free web counter
Link2Me SEO Link Exchange Directory
Quality directory of webmasters actively seeking link exchange. Improve your search engine rankings and link popularity the easy way. Work clever not hard.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
hit counter
free web counter
Link2Me SEO Link Exchange Directory
Quality directory of webmasters actively seeking link exchange. Improve your search engine rankings and link popularity the easy way. Work clever not hard.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Youth in Revolt
Youth in Revolt is the 2010 American feature film adaptation of C.D. Payne's epistolary novel of the same name. The film premiered at the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival on September 15, 2009.[1] A wide release is set for January 8, 2010. The film is rated R for sexual content, language, and drug use.
Nick Twisp (Michael Cera) is a cynical sex-obsessed 16-year-old who, while on vacation in a trailer park, meets Sheeni Saunders (Portia Doubleday), an intellectual. The only things really standing in his way are Sheeni's poetry-writing ex-boyfriend Trent (Jonathan B. Wright), Nick's temperamental divorced parents (Steve Buscemi and Jean Smart), and Nick's mom's boyfriends (Zach Galifianakis and Ray Liotta). When Nick realizes she is not interested, he comes up with an alter-ego, named Francois, who resembles Nick, but has blue eyes, a mustache, a deeper voice, and a player/bad boy attitude to help him with his pursuit of Sheeni. But when Francois ends up making Nick a wanted criminal, everything spins out of control.
The film currently holds an 83% 'Fresh' rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 6 reviews.[2]
The film was in production as of February 6, 2009 when re-shoots were being filmed in Shreveport, LA. Newcomer Portia Doubleday has been cast as Nick's love interest Sheeni; Steve Buscemi as George, Nick's greedy and temperamental father; Jean Smart as Estelle, Nick's erratic mother; and Ray Liotta as Estelle's fascist boyfriend Oakland PD Officer Lance Wescott.[3]
Nick Twisp (Michael Cera) is a cynical sex-obsessed 16-year-old who, while on vacation in a trailer park, meets Sheeni Saunders (Portia Doubleday), an intellectual. The only things really standing in his way are Sheeni's poetry-writing ex-boyfriend Trent (Jonathan B. Wright), Nick's temperamental divorced parents (Steve Buscemi and Jean Smart), and Nick's mom's boyfriends (Zach Galifianakis and Ray Liotta). When Nick realizes she is not interested, he comes up with an alter-ego, named Francois, who resembles Nick, but has blue eyes, a mustache, a deeper voice, and a player/bad boy attitude to help him with his pursuit of Sheeni. But when Francois ends up making Nick a wanted criminal, everything spins out of control.
The film currently holds an 83% 'Fresh' rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 6 reviews.[2]
The film was in production as of February 6, 2009 when re-shoots were being filmed in Shreveport, LA. Newcomer Portia Doubleday has been cast as Nick's love interest Sheeni; Steve Buscemi as George, Nick's greedy and temperamental father; Jean Smart as Estelle, Nick's erratic mother; and Ray Liotta as Estelle's fascist boyfriend Oakland PD Officer Lance Wescott.[3]
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus review
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is an upcoming fantasy film directed by Terry Gilliam and written by Gilliam and Charles McKeown. The film follows the leader of a travelling theatre troupe who, having made a deal with the Devil, takes audience members through a magical mirror to explore their imaginations.
The film's world premiere was during the 62nd Cannes Film Festival, out of competition.[2] The film received a PG-13 rating for "violent images, some sensuality, language and smoking." and will receive a 12A rating in the UK for strong language and some violent scenes.
The UK release for the film was due to release on 6 June 2009 but pushed back to 16 October 2009 due to the successful premiere at the Cannes Film Festival.
In the present day, immortal 1,000-year-old Doctor Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) leads a traveling theatre troupe—including a sleight of hand expert, Anton (Andrew Garfield), and a dwarf, Percy (Verne Troyer)—that offers audience members a chance to go beyond reality through a magical mirror in his possession.[3] Parnassus had been able to guide the imagination of others through a deal with the Devil (Tom Waits), who now comes to collect on the arrangement,[4] targeting the doctor's daughter (Lily Cole). The troupe, which is joined by a mysterious outsider named Tony (portrayed by Heath Ledger, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell),[5] embark through parallel worlds to rescue the girl.[6]
The film's world premiere was during the 62nd Cannes Film Festival, out of competition.[2] The film received a PG-13 rating for "violent images, some sensuality, language and smoking." and will receive a 12A rating in the UK for strong language and some violent scenes.
The UK release for the film was due to release on 6 June 2009 but pushed back to 16 October 2009 due to the successful premiere at the Cannes Film Festival.
In the present day, immortal 1,000-year-old Doctor Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) leads a traveling theatre troupe—including a sleight of hand expert, Anton (Andrew Garfield), and a dwarf, Percy (Verne Troyer)—that offers audience members a chance to go beyond reality through a magical mirror in his possession.[3] Parnassus had been able to guide the imagination of others through a deal with the Devil (Tom Waits), who now comes to collect on the arrangement,[4] targeting the doctor's daughter (Lily Cole). The troupe, which is joined by a mysterious outsider named Tony (portrayed by Heath Ledger, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell),[5] embark through parallel worlds to rescue the girl.[6]
Daybreakers movie review
Daybreakers is a sci-fi vampire film written and directed by Peter and Michael Spierig.[4] The film stars Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe and Sam Neill. Daybreakers was released in the United Kingdom on January 6, 2010 and was released in North America on January 8, 2010.[5]
In November 2004, Lionsgate acquired the script to Daybreakers, written by Peter and Michael Spierig. The brothers, who directed Undead (2003), were attached to direct Daybreakers.[6] In September 2006, the brothers received financing from Film Finance Corporation Australia, with production set to take place in Queensland.[7] In May 2007, actor Ethan Hawke was cast into the lead role.[8] Later in the month, Sam Neill joined the cast. Daybreakers began filming in Gold Coast, Queensland at Warner Bros. Movie World studios on July 16, 2007.[9] Weta Workshop created the creature effects.[8] The production budget was $21 million, with the State Government contributing $1 million to the filmmakers.[10] Principal photography was completed on schedule in September 2007, with reshoots following to extend key sequences.[11]
Hawke described the film as an allegory of man's pacing with natural resources, "We're eating our own resources so people are trying to come up with blood substitutes, trying to get us off of foreign humans."[12] The actor also said that despite the serious allegory, the film was "low art" and "completely unpretentious and silly".[13]
The film received favorable to mixed reviews. It currently holds a 64% "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 88 reviews,[16] as well as a score of 60 out of 100 on Metacritic based on 27 reviews.[17] Variety gave the film a negative review stating the film had a "cold, steely blue, black and gray "Matrix"-y look" going on to say Daybreakers "emerges as a competent but routine chase thriller that lacks attention-getting dialogue, unique characters or memorable setpieces that might make it a genre keeper rather than a polished time-filler."[18] Rolling Stone gave the film two and a half out of four stars and called the film a B movie and a "nifty genre piece".[19]
Showing Search Results that Google has not found yet:
1 to 3 of 3 Articles matching 'daybreakers' in related articles.
Pages: 1
1. Watch Daybreakers Movie Online Free
December 29, 2009
Daybreakers is an upcoming 2010 vampire film written and directed by Peter and Michael Spierig. The film stars Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe and Sam Neill. Filming took place in Australia from July to September 2007. Daybreakers is scheduled to be released in the United Kingdom on January 6, 2010 and in North America on January 8, 2010. Watch New Movies Online In 2019, a plague transforms a majority of the world's population into vampires. With only a handful of humans left to provide blood, starvation is a very real risk for their new species. In response, the vampires seek to farm the... (read more)
Author: Kevin Phillips
2. The Most Desired Films Online Free in 2009
December 29, 2009
In fact Hollywood publishes plenty well patronized masterpieces every year. And straightaway we are going to tell you the most wanted films in 2009 that plenty of Hollywood movies fans truly admire and have spent a lot of looking for dozens of cinemas or watch them online with lots of concern and passions. 1. Daybreakers This movie talks about vampires of the brothers Michael and Peter Spierig. The narrative occurred in 2017 reporting a really seriously infectious disease that causes humans almost become bloodthirsty creators. Though the plot is nothing new at all, Daybreakers has attain... (read more)
Author: Jani Montes
3. Watch Daybreakers Online Free
December 25, 2009
Watch Daybreakers OnlineAre you trying to watch Daybreakers online? It is true that Daybreakers is a motion picture that is to be released in the coming year. That's right, this latest electric motion picture will be made available on the 8th January 2010. Thedirection of this movie was carried out in Australia in 2007. It will be released in United Kingdom & North America this January and is set to send ripples throughout the box office. If you are not able to visit a cinema then you can find the internet to watch this film directly from the ease of your own home. Nowadays, it is possible to ... (read more)
Author: Dirk Wilkins
Pages: 1
Author Login
Email Address:
Password:
Forgot your password?
Register for Author Account
BOTTOM LINE: Boring, long-winded, lifeless and corny, "New Moon" takes an otherwise good idea and creates a far below average film experience, with a love story that is excruciating to watch in its self-absorbed and clunky melodrama.
THE GOOD: "New Moon" starts with a strong and unique concept for a vampire film, thanks to the book upon which it is based. In this sequel, Bella (Kristen Stewart) is torn between her love for vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) and werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner), while delving in to their worlds and the factors in which they are opposed. The film builds on its predecessor by expanding the love story and the world, and this is helped somewhat by the better technical execution of the images and editing; "New Moon" looks and feels more like a film than Twilight, with some clever filmmaking techniques such as the 360 degree camera move on Bella as she transitions through months of depression after Edward leaves her. If nothing else, "New Moon" is technically more accomplished than its predecessor.
THE BAD: The bad points for this film are almost too many to compress in to this review. Structurally, the film is something of a mess; it would seem the spine of it is the love triangle between Edward, Jacob and Bella but the film moves between this and other subplots with jarring transitions. Edward and Bella are doing great in the beginning, and then we are brought to one scene where he breaks up with her, without much warning except for a couple of perfunctory and arbitrary lines of dialogue explaining Edward's actions. We then spend an inordinate amount of time on the developing relationship between Bella and Jacob, with both eventually spouting their words of love in some of the most long-winded and corny sequences in cinematic history, with dialogue worse than a soap opera, and blatant "look-at-me" shots of poor Taylor Lautner walking around without his shirt on. It then gets worse when the vampires return, again an arbitrary transition in story, and Bella finds she has to save Edward from a rather nasty death at the hands of the vampire elite in Rome. Again, more long winded sequences, culminating in Edward spouting how Bella is the best and only thing in his world, yada-yada-yada...
Both Edward and Jacob are clearly suffering in their passion for Bella, but unfortunately this is completely unbelievable because Bella, as played by Kirsten Stewart, is one of the most boring and lifeless heroines committed to film. It is hard to imagine why any one would be that passionate over someone so average. Stewart's performance is so lifeless that all of her character's motivations seem stupid, particularly her 'junkie' tricks of doing dangerous things to keep Edward near her in spirit. The story being told in this film relies on performances to carry it dramatically, and the actors here have either been given no direction, not much to work with, or they checked their skills at the door when production started. All of this combined makes for a film that can be at times excruciating to watch in its corny silliness.
If the film had thirty minutes cut from the running time it may have worked better, but not much. What is astonishing above all of this is that no one on the production of this film ever noticed how bad a product they were making. There is no excuse for this, given the resources behind the film and the seemingly good story implied in the plot. Or maybe they did not care; after all, the fans have spoken and the film is a huge hit.
