Rating: • • ½
Age Recommendation: 5+
This Western comedy was, to say the least, a disappointment. It's not unbearable, but I feel like this is a movie you really have to be in the mood to enjoy, and I was not in that mood. Small children might find it more enjoyable. The slapstick was mediocre, the one-liners painful, and the romance less than believable. Still, there is a sort of charm about the hapless dentist-turned-gunfighter Painless Peter Potter (Bob Hope) that makes you keep watching.
The motivations of his new bride, the ruthless Calamity Jane (Jane Russell) in disguise, seem mercenary, but somehow things work out for the couple. I think the plot only works because the ridiculousness distracts the viewer to the point of forgetting there ever was a point. While no Monty Python, Bob Hope's comic timing is well portrayed for the role he is given; the problem is that the role is beneath his ability. The repeated gag of being dragged through the dust by a team of horses that Bob conveniently keeps forgetting he unhitched from the wagon (usually only moments before) is sadly one of the better jokes.
Hope is funniest as Painless the dentist--who literally reads the dentistry instruction book as he practices his medicine--a role which he unfortunately only plays in the first half hour. The childish jokes keep the action going, but the actual laughs are few and far between. Also, the blatant stereotyping of American Indians made me wince, so be prepared to take those segments with a grain of salt. Watch for his song "Buttons and Bows," which, apparently won the Oscar for best original song.
Summary: Juvenile humor detracts from this bob Hope comedy. Although the movie has most of the Western elements, it tries too hard to be funny, which detracts from the surprisingly logical plot while falling flat on its face in the comedy department. If you come in expecting Blazing Saddles you will be sorely disappointed, but if you keep a positive attitude you might find this whimsical traipse through the old West to be enjoyable. Adults will have to be slap happy to truly appreciate the humor, but I imagine children will enjoy it much more.
The Good: song "Buttons and Bows," dentist sequence
The Bad: demeaning portrayal of American Indians, visual gags
The Even Worse: jokes
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Avatar (2009)
Rating: • • •
Age Recommendation: 15+
If you take Disney's Pocahontas, combine it with Dances with Wolves, and replace the Native Americans with tall blue cat people, what you get is James Cameron's Avatar. For you cartoon watchers out there, do not be deceived; this Avatar has nothing to do with The Last Airbender. And, in my opinion, this movie is far overrated.
Instead of white men looking for gold, as in Pocahontas, you have army guys looking for "unobtanium," a fictional element which looks something like a floating hunk of metal and sounds like something out of Dr. Seuss. With a strangely placed "support our troops" message, the hero is a wheelchair-bound ex-soldier (Sam Worthington) who joins an experiment led by a missionary scientist (Sigourney Weaver) to control the body of a Na'vi (tall blue cat person). Like Dances with Wolves, our soldier hero is soon adopted, at first reluctantly, but then enthusiastically by the tribe as he overcomes a series of linguistic barriers and undergoes the ritual all Na'vi youths must complete to become a warrior. And then he has to lead them in an epic battle for their homeland.
The visuals are breathtaking at times, but if you're looking for the cute fuzzy sidekicks of Pocahontas, you're looking in the wrong place. Not a single creature on this planet has a strand of hair excepting the Na'vi, or feathers or scales, despite the amazing advances in computer technology that allowed for Narnia, Ice Age, Bolt, etc. Instead, they are all skin and bones and extra limbs and mandibles for jaws. The floating mountain range is awesome and the flora is cool if you like the idea of venus flytraps pimped out with neon lights and cottonwood seeds that float through the air like jellyfish through water. Oh, and you know how American Indians are always portrayed as having a "connection" with nature? In Avatar, the connection is physical. The Na'vi have tentacles hidden in their braided hair that serve as a USB linking their brains to those of the six-legged hairless horses or four-winged dragon bird things they use for transportation.
Avatar is not without its emotional moments. With a beautiful score of music, you get to watch main characters die, at times by the handful. There is drama, but this film is not a drama. There is humor from time to time, but it's not a comedy. It's sci-fi, but it's no space epic. The closest category seems to be a war movie, but even that is just one element. This is a movie that's not about the acting, or any one element, but instead about the spectacle. While James Cameron attempts to pass off his tale as an original story, it is really just a collection of overused plot elements set in a unique but still very familiar alien world.
