Change Your Image
rmilljunk
Reviews
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)
Hopes were high, and well met
As is any fan of the well-written Harry Potter saga, I expected great things from this latest film installment: The Half-Blood Prince; with David Yates again at the helm why wouldn't I expect anything less? By 3:00AM I walked out of the the midnight showing tired, but happily entertained. This series is built for success from the start and this film carries it along just as well as the book did. There is so much to like about this film from the witty humor, suspenseful action, thrilling adventure, and breath-taking cinematography. This particular episode of the saga seems to be rooted in the real world (or Muggle World) rather than solely in the world of Hogwarts and Wizards. This gives the movie an excellent sense of drama and works well since the fantastical feel is kept alive throughout.
While the story and adventures are exciting and revealing it is really the characters and our love for them as viewers that really pulls in the audience. Once you're willing to go along the ride of their life with Harry, Ron, and Hermione (wonderfully portrayed by their rightful actors as usual) then you will find yourself truly sucked into the incredible events that are happening to them.
The movie clocks in at 2 hours and 33 minutes, but by the end the length shouldn't matter and the dull ache in your rear from the stone-like chairs at your movie theater should be put to the back burner due to the fresh story-telling of this movie. By the end I found myself crying out for more story and I will happily, and patiently, wait for the last couple installments.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince meets expectations and is a must see for this summer.
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)
I loved this movie!
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor had everything I could ever want in a movie:
The clichés are endless, the humor is therefore pitiful, the acting is abysmal, the storyline is exactly the same as the first two, the storyline is therefore awful, the special effects are mediocre by today's standards, the directing was evidently rushed, and the editing was choppy and nauseous.
I don't feel the need to give this movie that much attention because the movie didn't seem to give any to me.
"Oh here we go again!" -Best damn line I've ever heard!
Across the Universe (2007)
No longer the "Magical Mystery Tour"...
Usually when someone sets out to produce a musical, they contrive a story and then create the songs to emphasize certain points or aspects that make up the story. Julie Taymore went against the grain with Across The Universe by taking thirty-three already famous songs by The Beatles and letting those songs shape the story she wanted to tell.
...And what a mess it is.
Sure, this musical has it's good moments, mostly involving very original and innovative visuals and choreography, but it's low points and downfalls far outweigh the good! This musical accomplishes in creating some well-planned feel good moments, but ultimately fails in mashing together beloved songs into pointless and choppy nuances and obnoxious propaganda.
Before I continue let me make it very clear that although I seem to be taking on the role of a critic I am in NO WAY trying to say that I could do any better. I can't and I know I can't. I'm simply making observations as an audience member and sharing my opinions as a movie fan who knows what to expect.
Let us get down to the nitty of the gritty...there are two screaming faults this movie has in my eyes. One, too much liberality in licensing their own meanings to The Beatles wonderful songs; two, a broken flow of music and story that rarely seems to connect.
My first example of Julie Taymore and her crew taking far too much advantage of making their own interpretations of The Beatles songs comes from the beginning of the movie. A cheerleader is singing "I Want to Hold Your Hand" (very well I might add) but you find out that she's longingly singing the song to herself about another female. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to get into anything about homosexuality specifically, all I'm saying is, how do you know that's what The Beatles intended? You could argue by saying, "How do you know that's NOT what The Beatles intended?" Alright I'll give you that one...but the point still remains, Taymore is taking the liberty of morphing all these songs into what she wants for her story. And again, when they do the musical sequence for "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" they sing the words over and over again "She's so heavy, she's so heavy, she's so heavy, etc." and in the movie they depict that by showing a group of soldiers carrying the Statue of Liberty and making a subtle point about government.
"What's so bad about that?" you ask? People who loved The Beatles and flocked to see this movie will forever associate the meanings of their songs with the meanings shown in this film. And whether or not the movie actually DID get the meanings right the point is Taymore and her crew assumed the position of actually knowing the interpretations and asserted their false position of leadership by incorporating it all into their blockbuster film.
Also, the movie was choppy, wavering, and sometimes just pointless. For example, the character Prudence nearly seemed irrelevant except for the fact that, because of her name, later on they had the chance to sing another song ("Dear Prudence")! Oh how contrived...
