Showing posts with label R. Show all posts
Showing posts with label R. Show all posts

Friday, July 3, 2009

Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen

In a Nutshell: Robots pretty! The rest? Eh. Go in with low expectations, and you might be okay.

Quick Plot: What plot? An ancient robot seeks an equally ancient power source that is hidden on Earth, to the detriment of all planetary inhabitants.

In Detail: Um, that's really about it. Most of the story development of this film could fit in a haiku or two. As another very pithy reviewer put it: not much more than meets the CGI. (That reviewer's full remarks at http://bit.ly/JtvQ0 and it is too funny. DH fully agrees with him, more than he agrees with me.) Don't get me wrong, the CGI is awesome. If you have any inclination to see it, do see it on the big screen. Well, when you can actually see it. Why they spend all this money on the robots and then *not* pull the camera back so you can actually see what's going on is beyond me. I thought it was just blah. DH thought it was terrible, though I do think he's a little more emotionally invested in Transformers (in general, not necessarily Michael Bay's incarnation) than I am. We both agreed that it committed the cardinal sin of any major action blockbuster: it was boring. Not sure how that is even possible, but it was. And I'm not one who is a stickler for location accuracy, but I am pretty darned sure that there is not a desert with distant rocky mountains out the back door of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, not even the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center. Looked a whole lot more like Arizona (where it was filmed), which I am quite sure is nothing even remotely like Washington, DC. Just one glaring example of the many many things that were very wrong with the film.

Will I Buy It? I genuinely do not know. Pretty sure we're both leaning towards no. I don't particularly want to see it again, and I know DH doesn't either. We'll have to discuss it.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Red Eye

In a Nutshell: Very good for a B-movie; not bad for a regular movie even. Worth renting, but don't rush out and see it.

Quick Plot: Lisa just wants to get home to see her dad, and she's rather anxious after her flight to Miami has been seriously delayed. After numerous run-ins with a charming stranger, she discovers she is sitting next to him on the plane. It is not a happy accident. If she does not help him to assassinate a high profile politician before they land, he will have her father killed. But what can she do about it at 30,000 feet?

In Detail: First off, let me dispel what seems to be a common misconception about this film, which stems from a combination of the television commercial and the director. Yes, it is a Wes Craven film. Yes, it is a thriller. But NO, there are not *any* supernatural elements of any kind in this movie. I knew what the film was about before I saw the trailer, so I didn't think anything of it. It was only when my brother commented on being surprised about them just being "normal" people, and then my husband commenting that it "doesn't seem like your kind of movie" that I realized that the television commercial could be misleading if you didn't know the plot, particularly when it is a Craven film. No demons, no "monsters," just your average everyday wacko. ;) Having said all of that, the film is quite tense. Not as tense as War of the Worlds, but well done none the less. I was willing to suspend disbelief until the very end, when things started getting a little out of hand. And one particular element of the ending was quite disappointing. Other than that, I'd say it's worth seeing. Rent it, maybe, or catch it on television, but worth seeing none the less. A fun, brainless, rainy afternoon type flick.

Will I Buy It? No. Worth seeing once. That's about it.

Thursday, December 18, 2003

Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

In a Nutshell: Very good. Not quite as good as Fellowship, but infinitely better than Towers. Certainly didn't feel like 3.5 hours, that's for sure.

Quick Plot: Do you really need one? Frodo and Sam are off to destroy the ring, Aragorn must lead the race of men to victory over the Orcs and the forces of Sauron.

In Detail: Quite good, if a little confusing for non-readers (like myself; no stone-throwing, please, I'll get to it one day). I have some serious timeline issues with how it all works out, but it does work out, in some highly unexpected ways. I think the absolute best compliment I can give is that it sure didn't feel like it was 3.5 hours long. It held my interest, it rarely slowed to the point of checking a watch (which I did twice, I think), and there is really no good place to go to the restroom, so don't drink *anything* before going to see it.

Will I Buy It? Yep.

Monday, November 3, 2003

Runaway Jury

In a Nutshell: It's a Grisham. Good, keeps your interest, not spectacular.

Quick Plot: A high profile case in New Orleans draws the top jury consultant in the nation to insure victory for the defense, but another party "owns" a jury member, and is willing to push the verdict either way, for a price.

In Detail: It was a Grisham, which means it is bound to be entertaining and tense. It also means that it is unlikely to be spectacular, and this wasn't. My two favorite Grisham films are The Client and The Pelican Brief. The ending here, while a surprise, just seemed to be a bit of a let down. I was geared up for something much more. I'd say worth seeing, but rent it.

Will I Buy It? Doubtful.

Monday, October 13, 2003

Roman Holiday

In a Nutshell: Is there really a more perfect film? Simply wonderful!

Quick Plot: Princess Ann is tired of royal life. After a whirlwind tour of Europe, she runs away to try and experience something of the "real world" while in Rome. But unbeknownst to her, the man who offers to show her around is an American reporter, hoping for the scoop of the decade.

In Detail: How can a movie get better than this? Audrey Hepburn (in her film debut) and Gregory Peck. That should be enough to cause you to run out and see this movie right now. The story is sweet and charming, and even manages to rise above it's 1950s sanitizing to be very "real." We've all had an experience like this, where duty (or morals) leads us away from something we want. Just a wonderful wonderful film! I'm ashamed it took me this long to see it.

