Step Up 2 Movie Review

I went to the special premiere screening of Step Up 2 coincidentally with all the Top 12 finalists from So You Think You Can Dance (Australia) and honestly it was one of the WORST movies I've ever seen, hands down the WORST dancemovie I've ever seen that it's the type of movie only worth downloading and watching from your computer. Or even just cut scenes from Youtube. That's because you can skip all the talking BS and go straight to the mediocre and overdramatized dance sequences which is probably the only reason people go to watch it anyway.

Ok, so I'm probably not the target audience. I'm a street dancer and as my fellow crew member Chux would say, "You're not a street dancer, if you're not on the street." Maybe I just had higher expectations, considering Jabbawockeez were involved, and their 30 second spot was the best part of the film. That, and Chase's (Robert Hoffman, You Got Served) freestyle solo in class.

The lead actors were dull and plain, lacking the street cred they claim in the film. There was so much cleavage or stomach being shown but at least it distracted me from the crap talking (and I don't mean the amusing type of crap). And Cassie, her role was so useless, she would've been better if her character was the evil bitch ex-girlfriend of the popular guy, or maybe they could've scrapped her altogether from the film, it prolly wouldn't have made a difference. Storyline? What storyline?

There were around 3 main dancing scenes, the first with the trampolines was not all that impressive, and the ending was a piece of crap. They took Omarion's rain scene from You Got Served, added a lot more people and a lot more rain and a longer routine. Sure, the dancing was cool but it wasn't all that fresh. I've seen much better on the streets and battlegrounds of Sydney.

I think watching America's Best Dance Crew and the 360 Crew Freestyle Battles a few weeks ago, set my standards for the dancing in this movie, so it's not so bad to those who don't watch a lot of live freestyle dance battles or street group showcases (i.e. Kabamodern and Jabbawockeez - youtube them!)

So just because I really disliked it doesn't mean I'm going to advise other people not to watch it because F*** you are all capable of making your own decisions and I encourage that. I actually thought the first one was alright, and it sh*ts all over this one.

Source

Read more »

Drama, Review, Youth,

{[['']]}

The Taking of Pelham 123 Movie Review

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 Is a New thriller starring Denzel Washington and John Travolta directed by Tony Scott shot in the subways of New York City. The story starts as a man who calls himself "Ryder," (John Travolta) leads a band of thugs as they highjack a subway train and MTA dispatcher Walter Garber (Denzel Washington) who is Reluctantly forced to be the Lead negotiator.

movie review The Taking of Pelham 123

This Film is a remake of a 1974 movie of the same name and reworked to meet a new audience. With modern dialog and cell phones, laptop computers and of course the fact that 911 effects the city still, this film was a really fast pace based roughly on the old plot. There are some wild scenes in this movie of New York City as the Mayor, (James Gandolfini) agrees to pay a $10 million ransom and they try to get the money across the city to the subway station. If nothing else is worth the price of admission to see James Gandolfini, Tony Soprano as mayor of New York it’s so cool. Denzel Washington and John Travolta work wel together and their voices are what id cool to have to big name actors in a dialog driven story about two characters that interact over a radio on the subway car. This film was made for a younger audience and I think that those are ones that do go to the movies regularly.

I think my fellow Critics just didn’t get that part of the puzzle, that this film was made with the 17-27ish age group in mind, so it’s fast cuts and rough, realistic dialog. What would a career family man with a Wife and kids and an ex-con straight out of prison talk like, what would the banter be? I think the writers nailed it dead on and the two main actors and Gandolfini included deliver the lines flawlessly. Also, the fact that this film has scenes filmed on the streets of New York to would in my opinion must have been a logistical nightmare and an undertaking that is in itself a commendable feat. This film also has some great editing and that’s often overlooked, editor Chris Lebenzon stitches together a compelling series of images that suck you in, and work well with the Music by Harry Gregson-Williams. This is a good film, not a great film and it overcomes a story that is antiquated, and turns it into a new and improved version that is engaging to watch.

Directed by Tony Scott
Produced by Tony Scott, Todd Black, Jason Blumenthal, Steve Tisch
Written by Screenplay: Brian Helgeland, David Koepp (uncredited),
Novel: Morton Freedgood
Starring Denzel Washington, John Travolta, James Gandolfini, Luis Guzman, John Turturro, Gbenga Akinnagbe, Frank Wood
Music by Harry Gregson-Williams
Cinematography Tobias A. Schliessler
Editing by Chris Lebenzon
Studio Relativity Media, Scott Free Productions,Escape Artists
Distributed by Columbia Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

Source

Read more »

Action, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}

Kung Fu Panda (2008) Movie Review

“Kung Fu Panda” is the story of a fat (is there any other kind?) panda that dreams about being an awesome kung fu warrior, and when given the chance, rises to the occasion. In-between those moments, we get plenty of fat jokes at the panda’s expense, and enough cartoon kung fu violence to, possibly, convince parents this may not be the right movie to be taking your very impressionable kids. Especially if said kids have a bad habit of using little sis as a punching dummy to try out his new “moves”.

