FlixChatter Review: Motherless Brooklyn (2019)

Edward Norton is one of the best actors working today, but I feel like it’s been a while since I saw him as a proper leading man. This time he also takes the helm in his passion project, based on Jonathan Lethem’s 1999 novel of the same name. Norton plays Lionel Essrog, a lonesome private detective with Tourette Syndrome attempting to solve the murder of his mentor.

One thing I noticed right away was the stellar cast, so I was quite dumbfounded when I read on IMDb trivia that the principal major stars worked for free here. Bruce Willis payed his mentor Frank Minna whom we learn later has taken Lionel and his colleagues who worked for his detective agency under his wing. It’s clear that Lionel loved Frank, perhaps even idolized him. The film is set up like a whodunnit classic noir of the Hollywood Golden age, but it’s actually not hugely unpredictable. Lionel’s constant voiceover provides so much info to the audience that initially it was overwhelming. Thankfully over time I was fine with it and actually enjoyed the way the story unfolds. There’s kind of an unhurried pace the way Norton tells the story, hence the nearly 2.5-hour running time.

At a council meeting, Lionel’s investigation reveals a bigger connection to the city than he originally thought. I have to say that it’s not until Lionel meets a black community lawyer Laura Rose (played by the sublime Gugu Mbatha-Raw) that things started to get really interesting. Laura and her boss Gaby (Cherry Jones) are fighting gentrification in NYC where the poor and minorities are being driven out of the city by a development tycoon Moses Randolph (Alec Baldwin). Baldwin relishes in playing a callous, unapologetically-corrupt, racist power broker (modeled after a real life ‘master builder’ Robert Moses) who utters lines like “Power is feeling, knowing, that you can do whatever you want, and not one fucking person can stop you,” Meanwhile, Willem Dafoe plays a rather beaten-down sort of a man who’s backed into a corner. This has been quite a year for Mr. Dafoe – his performance here might not be as memorable as the one in The Lighthouse, but he’s always fascinating to watch on screen.

As the lone female figure in a largely male cast, I absolutely adore Mbatha-Raw. I always lights up whenever I see her on screen, she’s so criminally underrated. The tentative bond between Lionel and Laura feels natural as they share something in common. Lionel friends call him ‘Freakshow’ though he’s a brilliant investigator and Laura, as a woman of color with a law degree, each have their own struggles about where they fit in. I particularly love the scene in a jazz club where Lionel slowly dances with Laura, as Michael Kenneth Williams as the Trumpet man performed on stage. It’s a sweet moment that gives us a respite from all the puzzle-solving scenarios, and it’s perhaps the first time Lionel feels ‘safe’ in the arms of a woman.

But there’s no argument that this is Norton’s film… a vehicle for his acting chops and directing endeavor. He’s in virtually every single scene… if he’s not visually on screen, his voice would be, narrating it. I find it interesting that two recent films by acclaimed actors feature characters suffering from neurological conditions. While Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck aka Joker suffers from the Pseudobulbar Affect that caused him to laugh/cry uncontrollably, Norton’s Lionel suffers from a neurological disorder characterized by involuntary tics and vocalizations where he’d compulsively utters inappropriate words like ‘tits’ in public. I can’t comment whether his portrayal of the syndrome is accurate (I read that the Tourette’s Association of America approved of the film), but his performance at times invites laughter from the audience, and I can’t help feeling guilty every time I chuckle.

Now, as for his directing chops, I think he’s a promising filmmaker, but I think this story could’ve been much more gripping when done by a veteran director. For one, a tighter editing and more dynamic pacing would make the film feels less sluggish. But considering this is his sophomore effort, I suppose it takes time for someone to hone their craft. At least this movie isn’t boring, not to me anyway. Norton has said in many interviews that he learned from past visionary directors, the likes of Milos Forman, Spike Lee, David Fincher which eventually inspired him to direct.

