Julianne Moore stars in this odd movie, about blindess mysteriously sweeping the planet. The victims just see white but their eyes appear normal and the medical community can not explain it.
Mark Ruffalo is also in the movie, he plays an opomologist who falls victim to this strange disease right at the outset. He performed impressively in the well laid out Zodiac movie.
Danny Glover has a small role in this movie. This movie has a strange twist, most of the movie takes place in a disgusting prison with three wards and one ward begins to hoard the food, only trading it for the jewelry. Ruffalo is a wimp doctor who falls for this ploy, after the jewelry is gone from the two other ward, the bully ward which has a gun and is run by a sadistic dictator, then demands the other two wards offer their woman for the food. The story Animal Farm or 1984 comes to mind but this story is much more fantastical. The science on how this disease operates goes down the drain. The outside world is not shown, this movie is just difficult to watch. The depravity of mankind is shown, or the wimpiness of it.
Julianne Moore can see throughout the movie and she choses to live and reside in this hell hole. Her husband is Ruffalo and she loves him so much she chooses to remain and take care of him. After about three days, he detests this since she is more of his mother or nurse. Why she just does not sneak over to the ward and sneak some food out is beyond me. She can see, the only one in there who can see, she chooses not take advantage of this. If one thinks Children of Men is hard to watch, this movie makes that seem like Rocky 4, Predator, or Shawshank Redemption.
When they fight back, a fire breaks out, and they have to escape. Julianne pleads to the guards for help. In doing so, she pushes open the door and opens the large fence. Before, she would have been shot for doing this or trying to. She walks outside the compound and realizes they are free, no one is watching over them. They walk outside and the outside city is in disaray. Trash everywhere, society has broken down. About 1/3rd into the movie, Glover's character explains to Ruffalo's ward that there were plane, car, and truck crashes, people just stopped driving any where. Which does not make sense since if one can see, then drive. Just drive slowly since apparently one can become blind in about 15 seconds or so.
About half way through the movie, Moore's character fights back by killing their leader who has already raped her. Ofcourse he deserved to die about five minutes after he began speaking, especially after he declared himself the self proclaimed ruler of this ad hoc institution.
The movie ends with Moore taking her husband and some followers to their home by walking across town holding hands or a rope. By this point, many have died but falling down stairs or off ledges, starvation, or lack of water, what not. All of a sudden, one of the main characters, an Asian guy, regains his sight just as strangely as he lost it during the inception of the movie. The point of this movie is that our sight is important. This is as obvious as 2 x 3 = 6.
I would allocate this movie 1 star out of five. *
Glad this movie did not have the environmenalist theme thrust down our throat like M. Night Shyamalan's did to us with the The Happening, earlier this year. That entire central premise is based on wicked lies, Al Gore innuendo, and fabricated statistics. One bright aspect of this film. But this movie is not worth watching, I would not recommend it to anyone. Street Kings is worth watching for the third time before this movie is ever watched for the first time.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Lower Learning
Jason Biggs is still making a living playing the same soft, weak, and gutless person as he did in the American Pie movies.
Eva Longoria Parker, glad she took Tony's name without any fuss, starred in this movie. She was a school inspector and Biggs plays the VP at this terrible and ridiculous school.
Monica Potter has taken a step down from her criminal ways in the disappointing Mogan Freeman thriller A Long Came a Spider. She plays a teacher who does not teach her students anything because of her personal issues relating to a divorce.
The principal is the leading cause of this crooked and defunct school. Where teachers teach unrelated material, ignore the students and read their own magazines, set up school fights, allow bullies to terrorize physically weaker students, and are basically contributing to a disgusting learning atmosphere. This reminds me of my 8th grade year at Fern Bacon in South Sacramento.
Apparently, Biggs's character used to be a hostage negotiator which is about as believable as Nanci Pilosi attacking Iran rather than her own country.
This entire movie, evidently, consumes one day. In the morning, the principal is playing golf with one of the chosen students sitting in a portable child's pool while he tries to chip his golf balls into it.
The movie starts off with the P/E teacher attempting to do some jumping jacks but can not do one properly and has to sit down for a breather after 3 of them because he is over weight and out of shape. That was hilarious.
Another attractive face in this decent comedy is Jill Latiano.
The movie is funny, a total exageration of all lazy teacher's out there. I mean, even the dibilitating teacher's unions of the past 30 years would not defend the actions of half of the teachers profiled in this movie. One teacher drugs her students so they are quiet while she reads her favorite magazines. Most cuss and use terrible language in the range and right in front of their students. Potter does not teacher her students one thing all day long.
The principal accepts bribes from anything that breathes.
Biggs's character is pathetically weak apparently because Longoria did not accompany him to the high school dance. Yes, they attended the same high school. He squares down with the principal at the end of the movie while the principals finally capitulates. He realizes his leadership has set a horrendous example for a so called learning institution. Bigg's is trying to save the school from being shut down while the principal is hoping it is shut down by the district so he can escape with his long career of liquifying the school's capital for his own personal gain.
The ending was pretty weak and Biggs is notthat good of an actor, listening to him speak for that length of time is not appealing or inspiring. Longoria just stands there, seemingly waiting for her chance to speak. Poor directing writing. The movie had some cool music though.
I allocate this movie two stars out of five. * It is not as funny or sophisticated as Burn After Reading and does not match the magnitude of hilarity that Pineapple Express does.
Eva Longoria Parker, glad she took Tony's name without any fuss, starred in this movie. She was a school inspector and Biggs plays the VP at this terrible and ridiculous school.
Monica Potter has taken a step down from her criminal ways in the disappointing Mogan Freeman thriller A Long Came a Spider. She plays a teacher who does not teach her students anything because of her personal issues relating to a divorce.
The principal is the leading cause of this crooked and defunct school. Where teachers teach unrelated material, ignore the students and read their own magazines, set up school fights, allow bullies to terrorize physically weaker students, and are basically contributing to a disgusting learning atmosphere. This reminds me of my 8th grade year at Fern Bacon in South Sacramento.
Apparently, Biggs's character used to be a hostage negotiator which is about as believable as Nanci Pilosi attacking Iran rather than her own country.