For the original review, follow this link: http://www.allaboutmovies.net/filmreviewnewmoon.htm
Todd Murphy is a staff reviewer at the film/DVD review web site, http://www.allaboutmovies.net - for all the latest reviews on the newest releases.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Todd_Murphy
In November 2004, Lionsgate acquired the script to Daybreakers, written by Peter and Michael Spierig. The brothers, who directed Undead (2003), were attached to direct Daybreakers.[6] In September 2006, the brothers received financing from Film Finance Corporation Australia, with production set to take place in Queensland.[7] In May 2007, actor Ethan Hawke was cast into the lead role.[8] Later in the month, Sam Neill joined the cast. Daybreakers began filming in Gold Coast, Queensland at Warner Bros. Movie World studios on July 16, 2007.[9] Weta Workshop created the creature effects.[8] The production budget was $21 million, with the State Government contributing $1 million to the filmmakers.[10] Principal photography was completed on schedule in September 2007, with reshoots following to extend key sequences.[11]
Hawke described the film as an allegory of man's pacing with natural resources, "We're eating our own resources so people are trying to come up with blood substitutes, trying to get us off of foreign humans."[12] The actor also said that despite the serious allegory, the film was "low art" and "completely unpretentious and silly".[13]
The film received favorable to mixed reviews. It currently holds a 64% "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 88 reviews,[16] as well as a score of 60 out of 100 on Metacritic based on 27 reviews.[17] Variety gave the film a negative review stating the film had a "cold, steely blue, black and gray "Matrix"-y look" going on to say Daybreakers "emerges as a competent but routine chase thriller that lacks attention-getting dialogue, unique characters or memorable setpieces that might make it a genre keeper rather than a polished time-filler."[18] Rolling Stone gave the film two and a half out of four stars and called the film a B movie and a "nifty genre piece".[19]
Showing Search Results that Google has not found yet:
1 to 3 of 3 Articles matching 'daybreakers' in related articles.
Pages: 1
1. Watch Daybreakers Movie Online Free
December 29, 2009
Daybreakers is an upcoming 2010 vampire film written and directed by Peter and Michael Spierig. The film stars Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe and Sam Neill. Filming took place in Australia from July to September 2007. Daybreakers is scheduled to be released in the United Kingdom on January 6, 2010 and in North America on January 8, 2010. Watch New Movies Online In 2019, a plague transforms a majority of the world's population into vampires. With only a handful of humans left to provide blood, starvation is a very real risk for their new species. In response, the vampires seek to farm the... (read more)
Author: Kevin Phillips
2. The Most Desired Films Online Free in 2009
December 29, 2009
In fact Hollywood publishes plenty well patronized masterpieces every year. And straightaway we are going to tell you the most wanted films in 2009 that plenty of Hollywood movies fans truly admire and have spent a lot of looking for dozens of cinemas or watch them online with lots of concern and passions. 1. Daybreakers This movie talks about vampires of the brothers Michael and Peter Spierig. The narrative occurred in 2017 reporting a really seriously infectious disease that causes humans almost become bloodthirsty creators. Though the plot is nothing new at all, Daybreakers has attain... (read more)
Author: Jani Montes
3. Watch Daybreakers Online Free
December 25, 2009
Watch Daybreakers OnlineAre you trying to watch Daybreakers online? It is true that Daybreakers is a motion picture that is to be released in the coming year. That's right, this latest electric motion picture will be made available on the 8th January 2010. Thedirection of this movie was carried out in Australia in 2007. It will be released in United Kingdom & North America this January and is set to send ripples throughout the box office. If you are not able to visit a cinema then you can find the internet to watch this film directly from the ease of your own home. Nowadays, it is possible to ... (read more)
Author: Dirk Wilkins
Pages: 1
Author Login
Email Address:
Password:
Forgot your password?
Register for Author Account
BOTTOM LINE: Boring, long-winded, lifeless and corny, "New Moon" takes an otherwise good idea and creates a far below average film experience, with a love story that is excruciating to watch in its self-absorbed and clunky melodrama.
THE GOOD: "New Moon" starts with a strong and unique concept for a vampire film, thanks to the book upon which it is based. In this sequel, Bella (Kristen Stewart) is torn between her love for vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) and werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner), while delving in to their worlds and the factors in which they are opposed. The film builds on its predecessor by expanding the love story and the world, and this is helped somewhat by the better technical execution of the images and editing; "New Moon" looks and feels more like a film than Twilight, with some clever filmmaking techniques such as the 360 degree camera move on Bella as she transitions through months of depression after Edward leaves her. If nothing else, "New Moon" is technically more accomplished than its predecessor.
THE BAD: The bad points for this film are almost too many to compress in to this review. Structurally, the film is something of a mess; it would seem the spine of it is the love triangle between Edward, Jacob and Bella but the film moves between this and other subplots with jarring transitions. Edward and Bella are doing great in the beginning, and then we are brought to one scene where he breaks up with her, without much warning except for a couple of perfunctory and arbitrary lines of dialogue explaining Edward's actions. We then spend an inordinate amount of time on the developing relationship between Bella and Jacob, with both eventually spouting their words of love in some of the most long-winded and corny sequences in cinematic history, with dialogue worse than a soap opera, and blatant "look-at-me" shots of poor Taylor Lautner walking around without his shirt on. It then gets worse when the vampires return, again an arbitrary transition in story, and Bella finds she has to save Edward from a rather nasty death at the hands of the vampire elite in Rome. Again, more long winded sequences, culminating in Edward spouting how Bella is the best and only thing in his world, yada-yada-yada...
Both Edward and Jacob are clearly suffering in their passion for Bella, but unfortunately this is completely unbelievable because Bella, as played by Kirsten Stewart, is one of the most boring and lifeless heroines committed to film. It is hard to imagine why any one would be that passionate over someone so average. Stewart's performance is so lifeless that all of her character's motivations seem stupid, particularly her 'junkie' tricks of doing dangerous things to keep Edward near her in spirit. The story being told in this film relies on performances to carry it dramatically, and the actors here have either been given no direction, not much to work with, or they checked their skills at the door when production started. All of this combined makes for a film that can be at times excruciating to watch in its corny silliness.
If the film had thirty minutes cut from the running time it may have worked better, but not much. What is astonishing above all of this is that no one on the production of this film ever noticed how bad a product they were making. There is no excuse for this, given the resources behind the film and the seemingly good story implied in the plot. Or maybe they did not care; after all, the fans have spoken and the film is a huge hit.
For the original review, follow this link: http://www.allaboutmovies.net/filmreviewnewmoon.htm
Todd Murphy is a staff reviewer at the film/DVD review web site, http://www.allaboutmovies.net - for all the latest reviews on the newest releases.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Todd_Murphy
Film Review - The Twilight Saga - New Moon (2009)
BOTTOM LINE: Boring, long-winded, lifeless and corny, "New Moon" takes an otherwise good idea and creates a far below average film experience, with a love story that is excruciating to watch in its self-absorbed and clunky melodrama.
THE GOOD: "New Moon" starts with a strong and unique concept for a vampire film, thanks to the book upon which it is based. In this sequel, Bella (Kristen Stewart) is torn between her love for vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) and werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner), while delving in to their worlds and the factors in which they are opposed. The film builds on its predecessor by expanding the love story and the world, and this is helped somewhat by the better technical execution of the images and editing; "New Moon" looks and feels more like a film than Twilight, with some clever filmmaking techniques such as the 360 degree camera move on Bella as she transitions through months of depression after Edward leaves her. If nothing else, "New Moon" is technically more accomplished than its predecessor.
THE BAD: The bad points for this film are almost too many to compress in to this review. Structurally, the film is something of a mess; it would seem the spine of it is the love triangle between Edward, Jacob and Bella but the film moves between this and other subplots with jarring transitions. Edward and Bella are doing great in the beginning, and then we are brought to one scene where he breaks up with her, without much warning except for a couple of perfunctory and arbitrary lines of dialogue explaining Edward's actions. We then spend an inordinate amount of time on the developing relationship between Bella and Jacob, with both eventually spouting their words of love in some of the most long-winded and corny sequences in cinematic history, with dialogue worse than a soap opera, and blatant "look-at-me" shots of poor Taylor Lautner walking around without his shirt on. It then gets worse when the vampires return, again an arbitrary transition in story, and Bella finds she has to save Edward from a rather nasty death at the hands of the vampire elite in Rome. Again, more long winded sequences, culminating in Edward spouting how Bella is the best and only thing in his world, yada-yada-yada...
Both Edward and Jacob are clearly suffering in their passion for Bella, but unfortunately this is completely unbelievable because Bella, as played by Kirsten Stewart, is one of the most boring and lifeless heroines committed to film. It is hard to imagine why any one would be that passionate over someone so average. Stewart's performance is so lifeless that all of her character's motivations seem stupid, particularly her 'junkie' tricks of doing dangerous things to keep Edward near her in spirit. The story being told in this film relies on performances to carry it dramatically, and the actors here have either been given no direction, not much to work with, or they checked their skills at the door when production started. All of this combined makes for a film that can be at times excruciating to watch in its corny silliness.
If the film had thirty minutes cut from the running time it may have worked better, but not much. What is astonishing above all of this is that no one on the production of this film ever noticed how bad a product they were making. There is no excuse for this, given the resources behind the film and the seemingly good story implied in the plot. Or maybe they did not care; after all, the fans have spoken and the film is a huge hit.
For the original review, follow this link: http://www.allaboutmovies.net/filmreviewnewmoon.htm
Todd Murphy is a staff reviewer at the film/DVD review web site, http://www.allaboutmovies.net - for all the latest reviews on the newest releases.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Todd_Murphy
THE GOOD: "New Moon" starts with a strong and unique concept for a vampire film, thanks to the book upon which it is based. In this sequel, Bella (Kristen Stewart) is torn between her love for vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) and werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner), while delving in to their worlds and the factors in which they are opposed. The film builds on its predecessor by expanding the love story and the world, and this is helped somewhat by the better technical execution of the images and editing; "New Moon" looks and feels more like a film than Twilight, with some clever filmmaking techniques such as the 360 degree camera move on Bella as she transitions through months of depression after Edward leaves her. If nothing else, "New Moon" is technically more accomplished than its predecessor.
THE BAD: The bad points for this film are almost too many to compress in to this review. Structurally, the film is something of a mess; it would seem the spine of it is the love triangle between Edward, Jacob and Bella but the film moves between this and other subplots with jarring transitions. Edward and Bella are doing great in the beginning, and then we are brought to one scene where he breaks up with her, without much warning except for a couple of perfunctory and arbitrary lines of dialogue explaining Edward's actions. We then spend an inordinate amount of time on the developing relationship between Bella and Jacob, with both eventually spouting their words of love in some of the most long-winded and corny sequences in cinematic history, with dialogue worse than a soap opera, and blatant "look-at-me" shots of poor Taylor Lautner walking around without his shirt on. It then gets worse when the vampires return, again an arbitrary transition in story, and Bella finds she has to save Edward from a rather nasty death at the hands of the vampire elite in Rome. Again, more long winded sequences, culminating in Edward spouting how Bella is the best and only thing in his world, yada-yada-yada...
Both Edward and Jacob are clearly suffering in their passion for Bella, but unfortunately this is completely unbelievable because Bella, as played by Kirsten Stewart, is one of the most boring and lifeless heroines committed to film. It is hard to imagine why any one would be that passionate over someone so average. Stewart's performance is so lifeless that all of her character's motivations seem stupid, particularly her 'junkie' tricks of doing dangerous things to keep Edward near her in spirit. The story being told in this film relies on performances to carry it dramatically, and the actors here have either been given no direction, not much to work with, or they checked their skills at the door when production started. All of this combined makes for a film that can be at times excruciating to watch in its corny silliness.
