Ted (2012)

4/5

Seth MacFarlane's Ted is a hilariously ridiculous movie. It's essentially a buddy movie, about John (Wahlberg) and Ted (MacFarlane)--a living, breathing teddy bear. John, picked on and tormented as a kid, made a wish to have his teddy bear come to life and be his best friend forever. And his wish came true! Ted enjoyed some childhood celebrity before the pair eventually settled into their mid-thirties routine of smoking pot and vegging out on a couch. But John's girlfriend of four years, Lori (Kunis), feels like John+Ted is getting in the way of John+Lori. There is one (disgustingly hilarious) event involving a game of truth or dare with some strippers that Ted brought over to their apartment that pushes Lori over the edge, and she demands that John choose between her and Ted.

I think Ted did a surprisingly good job describing the difficulty of balancing friendships and relationships and growing up without leaving your past behind. It contained a number of tender moments that felt authentic and honest--and were completely unexpected coming from the creator of Family Guy. What was not unexpected, on the other hand, was the over-the-top fight scene that was as ridiculous and enjoyable as I was hoping it would be. MacFarlane did a great job writing and directing the piece, able to pace it well in a format completely different from 20-minute televised serials. But I think he let himself go a little too crazy, specifically regarding the utterly bizarre Giovanni Ribisi character. Overall, a formidable and highly recommended entry from MacFarlane.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1637725/

Date Night (2010)

4/5

Date Night is an incredibly fun movie that delivered non-stop laughs with an action twist. The plot follows Phil and Claire Foster (Carell, Fey) as two parents whose marriage is slowly becoming routine and whose children occupy the little free time they have after work. When their friends decide to get a divorce, Phil realizes that he has something special with Claire that he doesn't want to lose and decides to take her out to a special night in Manhattan at an upscale seafood restaurant. After arriving without a reservation, they take another couple's table and are believed to be the couple that stole a flash drive from gangster Joey Miletto (Liotta). They are chased around the city for about an hour and a half and finally end up happy together with their marriage secure. (Whoops, I just ruined the ending.)

The writing in this movie is perfect and the two NBC Thursday night stars pull it off with aplomb. Carell and Fey together are a dream come true; they are my ideal comedy duo and they do not disappoint. They should do everything together. The dialogue is 30 Rock gone mainstream and it flies. The humor was quick and the editing kept pace. There are too many funny scenes to even recount and there is absolutely no dead space in the 90 minute movie. It is literally laugh after laugh after laugh. The movie also has a little bit of heart thrown in there for good measure and, while it's not quite the tearjerker it intended to be, it's certainly got a little sap to separate it from the straight-up comedies we see all the time. I probably would've given this movie a higher rating had some unnecessary scenes been deleted and had the emotional aspect hit home harder. All in all, this is a terrific movie for anyone who loves Steve Carell or Tina Fey. Go watch it as soon as you can.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1279935/

The Lovely Bones (2009)

2/5

Peter Jackson's adaptation of Alice Sebold's book The Lovely Bones is an interesting concept, but one that I did not find fulfilling or satisfying. It felt depressing instead of uplifting, with a poorly defined purpose that was carried out even more poorly. The plot follows 14-year-old Susie Salmon (Ronan) after being murdered by neighbor George Harvey (Tucci). Her death is a terrifying, painful, and drawn out one. It devastates and nearly destroys her family; her mother (Weisz) copes through acceptance and isolation and her father (Wahlberg) through denial and investigation. The police fail to locate the man after two years, and he prepares to strike again.

Technically, the film appears competent but has a number of underlying imperfections. Jackson uses editing expertly to build tension, however, the mood shifts at a brisk and almost too rapid pace. The audience is never quite sure what emotion to feel at what time. The directing also felt timid and uncertain, as if Jackson didn't think everything out and just started shooting. The beginning scenes hide Tucci's face, as if his identity would be a mystery throughout the film, but after about 5 minutes we find out who he is. Did Jackson not realize that a good 90% of the movie would be based around us knowing who he is or was there some ultra-subtle purpose that I missed?

I'm confused as to Jackson's motivations for a number of other scenes, especially those concerning Susie. I don't know what the "in between" represents or how any of her postmortem emotions are new, interesting, or even relevant. This newfangled purgatory is baffling, bizarre, and unnecessary, although I guess that's what separates it from other movies about similar topics. Unfortunately, I still found it to be an empty metaphor with uncertain meaning. The CGI is another area that appeared magical at first, but on closer inspection was just not quite good enough to be realistic. It was off by just a small amount, but enough to make you realize that what you were watching wasn't filmed but made, and that made it stand out even more. He spent far too much time on special effects and far too little time fortifying the story, understanding its meaning, and figuring out how best to show that to the audience.

I left the theater imagining that this was a great movie, or at least a good one. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that it had less meaning than I attributed to it and more problems than I originally recognized. Don't let Jackson's infamous special effects trick you: this movie is nothing special, and not worthy of your time or money. It's a simple story told simplistically. Other movies have tread more tenderly, examined the topics more sensitively, and forced you to think more honestly and deeply about your feelings than this movie did. For my money, I'd rather see In the Bedroom or Little Children again. Pass on The Lovely Bones.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/

The Happening (2008)

3/5

M. Night Shyamalan's The Happening starts with a stunning intro credit sequence. An elegant and evocative precursor to the movie, the tranquil movement of clouds as they pass by subtly turns menacing. An airborne toxin is blocking people's "survival" neurotransmitters and causing them to commit suicide. This is a terrifying concept, but perhaps more terrifying is not what this toxin does to those affected, but what it does to those unaffected and afraid, those still human enough to make their own decisions and suffer the consequences. The visuals are eerie and memorable, the music effective, and the pacing perfect. I'm actually very impressed with Shyamalan's progress as a technical director. Unfortunately, that's where the positives end.

