Review: Whatever Works (2009)

Woody Allen's latest venture brings us back to his roots; New York (duh). Essentially he wrote the main part for himself, but instead chose a different neurotic, misanthropic Jew (Larry David). You can see how that kind of character can get a little tedious after a while. Still, the film was about as decent as I think anyone could've expected. It's hard to follow up Vicky Christina Barcelona (because that was awesome), but he did alright. It's got to be hard to keep writing screenplays and not recycle (there was essence of Manhattan here and there). But Woody Allen, he continues to show he's still relevant.

Recommended? It's worth checking out.

Grade: C
(28)

Review: Moon (2009)

*I am like a month behind but thank the lord I only have four movies to review. Go me.*
Moon is a really interestingly psychologically and physically plot-driven. Does that make sense? I totally expected this odd mind-bend of a journey about a guy who is stationed at the Moon for 3 years and starts losing his mind a lá The Shining. But it's more 2001: A Space Odyssey than the former. Still there is a (nicely done) heavy influence of Kubrick, complete with serene A.I. companion (sadly not named HAL). Great work for first-timer Duncan Jones, and I tells ya, this was really hurting for some "Space Oddity" or "Star Man." Would that have been just too obvious?

I will say: It would've done great with a Brian Eno score. I defy anyone who says differently!

Recommended? Well it's probably too late to see it anywhere now, but definitely.

Grade: B+
(27)

Review: Public Enemies (2009)

Since I've started this blog, there has not been a movie with Johnny Depp for me to review. So this is the first time I can point this out; Johnny Depp is singularly responsible for my love of film. I had once been a lover of movies, but somehow they got away from me. Then I saw Pirates of the Caribbean when I was 15 and remember thinking that his performance was the first one where I actually thought "that was an amazing acting performance." Thus, my love affair with Johnny Depp and the need to see films emerged.

So. That said, on to Public Enemies. I had a few issues with this one. First of all, I don't know much about the story of John Dillinger. However, the film was presented as if everybody should have a decent amount of knowledge going in. Essentially, I was lost a lot of the time and it was really difficult to absorb information. There were so many characters that were never properly introduced and some that never saw the end of their story line. For example. Billy Crudup as J. Edgar Hoover comes into the story with somewhat of an introduction, gives a great performance for a few scenes, but then fades away into the background and is never heard from again. Even Christian Bale who is supposedly a co-lead on this one, was sort of missing half the time and the other half he wasn't doing it for me (although, I don't think he can be blamed for that.)

The film's biggest problem was the writing. I really felt it lacked depth. It's over 2 hours but I still don't quite know if I got anything out of it. There was hardly any character development or a commitment to themes. I was under the impression that this film was more about the beginning of the FBI's crack down on local law enforcement (all established because of John Dillinger). And was it about that? Maybe. It was touched upon briefly but again, I got the impression that the film was mocking me for my lack of knowledge.

In terms of technical problems, there was something wrong with the sound mixing, because a lot of the dialogue was lost on me. Either the actors were mumbling or those audio tracks were not deemed important enough in the editing process. To sum up; this film missed the mark.

All disappointment aside, the camera work in this film is phenomenal. Honestly some of the best hand-held camera work I've seen. I love Johnny Depp and he always delivers. Always.

Recommended? Eh...

Grade: C
(26)

Review: The Hangover (2009)

Ridiculously over-the-top and delightfully witty. No but really, it's quite funny. And I'm sorry to Bradley Cooper for doubting you for so long.

Recommended? Yep

Grade: B
(25)

Random News: Oscars to nominate 10 for Best Picture

Official Press Release:

Beverly Hills, CA (June 24, 2009) — The 82nd Academy Awards, which will be presented on March 7, 2010, will have 10 feature films vying in the Best Picture category, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences President Sid Ganis announced today (June 24) at a press conference in Beverly Hills.

Read the full story here.

--
Okay, most of us know that Oscars don't really mean anything, but to those in the industry, it's still a pretty nice thing to be nominated. So on behalf of them, I offer this opinion:

First of all, I'm struggling to see how they'll even be able to find 10 films worthy of a "best picture" nomination. The five up for it last year weren't even all the best ones. But even so, 10 films up for best picture. It's ridiculous. It completely cheapens the whole honor. It will cease to be a big deal for people. The ones who say "It's an honor just to be nominated." Yeah well, you and everybody else in the room. I just think it loses something. Credibility, perhaps.

Review: Wolverine (2009)

What a stupid, stupid movie.

Recommended? Wait for the DVD.

Grade: C- (only because Ryan Reynolds is quite enjoyable in his 5 minutes of screen time)
(24)

Review: Up (2009)

As if anything Pixar does is ever less than great. I admire that they address adult issues to add some gravity to a film that is otherwise silly and whimsical. Really touching, really funny, really worth it.

Recommended? Yes. But I don't know if you really need to see it in 3D.

Grade: A
(23)