If the film had thirty minutes cut from the running time it may have worked better, but not much. What is astonishing above all of this is that no one on the production of this film ever noticed how bad a product they were making. There is no excuse for this, given the resources behind the film and the seemingly good story implied in the plot. Or maybe they did not care; after all, the fans have spoken and the film is a huge hit.
For the original review, follow this link: http://www.allaboutmovies.net/filmreviewnewmoon.htm
Todd Murphy is a staff reviewer at the film/DVD review web site, http://www.allaboutmovies.net - for all the latest reviews on the newest releases.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Todd_Murphy
Nine - Movie Review
"Nine"
My 0-10 rating: 7
Genre: Musical, Romance
Director: Rob Marshall
Screenplay: Michael Tolkin, Anthony Minghella, based on the 1982 musical show, inspired by Frederico Fellini's 1963 film "8 1/2"
Cast: Daniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Judi Dench,
Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren
Time: 1 hr., 58 min.
Rating: PG-13 (sexual content)
With relentless high octane glitz, ritz and supercharged dazzle of the Italian glory days of cinema, "Nine" has the megawattage gut energy that will leave you helplessly entertained.
But, you've noticed, the critical reviews nationally haven't been great. Why? Well, y'see, if you must measure the quality of a movie by its plot and character depth, don't even bother checking in on this one. That ain't what it is. This is style, not substance, and whether in movies, theater, politics, or just personal communication, guess which one always wins.
No, we're talking red hot showmanship and dazzling delivery here, immersed in a cultural display of the times with such smash and dash that you'll find yourself still holding onto your first handful of popcorn after ten minutes in.
This treatment, indeed, is the heartbeat of the film, creating enormous energy from only basic material, much as do the character celebrities within it. Some may argue that this is little more than a series of musical vignettes, each creating on its own. Perhaps, but irrelevant. At the film audience stimulation level, it's wild.
Each and every star seems primed and bursting with the aplomb and delivery required, and much more. Stars to whom we hadn't previously associated singing talent blast forth here with piercing power. The production numbers are not especially paced for dramatic effect; they just vibrate on their own from high tension to high tension. In effect, the film has made full-length feature out of film previews. And hey, it works.
Emotional connections? No, that's not what this about.
With but a token salute to Frederico Fellini's 1963 film "8 1/2," "Nine" sprawls across the screen with every intent to fill every frame to every corner with sexy spectacle and/or quick-energizing dialogue in the show people-speak of the glittering stage. In an almost indifferent storyline, if plot is what you must have, the 1965 setting offers a middle-aged Italian director going through a mental block in his creative genius.
It all opens at Rome's Cinecitta Film Studios where famed director Guido Contini (Daniel Day-Lewis) winds his way to the huge Stage Five as his fiercely loyal coterie of lovers, stage hands and what would later be called groupies hover in his glorious presence. He is only too aware that the movie that is about to be filmed, "Italia" (his ninth, and so the title), has as yet not even been written. Yet here he is facing the press and his idolizing hordes.
When one of the reporters, in the context of Contini's last two box office bombs, asks him, "Have you run out of things to say?" he knows he better withdraw from the moment and start to face himself. Escaping to a seaside resort, in typical Italian celebrity tradition, he tells his wife (Marion Cotillard) to remain at home all the while as he arranges to see exclusively his sizzling mistress Carla (Penelope Cruz) who sets the place glowing with her "A Call from the Vatican" number.
Among Contini's closest woman are also provocative singer Claudia (Nicole Kidman) -- and his mother (Sophia Loren). They provide the nucleus of his relationships, although he is made constantly aware of the hard fact that in real life they are quite the independent women, none bending readily to his will.
So the "plot" unashamedly lets itself rest on Contini's mental block in creativity. Who cares, anyway.
Just come and flow with it.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until his column was budget-cut on Dec. 31, 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
My 0-10 rating: 7
Genre: Musical, Romance
Director: Rob Marshall
Screenplay: Michael Tolkin, Anthony Minghella, based on the 1982 musical show, inspired by Frederico Fellini's 1963 film "8 1/2"
Cast: Daniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz, Nicole Kidman, Judi Dench,
Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren
Time: 1 hr., 58 min.
Rating: PG-13 (sexual content)
With relentless high octane glitz, ritz and supercharged dazzle of the Italian glory days of cinema, "Nine" has the megawattage gut energy that will leave you helplessly entertained.
But, you've noticed, the critical reviews nationally haven't been great. Why? Well, y'see, if you must measure the quality of a movie by its plot and character depth, don't even bother checking in on this one. That ain't what it is. This is style, not substance, and whether in movies, theater, politics, or just personal communication, guess which one always wins.
No, we're talking red hot showmanship and dazzling delivery here, immersed in a cultural display of the times with such smash and dash that you'll find yourself still holding onto your first handful of popcorn after ten minutes in.
This treatment, indeed, is the heartbeat of the film, creating enormous energy from only basic material, much as do the character celebrities within it. Some may argue that this is little more than a series of musical vignettes, each creating on its own. Perhaps, but irrelevant. At the film audience stimulation level, it's wild.
Each and every star seems primed and bursting with the aplomb and delivery required, and much more. Stars to whom we hadn't previously associated singing talent blast forth here with piercing power. The production numbers are not especially paced for dramatic effect; they just vibrate on their own from high tension to high tension. In effect, the film has made full-length feature out of film previews. And hey, it works.
Emotional connections? No, that's not what this about.
With but a token salute to Frederico Fellini's 1963 film "8 1/2," "Nine" sprawls across the screen with every intent to fill every frame to every corner with sexy spectacle and/or quick-energizing dialogue in the show people-speak of the glittering stage. In an almost indifferent storyline, if plot is what you must have, the 1965 setting offers a middle-aged Italian director going through a mental block in his creative genius.
It all opens at Rome's Cinecitta Film Studios where famed director Guido Contini (Daniel Day-Lewis) winds his way to the huge Stage Five as his fiercely loyal coterie of lovers, stage hands and what would later be called groupies hover in his glorious presence. He is only too aware that the movie that is about to be filmed, "Italia" (his ninth, and so the title), has as yet not even been written. Yet here he is facing the press and his idolizing hordes.
When one of the reporters, in the context of Contini's last two box office bombs, asks him, "Have you run out of things to say?" he knows he better withdraw from the moment and start to face himself. Escaping to a seaside resort, in typical Italian celebrity tradition, he tells his wife (Marion Cotillard) to remain at home all the while as he arranges to see exclusively his sizzling mistress Carla (Penelope Cruz) who sets the place glowing with her "A Call from the Vatican" number.
Among Contini's closest woman are also provocative singer Claudia (Nicole Kidman) -- and his mother (Sophia Loren). They provide the nucleus of his relationships, although he is made constantly aware of the hard fact that in real life they are quite the independent women, none bending readily to his will.
So the "plot" unashamedly lets itself rest on Contini's mental block in creativity. Who cares, anyway.
Just come and flow with it.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until his column was budget-cut on Dec. 31, 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
Alvin and the Chipmunks
Created by Ross Bagdasarian, Sr. in 1958, Alvin and the Chipmunks is a five time Grammy Award winning animated music group. The group consisted of three talking chipmunks (Alvin, the mischievous trouble maker, Simon, the smart one with glasses and Theodore, the chubby sweetheart). In the past, the chipmunks were shown as cartoons and now they are shown in a full length movie as anthropomorphic chipmunks.
The movie begins in a tree farm where the three chipmunks are storing acorns for the winter whilst singing 'Bad Day' (by Daniel Powter). Seconds later their tree is cut down and taken to Los Angeles where it is place in the middle of Jett Records recording company and fitted with tinsel and wrapping and Christmas decorations. They abandon the tree and jump into the basket of Dave Seville (who is a songwriter) only to be thrown into a trashcan with the basket.
After escaping from the trashcan and messing up his entire house the chipmunks are discovered and thrown outside. They stand next to the window and sing a song. Dave opens the window and lets them in. He then explains to them that they must sing his song to stay there for the night. Even though they make Dave lose his job and girlfriend, they become the biggest pop sensation the world had ever seen and give Dave his job and his girlfriend back. But shortly after their first performance the record executive Ian Hawke begins to break the family up. Hawke takes the chipmunks on tour not realizing the damage he is doing to their vocal cords. Meanwhile what is Dave doing? And what will happen to his little family?
This movie was one of the funniest I have ever come across and I would love to see it again and again.
Here are some memorable quotes from the movie that I loved
David Seville: [picks up a sandwich from the floor]
Simon: we put a few toaster waffles aside for winter
Theodore: and we're not sharing!
David Seville: guys, we're gonna have food all winter so if you start storing it, it's gonna get gross and we're gonna have rodent - ...
Simon: [looks at dave]
Theodore: [looks at dave]
Alvin: [looks at dave]
David Seville: bad you know... non-talking rodents around here
David Seville: [sees Theodore eating something small and brown] Whoa Theodore, did you just-?
Alvin: Relax Dave, it's just a raisin.
David Seville: Prove it.
Alvin: [swipes the 'raisin' and eats it] Mmm-hmm.
David Seville: Okay.
Alvin: [he leaves]
Alvin: [quickly spits it out and points a finger at Theodore] Dude, you owe me big time!
Theodore: Oh...
David Seville: Chipmunks don't talk.
Simon: Our lips are moving and words are coming out.
Alvin: [during a chase] They'll never take us alive!
Simon: [in the cat carrier] They just did take us alive, Alvin!
Alvin: Don't ya wish yo girlfriend was hot like me? Don't ya wish yo girlfriend was a freak like me?
Alvin: [Dave opens dishwasher] AH!
David Seville: Get out.
Alvin: I'm waiting for the rinse cycle!
I highly recommend this movie, it was catchy and funny all rolled into one memorable movie.
Tsoof and Eden love to download full movies from the Internet.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Eden_Baras
The movie begins in a tree farm where the three chipmunks are storing acorns for the winter whilst singing 'Bad Day' (by Daniel Powter). Seconds later their tree is cut down and taken to Los Angeles where it is place in the middle of Jett Records recording company and fitted with tinsel and wrapping and Christmas decorations. They abandon the tree and jump into the basket of Dave Seville (who is a songwriter) only to be thrown into a trashcan with the basket.
After escaping from the trashcan and messing up his entire house the chipmunks are discovered and thrown outside. They stand next to the window and sing a song. Dave opens the window and lets them in. He then explains to them that they must sing his song to stay there for the night. Even though they make Dave lose his job and girlfriend, they become the biggest pop sensation the world had ever seen and give Dave his job and his girlfriend back. But shortly after their first performance the record executive Ian Hawke begins to break the family up. Hawke takes the chipmunks on tour not realizing the damage he is doing to their vocal cords. Meanwhile what is Dave doing? And what will happen to his little family?
This movie was one of the funniest I have ever come across and I would love to see it again and again.
Here are some memorable quotes from the movie that I loved
David Seville: [picks up a sandwich from the floor]
Simon: we put a few toaster waffles aside for winter
Theodore: and we're not sharing!
David Seville: guys, we're gonna have food all winter so if you start storing it, it's gonna get gross and we're gonna have rodent - ...
Simon: [looks at dave]
Theodore: [looks at dave]
Alvin: [looks at dave]
David Seville: bad you know... non-talking rodents around here
David Seville: [sees Theodore eating something small and brown] Whoa Theodore, did you just-?
Alvin: Relax Dave, it's just a raisin.
David Seville: Prove it.
Alvin: [swipes the 'raisin' and eats it] Mmm-hmm.
David Seville: Okay.
Alvin: [he leaves]
Alvin: [quickly spits it out and points a finger at Theodore] Dude, you owe me big time!
Theodore: Oh...
David Seville: Chipmunks don't talk.
Simon: Our lips are moving and words are coming out.
