Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989)

4/5

Steven Soderbergh's Sex, Lies, and Videotape is the quintessential independent film of the late 80's/early 90's, and it undoubtedly set the bar for independent film for the next decade. It focuses on the characters more than the plot, their motivations more than their actions, and their relationships more than their promiscuity. It is appropriately patient, awkwardly humorous, and sensually descriptive. It is emotionally explosive and subtly fascinating. But it is also maddeningly unclear sometimes.

The movie is basically a four-person character study. But it never feels as if the writer created the characters and manipulated them to his whims like voodoo dolls. Instead, the characters were real people, and the writer simply watched them interact in his mind, and faithfully transcribed the events. This is an expertly-written film that feels impossibly realistic and true. And contains interesting thematic elements. It examines the ubiquity of sex and lies, through the eyes of each character. It uses videotape and asks what it means to watch, to point the camera at someone, and to have it pointed at yourself.

The movie is certainly dated, and shows its age from hairstyles to clothing to slang, but that never takes away from the experience. What does take away is the somewhat deflated ending; and the feeling that I never got a satisfying explanation of what exactly happened in the characters' pasts and why. Part of me enjoys that, knowing that real life is never so tidy, but the rest of me is annoyed. Still, the movie is a great watch and asks intriguing questions. Highly recommended.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098724/

A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas (2011)

2/5

A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas is a very Harold & Kumar movie, it's just not a very good movie. It is, in fact, a very stupid movie. The story and the jokes feel like rehashed sloppy second versions of the first one (and probably the second one too, but I never saw it). It is just as rude, crass, and vulgar as every other stoner comedy made in the last 10 years. And it is just as funny as well--which is to say only occasionally funny. The jokes, when they do hit home, can be great. But they can be abysmal as well. The shining light in this series is Neil Patrick Harris, and he does not disappoint here. Unfortunately, he is not enough to make this a memorable movie in any sense of the word. The best I can say about Harold & Kumar is that it is mindless entertainment, with a big focus on mindless. If I were Kal Penn, I probably wouldn't have quit my day job to make this movie.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1268799/

The Avengers (2012)

4/5

The Avengers is a spectacle in the most gaudy way possible. I suppose that's not entirely unanticipated given the fact that the last six movies put out by Marvel have basically been advertisements for this one. And that this comic book nerd's fantasy has been decades in the making. It had to come out with a bang. And bang it did, with the most profitable opening weekend of all time. And yet, despite all its financial success, I don't feel like this movie will be remembered for very long. It's one of those movies everybody just had to see because everyone else was talking about it, but then it seemed to slowly fade into obscurity.

Iron Man and The Dark Knight were, for me, the two big superhero movies from the last 10 years, each taking wildly divergent paths. The Dark Knight was serious, filled with gritty realism and terrifying villains. Iron Man was humorous, good-natured fun. The Avenger is firmly entrenched in the latter camp; it's the next movie in a line of factory-made films cut from the same cloth as Iron Man aimed to guarantee success with the least risk possible. And it is an entertaining, well-written, well-paced film that probably didn't offend anybody. But it was more of a Marvel movie than a Joss Whedon movie, and I think that's my issue with the film.

Joss Whedon's writing and directing here was relatively uninspired compared to The Cabin in the Woods, Serenity/Firefly, and Dollhouse. There were some clever lines and cool twists in the plot, and Whedon effortlessly balanced five major leads with widely varying characteristics and motivations, but nothing about this movie really impressed me in any way. It's a fine movie; I just expected a lot more given Whedon's involvement. He can--and will--do better.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0848228/

Fast Five (2011)

4/5

Fast Five, no matter how much better it is than the previous four films in the franchise, is a pretty silly movie. It starts with a jailbreak that is somehow perfectly orchestrated such that they are able to wedge a sports car under a moving prison transport, get the bus to roll over about ten times without killing any inmates, and then rescue Vin Diesel and take him to Rio. Diesel and his gang then proceed to rob "the most powerful gangster in all of Rio" in the most preposterous manner imaginable while The Rock tries to track him down, killing anyone and everyone in his path like he's the Hulk.

