Our Idiot Brother

Our Idiot Brother directed by Jesse Perez, starring Paul Rudd, Elizabeth Banks, Zooey Deschanel, Emily Mortimer, Adam Scott, Rashida Jones, and Steve Coogan.

This is not a great movie but I had a good time watching it, so I guess in the end that makes it an entertaining watch and that it was.  This movie kind of reminded me of Forest Gump - only much better as this movie seemed to know what it was where as Forest Gump I've always felt seemed really confused about itself.

The main reason I saw this movie is because Paul Rudd is in it.  I've always liked him as an actor and he does a great job here playing a simple man who doesn't want to get bogged down with the complexities of life. Along the way we meet his three sisters and get to see their vastly different personalities and lifestyles as they compare to their brother. 

Ultimately it's the interconnecting of these relationships that dominates this movie and what makes it an enjoyable watch.  Paul Rudd commands as the "Idiot Brother" but it was a good idea of the producers of this movie to tag-team him up with three really good actresses who compliment Rudd's performance in spades.  It's their chemistry on screen is the guiding force of this movie and they all step up to the challenge.  Even the side characters are played by some really good actors - not great actors but really good supporting actors the completely help to move the story along as well as adding to the already seasoned chemistry of everyone else in the movie. 

All in all it was a good watch.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Black Dossier

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Black Dossier written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Kevin O' Neill.

Finally a sequel to The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen that lived up to the first two books and wasn't as jumbled a mess as the many other League books being written. 

I'm not saying this book is perfect but it does live up to what Moore wanted to do with the League.  It also doesn't feel as rushed as some of the later League books felt.  Moore seemed more in control of what he was doing here as this story is longer and he gives time to develop characters, which is something that was seriously lacking from later books.  This time he lets scenes play out for pages and not just a page or two - like in most Marvel and DC comics - a good writer knows that pages help to develop characters and story, with the lack of that being something that feels rushed and half full. 

The Black Dossier is anything but half full, as this is a concept comic, which of that they are few and far between in the comic world.  Being a concept comic it largely succeeds on that level and the level of exploring of the world Moore created with the first League book.  Moore has the characters in the book read the titled Black Dossier at very points in the story of which there is a play, a short story, some fliers, a pictorial history of a character Orlando and even a portion of the book in 3-D (glasses are included with the book). 

He really does open up the mythology of the League as he builds upon what he did before, which is something most of the later books failed to do.  The one thing this book does though is starts the weaknesses that has dominated Moore's writing of late, namely that is his obsession with sex and nudity for no reason than he can do it with the comic label he's writing for.  They don't add anything to the story or mythology of the world he's creating  and that has been a failing I've noticed with his books.  This is a shame because I think it really hurts his story as it breaks the flow of what he's doing and turns his story into a typical movie or book that has to have a sex/nudity scene just for the sake of selling more seats or appeasing the audience.  This basically reduces Moore to a typical writer, of which he is not but by doing this he becomes just another writer in the crowd and his work of late has been showcasing this.





  

The Green Hornet

The Green Hornet directed by Michael Gondry, starring, Seth Rogen, Cameron Diaz, Christoph Waltz, and Jay Chou.

I don't even know what they were thinking when they made this movie.  It's so off kilter.  The main character is completely miss cast. The overall concept doesn't really make any sense.  The main character is a dick and completely unlikeable. 

I honestly don't even know what this movie is trying to do.  I think the movie doesn't even know what it's trying to do.  The movie feels really lost to me and this confusion transfers to screen really well.

I had heard how bad this movie was but I thought I'd give it a watch just to see if it was going to be one of those movies that ends up being so bad it's good or that it might earn a spot on my guilty pleasure list.  This movie is so bad it's not even one of those it's so bad it's good movies.  I guess I can see how this might earn a spot on someone's guilty pleasure list - because technically any bad movie can be on that list, the only criteria is that the person has to know the movie is bad - but it didn't end up my guilty pleasure list, not by a long shot.

I don't even know what more to say about this movie?  If you want to see a really bad movie from the screenplay, the concept, the dialogue, and the directing - which really isn't that bad but even it can't lift the terribleness of this movie from the gutter of which it came. 

The only props I will give this film is that Jay Chou, Cameron Diaz, and Christoph Waltz actually did a good job acting.  And this is Cameron Diaz's sexist roll she's done in a long and yes there is one scene in which she is there in her underwear showing off her long legs.  Like I've said before I think it's in her contract she has to have at least one scene like that. 

3 Days to Kill

3 Days to Kill directed by McG, starring Kevin Costner, Hailee Steinfeld, Connie Nielson, and Amber Heard.

I do not like McG as a director.

In my opinion he hasn't directed a movie yet that justifies all of the media attention and articles I've read about him being the next generation of directors to take over Hollywood.  If he's of that generation - the future of movies does not bode well.  He's definitely a better producer than he is a director and even by saying this this is his best directed movie, I don't know what that means because this is by no means a good movie.  The only thing it does have going for it is that it's his most entertaining movie to date and doesn't feel like a TV show (his Charlie Angel's movie all felt like they were made on a TV stage versus a movie studio) nor it is as lifeless as his Terminate: Salvation turned out.  This movie has more in common with McG's This Means War: it's more polished, slick, well paced, but still doesn't add up when the credits roll. 

There's a weird mixture of comedy and action that doesn't quite connect the same way I think it did when the movie was being made.  This mixture bubbles over onto the movie from too much stirring instead of being blended together with care - it all feels very haphazardly poured together.  The action scenes are staged, directed, and choreographed rather well, as it seems McG has learned something over the years he's tightened the blindfold on Hollywood's eyes.  Took him long enough though.  Even the drama scenes don't burden down the movie.  It's just the internal logic and comedy of the screenplay that completely undermines the story and the pacing.
                                     

Noah

Noah directed by Darren Aronofsky, starring Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Anthony Hopkins, Emma Watson, Ray Winstone, and Logan Lerman.