It’s hard not to notice some of the timely parallel of what’s going on today… the commentary about insatiable power and that the Moses character has that Trump-like, big-bully mannerism and cockiness. According to NPR, Norton actually finished writing the script before Trump came into power, when he was just a game-show host. “I would say President Trump is a game-show host also — it’s just a more damaging game that he’s playing. …” The film is also a love letter to New York, a city Norton clearly loved. The production design, set pieces, costumes, etc. are meticulously-crafted to reflect 1950s NYC, shot beautifully by Dick Pope (whom Norton worked with in The Illusionist). The scene in the train station (apparently Norton’s crew recreated the Penn Station) look magnificent, and I love the night scenes, particularly the foggy night on the Brooklyn bridge, which shows just how dramatic and atmospheric NYC nights are depicted in the movies.

I love a good mystery film that isn’t overly grim and violent, and Motherless Brooklyn certainly fits the bill. It’s not quite as riveting nor utterly brilliant as L.A. Confidential, a 1950s neo-noir that Norton reportedly admire, but this one is still an enjoyable ride. It helps that I immediately sympathizes with Lionel, which makes me invested in his quest to solve his mentor’s murder. The revelation of what the title means is memorably poignant moment, I like that Norton isn’t afraid to wear his heart on his sleeve. So despite the overlong running time, I still highly recommend this film, and I hope Norton would continue to make films in the future.

– Review by Ruth Maramis


Have you seen Motherless Brooklyn? I’d love to hear what you think.

FlixChatter Review: GLASS (2018)

GuestPost_Vince

Written & Directed by M. Night Shyamalan
Starring: James McAvoy, Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson

I collected comic books as a kid during the late 70s through the 80s. As an introverted 8 year old, comics (from DC to Marvel, to Batman, X-Men, and eventually to graphic novels) provided a sense of wonder and mystery. Even in the post Star Wars 70s and 80s, the comic book medium elicited a kind of excitement that spurred the imagination. With all of the super powers and amazing impossibilities drawn in that wonderful half-tone of ink, words and colors, within those pages was an undeniable humanism to the drama of these characters.

As I grew older, I came to realize that the fantastic isn’t much without the human element. Comics had come to embrace a superhero based in the real-world with real-world problems (divorce, domestic issues, addiction, flawed motives, graphic violence, sex, questionable ethics and morality). M. Night Shyamalan’s Unbreakable (2000) is a testament to this realization. Its subtle approach to the fantastic (and very human) superhero reflected the evolution of comics into the millennium.

Shyamalan used simple everyday conversation and situations for dramatic effect, all without the bombast of today’s super-hero CGI excesses that is proving fatiguing (at least to this particular moviegoer) to some of today’s audience. I admit, I still look forward to Avengers: Endgame (I need closure after watching all those other movies), Dark Phoenix (my favorite of all the humanistic superhero sagas of all time), and seeing Spider-Man:Into the Spiderverse proved that there were still creative bounds to achieve. Unbreakable went against the grain back then and still stands today as a great example of an alternate way to portray super-heroes on screen.

Which brings us to 2019’s GLASS: Unbreakable’s official follow-up and semi-continuation of 2016’s very fine SPLIT. Here we pick up where SPLIT left off and 19 years after the events of Unbreakable. David Dunn (Bruce Willis with an understated performance) is now in the private security business along with his son Joseph. Joseph knows of his abilities and assists his father in tracking down criminals. Infamously known as the vigilante “The Overseer”, David’s alter-ego tracks down Kevin Wendell Crumb aka The Horde (James McAvoy in another fine performance) who is still terrorizing the city. Meanwhile, Elijah Price, aka Mr. Glass (played by the venerable Samuel Jackson) has spent the last couple of decades in a mental institution under the current care of Dr. Elle Staple (Sarah Paulson).