Alvin: [during a chase] They'll never take us alive!
Simon: [in the cat carrier] They just did take us alive, Alvin!
Alvin: Don't ya wish yo girlfriend was hot like me? Don't ya wish yo girlfriend was a freak like me?
Alvin: [Dave opens dishwasher] AH!
David Seville: Get out.
Alvin: I'm waiting for the rinse cycle!
I highly recommend this movie, it was catchy and funny all rolled into one memorable movie.
Tsoof and Eden love to download full movies from the Internet.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Eden_Baras
Movie Review - Sherlock Holmes
Director: Guy Ritchie.
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Mark Strong.
Based On: The Sherlock Holmes series or novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
I keep reading that true fans of the Sherlock Holmes series of novels will be appalled by director Guy Ritchie's take on his version of this literary classic, but in my opinion this is exactly how I picture Holmes when I read Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's words. Holmes was an opium smoker, and Ritchie's depiction of how he lived is a mirror of how drug addicts have survived over the years (even the well to do ones!).
Guy Ritchie is best known for his edge of the seat action movies such as Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, and initially I questioned whether he could do justice to something as well known as Sherlock Holmes. I am more than happy to report that my fears were ungrounded, as I sat through over 2 hours of riveting entertainment. This is a dark movie with black magic undertones, but it is set in what I consider the greatest recreation of Victorian London I have ever seen in a movie theatre.
This latest manifestation of the great detective is a total reversal of anything we have seen previously about the character. Gone is the fussy, well dressed genius we have come to know, and in its place Robert Downey Jr. revels in the role of the eccentric bare-knuckle fighter that Holmes has become in this movie. The powers of deductive wisdom are still there, but in this version they are more likely to be used to demonstrate how to cripple an adversary as much as they are used to explain an event.
I'm not sure how this film will go down with diehard Holmes fans, especially if they are suckers for the sugar coated nonsense we've seen up to now, but this is the real Sherlock Holmes, set in the real London of the late 19th century, where murder and villainy were commonplace. While I don't want to spoil the ending, I think I'm pretty safe in saying that Holmes and Watson resolve a seemingly impossible set of circumstances and rescue England from the grip of supernatural powers.
The film ends with Holmes and Watson about to set off to track down Professor Moriarty, which for anyone who enjoys this movie is excellent news, we now know what the sequel will be about... can't wait.
To read more top movie reviews visit the authors website http://www.cheap-dvds-advisor.com which specializes in providing as much information as possible about DVD's and movies.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Ray_E_Baker
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams, Mark Strong.
Based On: The Sherlock Holmes series or novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
I keep reading that true fans of the Sherlock Holmes series of novels will be appalled by director Guy Ritchie's take on his version of this literary classic, but in my opinion this is exactly how I picture Holmes when I read Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's words. Holmes was an opium smoker, and Ritchie's depiction of how he lived is a mirror of how drug addicts have survived over the years (even the well to do ones!).
Guy Ritchie is best known for his edge of the seat action movies such as Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, and initially I questioned whether he could do justice to something as well known as Sherlock Holmes. I am more than happy to report that my fears were ungrounded, as I sat through over 2 hours of riveting entertainment. This is a dark movie with black magic undertones, but it is set in what I consider the greatest recreation of Victorian London I have ever seen in a movie theatre.
This latest manifestation of the great detective is a total reversal of anything we have seen previously about the character. Gone is the fussy, well dressed genius we have come to know, and in its place Robert Downey Jr. revels in the role of the eccentric bare-knuckle fighter that Holmes has become in this movie. The powers of deductive wisdom are still there, but in this version they are more likely to be used to demonstrate how to cripple an adversary as much as they are used to explain an event.
I'm not sure how this film will go down with diehard Holmes fans, especially if they are suckers for the sugar coated nonsense we've seen up to now, but this is the real Sherlock Holmes, set in the real London of the late 19th century, where murder and villainy were commonplace. While I don't want to spoil the ending, I think I'm pretty safe in saying that Holmes and Watson resolve a seemingly impossible set of circumstances and rescue England from the grip of supernatural powers.
The film ends with Holmes and Watson about to set off to track down Professor Moriarty, which for anyone who enjoys this movie is excellent news, we now know what the sequel will be about... can't wait.
To read more top movie reviews visit the authors website http://www.cheap-dvds-advisor.com which specializes in providing as much information as possible about DVD's and movies.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Ray_E_Baker
"The Blind Side" Movie Review
"The Blind Side" (my 0-10 rating: 8)
Genre: Drama, Sports
Director: John Lee Hancock
Screenplay: John Lee Hancock, based on a true story in the Michael Lewis book
Cast: Sandra Bullock, Tim McGraw, Kathy Bates, Quinton Aaron, Lily Collins, Jae Head
Time: 2 hr., 6 min.
Rating: PG-13 (brief violence, drug and sexual references)
A just-plain well-made sports movie with superb audience appeal, charming personalities, a sprightly demeanor and totally entertaining.
"The Blind Side" is Sandra Bullock's best performance ever. Her sassy and brassy character's dynamics depend entirely on insightful, professional interpretation and she proves consummately skilled at every line, every nuance and a consistently on-target southern accent.
Director John Lee Hancock seems to perceive, at every moment, the dialogue, body language, story progression, photography and editing to keep his film stepping in a polished lively pace, with gripping, carefully delivered emotions and an unerring sense of audience involvement. It has a refreshing integrity about it, with sharp insights into the present-day South in relation to race matters. One may complain slightly that it could have used more volatile material here and there, but I'm totally satisfied.
Michael Oher was born among 13 siblings in the slums of Memphis, an African-American child from a broken home. He had never known his father who, in fact, was murdered, something which this child learned only after he'd entered high school. His mom was a crack addict, his brothers and sisters soon scattered everywhere. Oher (Quinton Aaron) was destined for NFL stardom. Bodily, he was huge.
Oher (Quinton Aaron), classmate of teenager Collins (Lily Collins), is invited by her mother Leigh Ann Tuohy (Sandra Bullock) to be taken under the wing of their affluent white family, with loving dad Sean (Tim McGraw) and smart-mouthed but football-savvy son SJ (Jae Head). Leigh Ann is a successful interior decorator and dad owns many fast-food eateries.
This is happening in Oher's senior year at high school. They dedicate themselves to help the very withdrawn Oher rise by his own resources which, at first, do not impress the staff at the well-heeled private school. But the football coach (Ray McKinnon), who's desperate at this point for some budding game force, gets Oher in as a student. How he's to learn sophisticated history, literature and writing is another matter, even given over to the dedication of a special private tutor (Kathy Bates).
Oher shows excellent talent as a football player, much to the pride also of the Tuohy family who have a history of football playing. It is determined early on in the relationship that Oher's psychology includes a profound and very deep desire to protect those about whom he cares. The coach, perfectly aware that in the game of football it's the left tackle who's supposed to protect the quarterback from blind side attacks, sees this protection aspect of the physically imposing Oher as invaluable.
Yet how is Oher, with a grade-point averaged of 1.5 (a "D"), going to qualify for the universities whose scouts are coming after him.
More than Quinton Aaron as Michael, Sandra Bullock throws herself into this role with a driving perfection. Her Leigh Ann's feisty, no-nonsense energy proves to be an audience-captivating generator of appreciative emotional attachment.
With not even a hint of a dull moment anywhere, and lots of chuckle-worthy encounters, allowing only a carefully parceled sentimentalism, I'll recommend this as one of the most engaging little dramas of the year.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram when it was budget-cut at the end of 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
Genre: Drama, Sports
Director: John Lee Hancock
Screenplay: John Lee Hancock, based on a true story in the Michael Lewis book
Cast: Sandra Bullock, Tim McGraw, Kathy Bates, Quinton Aaron, Lily Collins, Jae Head
Time: 2 hr., 6 min.
Rating: PG-13 (brief violence, drug and sexual references)
A just-plain well-made sports movie with superb audience appeal, charming personalities, a sprightly demeanor and totally entertaining.
"The Blind Side" is Sandra Bullock's best performance ever. Her sassy and brassy character's dynamics depend entirely on insightful, professional interpretation and she proves consummately skilled at every line, every nuance and a consistently on-target southern accent.
Director John Lee Hancock seems to perceive, at every moment, the dialogue, body language, story progression, photography and editing to keep his film stepping in a polished lively pace, with gripping, carefully delivered emotions and an unerring sense of audience involvement. It has a refreshing integrity about it, with sharp insights into the present-day South in relation to race matters. One may complain slightly that it could have used more volatile material here and there, but I'm totally satisfied.
Michael Oher was born among 13 siblings in the slums of Memphis, an African-American child from a broken home. He had never known his father who, in fact, was murdered, something which this child learned only after he'd entered high school. His mom was a crack addict, his brothers and sisters soon scattered everywhere. Oher (Quinton Aaron) was destined for NFL stardom. Bodily, he was huge.
Oher (Quinton Aaron), classmate of teenager Collins (Lily Collins), is invited by her mother Leigh Ann Tuohy (Sandra Bullock) to be taken under the wing of their affluent white family, with loving dad Sean (Tim McGraw) and smart-mouthed but football-savvy son SJ (Jae Head). Leigh Ann is a successful interior decorator and dad owns many fast-food eateries.
This is happening in Oher's senior year at high school. They dedicate themselves to help the very withdrawn Oher rise by his own resources which, at first, do not impress the staff at the well-heeled private school. But the football coach (Ray McKinnon), who's desperate at this point for some budding game force, gets Oher in as a student. How he's to learn sophisticated history, literature and writing is another matter, even given over to the dedication of a special private tutor (Kathy Bates).
Oher shows excellent talent as a football player, much to the pride also of the Tuohy family who have a history of football playing. It is determined early on in the relationship that Oher's psychology includes a profound and very deep desire to protect those about whom he cares. The coach, perfectly aware that in the game of football it's the left tackle who's supposed to protect the quarterback from blind side attacks, sees this protection aspect of the physically imposing Oher as invaluable.
Yet how is Oher, with a grade-point averaged of 1.5 (a "D"), going to qualify for the universities whose scouts are coming after him.
More than Quinton Aaron as Michael, Sandra Bullock throws herself into this role with a driving perfection. Her Leigh Ann's feisty, no-nonsense energy proves to be an audience-captivating generator of appreciative emotional attachment.
With not even a hint of a dull moment anywhere, and lots of chuckle-worthy encounters, allowing only a carefully parceled sentimentalism, I'll recommend this as one of the most engaging little dramas of the year.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram when it was budget-cut at the end of 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
Up in the Air - Movie review
This is an interesting drama starring the stalwart George Clooney (Ocean's eleven) as Ryan Bingham, whose job is to fire individuals from organisations who have designated Ryan and his company to do this on their behalf. As Ryan gets to travel all over the world he has accumulated a lot of air miles to the point that he gets special reservations, and an assortment of cards entitling him to various incentives due to his air miles accumulation.
Ryan tries to be as sympathetic but yet firm as he tells employees that they have been let go, but his boss Craig Gregory played by Jason Bateman (The Break-up) has brought in Natalie Keener played by the lovely Anna Kendrick (Twilight) a recent Cornell graduate with an interesting software that could mean that staff no longer have to be given the personal touch when they let people know that they have been fired. Ryan is not happy that his personal touch is being replaced by software, but his boss Craig convinces him to take Natalie with him on his visits, to show her the ropes so to speak.
Ryan is also aiming to accumulate enough air miles to get a much sought after gold card, that would mean he had accumulated ten million miles, and will have his name on an airplane wing for his loyalty. While at a bar he comes across Alex Goran played by the lovely Vera Farmiga (Running Scared), who is equally fascinated with loyalty cards. They spend the night, and agree to keep in touch when next they need each other.
