specialist and Sliver.  The film is not entirely pointless as it reveals exactly how bad a film has to be for Joe Eszterhaus to refuse to make it – exactly this bad.

Bad Instincts Read More »

Die Hard in a Bank

  • Title: Inside Man
  • IMDb: link

Inside Man

I love heist flicks.  I mean I l-o-v-e ‘em!  So I’m predisposed to like a film like this though I also tend to nitpick at them as well.  Spike Lee’s attempt to make a mainstream film has actually produced a pretty good genre flick.  While not a great movie Inside Man works pretty well as a heist flick and makes the most of its cast and setting.

Die Hard in a Bank Read More »