Eddie Izzard's appearance was definitely fun (he's a good actor) but sequences like the circus, and where JoJo comes to New York and they sing "Come Together" (so out of place) is all so forced and pointless most of the time. It becomes more of a dragged out music video than a movie. The story was mostly simple and served only the purpose of giving a backdrop to the music.
I suppose that I just saw it on DVD and I actually didn't get the "movie theatre experience" but all the same, it was a disappointment. The music was stunning at times, the singing was mostly well performed especially by the younger actors, and the visuals were almost always astounding and innovative. But the incongruity of it all, the forcing and obvious contriving of it all, and the lack of strong story brings it all way down. I felt like I was being catered to as a 12 year old, and even by a 12 year old's standards, it was pointless and waste of time...
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Strong as ever
For better or worse Peter Jackson and team continued to release the second installment of "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. For some, this brings great joy, for others, this brings dread at the thought of being dragged to another three hour escapade of traveling midgets trying to destroy some jewelry by their nerdy, obsessed friends.
So there I am sitting down, eager to watch the next chapter in a movie trilogy based off of my favorite books. I enjoyed the first one so much that by the time this one came around I had no option but to, again, expect nothing but excellence. The bar was set, the standards were made, and they were already as high as they could be...and they did it again! Flawless execution in adaption, remarkable cinematography, convincing acting, exciting battles, great choreography and overall storytelling.
This chapter in the series is the most action oriented. I mean sure, the last movie may have had the largest battle scene ever seen on screen today but "The Two Towers" was the one to actually go deep into the battle and really bring about a great war epic. This one incorporated a lot of eye candy for the typical everyday movie viewer. Yes, slashing, hacking, bow work, and massacres of bloody orcs aplenty! But don't let that fool you, it's also filled with an excellent story and expansion of character development.
This time around the story focuses even more in on the world of men. It deals with men struggling to survive in a war that is quickly turning directly toward them. And while J.R.R. Tolkein's books dealt a lot with the half lings and their journey to destroy the One Ring, he also dealt a lot with man and their common struggles of power, love, and honor. He was after all a man himself...most of his writings in fact actually reflected his own life when it came to stories of men.
I could go on and on about this movie; how the music captures the heart of Middle Earth, how the sets for Rohan (the mountainous land of men) looked so convincingly real and inhabitable, etc. But I'll stop it short and just let you know that this movie is no let down, just like "Fellowship" was no let down either. It continues to give justice to Tolkein's work and it's pulled off with style, integrity, and excellent workmanship. "The Two Towers" will inform the public of the wonderful work Tolkein did 50 years ago, and entertain even more.
Enchanted (2007)
Disney's back, and they hit the mark!
I remember the days of Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and Little Mermaid. Some of you out there might actually be able to remember the days of Peter Pan, but I'm afraid I can only go back as far as the early '90s...
Enchanted is a very goofy, playful movie full of Disney jokes that poke fun at themselves. The reason I didn't give this movie more than 7 (a "good" rating in my opinion) is because it definitely didn't have the same feel as their older classics, but I really appreciated how Disney took a risk at making fun of itself for the sake of producing a truly entertaining and enjoyable film.
The acting was overall very well done with the whole cast. Amy Adams pulled off a blank, dreamy-eyed princess near perfectly; James Marsden played a similar prince very well and I was particularly impressed after having seen him as Cyclops for so long. Timothy Spall has definitely stood out to me lately in movies and I was very pleased to watch him on screen.
The plot, although generally typical for a Disney movie, took me by surprise. I knew it wouldn't be terribly "deep" per se, but I was shocked by how intricate they were with the story. Also, the theme was quite refreshing. The whole movie gave kids (and adults alike) a good idea of how to live properly IN the reality that we all occupy, but live FOR the dreams that are in our hearts.
There were a couple of complaints I had; although the music was quite enjoyable I was expecting some more musical numbers and a little more variety, and I kind of hoped for a movie with a little bit less "modern movie appeal" attached to it.