Summary: Is Avatar entertaining? Yes. Is it amazing? Not by my standards. The plot is recycled, and with 99% of the movie computer generated, it's hard to take the acting seriously. Overall enjoyable for families, friends, whoever.
The Good: not a dull moment, music, scenery (especially the floating mountains), action sequences, engaging
The Bad: hackneyed plot, attempts to sexualize blue cat people, hideous creatures
The Even Worse: nothing
Age Recommendation: 15+
If you take Disney's Pocahontas, combine it with Dances with Wolves, and replace the Native Americans with tall blue cat people, what you get is James Cameron's Avatar. For you cartoon watchers out there, do not be deceived; this Avatar has nothing to do with The Last Airbender. And, in my opinion, this movie is far overrated.
Instead of white men looking for gold, as in Pocahontas, you have army guys looking for "unobtanium," a fictional element which looks something like a floating hunk of metal and sounds like something out of Dr. Seuss. With a strangely placed "support our troops" message, the hero is a wheelchair-bound ex-soldier (Sam Worthington) who joins an experiment led by a missionary scientist (Sigourney Weaver) to control the body of a Na'vi (tall blue cat person). Like Dances with Wolves, our soldier hero is soon adopted, at first reluctantly, but then enthusiastically by the tribe as he overcomes a series of linguistic barriers and undergoes the ritual all Na'vi youths must complete to become a warrior. And then he has to lead them in an epic battle for their homeland.
The visuals are breathtaking at times, but if you're looking for the cute fuzzy sidekicks of Pocahontas, you're looking in the wrong place. Not a single creature on this planet has a strand of hair excepting the Na'vi, or feathers or scales, despite the amazing advances in computer technology that allowed for Narnia, Ice Age, Bolt, etc. Instead, they are all skin and bones and extra limbs and mandibles for jaws. The floating mountain range is awesome and the flora is cool if you like the idea of venus flytraps pimped out with neon lights and cottonwood seeds that float through the air like jellyfish through water. Oh, and you know how American Indians are always portrayed as having a "connection" with nature? In Avatar, the connection is physical. The Na'vi have tentacles hidden in their braided hair that serve as a USB linking their brains to those of the six-legged hairless horses or four-winged dragon bird things they use for transportation.
Avatar is not without its emotional moments. With a beautiful score of music, you get to watch main characters die, at times by the handful. There is drama, but this film is not a drama. There is humor from time to time, but it's not a comedy. It's sci-fi, but it's no space epic. The closest category seems to be a war movie, but even that is just one element. This is a movie that's not about the acting, or any one element, but instead about the spectacle. While James Cameron attempts to pass off his tale as an original story, it is really just a collection of overused plot elements set in a unique but still very familiar alien world.
Summary: Is Avatar entertaining? Yes. Is it amazing? Not by my standards. The plot is recycled, and with 99% of the movie computer generated, it's hard to take the acting seriously. Overall enjoyable for families, friends, whoever.
The Good: not a dull moment, music, scenery (especially the floating mountains), action sequences, engaging
The Bad: hackneyed plot, attempts to sexualize blue cat people, hideous creatures
The Even Worse: nothing
Monday, August 2, 2010
A Manner of Introduction
Hello, one and all! Whether you be an average Joe (or Jane), a fellow cinephile, a Hollywood producer, or Roger Ebert himself*, feel free to peruse my blog which will, after this post, consist in its entirety--or very close to it--of my personal reviews of as many movies as I can remember seeing and those new to me as I see them. Many of these films--in fact, most of them--will not be the latest to hit the theaters, as I am but a poor college student who rents her DVDs from the school library. Still, from time to time I will throw in a current film, so keep an eye out for those as they come.
You will notice a rating at the beginning of each post which will look something like this:
Rating: • • • • ½
I believe this rating system is rather self-explanatory, but in case I'm wrong, I will explain. Each little dot is like a star or a thumbs up or what have you. It is a positive vote by me for the movie in question. I will be using a five "•" scale, so in my example, the movie would have received 4.5 out of 5.0 dots, which is pretty darn good. I will only be using half and whole dots, to keep things simple. Basically, any movie earning three dots and above I found enjoyable, but if the movie receives less than that you can guess it's not one of my favorites.