This entire movie, evidently, consumes one day. In the morning, the principal is playing golf with one of the chosen students sitting in a portable child's pool while he tries to chip his golf balls into it.
The movie starts off with the P/E teacher attempting to do some jumping jacks but can not do one properly and has to sit down for a breather after 3 of them because he is over weight and out of shape. That was hilarious.
Another attractive face in this decent comedy is Jill Latiano.
The movie is funny, a total exageration of all lazy teacher's out there. I mean, even the dibilitating teacher's unions of the past 30 years would not defend the actions of half of the teachers profiled in this movie. One teacher drugs her students so they are quiet while she reads her favorite magazines. Most cuss and use terrible language in the range and right in front of their students. Potter does not teacher her students one thing all day long.
The principal accepts bribes from anything that breathes.
Biggs's character is pathetically weak apparently because Longoria did not accompany him to the high school dance. Yes, they attended the same high school. He squares down with the principal at the end of the movie while the principals finally capitulates. He realizes his leadership has set a horrendous example for a so called learning institution. Bigg's is trying to save the school from being shut down while the principal is hoping it is shut down by the district so he can escape with his long career of liquifying the school's capital for his own personal gain.
The ending was pretty weak and Biggs is notthat good of an actor, listening to him speak for that length of time is not appealing or inspiring. Longoria just stands there, seemingly waiting for her chance to speak. Poor directing writing. The movie had some cool music though.
I allocate this movie two stars out of five. * It is not as funny or sophisticated as Burn After Reading and does not match the magnitude of hilarity that Pineapple Express does.
Monday, October 27, 2008
W
Well, Oliver Stone is at it again. This movie depicts Bush's life. I am not sure how many people want to see a movie about this fellow, but that is not my concern. I would like to speak to Bill Clinton slightly more than Bush to ask him questions like: why did you not defend this country when Al Quaida was blowing us up all over the world? Did you think the community reinvestment act would lead to a housing crunch about 10 years later? Why did you throw your decrepid reputation down the drain further over a chunky girl when it could have been a hottie?
Josh Brolin plays George W. Bush. He performs as a looney tune character as most of this massive cast. Does W in real life call his dad "poppy?" I am not sure but that is funny. Stone totally played with history and facts in JFK, much like Dan Brown does with his novels.
Bush is a dead president and he did this to himself much like Clinton. I am not sure if Bush is a conservative, he just makes strange decisions, can not market ideas like social security reform when he is clearly on the right path, and seems to neglect his base. So why would Stone make this movie? The real W does not give a rat's ass about this movie or Stone's opinions or intentions.
Richard Dreyfuss is an outstanding Cheney, one of the few credible characters in this movie who does not seem to be purposely making a mockery of the person they are supposedly portraying. Elizabeth Banks is not a real Laura Bush, it is more of a mockery on her character, on how childlike she is in the movie. Brolin, from Stone's direction, makes W seems just totally Paris Hilton like. Perhaps at some point he was, but he squared himself away sometime before he became governor of Texas. So, yes, this movie is a slap at W but it will not influence history, will not bring back Stone's buddy Saddam Hussein, and not offer more defense options for Oliver Stone's precious criminals and Guantanomo Bay terrorists who believes should be allowed to walk free to rape and attack humanity.
Michael Gaston, who I never heard of, at the behest of Stone, and some costume director, looks like he is playing Gen. Tommy Franks for holloween.
This movie is a farce. Even the people who loath Bush, are they really going to sit through this?
Clinton beat Bush the elder in 1991 because Bush was tired. Bush was VP, CIA director, he was wore out. Probably should not even have run in the first place. But that is history. Clinton was a moderate, whereas his wife and Obama are further to the left, especially the latter.
James Cromwell has been in so many movies it is hard to believe I do not know his name. From The General's Daughter to Minority Report and even a terrible villian in the hit TV show 24, he performed admirably again. That has something to do with why casting directors still ring him for role after role.
People who disagree with the Iraq war fail to comprehend the alternative would have been to baby sit him while we patrol and enforce the historic north and south no fly zones in Iraq. This would have went on for decades, atleast Saddam's life time which would have went to about 2025. Fidel Castro is still hanging around. Saddam's sons were worse than him, while they torture people every day with Saddam's approval and encouragement. Saddam was doing his best to aid our enemies, support the Hamas and their suicide bombers in Isreal and Lebanon.
This movie has pretty good music, but the reason Stone tossed certain songs in there I do not think were chosen for altruistic purposes. Stone falls into the Alec Baldwin and Charlie Sheen camp, more French like, not proud Americans. Socialism and big government are their true causes.
Our current president did not realize or have a plan to how to handle the situation when the Iraq troops stopped fighting and our enemies chose to fight without a unfiform. Though it is settling down, the guerrilla war took many years and damaged the Bush presidency.
People ask where are the WMD's? Go ask the Kurds. Saddam used the chemical weapons on them in the late 1980's and the Iranians as well. So only the ignorant raise this argument. They could be in Syria now or buried in the desert or Iraq used them all up in the conflicts I just mentioned.
Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld performed well as he always does. Rumsfield's troop realignment plan was strategically sensical. I am not sure where it stands now. Why are we still in Germany? When did WWII end again? They want us in Poland and the Ukraine. Ofcourse the Germans like our money as well.
This movie just basically centers around the Iraq conflict and war. There was more to the Bush presidency than this.
I allocate this movie one star.* It was not humorous for the most part, I did not learn anything, and there was not any action. It was just a slightly appealing but overall frivlous documentary.
Josh Brolin plays George W. Bush. He performs as a looney tune character as most of this massive cast. Does W in real life call his dad "poppy?" I am not sure but that is funny. Stone totally played with history and facts in JFK, much like Dan Brown does with his novels.
Bush is a dead president and he did this to himself much like Clinton. I am not sure if Bush is a conservative, he just makes strange decisions, can not market ideas like social security reform when he is clearly on the right path, and seems to neglect his base. So why would Stone make this movie? The real W does not give a rat's ass about this movie or Stone's opinions or intentions.