Ryan has been away in chasing his dream, that he has neglected his family, where his youngest sister Julie played by the lovely Melanie Lynskey (Coyote Ugly) is getting married, her elder sister Kara played by Amy Morton asks Ryan to take pictures at famous destinations he visits, with a cardboard cut-out of Julie and her groom to be Jim Miller, played by Danny McBride (Tropic Thunder, absolutely hilarious in Pineapple Express), it turns out due to the economic crisis, the couple have suspended any plans for a honeymoon and instead have asked various friends and family who are travelling to take pictures of idyllic destinations with their cardboard cut-out.
During their rounds Ryan's boss Craig, encourages Ryan to let Natalie fire a few people to see how she gets on, and Craig is so impressed by her performance he gives the go ahead for the software to go live, much to Ryan's disapproval.
Ryan sees Natalie as someone who has a lot of growing up to do, while she on the other hand wonders why he is not married, has no children and has no intention of settling down, Ryan calmly explains that this is the life he has chosen and he is OK with it. His philosophy so far will soon come into conflict with his personal desires, as he believes all relationships, belongings, including homes, cars, accessories are all baggage that should be put in a rucksack and discarded, as they weigh an individual down, in fact he gives motivational speeches based on this theory, but during their trip, and visiting his sister who is about to be married he begins some reflections on how his life has panned out, and begins to open up to the possibility that he is lonely, and would like to find someone to spend that loneliness with.
It is an interesting romantic drama, and at the end you realise the early documentary style footage were from genuine reactions from people who had been fired.
Mr D Stevens is a reviewer at Movie reviews.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dan_Stevens
Ryan tries to be as sympathetic but yet firm as he tells employees that they have been let go, but his boss Craig Gregory played by Jason Bateman (The Break-up) has brought in Natalie Keener played by the lovely Anna Kendrick (Twilight) a recent Cornell graduate with an interesting software that could mean that staff no longer have to be given the personal touch when they let people know that they have been fired. Ryan is not happy that his personal touch is being replaced by software, but his boss Craig convinces him to take Natalie with him on his visits, to show her the ropes so to speak.
Ryan is also aiming to accumulate enough air miles to get a much sought after gold card, that would mean he had accumulated ten million miles, and will have his name on an airplane wing for his loyalty. While at a bar he comes across Alex Goran played by the lovely Vera Farmiga (Running Scared), who is equally fascinated with loyalty cards. They spend the night, and agree to keep in touch when next they need each other.
Ryan has been away in chasing his dream, that he has neglected his family, where his youngest sister Julie played by the lovely Melanie Lynskey (Coyote Ugly) is getting married, her elder sister Kara played by Amy Morton asks Ryan to take pictures at famous destinations he visits, with a cardboard cut-out of Julie and her groom to be Jim Miller, played by Danny McBride (Tropic Thunder, absolutely hilarious in Pineapple Express), it turns out due to the economic crisis, the couple have suspended any plans for a honeymoon and instead have asked various friends and family who are travelling to take pictures of idyllic destinations with their cardboard cut-out.
During their rounds Ryan's boss Craig, encourages Ryan to let Natalie fire a few people to see how she gets on, and Craig is so impressed by her performance he gives the go ahead for the software to go live, much to Ryan's disapproval.
Ryan sees Natalie as someone who has a lot of growing up to do, while she on the other hand wonders why he is not married, has no children and has no intention of settling down, Ryan calmly explains that this is the life he has chosen and he is OK with it. His philosophy so far will soon come into conflict with his personal desires, as he believes all relationships, belongings, including homes, cars, accessories are all baggage that should be put in a rucksack and discarded, as they weigh an individual down, in fact he gives motivational speeches based on this theory, but during their trip, and visiting his sister who is about to be married he begins some reflections on how his life has panned out, and begins to open up to the possibility that he is lonely, and would like to find someone to spend that loneliness with.
It is an interesting romantic drama, and at the end you realise the early documentary style footage were from genuine reactions from people who had been fired.
Mr D Stevens is a reviewer at Movie reviews.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dan_Stevens
"Invictus" Movie Review
"Invictus" (Unconquerable)
My 0-10 rating: 6
Genre: Drama.
Director: Clint Eastwood
Screenplay: Anthony Peckham, inspired by an 1875 poem by British writer William Ernest Henley and based on the John Carlin book, "Playing the Enemy."
Cast: Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon
Time: 2 hrs., 14 min.
Rating: PG (brief vulgarity)
Nelson Mandela for sports fans? Sounds unlikely but history and "Invictus" do it. It's not a biography, just a great story. But, truth be told, as dynamic movies go it's uninspired and, except for the crowd shots, wooden and without a compelling flow. Continuity is erratic, with many anemic scenes that express little of the world-shaking energy that's supposed to be happening. In a word, the film has its spots but generally it's not nearly as big as its events.
I felt no rising tension during this film; a lot of talk of urgency but little urgency. Morgan Freeman, not surprisingly, fills and overflows every frame he's in. Matt Damon's, however, is just a necessary character in the story, empty as a personality.
The story of Mandela is well-known: the rebellious black hero released after 27 years from a cruelly white-racist South African prison in 1990, elected president of the country in 1994 to end the final throes of the inhuman system of apartheid.
Read the words of the 1875 William Ernest Henley poem that Mandela often recited to himself while imprisoned on Robben Island and became his lifelong inspiration: The key final lines were: "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul."
He was also the master of his own enormous intelligence, a man of towering spiritual moment when he decreed that his new presidency was not the time for revenge but for bringing together.
Soon following his election, there develops the amazing true story of how Nelson Mandela joins up with the captain of South Africa's rugby team in an effort to use the game to unite their country. Just elected president, Mandela (Morgan Freeman) is more than aware that his nation is a hotbed of revenge-seeking racism following the abandonment of apartheid. It could easily have slipped inexorably into civil war. It's a challenge of world-shaking importance.
It happens that Mandela loves rugby (from which our football was derived). But the current South African rugby team, the Springboks, is one of the worst teams going. Mandela becomes the team's one-man public relations booster though it has only one black player. Mandela focuses on it as he endeavors to create a "Rainbow Nation" to bring forth national reconciliation between blacks and whites. He prevents the National Sports Council from closing down the Springboks.
The nation's majority blacks, however, favor soccer, not rugby. Indeed, soccer was always that game described in Britain as a "gentleman's game played by hooligans" as opposed to rugby, beloved by white South Africans, as "a hooligan's game played by gentlemen." But the 1995 Rugby World Cup was beckoning. (Rugby -- see below for a general overview of the game's rules -- is very similar to American football in its general objectives, that is, to move a ball through tacklers and strategies to a goal line).
The new captain of the bedraggled Springboks -- the whole team being viewed contemptuously by the black population as a remnant of the hated apartheid -- is white Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), the wisdom of this move being much to the skepticism of Mandela's aides and to the bitter resistance of black-dominating public opinion. But Mandela makes it clear that he wants a diversified state.
Over fierce resistance at all levels, the rebuilding of the team with both blacks and whites begins, with a distinct eye toward the World Cup final against the New Zealand team, the All Blacks (named for its uniforms). That great match will involve about 18 minutes of screen time. It is during that game that Mandela's mixed security team will at last come to terms with South Africa as a fully integrated state.
That 18 minutes is also the only answer to why you're expected to be still seated. Up till then, you've had to endure sermonizing and the routine frustrations of Mandela's quest. You can yawn. But those final minutes are certainly as grandly spectacular as in any sports film.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year movie critic for the New England Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram, his column terminated 12/31/07 for budget cuts.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
My 0-10 rating: 6
Genre: Drama.
Director: Clint Eastwood
Screenplay: Anthony Peckham, inspired by an 1875 poem by British writer William Ernest Henley and based on the John Carlin book, "Playing the Enemy."
Cast: Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon
Time: 2 hrs., 14 min.
Rating: PG (brief vulgarity)
Nelson Mandela for sports fans? Sounds unlikely but history and "Invictus" do it. It's not a biography, just a great story. But, truth be told, as dynamic movies go it's uninspired and, except for the crowd shots, wooden and without a compelling flow. Continuity is erratic, with many anemic scenes that express little of the world-shaking energy that's supposed to be happening. In a word, the film has its spots but generally it's not nearly as big as its events.
I felt no rising tension during this film; a lot of talk of urgency but little urgency. Morgan Freeman, not surprisingly, fills and overflows every frame he's in. Matt Damon's, however, is just a necessary character in the story, empty as a personality.
The story of Mandela is well-known: the rebellious black hero released after 27 years from a cruelly white-racist South African prison in 1990, elected president of the country in 1994 to end the final throes of the inhuman system of apartheid.
Read the words of the 1875 William Ernest Henley poem that Mandela often recited to himself while imprisoned on Robben Island and became his lifelong inspiration: The key final lines were: "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul."
He was also the master of his own enormous intelligence, a man of towering spiritual moment when he decreed that his new presidency was not the time for revenge but for bringing together.
Soon following his election, there develops the amazing true story of how Nelson Mandela joins up with the captain of South Africa's rugby team in an effort to use the game to unite their country. Just elected president, Mandela (Morgan Freeman) is more than aware that his nation is a hotbed of revenge-seeking racism following the abandonment of apartheid. It could easily have slipped inexorably into civil war. It's a challenge of world-shaking importance.
It happens that Mandela loves rugby (from which our football was derived). But the current South African rugby team, the Springboks, is one of the worst teams going. Mandela becomes the team's one-man public relations booster though it has only one black player. Mandela focuses on it as he endeavors to create a "Rainbow Nation" to bring forth national reconciliation between blacks and whites. He prevents the National Sports Council from closing down the Springboks.
The nation's majority blacks, however, favor soccer, not rugby. Indeed, soccer was always that game described in Britain as a "gentleman's game played by hooligans" as opposed to rugby, beloved by white South Africans, as "a hooligan's game played by gentlemen." But the 1995 Rugby World Cup was beckoning. (Rugby -- see below for a general overview of the game's rules -- is very similar to American football in its general objectives, that is, to move a ball through tacklers and strategies to a goal line).
The new captain of the bedraggled Springboks -- the whole team being viewed contemptuously by the black population as a remnant of the hated apartheid -- is white Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), the wisdom of this move being much to the skepticism of Mandela's aides and to the bitter resistance of black-dominating public opinion. But Mandela makes it clear that he wants a diversified state.
Over fierce resistance at all levels, the rebuilding of the team with both blacks and whites begins, with a distinct eye toward the World Cup final against the New Zealand team, the All Blacks (named for its uniforms). That great match will involve about 18 minutes of screen time. It is during that game that Mandela's mixed security team will at last come to terms with South Africa as a fully integrated state.
That 18 minutes is also the only answer to why you're expected to be still seated. Up till then, you've had to endure sermonizing and the routine frustrations of Mandela's quest. You can yawn. But those final minutes are certainly as grandly spectacular as in any sports film.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year movie critic for the New England Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram, his column terminated 12/31/07 for budget cuts.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
It's Complicated - Movie Review
It's Complicated"
My 0-10 rating: 7
Genre: Comedy
Director: Nancy Meyers
Screenplay: Nancy Meyers
Starring: Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, Alec Baldwin, John Krasinski, Lake Bell, Zoe Kazan, Mary Kay Place, Nora Dunn, Bruce Altman, Rita Wilson
Time: 1 hr., 58 min.
Rating: R (some drug content, sexuality)
A subtly, quietly moving comedy-romance, "It's Complicated" interests you, but after awhile you wonder why. Then you realize why: Meryl Streep and her intrinsic, immortal screen appeal. And if you're a baby boomer, you know why at a much deeper level.