There are a wide number of odd situations, side stories, and actions. Not odd in a thought-provoking way, but odd in an inexplicable and unrelated way that makes you wonder why it's in the movie at all. It often made the acting seem hollow and unnatural and made other aspects of the movie confusing as well. While Shyamalan's message against urbanization and deforestation was fine at first, it was pounded into the audience's head in an awfully heavy-handed way by the time the movie ended. Mark Wahlberg was perhaps not the best choice as the main character, mostly due to the way he talked and because I associated him with the recent SNL skit and was waiting for him to ask me to say hello to my mother for him. All in all, I really enjoyed watching the movie. It lived up to my expectations and I recommend it to anyone who was excited about it when they saw the trailers for it.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0949731/

We Own the Night (2007)

4/5

We Own the Night is a gritty, realist crime drama. Joaquin Phoenix plays a night club owner who occasionally dabbles in drugs, while brother Mark Wahlberg and father Robert Duvall serve in the police force. The cops are planning a big drug bust, but the Russian mafia they're trying to take down frequents Phoenix's night club. And things don't go as planned. What follows is an odyssey of constant tension and changing rules. I'll leave the rest of the details for you to discover in the theater.

The movie has a very realistic depiction of characters and events, with no superheroes and where unforeseen consequences can drastically alter the path of one's life. Indeed, Phoenix's transformation throughout the movie is unbelievably real; it is simply beyond good acting. The other actors give subtle, nuanced performances that are fleshed and full. The directing was nearly flawless. Much of the movie reminded me of the Godfather: the scope of events, the life-changing twists and turns, and the importance placed on familial ties. The entire movie seems to be an essay arguing that family is stronger than friendship. The Grusinsky family never betrayed each other, but are betrayed by best friends, father figures, and girlfriends. In fact, I found the end of the film to be the most explicit exposition, with the final words being "I love you" uttered to a family member.

Technically, this movie is rock-solid. The cinematography is beautiful--I loved the sequence with the car in the rain. There is terror and tension in so many scenes that reaches the same level as Michael Mann's best work. The car scene in the rain glued me to my seat; the scene where Phoenix enters the drug labs was heart-pounding; the end scene in the wheat field was on par with the ending to the Silence of the Lambs, where Jodie Foster is being stalked in the dark. The music was fairly perfect throughout, except a bit overbearing in the first scene.

I felt that the movie sometimes felt a bit underdeveloped. It could have benefited from more preproduction work as some plot points don't make much sense. I would have liked it to be a bit longer (15 minutes maybe), as it felt a bit rushed towards the end and as if we were missing some stuff throughout. Some characters were not unique and relied on archetypes, specifically the character of Jumbo. Other than that though this movie was quite an experience. Along with The Band's Visit and No Country for Old Men, it's my favorite of the entire Cannes Film Festival this year. I hope to see it again in theaters soon.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0498399/

Invincible (2006)

3/5

There were some surprisingly well-crafted long tracking shots and well-carried out editing. Mark Wahlberg's acting was actually pretty good. It was, all in all, a pretty entertaining underdog inspirational movie. It didn't last too long and probably wasn't in violent disagreement with reality (at least when it came to football). It was what I expected from a Disney movie.

It got extremely saccharine several times and ludicrously so. These moments were not only sappy (slow motion smiling and laughing and longing looks), but also overlong. The music made it even more melodramatic sometimes, although other times it was used effectively. It seemed to end too quickly, and yet I have no idea where it would have gone afterwards without completely forgoing facts. It seemed to go in many different directions and not really understand its point, so there were a lot of loose ends left open. It ended somewhat abruptly, like this review.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0445990/

The Departed (2006)

5/5

I just came back from seeing The Departed with Jed, Sameer, and Amar. This movie is phenomenal. It is a return to the genre the great master reinvented. I had ridiculously high expectations for this movie, and they were surpassed. It has the flash and fun of GoodFellas and Casino mixed in with the intensity and subtlety of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull. This is the zenith of entertainment in art. This is why you watch movies.

First off, the characters are the most unique, off-the-wall screen presences I can remember. The acting is so absolutely amazing that they are actually able to pull this off. The colors, style, and subtlety pervaded every shot and scene that to list off each memorable part of the movie would be to describe every second of it. The script is consistently funny, the violence sudden and shocking, and the subtext omnipresent. Watch it if you want to enjoy a good time, or if you want to analyze it as cinematic art. Just watch it.

The introductory scenes were so bizarre; it looked like an abundance of b footage spliced together randomly. I feel like Scorsese didn't really have a vision for how he wanted the beginning to look. I might be wrong though. And after the first ten minutes, I was so absorbed in the movie that I couldn't generate any more fictitious reasons like the one above to not love the movie. In fact, why am I writing this review and not seeing it again?

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0407887/