The cinematic elements are fairly standard for modern action movies: quick cuts, shiny shots, and all the explosions, chases, and fistfights you can take. The movie often hides what is going on from the viewers for no reason other than to surprise them later, and you have to try especially hard to suspend your disbelief in this movie, but the screenplay contain some clever twists, especially with respect to the heist. The dialogue, however, is laughable. Vin Diesel's performance makes the script seem even more ridiculous, as he apparently has confused yelling with acting. The Rock, who I respect much more than in his early days, is not only the best actor in the film, but the best by about ten orders of magnitude. It's a very enjoyable movie that succeeds as mindless entertainment, but don't expect anything more than that.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596343/

The Cabin in the Woods (2011)

4.9/5

The Cabin in the Woods is one of the most fascinating, enthralling movies I've seen in a long time. Written by Joss Whedon, it is a testament to the power of inventive, immersive storytelling. It gives me hope that there's still new ideas to be discovered and shared. The plot starts with five friends (Connolly, Hemsworth, Hutchison, Kranz, Williams) who take a trip to the titular cabin in the woods. They are warned by a gas station attendant (De Zarn) not to enter, but they choose to continue on, only to enter a world of horrors.

The movie is a joy to watch. It starts from a simple premise and constantly expands, adding layer after layer of complexity until its brilliant finale. It is set in a slasher horror genre, but contains elements of reality TV and ancient mythology. After a while, the horror element fades away and you are left with nothing but quality storytelling in a universe you've never before set foot in. It is exciting and entertaining, although it will not appeal to everybody. It aims to shock, at times, but also to make you smile. It succeeds admirably on all counts, and it is delightful the entire time.

As far as the acting goes, Kranz, Jenkins, and Whitford steal the show. They are incredible and they leave the rest of the cast in the dust. The camerawork and editing are pretty much what you'd expect from a horror movie, with the requisite shots of blurry objects sneaking up in the background and quick cut/loud noise combos. But even those are done in an almost tongue-in-cheek way that makes the whole movie all the more fun. I cannot seem to praise this movie enough, and I cannot wait to watch it again.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1259521/

The Five-Year Engagement (2012)

3/5

The Five-Year Engagement is a middle-of-the-road modern-day romantic comedy. The movie starts with Tom (Segel) botching his proposal to Violet (Blunt) one year after they first met, then continues on for the next five years as their wedding gets further and further postponed for various reasons. Things crop up in their lives and they start to doubt that they really are perfect for each other. It has its fair share of quirky side characters, some of whom you love (Kaling, Hart, Posehn) and some of whom you love to hate (Pratt, Ifans). It's got the big fight in the middle--although it does it in a way that makes both leads less likeable--and a terrifically sappy ending to jerk some tears out of your nasolacrimal ducts. The humor is occasionally raunchy to give manly men laughs but is usually simple and clean for the more mainstream viewers. It's formula to a T, and it's entertaining enough. It just isn't exciting enough.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1195478/

Haywire (2011)

4/5

Steven Soderbergh's Haywire is a tightly-paced action thriller about a covert ops agent (Carano) who is double-crossed by her boss (McGregor). If the plot feels tired and rehashed, that's because it is. Story-wise, nothing about this movie is all that new or interesting, despite the scriptwriter's best efforts at infusing it with twists and turns. Two things make this movie good, and two things only. One is the directing and the other is the fighting. And there are a lot of fight scenes. Soderbergh avoids the frenzied over-editing you find in lots of modern action films and keeps the camera far enough away so you can actually tell what's going on. The fighting feels authentic thanks to the lead, Carano, who is an MMA fighter and American Gladiator. Unfortunately, she's not a great actress. Her lines are cold and hard, so half the time she manages to sound like a badass and the other half she sounds like an idiot reading a script. If you know what to expect going in, this movie will more than live up to your expectations, but it's far from a genre-bending production.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/

Paul (2011)

3/5

Paul is the sci-fi version of Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. Like the other two, it was written by its leads Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, and is filled to the brim with references to all the best films of the genre that came before it. But unlike the other two, it felt like they were trying too hard to recapture their past success and just ended up beating a dead horse. The spoof/parody/homage formula they created was intriguing in Shaun of the Dead, perfected in Hot Fuzz, and has now become washed up in Paul. (Or maybe I'm just not as big a sci-fi fan as I am an action fan.)