With little complicated, with the simplest and almost predictable plot, the film at first strikes you as under-ambitious. Even as a chick-flick, compared to genre offerings out there in these modern times, it feels initially weak.
I mean, there's just not, at least on the surface, a whole lot going on here. You won't find the clever and titillating twists and sophistication of classics in the genre, like "When Harry Met Sally" and "Sleepless in Seattle."
But what you will find is the natural intrigue in a love triangle between three appealing suburban 50-somethings, one of them played by Streep, all of whose energy of attraction is developed with a compelling thrust. Which is to say, you can be drawn into this. The suspense is soft and endearing.
And the film is not without really funny moments, especially toward the final resolution. There can be little denial, however, that Meryl Streep is the film's draw, plus the raw-nerve appeal to those age-50s who see something of themselves here. Neither Streep's character Jane nor the others are sufficiently substantive to go on a comedy roll in this. The script is honest but of limited scope. It's just that it sets up its three prime characters as strongly sympathetic. You'd really like the best for them. Yet this is a triangle. Something will have to break. Can it make you laugh a little along the way? Yes, for sure. And as a tragi-comical note from the adage that girls grow up but boys just grow older, it has a sharp knell.
Jane (Meryl Streep), mother of three grown kids, owns a thriving gourmet Santa Barbara bakery-restaurant. Although divorced, that could have been worse; it was 10 years ago, friendly, although he'd been a philanderer. During those years, Jake (Alec Baldwin) and she, upon occasionally meeting each other again by chance or to share the kids, find themselves still friendly. And that cute young thing, Agness (Lake Bell), who had robbed Jake's affections, he'd married.
Jane, despite her rewarding career, is not satisfied with aging and searches out some plastic surgery. In the improved appearances department, he'd also like to re-do her kitchen. For this, she'll bring in architect Adam (Steve Martin).
But the real intrigue arising among these 50-somethings is with Jake. Seems that Jane and Jake are now brought together by the advent of their son's college graduation. The innocent dining celebration in which they indulge turns out to be anything but. Indeed, Jake is re-discovering Jane. He's liking her -- a real lot.
And so is kitchen designer Adam -- just divorced. And exceedingly vulnerable.
So Jane has ironically become the other woman. Jake and Adam, realizing the prize they're seeing regularly, both begin coming on in earnest.
Other amusing involvements concern the children and, more humorously, Jane's friends (Rita Wilson, Mary Kay Place, Alexandra Wentworth, Nora Dunn), who jump in with lots of girl-girl wit, waggery and insight that only the gender can fathom.
Jake's wife, Agness, is personality-ugly, as needed.
Applause for Steve Martin in a finely executed tender and sensitive role. Alex Baldwin is quite serviceable and, Meryl Streep, well...
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until his column was terminated for budget cuts on Dec. 31, 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
My 0-10 rating: 7
Genre: Comedy
Director: Nancy Meyers
Screenplay: Nancy Meyers
Starring: Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, Alec Baldwin, John Krasinski, Lake Bell, Zoe Kazan, Mary Kay Place, Nora Dunn, Bruce Altman, Rita Wilson
Time: 1 hr., 58 min.
Rating: R (some drug content, sexuality)
A subtly, quietly moving comedy-romance, "It's Complicated" interests you, but after awhile you wonder why. Then you realize why: Meryl Streep and her intrinsic, immortal screen appeal. And if you're a baby boomer, you know why at a much deeper level.
With little complicated, with the simplest and almost predictable plot, the film at first strikes you as under-ambitious. Even as a chick-flick, compared to genre offerings out there in these modern times, it feels initially weak.
I mean, there's just not, at least on the surface, a whole lot going on here. You won't find the clever and titillating twists and sophistication of classics in the genre, like "When Harry Met Sally" and "Sleepless in Seattle."
But what you will find is the natural intrigue in a love triangle between three appealing suburban 50-somethings, one of them played by Streep, all of whose energy of attraction is developed with a compelling thrust. Which is to say, you can be drawn into this. The suspense is soft and endearing.
And the film is not without really funny moments, especially toward the final resolution. There can be little denial, however, that Meryl Streep is the film's draw, plus the raw-nerve appeal to those age-50s who see something of themselves here. Neither Streep's character Jane nor the others are sufficiently substantive to go on a comedy roll in this. The script is honest but of limited scope. It's just that it sets up its three prime characters as strongly sympathetic. You'd really like the best for them. Yet this is a triangle. Something will have to break. Can it make you laugh a little along the way? Yes, for sure. And as a tragi-comical note from the adage that girls grow up but boys just grow older, it has a sharp knell.
Jane (Meryl Streep), mother of three grown kids, owns a thriving gourmet Santa Barbara bakery-restaurant. Although divorced, that could have been worse; it was 10 years ago, friendly, although he'd been a philanderer. During those years, Jake (Alec Baldwin) and she, upon occasionally meeting each other again by chance or to share the kids, find themselves still friendly. And that cute young thing, Agness (Lake Bell), who had robbed Jake's affections, he'd married.
Jane, despite her rewarding career, is not satisfied with aging and searches out some plastic surgery. In the improved appearances department, he'd also like to re-do her kitchen. For this, she'll bring in architect Adam (Steve Martin).
But the real intrigue arising among these 50-somethings is with Jake. Seems that Jane and Jake are now brought together by the advent of their son's college graduation. The innocent dining celebration in which they indulge turns out to be anything but. Indeed, Jake is re-discovering Jane. He's liking her -- a real lot.
And so is kitchen designer Adam -- just divorced. And exceedingly vulnerable.
So Jane has ironically become the other woman. Jake and Adam, realizing the prize they're seeing regularly, both begin coming on in earnest.
Other amusing involvements concern the children and, more humorously, Jane's friends (Rita Wilson, Mary Kay Place, Alexandra Wentworth, Nora Dunn), who jump in with lots of girl-girl wit, waggery and insight that only the gender can fathom.
Jake's wife, Agness, is personality-ugly, as needed.
Applause for Steve Martin in a finely executed tender and sensitive role. Alex Baldwin is quite serviceable and, Meryl Streep, well...
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until his column was terminated for budget cuts on Dec. 31, 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
Movie Review - Brothers
9 out of 10
With Brothers, based on the 2004 Danish film, Brodre, director Jim Sheridan has crafted a potent domestic drama with powerhouse performance from its three leads and supporting cast. Tobey Maguire, Natalie Portman and Jake Gyllenhaal all give Oscar worthy performances and are the reason the movie is as good as it is. In the hands of a lesser cast, the film would've easily wandered into pure soap opery, melodrama, but Brothers avoids that due to the empathy you feel for the main characters due to the nuanced performances of the talented cast.
At times the film acts as a thriller and war movie, but at its core, Brothers is really a family drama about the way the hell of war affects soldiers and their families. Maguire plays Sam Cahill, a marine who is about to embark on his fourth tour of duty in Afghanistan. He is the "good" son, serving his country and supporting his wife and two young daughters. Gyllenhaal plays Tommy, Sam's loser brother and black sheep of the military Cahill family. He is released from prison for robbing a bank days before Sam is set to ship off again. Although completely different, Sam and Tommy do get along quite well but their ex-marine father Hank (Sam Shepard) eyes Tommy with disgust at all times. Scarred by his stint in the Vietnam War, Hank took it out on his family causing one son to honor him and follow in his footsteps and the other screaming in the opposite direction.
Sam is captured in Afghanistan by the Taliban and is presumed dead. While being held prisoner he is subjected to all forms of torture and needless to say when he returns home after a long absence, he is not quite himself. While he's gone (and assumed dead), Tommy comforts Sam's wife, Grace (Natalie Portman) and kids, trying to fill the large void left by Sam and in turn begins to live up to his true potential. Things start out innocently enough, but soon Tommy and Grace develop a deep affection for one another. Soon after, Sam returns home, emotionally scarred and mentally unbalanced from his ordeal. Seeing the way his wife and brother interact, Sam becomes increasingly more and more paranoid and eventually flips out.
Director Jim Sheridan has done an outstanding job of developing the characters and getting the very most out of his cast. Maguire gives perhaps the best performance of his career to date and really deserves an Oscar nod for his work. He does more with his vacant stare than most actors can do with a full page monologue. His freak out during the tense climax of the film had me riveted. Maguire truly gives a tour-de-force performance here. Gyllenhaal and Portman have less showy roles than Maguire but both give incredibly solid performance. Gyllenhaal is quite believable as Tommy transforms from a drunken loser to a responsible caregiver and Portman has a quiet strength as the mother trying to keep it together for her family while dying on the inside.
The acting in this film is so extraordinary that it is impossible not to care for the characters and become wrapped up in their lives. In fact at the screening I attended, during the dramatic climax of the film a woman sitting two rows behind me was sobbing her eyes out, shouting (LOUDLY) at the screen.
"Oh no! Oh God no! Please no!" over and over. Given she was probably two nuts shy of an acorn tree, but still she was so invested in these characters and their fates you would think they were her close friends or family. That my friends are the hallmark of a powerful film experience.
To sum it up, Brothers is a potent domestic drama that will stay with you long after you leave the theatre. Even if this film isn't your cup of tea, the performances are worth the price of admission alone.
Bill Bonfanti is FilmGo.net's movie critic and Box office analysis. http://www.filmgo.net Every week you will find new reviews and box office predictions for the current crop of films in the theater.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Bill_Bonfanti
With Brothers, based on the 2004 Danish film, Brodre, director Jim Sheridan has crafted a potent domestic drama with powerhouse performance from its three leads and supporting cast. Tobey Maguire, Natalie Portman and Jake Gyllenhaal all give Oscar worthy performances and are the reason the movie is as good as it is. In the hands of a lesser cast, the film would've easily wandered into pure soap opery, melodrama, but Brothers avoids that due to the empathy you feel for the main characters due to the nuanced performances of the talented cast.
At times the film acts as a thriller and war movie, but at its core, Brothers is really a family drama about the way the hell of war affects soldiers and their families. Maguire plays Sam Cahill, a marine who is about to embark on his fourth tour of duty in Afghanistan. He is the "good" son, serving his country and supporting his wife and two young daughters. Gyllenhaal plays Tommy, Sam's loser brother and black sheep of the military Cahill family. He is released from prison for robbing a bank days before Sam is set to ship off again. Although completely different, Sam and Tommy do get along quite well but their ex-marine father Hank (Sam Shepard) eyes Tommy with disgust at all times. Scarred by his stint in the Vietnam War, Hank took it out on his family causing one son to honor him and follow in his footsteps and the other screaming in the opposite direction.
Sam is captured in Afghanistan by the Taliban and is presumed dead. While being held prisoner he is subjected to all forms of torture and needless to say when he returns home after a long absence, he is not quite himself. While he's gone (and assumed dead), Tommy comforts Sam's wife, Grace (Natalie Portman) and kids, trying to fill the large void left by Sam and in turn begins to live up to his true potential. Things start out innocently enough, but soon Tommy and Grace develop a deep affection for one another. Soon after, Sam returns home, emotionally scarred and mentally unbalanced from his ordeal. Seeing the way his wife and brother interact, Sam becomes increasingly more and more paranoid and eventually flips out.
Director Jim Sheridan has done an outstanding job of developing the characters and getting the very most out of his cast. Maguire gives perhaps the best performance of his career to date and really deserves an Oscar nod for his work. He does more with his vacant stare than most actors can do with a full page monologue. His freak out during the tense climax of the film had me riveted. Maguire truly gives a tour-de-force performance here. Gyllenhaal and Portman have less showy roles than Maguire but both give incredibly solid performance. Gyllenhaal is quite believable as Tommy transforms from a drunken loser to a responsible caregiver and Portman has a quiet strength as the mother trying to keep it together for her family while dying on the inside.