Richard Dreyfuss is an outstanding Cheney, one of the few credible characters in this movie who does not seem to be purposely making a mockery of the person they are supposedly portraying. Elizabeth Banks is not a real Laura Bush, it is more of a mockery on her character, on how childlike she is in the movie. Brolin, from Stone's direction, makes W seems just totally Paris Hilton like. Perhaps at some point he was, but he squared himself away sometime before he became governor of Texas. So, yes, this movie is a slap at W but it will not influence history, will not bring back Stone's buddy Saddam Hussein, and not offer more defense options for Oliver Stone's precious criminals and Guantanomo Bay terrorists who believes should be allowed to walk free to rape and attack humanity.
Michael Gaston, who I never heard of, at the behest of Stone, and some costume director, looks like he is playing Gen. Tommy Franks for holloween.
This movie is a farce. Even the people who loath Bush, are they really going to sit through this?
Clinton beat Bush the elder in 1991 because Bush was tired. Bush was VP, CIA director, he was wore out. Probably should not even have run in the first place. But that is history. Clinton was a moderate, whereas his wife and Obama are further to the left, especially the latter.
James Cromwell has been in so many movies it is hard to believe I do not know his name. From The General's Daughter to Minority Report and even a terrible villian in the hit TV show 24, he performed admirably again. That has something to do with why casting directors still ring him for role after role.
People who disagree with the Iraq war fail to comprehend the alternative would have been to baby sit him while we patrol and enforce the historic north and south no fly zones in Iraq. This would have went on for decades, atleast Saddam's life time which would have went to about 2025. Fidel Castro is still hanging around. Saddam's sons were worse than him, while they torture people every day with Saddam's approval and encouragement. Saddam was doing his best to aid our enemies, support the Hamas and their suicide bombers in Isreal and Lebanon.
This movie has pretty good music, but the reason Stone tossed certain songs in there I do not think were chosen for altruistic purposes. Stone falls into the Alec Baldwin and Charlie Sheen camp, more French like, not proud Americans. Socialism and big government are their true causes.
Our current president did not realize or have a plan to how to handle the situation when the Iraq troops stopped fighting and our enemies chose to fight without a unfiform. Though it is settling down, the guerrilla war took many years and damaged the Bush presidency.
People ask where are the WMD's? Go ask the Kurds. Saddam used the chemical weapons on them in the late 1980's and the Iranians as well. So only the ignorant raise this argument. They could be in Syria now or buried in the desert or Iraq used them all up in the conflicts I just mentioned.
Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld performed well as he always does. Rumsfield's troop realignment plan was strategically sensical. I am not sure where it stands now. Why are we still in Germany? When did WWII end again? They want us in Poland and the Ukraine. Ofcourse the Germans like our money as well.
This movie just basically centers around the Iraq conflict and war. There was more to the Bush presidency than this.
I allocate this movie one star.* It was not humorous for the most part, I did not learn anything, and there was not any action. It was just a slightly appealing but overall frivlous documentary.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Burn After Reading
George Clooney was funny in this movie, this movie was goofy. Was it Pineapple Express? Hardly, perhaps for older folks. Pineapple Express was the comedy movie of the year, beating Adam Sandler's and Ben Stiller's comdies this year, among many others. But this movie was funny, and there are several hysterical scenes. Glad Clooney did something to cover up the disappointing Leatherheads. But in this one, he needed massive help.
Even the CIA agents in the comfortable and secure office are funny but unbeknowst to themselves. Ofcourse, in reality, and intentionally, they are quite amusing to the viewer.
It was refreshing to see Brad Pitt in a role like this because he can do it. He can play the geeky and innocent type role. But his innocense ended when he tried to sell some secret CIA notes and information back to the originator of this work. John Malkovich plays an ex CIA agent who seemingly lost this sensitive information in a workout facility Pitt and the unappealing Frances McDormand work at. She wants to profit off of this information any way possible to pay for her liposuction fantasies that her HMO will not cover. The funny aspect is she thinks they should pay for it. Their act is a felony and they, surely Pitt's character, get over their head. Who do they think they are messing with? They are not made for this clandenstine work. But apparently they are too greedy and avarice to realize it. Which makes the movie go. It is still sort of confusing how Malcovich's secret CIA information ended up so the janitor or anyone could find it on the floor at their gym.
Malkovich's character is fired from his CIA post but relays it to his wife that he quit. Tilda Swinton from the Narnia movies plays Malkovich's wife. She is upset since she believes he is just trying to use her for her income and benefits. As a result, she files for divorce and they fight and jab at each other from then on out. This movie has more than one subplot which all sort of merge at the end.
Tilda was and is also having an ongoing affair with Clooney. Tilda and Malcovich seemingly just spend time at their sailboat and home just to avoid each other. In Tilda's case, it is to carry on her affair.
Seeing Clooney and Malkovich in the same scenes and movie is pretty cool.
Clooney becomes paranoid towards the end thinking people are following him. Though after anyone takes a life, that could induce some rapid characteristical changes.
Malkovich's moron insults to his not so close wife's supervisor is funny at the end. Richard Jenkins is the actor. He is attracted to this employee, Richard Jenkins plays the gym manager who has a horrible ending in broad daylight.
I allocate this movie four out of five stars, for its wit and humor, creativity. ****
Even the CIA agents in the comfortable and secure office are funny but unbeknowst to themselves. Ofcourse, in reality, and intentionally, they are quite amusing to the viewer.
It was refreshing to see Brad Pitt in a role like this because he can do it. He can play the geeky and innocent type role. But his innocense ended when he tried to sell some secret CIA notes and information back to the originator of this work. John Malkovich plays an ex CIA agent who seemingly lost this sensitive information in a workout facility Pitt and the unappealing Frances McDormand work at. She wants to profit off of this information any way possible to pay for her liposuction fantasies that her HMO will not cover. The funny aspect is she thinks they should pay for it. Their act is a felony and they, surely Pitt's character, get over their head. Who do they think they are messing with? They are not made for this clandenstine work. But apparently they are too greedy and avarice to realize it. Which makes the movie go. It is still sort of confusing how Malcovich's secret CIA information ended up so the janitor or anyone could find it on the floor at their gym.