Shyamalan matches the feel of Unbreakable. There’s nothing flashy here. The actors move the scenes along with a mid-tempo pace that is a welcome change to today’s CGI heavy and music video editing styles we’ve expected in the genre. In the early scenes, it establishes itself “as not of that ilk” so to speak. Things starts out promising – Willis speaks very little, as we would expect David Dunn to be. Dialogue is succinct, albeit comic book like. It’s not Shakespeare – just simple language, avoiding pretense though self-consciously. The film reveals its plot slowly at first and quite entertainingly especially when Dunn finally confronts Crumb/The Horde for the first time. Then as the trailers would have it, Dunn, Crumb and Elijah Price are fated together under Dr. Staple’s care and control. Her sole purpose, to convince the three men they are not superheroes or super-villains, but merely suffering from delusions of grandeur.

And this is where GLASS starts to unravel. This preposterous scenario is handled leisurely and predictably, following the normal template of the Asylum horror flick, with orderlies snuffed out in orderly fashion (pardon the pun). 2 other major scenes detailing our characters escape (because we know they will somehow) made me scratch my head in a “Huh?” moment and not in a good way. Of course Glass wouldn’t be complete without that Shyamalan signature twist ending that was either too preposterous or too predictable. To say anymore would give it away. However, it ultimately left me feeling hollow and unsatisfied. But then again, that could very well be the point: that in this day and age of Marvel and DC motion pictures, we’ve come to expect the expected and in such spectacular fashion, particle explosions and all. Shyamalan has always leaned toward dialogue and images to make a point and it has served him well in his best films. GLASS may belong to the exception of the lot.

Shyamalan’s Hitchcockian cameo in the film seems to make a statement in itself. His line about hanging out with ‘shady types’ in his youth but now changed for the better, could be construed as a veiled letting go of the legacy of his earlier works (mostly the duds that followed The Village back in 2004), and perhaps even Unbreakable itself.

James McAvoy is terrific once again as Crumb but that is a singular positive in what feels like run of the mill performances from Willis and Jackson. In retrospect, McAvoy’s character is the most interesting and believable in the movie. It was enough to carry SPLIT. But GLASS’s fragility, shatters before us. But still I can’t help giving Shyamalan the benefit of the doubt; as if he’s done with the specter of Unbreakable’s success… That instead of that films legacy being a boon, it’s too much of a curse to live up to. That said, I’ll still look forward to what he does next…

Vince_review


So what do you think of M. Night’s GLASS? Let us know what you think!

FlixChatter Review: Death Wish (2018)

I hate using the word “guilty pleasure” when talking about films that I enjoy but I think the old Charles Bronson‘s Death Wish films are definitely my guilty pleasures. Of course, with Hollywood pretty much refusing to make any films that resemble any kind of originality, a remake of the 1974 film was inevitable. The remake was originally going to star and be directed by Sly Stallone, but he left for creative differences. Then Joe Carnahan took over the project but left because he didn’t agree with the studio’s choice of casting Bruce Willis as the lead. The project somehow landed in the hands of, of all people, Eli Roth, whose previous films were all torture porn.

Dr. Paul Kersey (Bruce Willis) is living the good life, he’s got a great job, a big house that he shares with his beautiful wife Lucy (Elizabeth Shue) and daughter Jordan (Camila Morrone). One night while he’s away at work, thieves broke into his house, murdered his wife and left his daughter in a coma. Kersey’s world has now been turned upside down and when the authority couldn’t find his wife’s killers, he decided to turn into a vigilante. I think most movie goers are familiar with either the original film or this kind of story, it’s been told several times before and unfortunately there’s nothing new here in the remake.

Joe Carnahan gets the full credit for the screenplay but apparently Roth and another writer rewrote much of what Carnahan wrote but the screen writers guild gave all the credits to Carnahan. He probably wish his name doesn’t appear in the credits because the story is quite generic. I’ve never read the novel that it’s based on so I don’t know how close it is to the source material.