The acting in this film is so extraordinary that it is impossible not to care for the characters and become wrapped up in their lives. In fact at the screening I attended, during the dramatic climax of the film a woman sitting two rows behind me was sobbing her eyes out, shouting (LOUDLY) at the screen.
"Oh no! Oh God no! Please no!" over and over. Given she was probably two nuts shy of an acorn tree, but still she was so invested in these characters and their fates you would think they were her close friends or family. That my friends are the hallmark of a powerful film experience.
To sum it up, Brothers is a potent domestic drama that will stay with you long after you leave the theatre. Even if this film isn't your cup of tea, the performances are worth the price of admission alone.
Bill Bonfanti is FilmGo.net's movie critic and Box office analysis. http://www.filmgo.net Every week you will find new reviews and box office predictions for the current crop of films in the theater.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Bill_Bonfanti
Brothers" Movie Review
"Brothers" (My 0-10 rating: 7)
Genre: Drama, War.
Director: Jim Sheridan
Screenplay: David Benioff
Cast: Tobey Maguire, Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman, Sam Shepard, Mare Winningham
Time: 1 hr., 50 min.
Rating: R (romance intimacy, vulgarity, some disturbing violence, torture)
Powerful theme, major moral questions, but marred somewhat by uneven dramatic pacing.
"Brothers," in timely fashion, is the first film to deal with the effects of the Afghanistan war on our Marines. Hesitate before going to see it due to a few scenes of mind-bending atrocity.
As long as the film is into its sequences of anger and fury, it's horrendously well done. When, however, it tries to develop its essential intimacies in love relationships it suffers from stop-and-go momentum which abruptly slows its progression. Still, no doubt about it, its basic atrocity hook in the sequence depicting the barbaric and inhumanly savage punishments exacted by the Taliban (shot in Abiquiu, New Mexico) is so mind-shattering that I heard and felt the audience gasp and cringe in every part of the theater.
This is Tobey Maguire's deepest and broadest role ever, and he accomplishes it with a commendably studied finesse. He clearly wants you to suffer his anguish and humiliation with him. You're to be no passive observer in this. Add, in no lesser energy, the absorbing performance by Jake Gyllenhaal and the film overcomes its shortfalls.
Supported by flawlessly impactful performances at all adult and child roles, the ugly ironies of war achieve a uniqueness when one homecoming Marine carries within his embattled psyche a memory of trauma so catastrophic that he's a walking blockbuster. Natalie Portman, playing his wife, and Sam Shepard, as his father, roll with and against his force in a dynamic that keeps you glued.
Thirtysomething Captain Sam Cahill (Tobey Maguire), loving husband to his high school sweetheart Grace (Natalie Portman) and devoted father to two young girls, is facing his fourth tour of duty as a Marine, this one to Afghanistan. And into this emotion-laden scene in suburbia now arrives Tommy Cahill (Jake Gyllenhaal), Sam's younger brother. While Sam has always been the very model of the responsible family man and dutiful soldier, Tommy, just released from jail, is an aimless drifter, the exact opposite to Sam in every way.
But Tommy is also the life-of-the-party in any social situation. He's a provocateur, insensitive perhaps, but nonetheless the center of charm with his adroit wit and roguish personality. And he's into that very role now on his first night of freedom, moving into prominence at Sam's farewell dinner in the presence also of their parents, Elsie (Mare Winningham) and Hank Cahill (Sam Shepard), himself a retired Marine. It's more than plain that Hank is contemptuous of Tommy.
Soon comes the drama. On a mission in Afghanistan, Sam's chopper is shot down in the bleak and remote mountains. Sam is officially presumed dead. Back at home, his family is just receiving the full shock of being told of this catastrophe, facing the inevitable stark emptiness within themselves.
Tommy feels a surge of family loyalty and responsibility, now stepping forth to shelter Grace and the children under his wings, to say nothing of how he must now face himself.
But as fate would have it, Sam is not dead. Having been captured by the Taliban in the foreboding Pamir Mountains, Sam is barely surviving, mentally and physically, under the horrendous traumas of his captivity in which the Taliban captors force him to do an unimaginable act. So that even as he is being de-humanized and mentally changed forever, his brother Tommy is gaining character strength back home.
In fact, Grace and Tommy are getting into each other. Once regarding each other coldly, now they find themselves in shame and wariness over their mutual attraction. But, especially in regards to Tommy's wonderful rapport with her kids, it is happening.
Predictably, of course, the climax will build over what's to happen when Sam comes home. For Sam, who's become withdrawn and explosive in his time of captivity, harbors immediate suspicion of an attraction between Tom and Grace.
The energy of this family have changed strikingly. Loyalty, love and masculinity are now on the line. And a mind shattered.
Again, caution, should you elect to see this movie. As to what effect it may have on our resolve in the coming troop surge in Afghanistan, there's a real question as to whether the American public will rise and demand hard action against the grotesquely ugly Taliban, or, will say Let's Get Out!
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year movie critic for the statewide Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until the column's termination for budget cuts at end of 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
Genre: Drama, War.
Director: Jim Sheridan
Screenplay: David Benioff
Cast: Tobey Maguire, Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman, Sam Shepard, Mare Winningham
Time: 1 hr., 50 min.
Rating: R (romance intimacy, vulgarity, some disturbing violence, torture)
Powerful theme, major moral questions, but marred somewhat by uneven dramatic pacing.
"Brothers," in timely fashion, is the first film to deal with the effects of the Afghanistan war on our Marines. Hesitate before going to see it due to a few scenes of mind-bending atrocity.
As long as the film is into its sequences of anger and fury, it's horrendously well done. When, however, it tries to develop its essential intimacies in love relationships it suffers from stop-and-go momentum which abruptly slows its progression. Still, no doubt about it, its basic atrocity hook in the sequence depicting the barbaric and inhumanly savage punishments exacted by the Taliban (shot in Abiquiu, New Mexico) is so mind-shattering that I heard and felt the audience gasp and cringe in every part of the theater.
This is Tobey Maguire's deepest and broadest role ever, and he accomplishes it with a commendably studied finesse. He clearly wants you to suffer his anguish and humiliation with him. You're to be no passive observer in this. Add, in no lesser energy, the absorbing performance by Jake Gyllenhaal and the film overcomes its shortfalls.
Supported by flawlessly impactful performances at all adult and child roles, the ugly ironies of war achieve a uniqueness when one homecoming Marine carries within his embattled psyche a memory of trauma so catastrophic that he's a walking blockbuster. Natalie Portman, playing his wife, and Sam Shepard, as his father, roll with and against his force in a dynamic that keeps you glued.
Thirtysomething Captain Sam Cahill (Tobey Maguire), loving husband to his high school sweetheart Grace (Natalie Portman) and devoted father to two young girls, is facing his fourth tour of duty as a Marine, this one to Afghanistan. And into this emotion-laden scene in suburbia now arrives Tommy Cahill (Jake Gyllenhaal), Sam's younger brother. While Sam has always been the very model of the responsible family man and dutiful soldier, Tommy, just released from jail, is an aimless drifter, the exact opposite to Sam in every way.
But Tommy is also the life-of-the-party in any social situation. He's a provocateur, insensitive perhaps, but nonetheless the center of charm with his adroit wit and roguish personality. And he's into that very role now on his first night of freedom, moving into prominence at Sam's farewell dinner in the presence also of their parents, Elsie (Mare Winningham) and Hank Cahill (Sam Shepard), himself a retired Marine. It's more than plain that Hank is contemptuous of Tommy.
Soon comes the drama. On a mission in Afghanistan, Sam's chopper is shot down in the bleak and remote mountains. Sam is officially presumed dead. Back at home, his family is just receiving the full shock of being told of this catastrophe, facing the inevitable stark emptiness within themselves.
Tommy feels a surge of family loyalty and responsibility, now stepping forth to shelter Grace and the children under his wings, to say nothing of how he must now face himself.
But as fate would have it, Sam is not dead. Having been captured by the Taliban in the foreboding Pamir Mountains, Sam is barely surviving, mentally and physically, under the horrendous traumas of his captivity in which the Taliban captors force him to do an unimaginable act. So that even as he is being de-humanized and mentally changed forever, his brother Tommy is gaining character strength back home.
In fact, Grace and Tommy are getting into each other. Once regarding each other coldly, now they find themselves in shame and wariness over their mutual attraction. But, especially in regards to Tommy's wonderful rapport with her kids, it is happening.
Predictably, of course, the climax will build over what's to happen when Sam comes home. For Sam, who's become withdrawn and explosive in his time of captivity, harbors immediate suspicion of an attraction between Tom and Grace.
The energy of this family have changed strikingly. Loyalty, love and masculinity are now on the line. And a mind shattered.
Again, caution, should you elect to see this movie. As to what effect it may have on our resolve in the coming troop surge in Afghanistan, there's a real question as to whether the American public will rise and demand hard action against the grotesquely ugly Taliban, or, will say Let's Get Out!
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year movie critic for the statewide Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram until the column's termination for budget cuts at end of 2007.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
"Avatar" Movie Review
"Avatar"
(my 0-10 rating: 9)
Genre: Action-Adventure, Sci-Fi, Fantasy
Director: James Cameron
Screenplay: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang
Time: 2 hrs., 40 min.
Rating: PG-13 (intense warfare, sensuality, vulgarity)
Take the most spectacular sci-fi special effects space epic you've seen so far since the first Star Wars -- and "Avatar" transcends it, in visuals and concept, by light years. Five years in production and with a new concept in technology. So what's that mean to you?
Well, ultimately bedazzling special effects, not surprisingly. But also, James Cameron's grandly visionary super-spectacle wants you to be not merely hypnotized totally but deeply emotionally involved. That is, these are not the effects designed for adolescent boys at video games but for an adult audience trying to get some serious soul. The grand references to quantum theory of eternal energy, the Sacred Feminine in god worship and the spirituality of all animals and nature, have here raised the bar considerably in the sci-fi genre. And with sharp reference to the spiritual way of life of the Native American of old and to the essence of the Akashic Records of classic Buddhism, this is a good start in proposing high intelligence into the genre.
The grace and care with which Cameron portrays the love relationship, and its meaning within the grand view, is actually quite exquisite. The film, already destined for classical status, keeps a firm grip on hard pro-environment message, along with anti-mining and anti-corporate greed. Sarah Palin lovers need not attend. The planetscape settings created by computer, are extraordinary, and in fact singular, in their imagination and absolutely hypnotic and breathtaking textures and atmosphere. The film must be faulted from a perfect rating by the surprising failing in the credibility of its ending battle. More on that after the plot description.
It's the year 2154. Jake Scully (Sam Worthington), a Marine hero confined to a wheelchair, is recruited by a multinational corporation, operating through the U.S. Air Force, Marines, and a brutish, almost caricatured Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) in a matter of ultimate Earth-threatening urgency. Seems that total depletion of earth's energy supply is imminent. This corporation along with a military component, 30 years ago, had established a mining operation on the planet Pandora, light years away. The goal has been to mine a rare mineral that can save Earth. Problem: the atmosphere of Pandora is toxic to earthlings.
Another: the natives, the Na'vi, a tribe of sensuous 12-foot tall and proud, fluidly moving blue-skinned forest dwellers, are hostile; not by nature but because the earth people there want the land on which they live. For the moment, the corporate people must live in military base oxygen cocoons. But for more sophisticated operations, the Avatar Program has been designed. An "avatar," by definition is an embodiment of another being, in this case an actual transfer of consciousness into beings that travel in fortified armor and robotics.
Jake, re-born by this process into a handsome Na'vi avatar form with full intelligence and emotions, can now walk again. The form is under his mental control, like a puppet, from the ship. He has a long braided ponytail, a zebra-striped lean body and huge yellow eyes. He can run and leap like a gazelle. For Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), the tribal leader's daughter who's rescued him in the forest from a gigantic beast, he's quite the attraction. She takes him in to learn the arts of the warrior and the rituals of her culture.