Malkovich's character is fired from his CIA post but relays it to his wife that he quit. Tilda Swinton from the Narnia movies plays Malkovich's wife. She is upset since she believes he is just trying to use her for her income and benefits. As a result, she files for divorce and they fight and jab at each other from then on out. This movie has more than one subplot which all sort of merge at the end.
Tilda was and is also having an ongoing affair with Clooney. Tilda and Malcovich seemingly just spend time at their sailboat and home just to avoid each other. In Tilda's case, it is to carry on her affair.
Seeing Clooney and Malkovich in the same scenes and movie is pretty cool.
Clooney becomes paranoid towards the end thinking people are following him. Though after anyone takes a life, that could induce some rapid characteristical changes.
Malkovich's moron insults to his not so close wife's supervisor is funny at the end. Richard Jenkins is the actor. He is attracted to this employee, Richard Jenkins plays the gym manager who has a horrible ending in broad daylight.
I allocate this movie four out of five stars, for its wit and humor, creativity. ****
Nights in Rodanthe
The title is almost unpronouncable. The movie is simple, taking place along the gorgeous Carolina coast. It is a love story, not my time. There fore this blog will be short. My type of love story is the Terminator, where something actually happens.
Diane Lane is teamed up again with Richard Gere, but this movie was not as dramatic nor was it supposed to be as Unfaithful. Untraceable earlier this year was pretty good though, creative but sickening.
Gere plays a doctor who lost a patient to freak accident and wants to set things straight with the dead patient's husband. Scott Glen plays the husband and works that accent exceptionally, his Carolina accent is impressive. Richard Gere's character is also having family problems, like Diane Lane's. So what happens is just predictable.
Gere wants to set things straight with the husband and the cute little coastal inn that Lane is babysitting for just happens to be in the area. Gere is staying at this inn, without Internet, which to me is just preposterous. Gere does have home cooked meals from Lane who seems to have nothing else to do but to get hollered at by her daughter, argue with her husband or ex husband, and make the inn nice and tidy. Apparently, she used to be a an artist. Now she has a so called family crisis.
Regarding Gere, I am not sure how a wealthy and successful Doctor can be in such personal agony? I think he should take a trip to Africa or China or so many other parts of this world to realize how good he has it. So the few people, mainly woman, who are caught up in this so called personal tragedy are actually narrow minded and shallow. Gere's problems pail in comparison to people who are losing their jobs and/or homes in the USA and so many others. Gere's character has the basics covered, forever, there is not any other issues to me. The movie is a farce, made for wimpering folks.
I can not offer it up any stars really, what would I compare it to? Other baseless movies? The writing was OK. Christopher Meloni from SVU wanted to get away from that show for a day so he took part. He is a fine actor.
James Franco also was in a supporting position and ironically, this movie was still better than Spiderman 2 and 3 combined.
The movie is terribly boring. When they are tossing away all of the food and acting like sport's stars, they were bonding, but what was the viewer supposed to do? Be amused? That scene was ridicuously corny. Oh well, I did not pay for it.
Diane Lane is teamed up again with Richard Gere, but this movie was not as dramatic nor was it supposed to be as Unfaithful. Untraceable earlier this year was pretty good though, creative but sickening.
Gere plays a doctor who lost a patient to freak accident and wants to set things straight with the dead patient's husband. Scott Glen plays the husband and works that accent exceptionally, his Carolina accent is impressive. Richard Gere's character is also having family problems, like Diane Lane's. So what happens is just predictable.
Gere wants to set things straight with the husband and the cute little coastal inn that Lane is babysitting for just happens to be in the area. Gere is staying at this inn, without Internet, which to me is just preposterous. Gere does have home cooked meals from Lane who seems to have nothing else to do but to get hollered at by her daughter, argue with her husband or ex husband, and make the inn nice and tidy. Apparently, she used to be a an artist. Now she has a so called family crisis.
Regarding Gere, I am not sure how a wealthy and successful Doctor can be in such personal agony? I think he should take a trip to Africa or China or so many other parts of this world to realize how good he has it. So the few people, mainly woman, who are caught up in this so called personal tragedy are actually narrow minded and shallow. Gere's problems pail in comparison to people who are losing their jobs and/or homes in the USA and so many others. Gere's character has the basics covered, forever, there is not any other issues to me. The movie is a farce, made for wimpering folks.
I can not offer it up any stars really, what would I compare it to? Other baseless movies? The writing was OK. Christopher Meloni from SVU wanted to get away from that show for a day so he took part. He is a fine actor.
James Franco also was in a supporting position and ironically, this movie was still better than Spiderman 2 and 3 combined.
The movie is terribly boring. When they are tossing away all of the food and acting like sport's stars, they were bonding, but what was the viewer supposed to do? Be amused? That scene was ridicuously corny. Oh well, I did not pay for it.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Max Payne
Mark Wahlberg was another action movie but this movie was been redone and brought to life so many times now. Olga Kurylenko was the true bright spot in the movie, she is just absolutely stunning and James Bond will spend time with her soon.
Mark Walhberg has been in a string of hits but he hit a speed bump here. This movie was nothing on Shooter, not even in the same region of the The Departed, and not near the level of We Own the Night. The Departed being the best one here by far.
Walhberg playing the lone detective, which is the title, Max Payne, the independent hero which has been portrayed dozens of times and even more in law enforcement movies. The plot was laid out more fully about half way through the movie. A company made a drug for the military that makes one feel invinciple. A few could some how fight better and had increase stamina. Chris O'Donnell's character explains to us while Payne just whales on him in the former's office that this drug was a spectacular disaster. This drug only had a 1% success rate. Most others were uncontrollable, out of control, seeing hallucinations. Supposedly, the company that sponsor's this drug said it was the reason we are winning the war on terror.
So, Hollywood goes down this road. The surge won, we have knocked the terrorists around the world for a while, and some writer(s) thought of this idea. It is creative but this movie draws some dark scenes from Keanu Reeve's biblical and allegorical action movie Constantine. Constantine was not that impressive though. Why this title? I guess the creativity ended with the short plot storyline.
The bad white cop who is also is responsible for killing Walberg's wife, this has been done so many times in movies it would take too long to think of the movies with this same ending. Mila Kunis is in this movie, I do not know allot about her. But I do know she is no Olga.