I’m not a fan of Roth’s work, I don’t find his kind of horror films entertaining. I was skeptical about him doing an action picture and fortunately he did an okay job. He didn’t try to make it into a dark and serious action picture. But he never elevated the material to anything special either, the only thing he added was the extra gore during the action scenes. Also, I don’t think he really knows what kind of picture he wanted to make. Does he support vigilantism or is he against it? A lot of scenes sort of contradict each other.

The performances by the actors were fine, I think Willis tried to add some depth to his character but it didn’t really work. He’s kind of flat on many scenes. His character started out as someone who tried to avoid conflicts but he became John McClane once he lost his family. The only shining performance was Vincent D’Onofrio who played the brother of Kersey and the voice of reason in the story. All of the supporting actors were pretty generic.

At a time where gun control talks are dividing people in this country, this film doesn’t really need to be made. To be fair though, the film was finished way before the mass shootings that happened within the last few months here in the States. For the people don’t like gun violence, you best to stay away from this film. But anyone who like trashy B-action films, then you might enjoy it.

TedS_post


So have you seen Death Wish? Well, what did you think?

The Flix List: Five Movies Suffering From Identity Crisis

MoviesIdentityCrisis

Many filmmakers tried to mix several genres in one film, sometime it works nicely, i.e. Captain America: The Winter Soldier which is a superhero movie mixed with Cold War-era espionage intrigue. But most of the time, it turns out to be a disaster. Just look at Cowboys & Aliens, mixing Sci-fi with Westerns sounds like a crazy idea, but maybe it’s crazy enough that it could work. Alas, it turned out to be a bomb for Universal, as it barely made close to its $163 mil budget domestically.

So Ted comes up with five other films suffering from identity crisis which are also box office duds:

TedSaydalavongBanner

The Lone Ranger

LoneRanger

This box office dud tried to be too many things and in the end it just didn’t work. The film sort of reminded me of some of Buster Keator or Charlie Chaplin films from the 30s but then it also tried to be this serious western action/adventure of the 60s and 70s. I understand what Johnny Depp and the filmmakers were trying to do, but I think they should’ve picked a genre and stuck with it. Despite so many bad reviews it received last summer, I still thought it was an entertaining flick (check out my review) and I think it might have a cult following the years to come.

Tears of the Sun

TearsOftheSun

Antione Fuqua tends to mix genres in his films and this one was a good example of how NOT to do it. Originally the script was written as a Die Hard sequel but then things didn’t work out and Willis decided he wanted to make it a separate film. He even persuaded the studio executives to hire Fuqua to direct the film. Well, Willis ended up regretting that decision. When Fuqua took over the project, he decided to make it more into political drama instead of just straight up action/adventure. Apparently both Willis and Fuqua argued with one another during the entire shoot and vowed to never work with each other again. By combining real life tragedies and over-the-top action sequences, the film just didn’t work and when it opened in March of 2003, it failed miserably. The film only earned about $40mil at the box office and it cost around $70-90mil to produce, ouch!

The Devil’s Own

DevilsOwn

This big budgeted action/drama was plagued with behind-the-scenes drama. It seems Brad Pitt loves to be involved with films that has troubled production, (the infamous World War Z behind the scene issues and the ongoing arguments on the set of Mr & Mrs Smith), in this film the dramas involved Pitt and Harrison Ford. Both stars wanted the film to focus on their character, apparently Pitt was pissed when studio hired Ford to be in the film.

In the original script, Pitt’s character was the main focus and Ford’s character was just a supporting role. But when Ford read the script and demanded that he gets the cop part, the studio executives were more than happy to hire him, this was when Ford was still a box office champ, he had just starred in The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger and Patriot Games, all were box office hits. There were reports that Pitt wanted to leave the production of the film because he thought the film was going downhill fast after several rewrites. He even bad mouthed the film in an interview with Newsweek magazine, calling it “the most irresponsible bit of film-making.” He was unhappy with how the script has changed so much from the one he fell in love with, it was originally a dark and brutal drama thriller but then it switched into more of an action/thriller. And that was the problem with the film, it couldn’t decide if it wants to be drama or action, and it failed by combining both. The film reportedly cost $90-100mil to make and it only made about $40mil back.