But he's also to learn just who the enemy is, namely, the corporate assaulters upon the environment who brought him to Pandora, they who aim to demolish the land on which the Na'vi live. And, in the way of a cowboy taming a wild stallion, he'll have to bring a mighty flying dragon-like creature to accept him as its rider. Also, back on board the ship and realizing who's friend and foe here is top scientist, Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver). The finale will include a spectacle to make the word stupendous seem small, as mighty machine-gun decked military droids and vessels go into fierce action against Na'vi primitive tactics.
Now that ending: I felt irked by incredulity in that. We are to understand that by pure will, the Na'vis summoned all their 2000 or so people and attacked 22nd century gigantic machines of steel and technology with bows and arrows. Sometimes you'd see an arrow piercing the super windshields. Meantime, the Na'vi warriors, both male and female, are being mowed down by the guns -- which, rather absurdly, are still of our 2009 variety. No more weapons evolution? And, of course, you know who wins. Always. I had a hard time sitting through that. Really. But your eyes and minds need a movie like this. It will leave you withered in gasping.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram till it was terminated 12-31-07 for budget cuts. His total published experience numbered 36 years.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
(my 0-10 rating: 9)
Genre: Action-Adventure, Sci-Fi, Fantasy
Director: James Cameron
Screenplay: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang
Time: 2 hrs., 40 min.
Rating: PG-13 (intense warfare, sensuality, vulgarity)
Take the most spectacular sci-fi special effects space epic you've seen so far since the first Star Wars -- and "Avatar" transcends it, in visuals and concept, by light years. Five years in production and with a new concept in technology. So what's that mean to you?
Well, ultimately bedazzling special effects, not surprisingly. But also, James Cameron's grandly visionary super-spectacle wants you to be not merely hypnotized totally but deeply emotionally involved. That is, these are not the effects designed for adolescent boys at video games but for an adult audience trying to get some serious soul. The grand references to quantum theory of eternal energy, the Sacred Feminine in god worship and the spirituality of all animals and nature, have here raised the bar considerably in the sci-fi genre. And with sharp reference to the spiritual way of life of the Native American of old and to the essence of the Akashic Records of classic Buddhism, this is a good start in proposing high intelligence into the genre.
The grace and care with which Cameron portrays the love relationship, and its meaning within the grand view, is actually quite exquisite. The film, already destined for classical status, keeps a firm grip on hard pro-environment message, along with anti-mining and anti-corporate greed. Sarah Palin lovers need not attend. The planetscape settings created by computer, are extraordinary, and in fact singular, in their imagination and absolutely hypnotic and breathtaking textures and atmosphere. The film must be faulted from a perfect rating by the surprising failing in the credibility of its ending battle. More on that after the plot description.
It's the year 2154. Jake Scully (Sam Worthington), a Marine hero confined to a wheelchair, is recruited by a multinational corporation, operating through the U.S. Air Force, Marines, and a brutish, almost caricatured Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) in a matter of ultimate Earth-threatening urgency. Seems that total depletion of earth's energy supply is imminent. This corporation along with a military component, 30 years ago, had established a mining operation on the planet Pandora, light years away. The goal has been to mine a rare mineral that can save Earth. Problem: the atmosphere of Pandora is toxic to earthlings.
Another: the natives, the Na'vi, a tribe of sensuous 12-foot tall and proud, fluidly moving blue-skinned forest dwellers, are hostile; not by nature but because the earth people there want the land on which they live. For the moment, the corporate people must live in military base oxygen cocoons. But for more sophisticated operations, the Avatar Program has been designed. An "avatar," by definition is an embodiment of another being, in this case an actual transfer of consciousness into beings that travel in fortified armor and robotics.
Jake, re-born by this process into a handsome Na'vi avatar form with full intelligence and emotions, can now walk again. The form is under his mental control, like a puppet, from the ship. He has a long braided ponytail, a zebra-striped lean body and huge yellow eyes. He can run and leap like a gazelle. For Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), the tribal leader's daughter who's rescued him in the forest from a gigantic beast, he's quite the attraction. She takes him in to learn the arts of the warrior and the rituals of her culture.
But he's also to learn just who the enemy is, namely, the corporate assaulters upon the environment who brought him to Pandora, they who aim to demolish the land on which the Na'vi live. And, in the way of a cowboy taming a wild stallion, he'll have to bring a mighty flying dragon-like creature to accept him as its rider. Also, back on board the ship and realizing who's friend and foe here is top scientist, Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver). The finale will include a spectacle to make the word stupendous seem small, as mighty machine-gun decked military droids and vessels go into fierce action against Na'vi primitive tactics.
Now that ending: I felt irked by incredulity in that. We are to understand that by pure will, the Na'vis summoned all their 2000 or so people and attacked 22nd century gigantic machines of steel and technology with bows and arrows. Sometimes you'd see an arrow piercing the super windshields. Meantime, the Na'vi warriors, both male and female, are being mowed down by the guns -- which, rather absurdly, are still of our 2009 variety. No more weapons evolution? And, of course, you know who wins. Always. I had a hard time sitting through that. Really. But your eyes and minds need a movie like this. It will leave you withered in gasping.
Marty Meltz, http://www.martymoviereviews.com, was the 30-year films critic for the Award-winning Maine Sunday Telegram till it was terminated 12-31-07 for budget cuts. His total published experience numbered 36 years.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Marty_Meltz
2012 the Movie - An Experts Review
Review of 2012 The Movie:
* End of the world - 2012 marks the end of the world as people have known it, not the end of the world literally.
* 2012 is also not literal - however 12.21.2012 is a deadline. This deadline marks a time when old behaviors will finally come to a majority end. The pain will have gone on too long and people will finally be convinced that their old patterns are only hurting them and those around them.
* The massive destruction of cities and lives - marks a total breakdown of the old structures and ways of thinking and doing things.
* John Cusack - portrays a person who is lost in a pre-2012 world and empowered in a post-2012 world. Values will no longer be based on your bank account, but based on your deeds.
* People are still living, acting and thinking in a pre-2012 world - anyone who seems lost or crazy right now, like John Cusack or Woody Harrelson represent people who 'normal people' need to take a second look at. Ask yourself, "what you are missing?"
* There is no place to run - everything and everyone is in this together. It's about paying attention, stopping the self-centeredness, learning to love and help one another and be part of the solution before it becomes urgent.
* The constant cracking of the earth throughout the movie - suggests the breakdown of any stability in people's lives. This has been happening for many years now with the breakdown of the global economy. In addition to finances, this is also showing up in personal relationships, the need for purpose in people's work and what is important in every small and large way.
* Holding on to your past possessions and behaviors is not a choice - if it is a struggle and makes you act out in the old ways then it is not sustainable. Let it go (empty the cup) so you make room for the natural flow of things. Once you willingly do this it will not be long before you see 'the new' flow in. This 'new' will be the result of trusting, a free-fall from the previous pain and suffering of holding on to unsustainable patterns.
Conclusion: These are all symbolic messages describing the urgent need to shift our priorities and values. A need to let go of everything in order to begin to 'get it right'.
Even Mother Nature has had its 'I've had it day' with all the abuse and imbalances. Ultimately it will be Mother Nature that forces these changes. Most of mankind will get pushed through the door, rather than willingly walk though. Getting pushed happens when you have waited too long. Willingly walking through those doors happens long before the urgency and those that willingly walk through are part of the solution when everything falls apart. Those of you that walked though willingly years ago have been ridiculed as being a weirdo, a kook, a freak or even being negative. Maybe this lonely journey has at times made you feel like 'they' the so-called 'normal people' were right all along. But the "movie" hasn't played out yet so who knows?
To some, this '2012 The Movie' will seem a perfect interpretation by the time 12.21.2012 is here. There will be those who never thought that this type of change could happen in their lifetime. To others, this '2012 The Movie' will be a host of symbolic descriptions on how different this world and world behavior will be after 12.21.2012.
For those who have walked through the door willingly, they have already planned for the worst and hope for the best. Those that are waiting to get pushed have not planned at all. They cannot imagine that the worst could ever happen... it is just not an option.
Ray Holley and Linda Deir, Intuitive Medium Team... The Nostradamus of the NEWS. News predictions published in our CR News Reports(c) monthly on 14 topics related to your daily life - Week, Months, Years in advance, so you can prepare for what's going to happen before it actually occurs.
Get our FREE Audio Prediction located in the top right-hand corner of each web page... http://www.ChanneledReadings.com.
info@channeledreadings.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Linda_Deir
* End of the world - 2012 marks the end of the world as people have known it, not the end of the world literally.
* 2012 is also not literal - however 12.21.2012 is a deadline. This deadline marks a time when old behaviors will finally come to a majority end. The pain will have gone on too long and people will finally be convinced that their old patterns are only hurting them and those around them.
* The massive destruction of cities and lives - marks a total breakdown of the old structures and ways of thinking and doing things.
* John Cusack - portrays a person who is lost in a pre-2012 world and empowered in a post-2012 world. Values will no longer be based on your bank account, but based on your deeds.
* People are still living, acting and thinking in a pre-2012 world - anyone who seems lost or crazy right now, like John Cusack or Woody Harrelson represent people who 'normal people' need to take a second look at. Ask yourself, "what you are missing?"
* There is no place to run - everything and everyone is in this together. It's about paying attention, stopping the self-centeredness, learning to love and help one another and be part of the solution before it becomes urgent.
* The constant cracking of the earth throughout the movie - suggests the breakdown of any stability in people's lives. This has been happening for many years now with the breakdown of the global economy. In addition to finances, this is also showing up in personal relationships, the need for purpose in people's work and what is important in every small and large way.
* Holding on to your past possessions and behaviors is not a choice - if it is a struggle and makes you act out in the old ways then it is not sustainable. Let it go (empty the cup) so you make room for the natural flow of things. Once you willingly do this it will not be long before you see 'the new' flow in. This 'new' will be the result of trusting, a free-fall from the previous pain and suffering of holding on to unsustainable patterns.
Conclusion: These are all symbolic messages describing the urgent need to shift our priorities and values. A need to let go of everything in order to begin to 'get it right'.
Even Mother Nature has had its 'I've had it day' with all the abuse and imbalances. Ultimately it will be Mother Nature that forces these changes. Most of mankind will get pushed through the door, rather than willingly walk though. Getting pushed happens when you have waited too long. Willingly walking through those doors happens long before the urgency and those that willingly walk through are part of the solution when everything falls apart. Those of you that walked though willingly years ago have been ridiculed as being a weirdo, a kook, a freak or even being negative. Maybe this lonely journey has at times made you feel like 'they' the so-called 'normal people' were right all along. But the "movie" hasn't played out yet so who knows?
To some, this '2012 The Movie' will seem a perfect interpretation by the time 12.21.2012 is here. There will be those who never thought that this type of change could happen in their lifetime. To others, this '2012 The Movie' will be a host of symbolic descriptions on how different this world and world behavior will be after 12.21.2012.
For those who have walked through the door willingly, they have already planned for the worst and hope for the best. Those that are waiting to get pushed have not planned at all. They cannot imagine that the worst could ever happen... it is just not an option.
Ray Holley and Linda Deir, Intuitive Medium Team... The Nostradamus of the NEWS. News predictions published in our CR News Reports(c) monthly on 14 topics related to your daily life - Week, Months, Years in advance, so you can prepare for what's going to happen before it actually occurs.
Get our FREE Audio Prediction located in the top right-hand corner of each web page... http://www.ChanneledReadings.com.
info@channeledreadings.com
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Linda_Deir
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)