This movie was bad, very boring, and seemed to be a lot longer than its run time, which is never a good thing.  I won't even go into how the movie's story line could diverge as much as it did from the Bible.  I'll just leave it at that and focus on why it failed as movie in general.

This movie fails because it has no real set story line and decides to be a political driven agenda movie instead of being a movie with good characters.  It pushes the Eco, be green, global warming, and man is destroying the environment down my throat, leaving this movie as subtle as a sledge hammer.  This Eco message becomes the story line and driving point of the whole movie, characters and story line be damned.  Then lets throw in as many cliched conflicts points and scenes as can be there for no other reason than they just have to be there as long as the Eco message is being driven home.  This lack of real characters is very sore spot in the movie.  No clear cut characters populate this movie only cliche ridden cardboard stamped people that serve no more purpose to rise up at certain points in the movie to provide some conflict.  The characters aren't people and I never once cared about anyone in this film.  Most of them are unlikable to a fault - especially Noah.

The other thing I couldn't figure out was why Aronofsky decided to go all independent with some of the shots and scenes in this movie.  There were a lot scenes where the shots felt dated, gimmicky, and low budget, which for me totally brought me out the movie and the story being told.  Scenes should never do this as these scenes completely broke the pacing and flow of the movie.  I couldn't seen any justification for him to do the scenes like he chose to do them.  It made no sense to me and left me more confused than anything else.

Overall this movie was just confusing mess.

The Lego Movie

The Lego Movie directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, with the voices of Christ Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett, Jonah Hill, Morgan Freeman, Will Ferrell, Will Forte, Liam Nesson, and a bunch of other people associated with Legos or any other type of sci-fi or super hero movies.

I thought this was a really good movie.  Not just as a kids movie but just as a movie in general.  It was funny, well paced, not to long, and well it's based on a kids toy I still play with today.  I really like Legos and I've got to admit I didn't think there would be much a story line to use or create to get this movie to work.  But the writers found a good way to make this movie a sort of meta experience without getting to carried away with the metaphysical aspects of the movie.  It was the meta aspect of this movie that truly made it more than just a kids movie and helped to lift the movie beyond just being a movie about toys.

The naysayers will say this is just a long commercial for Legos.  My response to that statement is, isn't any superhero movie just a long commercial for superheroes or for that matter about 90% of movies released in the summer are just a long commercial for something.  So yes, this movie is a commercial but I think it's that aspect of the movie - the Legos - that really help to connect with the viewer because everyone has played with Legos as some point in their life and the story line uses this not just a gimmick but as part of the story.  That is a brilliant part as the metaphysical helps to ground the movie in reality in a gimmicky but real way without feeling forced.  It all flows together so well I was amazed. 

Did I mention this is a kids movie?

It is and despite all of the meta, wild things I've been talking about, this movie never loses focus of the fact it is a kids movie.  The humor is funny, the story line is good, and the characters alone are worth seeing this movie as the voice actors really bring them to life.  I'm not kidding about that either, they really brought their A game into the voicing these characters.

NOS4A2

NOS4A2 written by Joe Hill.

Well first thing is first and Joe Hill will never be able to get away from this fact - EVER.  Yes, Joe Hill is the son of the writer Stephen King.  This in no way validates or excuses any writing from Joe Hill and from what I've read about Joe Hill he didn't ride the coat tails of his dad to get his writing career started.  But when the information about his relationship with King was revealed, well there's just not a lot that can be done to hide that fact now considering Stephen King is one of the most famous and prolific writers ever to start writing.  Not that Joe Hill is hiding because he's not.  He's a good writer on his own.  I've read a lot of King books and I've enough of Joe Hill to know that he knows how to write.  I think it's interesting that he draws a lot of how King sees the middle class and working class people into his writing - those similarities can't be ignored.  And in my opinion Hill has just taken one of the writing styles his father is known for and just ran with it.  NOS4A2 has this presence of the middle class and working man clearly woven throughout the book and I will admit that has always been one of the most endearing things I've liked about King and his writing - his admiration and fondness for the middle class and blue collar worker.  He's never belittled them, made fun of the, or used them as punching bag.  They've always been heroes and been ones to step up to the plate when the going gets tough.  Joe Hill has taken this same view point - with that viewpoint comes an easy way to connect with characters in his book.


Personally, though I think Joe Hill's comic series Locke and Key is much better not just as comic series but as an overall story than NOS4A2.  I had a hard time figuring out if this book is supposed to be horror or some kind of modern fantasy.  It didn't really feel like horror.  Don't get me wrong it had horror aspects but the horrific, bone chilling, scare the pants off you aspect was not there and at times it seemed like it wanted to jump into the horror element but it never fully committed to that.  It had a more fantastical fairy tale kind of feel to it and that feel it truly committed to.  I just wish Hill had explored that fantastical element more because that world, when it was talked about in the book really brought the story to life and by the books end I didn't feel completely satisfied with what I had read.  There still seemed like a lot more he could have done with the story than what the over all book ended up being. 

I never full connected with any of the main characters. I connected with them enough that I was able to get into the story and finish it but I never became fully engaged with them.  I don't know why this is, even when I think about it I can't quite pin down what was missing but something was missing.  There just seemed to be something that was keeping me detached from them.  Some puzzle piece that was missing from the box.  I did like some of the secondary characters more than the main characters.  I felt they had more depth and personality that was not present in the main characters. 

It was a good read and I don't regret the time I spent reading this book but I just wish he had explored the fantastical elements of the story more.  I believe this would have made the books length feel more justified and satisfied by the last page.