Hancock

Hancock

Well this film actually was a huge hit when it came out but I thought it didn’t work at all, I actually named it one of the worst films from 2008. The original script was a much darker story about a superhero who hates saving the world and Michael Mann was attached to direct it in early 2000s. But with several rewrites and delays, Mann gave the job to his protégé Peter Berg. Berg wanted to make it close to the original script but pressures from studio heads forced him to make it into a mixed of light comedy and action/adventure but also with some dark moments. Seriously the tone of this film was so uneven, I wanted to walk out of the theater. I think this was a huge missed opportunity to make a film about a “real” superhero living in our society and sick of saving idiotic people but again it’s all about making money for studios so what they made was a crappy wannabe film.

Random Hearts

RandomHearts

This film maybe the prime example of how not to mix several genres into one film, was this film supposed to be police drama thriller, mystery suspense or romantic drama? What’s so surprising was that the film was directed by Sydney Pollack, who was considered one of the good directors at the time. The behind-the-scene drama was more well known than the actual film, apparently Pollack and his leading man Harrison Ford constantly argued during the production of the film. It got so bad that they stopped talking to one another and vowed to never work with each other again. It’s kind of funny because while making Sabrina together a few years prior, they were good buddies. The film opened in the fall of 1999 with little fanfare and the studio hardly promoted it, probably because they saw it and decided it was a turkey and didn’t want to spend any money on promotions.


TedS_post


Have you seen any of these? If so what do you think? Feel free to list of other films you think suffer from an identity crisis.

Question of the Week: 80s/90s aging movie stars still in action – Love ’em or Hate ’em?

Tonight I’m going to a screening of 3 Days to Kill. Yes the trailer looks ridiculous and the director is McG so the likelihood of this being good is pretty slim. But y’know what, I’m still going to see it for the nostalgia factor as I quite like Kevin Costner as an action hero, whom I first saw in a spy thriller No Way Out in the late 80s. I’m dating myself here, but those who grew up in the 80s like I did likely remember these stars in their prime. Costner’s getting a career resurgence since winning a Golden Globe for his performance in the TV miniseries Hatfields & McCoys. Interestingly, he’s only one of a slew of 80s/90s movie stars who’re still in demand in today’s movies.

3DaysToKill_NonStop

In fact, within a week of each other, 59-year-old Costner and 61-year-old Liam Neeson have a new movie coming out with each of them getting top billing. Both are action movies, which seem to be the genre these old, err seasoned movie stars get hired for, strangely enough. I just came across this NY Post article last night where I read about Neeson’s reaction why he took those action roles: “Because they’re dumb enough to offer them to me … It’s like, I’m 61 years of age. I mean, come on. It’s a joke. It’s like [mimes talking into phone], ‘How much? OK, I’ll be there.’” Ahah, you gotta love his honesty!

But hey, there are economic reasons why Hollywood would rather offer action roles to familiar names. That NY Post article also talked about how foreign audiences actually love ‘stars of immediate past’ and the universal appeal of an action adventure is easier to market than a decidedly more culturally-relevant comedy or drama. The Expendables 2 only grossed $85 mil domestically but made well over $200 mil in foreign markets total. Even the relative dud like Escape Plan with Sly Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger which only earned a paltry $25 mil here in the US made over $100 mil in foreign markets. So they may be old but certainly not flat-lined yet at the box office.

There’s practically a new sub-genre of *aging stars in action* movies with a cast that pride themselves of being older, wiser and still very much bad ass. It has spun several successful franchises like Taken (Neeson’s vehicle), RED aka Retired Extremely Dangerous (Bruce Willis’ vehicle) and The Expendables, kick-started by Sly himself, easily one of THE biggest action heroes of all time, and starring the who’s who of 80s & 90s action.