Overall, this movie was charming. It paid homage to classic Disney movies and it sort of revived something that we've begun to lose...a fun time at the movies.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
From one classic to another classic
I am and have been a huge Tolkein fan for quite a long time, so when I first heard that they were making a movie on the first book Fellowship of the Ring I anticipated it with great enthusiasm. I'll let you know that I was twelve years old when this movie came out but it is my favorite movie to this day, and for good reasons.
First, I'll just quickly put that Tolkein's works are possibly the most in-depth works of literature ever. I say in-depth on purpose for he spent most of his life inventing the world of Middle Earth. This fantasy world had so much time and effort invested into its creation that anyone who reads the books feels as though this world is real and could only be a short hike away. Tolkein didn't just write the Lord of the Rings stories, he created an entirely living breathing world with history, lore, culture, philosophy, and religion in which many stories were able to take place in.
So how does Peter Jackson transition this great masterpiece of written work into a film version you ask? With great time, precision, effort, care, and devotion in my words. Many fans of books made into movies will often complain that the movies were failures because they didn't get the same feel that the book did and they didn't have exactly the same information, but I believe that it is very possible for someone to adapt a great piece of literature into an equally great piece of film albeit it might not be a "word for word" representation.
I expected nothing less than outstanding work on this movie, it is after all based on my favorite book, and I must say I was well pleased. If there is anyone that could have captured the look and feel of Middle Earth better than Peter Jackson did I challenge someone to show me this person because I find it hard to believe that this person could possibly exist. And the same goes for Howard Shore who invented the very sounds of Middle Earth. Everyone involved in making this film had a lot of pressure on them, because there were plenty of people out there who would have been violently perturbed had they screwed it up. What can I say, there's crazy people out there.
To put it simply, everything in this movie is the exact movie form of this book. Ian McKellen IS Gandalf, Elijah Wood IS Frodo, the set for Rivendell WAS Rivendell, the theme music for the fellowship WAS the music playing behind the marching fellowship when you read the book, that prop ring WAS the One Ring, etc. Obviously those statements aren't technically true but I think this team did the best they possibly could at portraying this story on screen.
I applaud them all for giving me and many others exactly what we wanted. It might not have been mirrored page by page, but this movie will ring out as one of the greatest fantasy epic movies of our time. A truly awe inspiring adaption of a truly awe inspiring book...
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)
Shocking
When I saw the original poster of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, before I knew it was Johnny Depp or Tim Burton, I thought to myself, "I have no idea what it is but, hey, it looks interesting." Finally I saw a trailer and I realized that it was Johnny Depp as a murderous barber and then I thought to myself, "Wow, freaky. But still interesting" and then Depp opened his mouth and started singing whilst wielding a sharp razor...my friend and I immediately busted out laughing in the theatre.
Now don't get me wrong, I like musicals, I thoroughly enjoy them. Nonetheless, that was a shock I didn't expect. I can't say that I anticipated this movie more than I anticipated say...Lord of the Rings perhaps, but I was definitely excited to see how this movie did.
As far is acting is concerned I expected a lot from Johnny Depp (there's no reason why I shouldn't) and for the most part, he met my expectations. I hear people constantly talking about how Helena Bonham Carter deserves an Oscar for her performance in this movie but I fail to see it. The movie is a dark and gray and her face is gray, and her voice is monotone through and through. So except for ONE sequence whenever she was on screen she sort of blended in with the environment and I faded out.
Music is obviously a big factor in musicals and while the music in Sweeney Todd wasn't necessarily bad, it wasn't very strong and that's big hit in a musical. Johnny Depp talk-sings through most of the movie; fans of the original on-stage musical disliked that because the original man who played Sweeney had a very operatic voice, but I liked it I personally thought it fit the character. There's a young boy in the movie, I forget his name, but he amazed me! When he started singing I was so shocked, I didn't know a little boy that size could possibly have vocal cords that strong. Also, the song between Sweeney and the Judge "Pretty Women" is one of my favorites and I thought it was well done. But save that one song, no songs TRULY excited me, rang in my head, or really stuck out.
Cinematography and directing was astounding as expected with Tim Burton. The dark tones and splashes of red have been used before but he pulled it off with flair. There's a song in this movie and during that sequence the cinematography changes to dreamy scenery with very bright colors that contrast with Depp's and Carter's pale Halloween-like faces. It's possibly my favorite part of the whole movie, that entire sequence is fantastic!