Ludacris can not act that well, that just undermines any credibility this movie was supposed to have. His political statements in reality are just absurd as well.
Amaury Nolasco is using his Prison Break clout to work for him. He is the villian who appears to be a demon. Supposedly it has to do with some tattoo and getting to heaven by dying in action. I think they said, or some tattoo artist, it is Norse God story. This is just some of the information Payne digs up along his way with Kunis's character Mona Sax being present here. Nolasco's character was one of the main villians, a former military member who apparently is hooked on the drug, has his own posse, and kills for the fun of it.
This movie is not as good as Street Kings. Nothing on Eagle Eye and not even close to Body of Lies. And does not approach any level near one episode of Prison Break. Olga is worth half the movie. Kind of cold to be dressed how she is in this movie.
I would allocate this movie two stars out of five. **
Mark Walhberg has been in a string of hits but he hit a speed bump here. This movie was nothing on Shooter, not even in the same region of the The Departed, and not near the level of We Own the Night. The Departed being the best one here by far.
Walhberg playing the lone detective, which is the title, Max Payne, the independent hero which has been portrayed dozens of times and even more in law enforcement movies. The plot was laid out more fully about half way through the movie. A company made a drug for the military that makes one feel invinciple. A few could some how fight better and had increase stamina. Chris O'Donnell's character explains to us while Payne just whales on him in the former's office that this drug was a spectacular disaster. This drug only had a 1% success rate. Most others were uncontrollable, out of control, seeing hallucinations. Supposedly, the company that sponsor's this drug said it was the reason we are winning the war on terror.
So, Hollywood goes down this road. The surge won, we have knocked the terrorists around the world for a while, and some writer(s) thought of this idea. It is creative but this movie draws some dark scenes from Keanu Reeve's biblical and allegorical action movie Constantine. Constantine was not that impressive though. Why this title? I guess the creativity ended with the short plot storyline.
The bad white cop who is also is responsible for killing Walberg's wife, this has been done so many times in movies it would take too long to think of the movies with this same ending. Mila Kunis is in this movie, I do not know allot about her. But I do know she is no Olga.
Ludacris can not act that well, that just undermines any credibility this movie was supposed to have. His political statements in reality are just absurd as well.
Amaury Nolasco is using his Prison Break clout to work for him. He is the villian who appears to be a demon. Supposedly it has to do with some tattoo and getting to heaven by dying in action. I think they said, or some tattoo artist, it is Norse God story. This is just some of the information Payne digs up along his way with Kunis's character Mona Sax being present here. Nolasco's character was one of the main villians, a former military member who apparently is hooked on the drug, has his own posse, and kills for the fun of it.
This movie is not as good as Street Kings. Nothing on Eagle Eye and not even close to Body of Lies. And does not approach any level near one episode of Prison Break. Olga is worth half the movie. Kind of cold to be dressed how she is in this movie.
I would allocate this movie two stars out of five. **
Friday, October 17, 2008
Quarantine
Jennifer Carpenter returns in this live footage film. She is not that attractive and she gains the most gruesome roles. I will forget her as her powerful role in the frightening movie The Exorcism of Emily Rose.
Jay Hernandez has also been in some nasty movies. But Hostile was so ridiculous to be taken serious. This movie he is a fireman whose name is Jake. Jennifer is a new reporter named Angela. I did not recognize any other actors but that could be because the movie was dark. The movie is filmed like Cloverfield, there is an opening for a sequel. But this movie is a copy of 28 days later but slightly more realistic since the bite victims do not turn into pysycho savages in seconds, it takes several minutes in this nutcase film.
Cloverfield was more original and was blanketed with gorgeous females.
Quarantine has been done so many times, I would not pay for it. It is not intended to be a blockbuster and is surly not going to reach Blairwitch numbers.
The plot consists for a fire crew responding a distress call from an apartment building some where in LA. A reporting team from a small show just happens to be tagging along. The first ten minutes of this is almost unwatchable with Angela flirting with the firemen and acting totally ignorant. Everything she is told, anyone with half a clue already knows about who is older than 16. After arriving to this building and seeing this nutcase older woman attack one of the police officers who arrives as well, they can not exit the building. The doors are somehow sealed shut and the police officer later turns into a violent savage. The biological entity that creates this is some sort of steriod or hybrid form of rabies. There happens to be a veterinarian in the apartment building who does explain to the viewer that rabies does not have a known cure. OK, so I learned one thing in this movie. This movie is just another form of Cujo but even more ridiculous as Stephen King's tale.
The movie does not have a pleasant ending. Apparently some wacko on the top floor, I believe the 4th, was hiding an infected human for a while. He must have been bit by a dog that was confiscated by an animal laboratory. So that storyline was a copy of the first 3 minutes of a much better film 28 Days Later.
The sequel to Cloverfield would be interesting.
This movie is allocated one star. *
Jay Hernandez has also been in some nasty movies. But Hostile was so ridiculous to be taken serious. This movie he is a fireman whose name is Jake. Jennifer is a new reporter named Angela. I did not recognize any other actors but that could be because the movie was dark. The movie is filmed like Cloverfield, there is an opening for a sequel. But this movie is a copy of 28 days later but slightly more realistic since the bite victims do not turn into pysycho savages in seconds, it takes several minutes in this nutcase film.
Cloverfield was more original and was blanketed with gorgeous females.
Quarantine has been done so many times, I would not pay for it. It is not intended to be a blockbuster and is surly not going to reach Blairwitch numbers.
The plot consists for a fire crew responding a distress call from an apartment building some where in LA. A reporting team from a small show just happens to be tagging along. The first ten minutes of this is almost unwatchable with Angela flirting with the firemen and acting totally ignorant. Everything she is told, anyone with half a clue already knows about who is older than 16. After arriving to this building and seeing this nutcase older woman attack one of the police officers who arrives as well, they can not exit the building. The doors are somehow sealed shut and the police officer later turns into a violent savage. The biological entity that creates this is some sort of steriod or hybrid form of rabies. There happens to be a veterinarian in the apartment building who does explain to the viewer that rabies does not have a known cure. OK, so I learned one thing in this movie. This movie is just another form of Cujo but even more ridiculous as Stephen King's tale.
