Hitchcock (2012)

3/5

Hitchcock tells the story of the titular director's decision to make Psycho, and the personal and professional challenges that came alongside it. As a whole, the movie is entertaining fare. But I think the problem is that the movie doesn't know its audience. Is it for Hitchcock fans? Psycho fans? movie fans? Who knows? It provides a teeny glimpse into the great director's life, but not nearly enough to satisfy. In fact, I would venture to say that the movie is more about Mrs. Hitchcock than about Mr. Hitchcock (and Mirren absolutely shines in her role). That wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I decided to rent the movie, so I was left with a perfectly fine movie that I wasn't expecting and didn't hate. If you decide to watch it, just know what you're getting into and you'll probably be able to enjoy it more.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0975645/

Valentine's Day (2010)

3/5

Uhh, I have no idea why Valentine's Day has been getting such terrible reviews, but it is utterly undeserving of such negativity. It was a fine romantic comedy, equal parts predictable (Kutcher and Garner) and equal parts unpredictable (Cooper and Roberts). It had cliches, but it also had surprises. (Perhaps the biggest surprise is that Ashton Kutcher plays a charismatic hero with aplomb and sympathy.) And it made me laugh and smile, which is exactly what it set out to do.

The plot is too complicated to type out here (or maybe I just don't remember all the details), but that doesn't really matter. Just know that it's about a bunch of men and women who get into and out of relationships on Valentine's Day. The technical aspects are nothing to write home about. The characters were simple but the acting was good. Some of the stories were not as good as some of the others, but the ones that were good were very good. There was some repetition and it felt just a tad too long, but all in all it was a solid romantic comedy. Watch this movie if you're interested in it; I don't think you'll be disappointed.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0817230/

The Illusionist (2006)

3/5

I saw The Illusionist with Sameer and my brother last night and was very entertained by it. However, I did have some complaints. It builds itself off of one big mystery. The rest of the movie is relatively pointless in that you could have seen the movie without the other parts and left the theater feeling exactly the same. There is no point to watching it more than once; the mystery is solved and that's about all this movie has to offer. Also, magic tricks in a movie just aren't that exciting. I especially disliked the use of in media res (starting in the middle of the action and then explaining how you got to that point). It didn't actually serve any purpose and merely justified sloppy (technique-wise) voiceover narration.

The "big mystery" itself was really refreshing and intriguing; I found myself guessing and just not finding the answer. Acting by Ed Norton and Paul Giamatti was superb as always, but they didn't particularly stand out in their roles for this movie compared to other projects they've done. Jessica Biel was mediocre; neither laudable nor laughable. The cinematography was pretty good, but I was vexed by Burger's choice of some queer angles. One thing I really like seeing was Paul Giamatti's teeth when he solves the big mystery. That almost made me happier than finally having the mystery solved.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0443543/