Will I Buy It? Yep!

Friday, October 3, 2003

The Rundown

In a Nutshell: It was fine. Certainly entertaining (and I have seen a film or two that couldn't even claim that), an quite funny in some places. And it certainly lives up to its billing: The Rock has definitely arrived with this film.

Quick Plot: Some time ago, Beck got in with the wrong people. In order to get out, and start a restaurant like he's always wanted, he has to do one last "job": find the boss's son, who has disappeared into the jungle.

In Detail: Not really much to say. It was entertaining, it was funny. It shows that The Rock is capable of carrying a film pretty much on his own, and he does equally well at comedy and action. Beyond that, it was your basic action popcorn flick. I do think some of the violence was out of line with the overall tone of the film, but perhaps that was part of the point (for it to be shocking). There wasn't a lot of it, and it wasn't gory, it just didn't seem to fit the tone. I also thought he would get out of the movie without actually shooting anyone with a gun. Sadly, not so. I think it would have been more difficult to write, but also more rewarding. As for the rest of the cast, the kid (can't even remember his name) was just annoying, IMO, though I didn't expect it to be otherwise. Rosario Dawson was good, just not really a big enough part. Many critics have been commending Christopher Walken's performance. It was fine, but I've seen better from him, including Catch Me If You Can. If you like brainless action and/or The Rock, then see it. We mainly caught it because we haven't seen a new film in the theater since mid-August! Not bad, but could certainly wait to be rented as well.

Will I Buy It? Doubtful!

Monday, February 17, 2003

The Recruit

In a Nutshell: Fairly average suspense flick. I guessed the twist before we ever entered the theater. Whether I'm that good or just lucky, you decide.

Quick Plot: James Clayton (Colin Farrell) is recruited into the CIA by Walter Burke (Al Pacino). James shows much promise, but is bounced out of the program. Or so it seems. Burke recruits him once again, indicating that his expulsion is actually his cover. His mission: to get close to the beautiful Layla, a colleague from training camp. She's really a mole (or is she?) stealing top secret files, and James must stop her.

In Detail: Really, there isn't much detail to give. It was a perfectly acceptable film, but there really wasn't anything to distinguish it from many others like it. It was just very typical. It was fairly suspenseful, fairly fun in places, and seemed to surprise some people at the end. As I mentioned, I already had it figured out, but I think it was just a lucky guess on my part. I didn't have it exactly right, but I was awfully darn close. I don't really recommend this as a big screen film. Rent if you think you need to see it.

Will I Buy It? Doubtful. Not enough for me for repeated viewings.

Tuesday, November 5, 2002

Return To Me

In a Nutshell: A perfectly pleasant rom-com (romantic comedy), with some funny, touching, and sweet moments.

Quick Plot: Following the death of his wife, Bob (David Duchovney) meets and falls for Grace (Minnie Driver), only to discover that Grace has had a heart transplant, and the heart she received was his wife's.

In Detail: I call this a fluff movie, but that is in no way a bad thing! Everything is scripted and predictable, and you know how it's going to end before it even starts. But that doesn't make the journey any less sweet or pleasant. In a way, it's a throw-back to the older formula films, and it's just as comforting. Minnie Driver is charming as ever, Bonnie Hunt and James Belushi have small but wonderful parts, and Robert Loggia and Carroll O'Connor (along with their kooky bunch of friends) steal the show. Very cute, with some great scenes. Worth renting for a nice sweet escape for a couple of hours.

Will I Buy It? Hmm... I don't know. I have several films already that fall into this "fluff" category, and as I prefer some others to this one, I don't intend to rush right out and get it. But if I found it on a sale rack for a reasonable price, I would certainly pick it up.

Monday, July 15, 2002

Reign of Fire

In a Nutshell: Okay, but needed more dragons!

Quick Plot: Dragons, awakened after hundreds of years lying dormant, have obliterated most traces of life from the Earth. A small band of humans just try to survive, until a dragonslayer comes with the promise of hope and freedom from fiery terror. (Hey, I just made that up on the spot. Sounds pretty good, if I do say so myself!)

In Detail: Well, it certainly wasn't the worst film I've ever seen, but not the best either. It had tension, it had humor (especially the little play they put on for the kids), it had awesome dragons. OTOH, the film is uneven and really really really needs more dragons! Almost every dragon shot in the film is in the trailer, so if the dragons are all you're going for, be prepared. However, if you are interested in seeing it, do see it in the theater, because what little dragon awesomeness there is will be lost on the small screen. Their roar is bone chilling, and you hear it a good bit. Seeing them is scary as *&%$, but you just don't see enough of them. We won't even talk about the plot holes that are big enough to drive a truck (or in this case, a tank) through. And, on a more personal note, what the heck is the point of going to see a Matthew McConaughey movie if there's no blonde curls and dimples to be found? He's all buffed up with an awesome body, but I found it really hard to make that be him. Bummer. Bottom line: it's a fun ride. See it in the theater if you're a dragon lover, but don't pay full price. Rental would be fine if it won't hurt you to miss big-screen beasts.

Will I Buy It? Doubtful, unless the special edition adds *lots* more dragons.