The movie does not have a pleasant ending. Apparently some wacko on the top floor, I believe the 4th, was hiding an infected human for a while. He must have been bit by a dog that was confiscated by an animal laboratory. So that storyline was a copy of the first 3 minutes of a much better film 28 Days Later.
The sequel to Cloverfield would be interesting.
This movie is allocated one star. *
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Body of Lies
Another winner by Ridley Scott. But this movie does not have the dramatic ending that his award winning movie Black Hawk Down did. Leonardo DiCaprio chooses another winner, but it is not The Departed in having such a complete cast or wonderful ending.
The powerful contrast offered by Ridley Scott comes down to patience. It is why us Americans are not having the success in gathering intel from our enemies as we would like or expect. The Chinese are the ultimate with this weapon: time. The Chinese have child agents that will be raised in America, attend our universities, and then work for our major companies and pass on trade or company secrets to their long time secret Chinese handlers. This movie shows the patience of Jordanian intelligence, using human intelligence and not relying on the fancy gadgets that Americans are now using. Both should be utilized.
Was this movie a slap in the face of the CIA or our methods in this struggle against jihad? That is up to the viewer, or the intelligent viewers that can detect this cinematic subtlety. I do not think it is, Russel Crowe, at the end, informs DiCaprio's character, "no one really likes the middle east." How about Dubai or Abu Dhabi, two of the most stunning and new cities on the face of this planet? Compared to some of the crumbing parts of America and violent gangs spread across the USA. I do not think someone needs to like the middle east to fight violent Islam effectively. But ofcourse they need to understand the enemy and have arab looking and speaking allies. This movie displays the shortage we have in that area. Crowe's character at the end took Dicaprio's character for granted, just assuming he would hop on for another ride, wrong move and attitude. Too unsympathetic to build loyalty.
Back to The Departed comparison, being undercover in Boston and infiltrating the Irish Mafia is just as dangerous as being an under cover CIA agent in Jordan and spying on terrorists.
Russell Crowe's lines are outstanding, especially in the beginning to some Washington beauracrats.
Al Saline is a fictional terrorist who is supposed to be Osama Bin Ladin. The CIA plays a trick on him by using a plan concocted by DiCaprio's character Roger Ferris. Ferris blows up a US military barracks in Incirik Turkey. The bodies used are fake, it is fabricated. The idea is to make Al Saline jealous to flush him out after a safe house is destroyed in Jordan. Most of the movie takes place in Jordan but the US is shown periodically and other parts if the middle east are shown like Dubai for instance. The plan is intriguing but the ending of this movie is disappointing.
Why does Ferris fall for a girl in his line of work in that part of the world? Ridiculous. Then she is kidnappned which I did not think would happen since I would think Ridley Scott would not copy so many other movies. For instance, Lethal Weapon II and various other action packed movies have already ran this idea into the ground.
Ferris is tortured at the end or punished. Which is one good idea in this movie. The difference between punishment and torture was explained in vivid detail in this movie. I liked that, the left may not. It may not be OK to torture someone, but punishing someone is acceptable.
The first half of this movie had the best action, the ending of this movie which I already harped on is weak. Ferris grows weary of the CIA's intentions and plans. He seems the war on terror is futile. They knew Ferris was going to be taken away, why they did not put a GPS tracker on him is beyond me. They had the Global Hawk spy plane or other spy flying machines througout this movie. They displayed the knowledge of high tech devices, put a GPS tracker on him.
The Jordan intelligence cheif at the end of the movie grabs his man, arrests the top ranked terrorist-Al Saline-without incident. He seems to be a fair guy until he is revealed at the end as the man who kidnaps Ferris's girl and tortures him-or punishes? Neither is pleasant for the one submitted to this treatment. But, it is not suppose to be and with all the villians on this planet attacking us solid citizens, it is good some feel physical retribution. Not so much in the US though. I never did trust the Jordanian intelligence chief, but Crowe's character is never that trust worthy either.
This movie was better written than Eagle Eye which makes it slightly better. Neither are great, neither are The Kingdom or DeJaVu, not even close to the latter. I would say Shooter beats both these recent, 2008, Hollywood attractions.
Atleast Hollywood knows or presents radical Islam in their true light. Unlike movies like Die Hard 4 who decided to revert back to the techno white guy as the chief antagonist.
Crowe was clearly better in Master and Commander and LA Confidential. Crowe was laid back in this movie, playing the pencil pusher who is unwilling to give up. He is the quintessential patriotic CIA man. This movie does illustrate we do not have enough Arab speaking or Arab personnel working for us, gathering intelligence in the middle east. Which is what is making this war on terror so frightening and uncertain. Crowe's character exemplifies that hard headeness and inability to listen and accept another method. American's do not have allot of patience, neither do I, but perhaps there should be some CIA agents that understand that some problems require long term solutions.
This movie is allotted four stars. ****
The powerful contrast offered by Ridley Scott comes down to patience. It is why us Americans are not having the success in gathering intel from our enemies as we would like or expect. The Chinese are the ultimate with this weapon: time. The Chinese have child agents that will be raised in America, attend our universities, and then work for our major companies and pass on trade or company secrets to their long time secret Chinese handlers. This movie shows the patience of Jordanian intelligence, using human intelligence and not relying on the fancy gadgets that Americans are now using. Both should be utilized.
Was this movie a slap in the face of the CIA or our methods in this struggle against jihad? That is up to the viewer, or the intelligent viewers that can detect this cinematic subtlety. I do not think it is, Russel Crowe, at the end, informs DiCaprio's character, "no one really likes the middle east." How about Dubai or Abu Dhabi, two of the most stunning and new cities on the face of this planet? Compared to some of the crumbing parts of America and violent gangs spread across the USA. I do not think someone needs to like the middle east to fight violent Islam effectively. But ofcourse they need to understand the enemy and have arab looking and speaking allies. This movie displays the shortage we have in that area. Crowe's character at the end took Dicaprio's character for granted, just assuming he would hop on for another ride, wrong move and attitude. Too unsympathetic to build loyalty.
Back to The Departed comparison, being undercover in Boston and infiltrating the Irish Mafia is just as dangerous as being an under cover CIA agent in Jordan and spying on terrorists.