There are jokes aplenty in this movie and I laughed more than my fair share for a comedy, but for some reason the film just didn't engage me. The character of Paul had too much Seth Rogen in him, the road trip adventure felt bland and unexciting, and for whatever reason I never found myself caring about what was happening. The movie is fine as far as entertainment goes, but I expect better from them. If it seems like I'm harsh on the movie, it's because I know those two can do better. And I hope they do on their next project.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1092026/

Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey (2011)

4/5

Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey is a truly fascinating movie. It is a character study of Kevin Clash, the man behind Elmo. As a young black kid growing up in Baltimore, he found his calling in puppetry. After being inspired by Jim Henson's Muppets, he created his own puppets and started putting on puppet shows for kids and charities in his neighborhood. He eventually got a shot in public access television before moving onto the big leagues and working with Jim Henson himself on Sesame Street.

As a documentary, it's impressive. We get to witness important personal moments in his life, but those are almost too intimate to watch while simultaneously being beautifully human and touching. Likewise, there is a wealth of footage that shows Clash's love affair with puppetry. We get to see his inimitable skill as he creates entire lives with his hands and his voice, and teaches others to do the same. We see his eyes brighten up with joy when he first visits the puppet factory, and every time he puts a puppet on his hand. The storytelling itself is even more terrific than I could have hoped for, bringing everything back to the beginning and rewarding the patient viewer. Being Elmo is a mesmerizing story that is sure to delight all viewers.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1787660/

Little Giants (1994)

3/5

Little Giants is one of those 90's movies that just don't get made anymore. It has a silly story, cheesy moments, and all the charm you can stuff in 100 minutes. Brothers Danny (Moranis) and Kevin (O'Neill) O'Shea are as different as you can get. Kevin escaped his small town home and became a football super-star while Danny remained at home and raised a family. When Kevin comes back to create a championship peewee football team, Danny feels bad for all the kids who weren't picked, including his own daughter Icebox (Waldron). Danny decides to create his own team and manages to wrangle all the misfits in town, and it suddenly turns into classic David vs. Goliath tale.

The movie is neither clever nor subtle, but it works precisely because it hams it up. Like all those cult classics you avoid unless you're part of the cult, you watch this movie with nostalgia for your youth and innocence. It reminds you of the times when you thought snot was funny and misheard words or misunderstood phrases were strokes of genius. The script is full of those awesome laugh-out-loud moments. The acting is passable but not believable. The characters are more exaggerated than circus drawings. The plot is more predictable than a Disney film. But it doesn't matter. It's senseless fun that you can appreciate it for what it is: a silly romp that never apologizes for being guilty fun.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110364/

Titanic (1997)

4.9/5

James Cameron's Titanic is an engrossing film, epic in scope yet focused on the individual players. It is a romance, certainly, but a classic one that will appeal even to non-romantics because it is a good story first and foremost. While there is nothing particularly original about the plot, it is a universal and timeless tale, well-told: doomed love attempting to escape the shackles of modern society; man's hubris resulting in their inevitable demise. Where it succeeds is in allowing the plot to go where the characters find themselves, instead of forcing the characters down the writer's pre-ordained path.

The technical achievements in the film are extraordinary for the time, and mesmerizing still. The cinematography and special effects are awe-inspiring, and the editing keeps the 3 hour movie surprisingly brisk and fast-paced. The acting, however, is where the movie really shines. Not only impressive for their ages, but impressive in their own right, DiCaprio and Winslet give heart-wrenching and breathtaking performances. I somehow forgot that they can make your heart skip with anticipation, with dread, with hope. You really care for the leads, and the stakes are raised that much higher when the big ship starts its slow descent.

The movie isn't perfect. It has a somewhat silly narrator structure wrapped around the perfectly self-sufficient story, and Bill Paxton's acting therein just left me cold. The script is also full of sailing cliches and movie tropes, from the captain sinking with the ship to the overly noble orchestra playing waltzes while the Titanic literally sinks inch by inch. Even if that stuff actually happened, that shouldn't have been the focus of the movie. Regardless, I finally appreciate why this movie holds such power to nearly everybody who watches it. It is a phenomenal achievement all around.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120338/