You can bet on seeing a bloody movie when you see this film. Bloody is actually an understatement, try the bloodiest movie I've ever seen. It's filled with sliced necks, crushing skulls, and grinding bodies and it's honestly nauseating. Some say that it's just necessary for the movie, and while they're mostly right I still believe certain things were unnecessary and could have been toned down.
One redeeming quality is the theme of the movie which is actually the main theme of the original musical which Tim Burton kept perfectly intact. That theme is: revenge is evil and it will consume and destroy everything including yourself. Still...after seeing the movie there were a couple scenes that I could have definitely been just fine without seeing entirely! Tim Burton and Johnny Depp actually made a mistake in my opinion, they made Sweeney Todd way too "attractive". His slicing executions eventually became so stylized, so choreographed, and so graceful that you almost anticipate his next killing RATHER than trying to yell out, "Stop the madness!" which is the whole point of the story.
The movie is entertaining, enticing, thought provoking, and well made but there is still one problem. The ending left me feeling hollow (much like the characters themselves). I won't tell you the ending, but I'll tell you this: when I walk out of a movie I want to feel entertained...not drained. But then again, maybe that's what Burton intended.
AVPR: Aliens vs Predator - Requiem (2007)
Insulting at best...
AVPR! Aliens Vs. Predator, sounds like a fun time at the movies right? Wrong.
I am a fan of the Alien and Predator movies (perhaps not the "biggest" fan but a fan nonetheless). I saw the first AVP movie and was mildly entertained. It definitely wasn't fantastic or really anything special but it was good fun the first couple times watching it. Then I saw posters for Aliens vs. Predator Requiem and I heard rumors that they were going to go for a darker, more intense, and somewhat original sequel.
To name a few complaints: the movie was too dark and it was near impossible to focus on any of the details, the dialog was awful...flat and boring at best with constant lines including "We need guns!" and "This plan is stupid!". I knew nothing about the characters nor did I care what the heck happened to them. I was confused throughout the entire movie who they actually wanted the main character to be, and by the time we got to the end I still didn't know who the main character was. There wasn't a sex scene but there was a sexual scene and it seemed so "thrown" into the movie I felt it was irrelevant, unimportant, and an insult to my intelligence. The violence was expected but the gory gross-out scenes crossed the line WAY too many times! (Pregnant ladies, babies, and young boys come to mind) There just wasn't enough action between the aliens and predator himself...which is obviously what I expected to see.
By the time the credits were rolling I was the thinking to myself: this wasn't Alien vs. Predator...this was a cheap-teen-horror-slasher-flick, a genre that has been used way to much in the last ten years. I felt the people involved in this movie could have made a much more entertaining movie, had they put more effort and thought into it.
Simply put, this movie is a sequel to a movie that is based off of two franchises that have all but reached the end as it is. It's bad, not sort of good, not slightly entertaining, just bad...
Chuck (2007)
Not bad, not bad...
So I gave this TV show a chance seeing as how Lost, Heroes, and The Office are the only other things I care about on TV (oh, most of the Discovery Channel is good too).
Regardless...I gave Chuck a chance and by the end of the first episode I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. It was exciting, funny, and really just plain fun. By the second (or maybe third) episode I began to realize the plot was actually a bit dull and it was mainly because one episode in particular just seemed like a waste of my life. But I forgave it and went on.
I read all these harsh reviews from other people and while some of them MAY be correct in certain aspects I just say, "Lighten up". It's fun. Period. It's not ground breaking, deep, or life changing, but it's a pretty darn good alternative to most entertainment out there and like I said if you can just not be so critical you might find that you enjoy it.
For example, I agree that it's near impossible if not absolutely impossible for every government secret that this country contains to ALL be sent in one email overnight on an everyday PC nonetheless. But also I don't believe actual super heroes walk the earth or that one man can stop multiple world crises in one whole day throughout his entire life, yet 'Heroes' and '24' are some of the top rated shows on television today.
My main point: Chuck might not be glorious, worthy of rewards, or breath-taking; but it IS fun, it is laughable, and it is worth giving a shot.