Expendables3

The Expendables‘ strong point is truly in the cast [I’ve seen the first film, it’s definitely NOT the script] and the possibilities seem endless. If you’re somewhat famous in the 90s and can still walk properly without a cane, there’s a chance Sly’d offer you a role [that is if you didn’t demand $1 mil/per day pay check like Bruce Willis]. It turns out he IS expendable after all ahah, though he’s not exactly running out of work. This Summer he’s reprising his role as detective in Sin City 2, which guess what, opens just a week after Expendables 3 😀

So long as the demand is there, I think we can expect relative *young’uns* like Tom Cruise, Keanu Reeves and Johnny Depp, who are in the early 50s or will hit it this year, would be around for at least another decade or so.


So what do you think folks? Do you wish these aging stars would retire already or are you loving the perpetual trend of aging stars in action?

Breaking Emotions Blogathon: Tears & Surprise

BreakingEmotions_Banner

When I first read about this blogathon, it was Sati’s post on Breaking Emotions: Fear I knew I had to take part! Thanks Mettel Ray for spearheading this awesome blogathon!

Here’s the BLOGATHON idea and rules:

Well, the idea of the Breaking Emotions blogathon is actually really simple: breaking down the most memorable scenes in movies that create the emotion(s) given to you during that particular week into a list of 3 or 5. Meaning, each week I will post two emotions (there are 8 all together) and all the participants can choose if they want to do both (3 scenes each) or just one (5 scenes).

The lists can be just words, images, videos, all of the above or simply the movie title and the description of that specific scene – it is all up to each participant themselves to decide. I just simply want to know what are the movie scenes that create these emotions and if there are any universal moments in movies that everybody seems to relate to emotionally.

Now here’s this week’s emotions and what Mettel Ray’s idea about them:

TEARS and SURPRISE

Now I know TEARS isn’t exactly an emotion but I just like the sound of “breaking tears” over “breaking sadness” and since I’m pretty sure tears are the most emotional thing a person can have, you guys won’t mind. Last time there were some questions regarding the emotions so I’ll try to explain the best as I can this time around – tears = sad. Yes, there are happy tears but I’m not looking for positive scenes, I’m looking for those soul cracking, heart breaking, Simba’s father dying kind of teary scenes.

BreakingTears_Surprise

To balance the sadness, let’s try to break SURPRISE as well – that’s an emotion I rarely have myself because I feel so many movies are becoming predictable but there are some special scenes out there I’m sure. So basically, I’m looking for a plot twist scene that surprised you, or a character’s decision that surprised you, or finding out that somebody is actually somebody’s child kind of surprise – dig deep and find those scenes that surprised you in a jaw dropping way.

Check out Mettel Ray’s post on Breaking Emotions: Tears & Surprise


It should be obvious for posts like these, but just in case, if you haven’t seen any of these, BEWARE OF SPOILERS!

Ok, so here are my picks:

TEARS

Toy Story 2When She Loved Me

Jesse pours her heart out to Woody about how she was cast aside by her owner Emily when she became a teenager. The scenes of Jesse being found under her bed after being there for years, only to be put into a charity donation box is just heartbreaking! Every time I heard that Randy Newman’s song When She Loved Me song, I can’t ever NOT cry! The sheer devastation of being abandoned just tears me to pieces. Yes I know she’s just a toy, but that’s the beauty of Pixar in creating something that’s SO relatable. Surely we’ve felt discarded at some point or another.

Indecent Proposal finale

A married woman – with her husband’s consent – agrees to a proposal from a billionaire to sleep with her for a million dollars. They see this is as a way out of their financial dilemma, but it threatens to destroy their relationship.