Below the rating, you will find an age recommendation. Because I find the MPAA G/PG/PG13/R system to be somewhat arbitrary and very inconsistent, I will be using my own age system that goes as follows:
5+
10+
15+
20+
A 5+ film is one I deem appropriate for all ages. These movies may be aimed at children, but not necessarily. It has more to do with the maturity level of the film content than the age of the intended audience. For example, I am quite certain I saw Star Wars between the ages of 5 and 10, (and possibly even before I was 5), and I thoroughly enjoyed it then. Even though it is aimed at an older audience, in my opinion this particular movie contains nothing so disturbing, graphic, profane, or sexual that would prevent it from being suitable for a child of 5; thus, I would rate it a 5+. The plus indicates that not only should a 5-year-old be able to handle the content, but so should anyone above that age.
A 10+ film would be one I believe to be suitable for anyone 10 and older, etc. etc. etc.
In addition you should know that, should you, upon reading one of my posts, find yourself with some opinion about said movie which you wish to share, be it positive, negative, or in between, you have a couple of options.
For one thing, you could always share said post with your friends, enemies, frenemies... whoever via e-mail, facebook, or other options you find available. I only ask that you credit me by at least listing the website, should you choose to copy and paste my work.
Another option is to click one of the buttons at the bottom of each post to express your positive, negative, or neutral stance in regards to my review.
Finally, feel free to comment on my posts, but please keep it clean and don't start arguing about politics because I've seen it happen on other movie review sites and it's not pretty.
In summary, I will be using my own rating and recommendation systems for each of my reviews. These reviews are my personal opinions which I wish to share with you. I look forward to feedback and friendly debate. Oh, and don't forget to check out the polls.
Enjoy!
Stephanie
* If you actually are Roger Ebert and you're reading this, first I must tell you that I greatly enjoyed interning at your film festival, and second... please send feedback!
HOW IT WORKS:
You will notice a rating at the beginning of each post which will look something like this:
Rating: • • • • ½
I believe this rating system is rather self-explanatory, but in case I'm wrong, I will explain. Each little dot is like a star or a thumbs up or what have you. It is a positive vote by me for the movie in question. I will be using a five "•" scale, so in my example, the movie would have received 4.5 out of 5.0 dots, which is pretty darn good. I will only be using half and whole dots, to keep things simple. Basically, any movie earning three dots and above I found enjoyable, but if the movie receives less than that you can guess it's not one of my favorites.
Below the rating, you will find an age recommendation. Because I find the MPAA G/PG/PG13/R system to be somewhat arbitrary and very inconsistent, I will be using my own age system that goes as follows:
5+
10+
15+
20+
A 5+ film is one I deem appropriate for all ages. These movies may be aimed at children, but not necessarily. It has more to do with the maturity level of the film content than the age of the intended audience. For example, I am quite certain I saw Star Wars between the ages of 5 and 10, (and possibly even before I was 5), and I thoroughly enjoyed it then. Even though it is aimed at an older audience, in my opinion this particular movie contains nothing so disturbing, graphic, profane, or sexual that would prevent it from being suitable for a child of 5; thus, I would rate it a 5+. The plus indicates that not only should a 5-year-old be able to handle the content, but so should anyone above that age.
A 10+ film would be one I believe to be suitable for anyone 10 and older, etc. etc. etc.
In addition you should know that, should you, upon reading one of my posts, find yourself with some opinion about said movie which you wish to share, be it positive, negative, or in between, you have a couple of options.
For one thing, you could always share said post with your friends, enemies, frenemies... whoever via e-mail, facebook, or other options you find available. I only ask that you credit me by at least listing the website, should you choose to copy and paste my work.
Another option is to click one of the buttons at the bottom of each post to express your positive, negative, or neutral stance in regards to my review.
Finally, feel free to comment on my posts, but please keep it clean and don't start arguing about politics because I've seen it happen on other movie review sites and it's not pretty.
In summary, I will be using my own rating and recommendation systems for each of my reviews. These reviews are my personal opinions which I wish to share with you. I look forward to feedback and friendly debate. Oh, and don't forget to check out the polls.
Enjoy!
Stephanie
* If you actually are Roger Ebert and you're reading this, first I must tell you that I greatly enjoyed interning at your film festival, and second... please send feedback!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)