Russell Crowe's lines are outstanding, especially in the beginning to some Washington beauracrats.
Al Saline is a fictional terrorist who is supposed to be Osama Bin Ladin. The CIA plays a trick on him by using a plan concocted by DiCaprio's character Roger Ferris. Ferris blows up a US military barracks in Incirik Turkey. The bodies used are fake, it is fabricated. The idea is to make Al Saline jealous to flush him out after a safe house is destroyed in Jordan. Most of the movie takes place in Jordan but the US is shown periodically and other parts if the middle east are shown like Dubai for instance. The plan is intriguing but the ending of this movie is disappointing.
Why does Ferris fall for a girl in his line of work in that part of the world? Ridiculous. Then she is kidnappned which I did not think would happen since I would think Ridley Scott would not copy so many other movies. For instance, Lethal Weapon II and various other action packed movies have already ran this idea into the ground.
Ferris is tortured at the end or punished. Which is one good idea in this movie. The difference between punishment and torture was explained in vivid detail in this movie. I liked that, the left may not. It may not be OK to torture someone, but punishing someone is acceptable.
The first half of this movie had the best action, the ending of this movie which I already harped on is weak. Ferris grows weary of the CIA's intentions and plans. He seems the war on terror is futile. They knew Ferris was going to be taken away, why they did not put a GPS tracker on him is beyond me. They had the Global Hawk spy plane or other spy flying machines througout this movie. They displayed the knowledge of high tech devices, put a GPS tracker on him.
The Jordan intelligence cheif at the end of the movie grabs his man, arrests the top ranked terrorist-Al Saline-without incident. He seems to be a fair guy until he is revealed at the end as the man who kidnaps Ferris's girl and tortures him-or punishes? Neither is pleasant for the one submitted to this treatment. But, it is not suppose to be and with all the villians on this planet attacking us solid citizens, it is good some feel physical retribution. Not so much in the US though. I never did trust the Jordanian intelligence chief, but Crowe's character is never that trust worthy either.
This movie was better written than Eagle Eye which makes it slightly better. Neither are great, neither are The Kingdom or DeJaVu, not even close to the latter. I would say Shooter beats both these recent, 2008, Hollywood attractions.
Atleast Hollywood knows or presents radical Islam in their true light. Unlike movies like Die Hard 4 who decided to revert back to the techno white guy as the chief antagonist.
Crowe was clearly better in Master and Commander and LA Confidential. Crowe was laid back in this movie, playing the pencil pusher who is unwilling to give up. He is the quintessential patriotic CIA man. This movie does illustrate we do not have enough Arab speaking or Arab personnel working for us, gathering intelligence in the middle east. Which is what is making this war on terror so frightening and uncertain. Crowe's character exemplifies that hard headeness and inability to listen and accept another method. American's do not have allot of patience, neither do I, but perhaps there should be some CIA agents that understand that some problems require long term solutions.
This movie is allotted four stars. ****
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
My Best Friend's Girl
Dane Cook is funny, but I am not sure is one of the studliest dudes around. But somehow, he was handed this role. He probably auditioned for it, and he worked hard to obtain it. That is fine. But I think it was more for his comedic skills and communicational gifts, not his physical appearance. I am not gay or anything, but playing this role alongside Kate Hudson, a step down from Matthew McConaughey. But the latter is not as funny as Cook. Oh well, no one, including myself, is not perfect.
Jason Biggs plays the recurring role, the good guy, the average dude, whatever. Kate Hudson, I guess she trades off with Drew Berrymore, with 1-2 romantic comedies every year. Hudson, apparently, this is all she wants to do which is already more than anything her unnappealing mother ever did. Not sure what Kurt Russel ever saw in her-Goldie Hawn.
This movie was funny, and the liberal nutcase Alec Baldwin plays an amazing dirtbag father.
Dane Cook has some hilarious scenes at his work. He plays a cubicle customer service representative who is totally indifferent to customers. Unix is the product he protects or works for and his number one role, evidently he made management, is to never offer a refund. This is their top priority in the office and he loves to stare at the new girl with his black buddy, who is funny in his own right, as she walks by. The new co worker is trying to get noticed since she wears tight pants every day.
Dane Cook plays a jerk for hire to make other guys look good to ex girl friends. The plot may be narrowly original. Allot of attractive females are in the movie, more attractive than the skinny Kate Hudson.
This movie is about 1/10 Pineapple Express and 1/5 Tropic Thunder. The happy and typical ending is present. The only suspense is who will end up kissing Hudson is Dane or Biggs. The music was average, decently chosen, but nothing memorable. Cook had the ultimate anti and derogatory female hip hop music in the movie. That was modestly funny. Cook was pretty funny in some scenes though, I will give him that.
I allocate this movie two stars out of five. **
Jason Biggs plays the recurring role, the good guy, the average dude, whatever. Kate Hudson, I guess she trades off with Drew Berrymore, with 1-2 romantic comedies every year. Hudson, apparently, this is all she wants to do which is already more than anything her unnappealing mother ever did. Not sure what Kurt Russel ever saw in her-Goldie Hawn.
This movie was funny, and the liberal nutcase Alec Baldwin plays an amazing dirtbag father.
Dane Cook has some hilarious scenes at his work. He plays a cubicle customer service representative who is totally indifferent to customers. Unix is the product he protects or works for and his number one role, evidently he made management, is to never offer a refund. This is their top priority in the office and he loves to stare at the new girl with his black buddy, who is funny in his own right, as she walks by. The new co worker is trying to get noticed since she wears tight pants every day.
Dane Cook plays a jerk for hire to make other guys look good to ex girl friends. The plot may be narrowly original. Allot of attractive females are in the movie, more attractive than the skinny Kate Hudson.
This movie is about 1/10 Pineapple Express and 1/5 Tropic Thunder. The happy and typical ending is present. The only suspense is who will end up kissing Hudson is Dane or Biggs. The music was average, decently chosen, but nothing memorable. Cook had the ultimate anti and derogatory female hip hop music in the movie. That was modestly funny. Cook was pretty funny in some scenes though, I will give him that.