This is actually not a sad scene per se, I think poignant is a more apt word. I included it here as what this couple’s gone through is quite heartbreaking. As someone who’ve been married for a decade, I realize just how crucial it is trust is in a relationship, and an emotional wound is a lot tougher to mend than a physical one, and the two are so interconnected. As I watched this, I was so saddened and moved by the fragility of the human heart. I feared that in they might never be able to survive their own gut-wrenching decision. They risked all that they’ve built together for money… This scene always made me bawl my eyes out thinking what it could’ve been, so much emotion are going through me and John Barry’s beautiful music just adds so much more to this poignant scene.

AtonementThe revelation about what really happened to Robbie and Cecilia

Earlier in the film we saw that the lives of Robbie n Cecilia are irrevocably changed when Cecilia’s sister Briony told a lie out of jealousy. In the last scene when Briony Tallis finally revealed during an interview about her new book, she finally revealed the tragic fate of both Robbie n Cecilia, one died of septicimia n the other in a bomb blast afew months later. So the happy reunion never happened, it was merely Briony’s way to somehow give Cecilia and Robbie their chance to be together in her book, if not in real life.

Atonement_Tears

I was sobbing uncontrollably during this scene. I’ve seen tales of lost love before but there’s something so heart-wrenching abt this story that pierces my heart. Robbie’s cold, pale face as he’s dying from his infected wound lingers haunts me long affer fhe film ends but it’s also the crushing reality that Briony has had to live with that burden of not being able to really atone for her sins.

SURPRISE

The Sixth Sense ending

It’s rare these days to be thoroughly n absolutely surprised by a movie’s plot, esp with the social media running rampant. When I saw this film in the theater I was totally floored when I finally realized who Bruce Willis’ character was all along. I haven’t rewatched it since but I often thought about all the clues I missed along the way (especially the dinner scene with his wife). Such a startling revelation that I still vividly remember to this day as it was such a strong emotional response. I wish Willis would do more understated roles like this one.

SixthSense_RedDoor

Deep Blue Sea – Samuel L. Jackson’s demise

I wanted to include a scene that surprises me but in a rather comical way. Well this one fits the bill. Ok it’s not a great movie or anything but worth a watch if you like shark thrillers (who hasn’t?.) This one is truly a huge WTF moment that happened as Sam Jackson’s character is giving a speech to his team about survival, but before he could finish the sentence about sealing off the pool, the giant fish just grabbed him n ate him alive! It was like WHOA!!! Ok so it’s not exactly funny to see someone get eaten alive by a big fish, but I just can’t help laughing hysterically at the irony of it all.

L.A. Confidential – Rollo Tamasi scene

Captain Dudley Smith: Don’t start tryin’ to do the right thing, boy-o. You haven’t the practice.


The complex roller coaster ride of this noir is delightfully dizzying. I remember that my head was spinning trying to process it all but the dialog, acting, cinematography was SO good I was mesmerized. This one scene features a great dialog between James Cromwell (Capt. Dudley Smith) and Kevin Spacey (Jack Vincennes), but what happens next totally came out of left field that it made me jump out of my seat. It was what you call a breathtaking moment, well for Spacey’s character, it’s a literal one.


What do you think of my picks? Which scenes would YOU pick for each emotion?

Weekend Viewing Roundup, Quick Thoughts on Comic-Con, & RED 2 review

Hello everyone! Hope you had an awesome weekend. If you happen to be at Comic-con the past few days, then I’m sure you had a blast (and you know I’m so green with envy!!) It made me feel a bit nostalgic seeing all those SDCC pics, maybe one day I’ll make it there again. Now, I haven’t read all the highlights from the big event but if I were at Hall H on Saturday, these two would’ve surely been the most scream-worthy panels!!

XMenDaysOfFuturePastCast
Click for a larger version

Just LOOK at this X-Men: Days of Future Past cast… I mean seriously!!! It’s incredible how good Hugh Jackman still looks after his breakthrough role as Wolverine thirteen years ago. Can’t wait for this movie already!

LokiComicCon2013
Thor who? Loki ruled Hall H!

I LOVE Tom Hiddleston‘s theatrical style and boy, this would’ve been the closest thing a lot of the Comic-con goers to seeing him ‘on stage.’ He certainly brought the house down with his performance! You can watch a video of it here.

Well, my weekend was ok (well considering I wasn’t at Comic-con), but hey, I got to see TREMORS, thanks to Cinekatz‘ Not-So-Secret Santa Review Swap in which I was “gifted” the monster flick from 1990 (review coming soon). I also rewatched Pacific Rim at IMAX Saturday night, which looks absolutely glorious in the giant screen. So that’s TWO monster movies in one weekend, which is a record for me 😀

Tremors
TREMORS
PacRim
PACIFIC RIM

I also got to re-watch one of my favorite superhero movies of all time. Well, even with a slew of comic-book movies since, I still rate this very high on my list. Batman Begins is one of the movies I’d bring if I were stranded in a desert island and I’d definitely pick it again in a heartbeat!

BatmanBegins
BATMAN BEGINS

Now, here’s my new release review from the screening a few days ago:

RED2poster

Though I enjoyed the first movie, I wasn’t exactly looking forward to the sequel. The only main draw for me is the cast and really, that’s the main highlight of this movie and the filmmakers knew that. You don’t go into these kinds of movies looking for an engaging story or character study, but you know what, they didn’t pretend to be a bombastic, over-the-top action flick so I still end up enjoying this quite a bit.

There’s really no point talking about the plot here, as the story is set up in such a way where it actually suits the actors playing these cartoonish characters. It’s as if the filmmakers had a checklist of what they want these actors to do in the movie and so the plot is written around that, if that makes sense. Seems like the actors are hired to do what they do best, some of them even did a parody to their famous characters they’ve done in the past (you’ll know it when you see it). The Retired-Extremely-Dangerous gang is once again on the run, being chased left and right as they attempt to solve the puzzle of finding a portable nuclear device.

Red2Stills

It’s too bad Karl Urban isn’t back to reprise his role as he was one of the highlights for me in the first movie. Also, instead of Morgan Freeman, we’ve got another seasoned actor (both happen to be 76 years old!) Anthony Hopkins. Nice to see him doing a comedic role though he’s not as fun to watch as Freeman.

Bruce Willis is back as Frank, which is basically a variation of John McClane (seems like Bruce is done with playing any other characters these days). Mary Louis Parker gets more screen time this time as his love interest Sarah, which is fine by me and she, along with John Malkovich‘s Marvin are the real comic relief in this movie. Their scenes together, especially the car chase all over Paris in a white Citroën, are preposterous fun. I guess you could describe the movie in that way as well. I don’t think I’d have enjoyed this movie as much if it weren’t for the actors. I love watching Dame Helen Mirren reprising her bad ass role of Victoria and her car case with Byung-hun Lee is hysterical! It’s right up there with all the outrageous action in those Fast & Furious movies.

Red2_DameMirren

I think the weakest link for me is Catherine Zeta-Jones as a Russian femme-fatale who used to be Frank’s lover. Her character is so darn boring and her romance with Willis’ character just falls flat. “Katja’s Frank’s ‘kryptonite,” Marvin explained to Sarah, which then drives her to do all kinds of jealous-driven shenanigans to one-up Katja. I do like charismatic Korean actor Byung-hun Lee here (not a bad replacement for Mr. Urban) who has a personal vendetta with Frank. He’s clearly hired for his awesome fighting skills and he totally delivered on that front.

Final Thoughts: The A-list cast seems to have a great time making this and it shows. Whilst it still brings the laughs and I was entertained for the most part, I do think the writing is so lazy and derivative. I hope they’re done with this movie, I mean how many franchises does Bruce Willis need?! I’m being generous here with my rating, because Mirren, Parker and Malkovich made me laugh so hard in this movie! Oh, there’s also Brian Cox in a small but memorable role, so yeah, there are TWO British thespians who’ve played Hannibal Lecter on screen!

3 out of 5 reels


Well, that’s my weekend recap. What did YOU watch this weekend?