I allocate this movie two stars out of five. **
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Eagle Eye
Shia LaBeouf is back another blockbuster. Is it on the same level as Transformers, no, but it does supercede Will Smith's Enemy of the State. The latter is extremely similiar to this film. The anti Catholic and slaughterer of history Dan Brown may have some issues with this movie since the Artificial Intelligence portrayed in this movie resembles his AI in his book Digital Fortress. I just happen to read that book about 6 months ago and that ending in that book was typical and anti-military but that is another story.
Eagle Eye was riveting and the beginning was tremendous. As astonishing and exciting as the initial Ethiopia scenes in the movie Shooter with Mark Walhberg.
Rosario Dawson performs well and is in a better written movie than the garbage movie Men in Black II.
The stud and bad ass from the hit show The Shield prevails in this film as well, Michael Chiklis is outstanding. He plays the NSA top man who does not seem to be too content at the end when the AI computer present's her plan to him. Why her, it was a female voice througout. Remote controlled drones were in this movie, intense chase scenes, and large scale machines that were set up and manipulated to smash cars and other objects were instilled throughout this film. This movie was funny in the beginning, Shia is a solid actor. The card game in the beginning was hilarious, Shia just outsmarting and outwitting his fellow companions. Is he another DiCaprio? Who knows? He seems to have been drawn to the action packed movies allot quicker or sooner in his career. DiCaprio took the less popular films but those involved more skill to act those parts. What's Eating Gilbert Grape and the Basketball Diaries to name a few.
Billy Bob Thornton performed as usual, him and Shia getting on the same page towards the end and Thornton taking on the reaper towards the end. Thornton is a solid actor, he was hilarious in the movie Mr. Woodcock.
Anthony Mackie held his own, fighting the AI machine at the end. He was strong in We Are Marshall as well.
Eagle Eye's plot consisted of two people, and some others holding minor roles, working together to accomplish a mission. We are not sure who is ordering them around, it is a female voice. The movie I Robot had an AI like this who caused allot of problems as well ofcourse that movie, the world was at stake, this movie, just the heads of state. But the implications are massive nevertheless. Interesting, Shia was in that movie as well. Eagle Eye's viewers are not told who is ordered the characters around until the half way point. We scripted, the investigators also find out, or atleast Dawson's character does about the same time. No one knows why these things have occured. Or what will occur.
Michelle Monaghan is also in the high stakes movie. She was in Mission Impossible III, just as exciting and heart pounding. But MI3 had a human antagonist, this one does not. MI3 was probably better since it was a little more original. Eagle Eye borrowed large parts from I Robot and a book I have already given mention to.
But MI3 had complicated plans and schemes the characters developed in a span of a few hours which is just too ridiculous to contemplate. Michelle had a more central role in Eye compared to MI3 though.
Sonic triggers, exploding crystals, some impressive theoretical ideas or real ones? Not sure, but the dialogue is intriguing. The slow parts are character builders ofcourse and entertaining and necessary. No wasted scenes, the music is intense and flows with the spectacular scenes.
Is it better than I Robot? No, I can not say that. I Robot was much more original and went deeper in its robot/human novelties. It caused one to think a little more. But Eagle is solid, as good as Shooter, perhaps a little above that. One of the better action movies of this year. We will see the new James Bond can whip this. Since this movie is probably as exciting as Casino Royale though that movie had better looking females.
Eagle Eye is allocated three stars. ***
Eagle Eye was riveting and the beginning was tremendous. As astonishing and exciting as the initial Ethiopia scenes in the movie Shooter with Mark Walhberg.
Rosario Dawson performs well and is in a better written movie than the garbage movie Men in Black II.
The stud and bad ass from the hit show The Shield prevails in this film as well, Michael Chiklis is outstanding. He plays the NSA top man who does not seem to be too content at the end when the AI computer present's her plan to him. Why her, it was a female voice througout. Remote controlled drones were in this movie, intense chase scenes, and large scale machines that were set up and manipulated to smash cars and other objects were instilled throughout this film. This movie was funny in the beginning, Shia is a solid actor. The card game in the beginning was hilarious, Shia just outsmarting and outwitting his fellow companions. Is he another DiCaprio? Who knows? He seems to have been drawn to the action packed movies allot quicker or sooner in his career. DiCaprio took the less popular films but those involved more skill to act those parts. What's Eating Gilbert Grape and the Basketball Diaries to name a few.
Billy Bob Thornton performed as usual, him and Shia getting on the same page towards the end and Thornton taking on the reaper towards the end. Thornton is a solid actor, he was hilarious in the movie Mr. Woodcock.
Anthony Mackie held his own, fighting the AI machine at the end. He was strong in We Are Marshall as well.
Eagle Eye's plot consisted of two people, and some others holding minor roles, working together to accomplish a mission. We are not sure who is ordering them around, it is a female voice. The movie I Robot had an AI like this who caused allot of problems as well ofcourse that movie, the world was at stake, this movie, just the heads of state. But the implications are massive nevertheless. Interesting, Shia was in that movie as well. Eagle Eye's viewers are not told who is ordered the characters around until the half way point. We scripted, the investigators also find out, or atleast Dawson's character does about the same time. No one knows why these things have occured. Or what will occur.
Michelle Monaghan is also in the high stakes movie. She was in Mission Impossible III, just as exciting and heart pounding. But MI3 had a human antagonist, this one does not. MI3 was probably better since it was a little more original. Eagle Eye borrowed large parts from I Robot and a book I have already given mention to.
But MI3 had complicated plans and schemes the characters developed in a span of a few hours which is just too ridiculous to contemplate. Michelle had a more central role in Eye compared to MI3 though.
Sonic triggers, exploding crystals, some impressive theoretical ideas or real ones? Not sure, but the dialogue is intriguing. The slow parts are character builders ofcourse and entertaining and necessary. No wasted scenes, the music is intense and flows with the spectacular scenes.
Is it better than I Robot? No, I can not say that. I Robot was much more original and went deeper in its robot/human novelties. It caused one to think a little more. But Eagle is solid, as good as Shooter, perhaps a little above that. One of the better action movies of this year. We will see the new James Bond can whip this. Since this movie is probably as exciting as Casino Royale though that movie had better looking females.
Eagle Eye is allocated three stars. ***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)