The above said, Dreamworks’ “Kung Fu Panda” is a fun little movie, although “little” may be a bit of an exaggeration. Take a look at the voice cast: Jack Black as Po the panda, Angelina Jolie as Tigress, Jackie Chan as Monkey, Dustin Hoffman as Shifu, and of course, the always incredible Ian McShane (of Deadwood fame) as the villainous Tai Lung. Which reminds me: I was never really sure why Tai Lung was supposed to be such a villain; as far as I can tell, his only qualification for the mantle is that he’s really good at kung fu, and he really, really wants that kung fu scroll that, when read, will endow the reader with incredible kung fu mastery. But to hear the movie talk about him, you would think the guy went around eating babies or some such.

But I digress.

In “Kung Fu Panda”, Jack Black voices Po, a happy-go-lucky panda who toils away in his father’s (voiced by the venerable James Hong, no less) noodle shop. His father dreams of passing on the family business, which includes the family’s secret ingredient noodle soup recipe to his son, but Po has other dreams – namely joining up with his idols, the five martial arts masters known as the Furious Five, and fighting the good fight against villainy and such. Alas, being a panda, he’s a bit, well, fat, and not all that coordinated. Or fast. Or able to climb a lot of stairs really fast. Because, you know, being fat and all. But as it turns out, Po’s secret weapon is none other than his appetite and prodigious belly, which comes in mighty handy when Tai Lung escapes his prison (guarded by 1,000 soldiers to Tai Lung’s singular prisoner) and seeks vengeance after 20 years of captivity..... read more

Read more »

Animated, Cartoon, Hot Movie,

{[['']]}

The Lord of the Rings : Return of the King

There's definite value to making a series of films at the same time: the quality and the "look and feel" is consistent, and the passion of the people involved, if present in the first film, is present in all of them. Most important of all (unlike in The Matrix or even the Star Wars series), it shows that the creators have thought through the implications of their story arc, rather than just generating sequels due to public pressure. In the case of The Lord of the Rings, it probably didn't hurt that the plot was based on a famous well-established book.

And this is how it ends. In The Return of the King, the filmmakers tell a fairly simple story: how the two Hobbits, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) finally return the powerful ring to the fires of Mount Doom. They take a well-paced 200 minutes to do so and every minute is worth watching.

The best character throughout the whole series of films for me was Smeagol (voiced Andy Serkis) whose history as he becomes the Gollum is showcased here, as is the corrupting nature of power. This is how the movie starts, and as everyone knows, it ends with his death. Perhaps the best lesson from this film is that Frodo is a potential Gollum, and Gollum is a potential Frodo.

The graphics were absolutely perfect. The final epic battle is a visual spectacle. And as has been the trademark in this movie series, the are interspersed with poignant scenes that are irrelevant to time and place, when viewed from an anthropomorphic perspective. Further, the visual scenes themselves a great mix of live action with computer-generated images which blend together seamlessly. The most anticlimactic moment had to do with the defeat of Sauron, which in the end I thought happened a little too easily. I would've liked to see him go head to head a little more with Frodo's friends.

No set of words in a review can do justice to The Lord of the Rings movies, save to say that it's best watched on a large screen with great surround sound so you can see for yourself why.

Source

Read more »

Action, Best Sellers, Box Office, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}

The Lord of the Rings : The Fellowship of the Ring

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is an old adage that has been the basis for many a story. It is the primary plot device behind John Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings classic. Written in 1954-55, with origins dating back to 1937, the first of the three movie installments, which have already been filmed, tries to stay true to the mystical world present in the book. The resulting effort is a definite success.

The star of the story, and the film, is not a person, but an object, a ring. The ring allows one to control a host of other rings handed down to the different peoples of Middle Earth: three rings belong to the immortal elves; seven to the dwarfs; and nine rings to mortal humans. The ring that rules all the others, forged using the fires of Mount Doom by the evil Wizard Sauron (Sala Baker), gives its holder so much power that it corrupts all those who seek to wear it, even the purest.

Of course, there are some peoples that are more pure than others. Humans generally seem incapable of wearing it without being corrupted by its influence (no surprise there). But there exists a diminutive people, the Hobbits, who do seem at least capable of carrying it without being polluted too much. It falls upon one Hobbit, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), to take the ring to Mt. Doom, which is the only place where it can be destroyed.

Frodo is aided in his quest by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen), the elf Legolas Greenleaf (Armando Bloom), the dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), two humans Strider aka Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and Boromir (Sean Bean), and three other Hobbits including Frodo's friend Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin). The story chronicles how Frodo, being a reluctant hero, travels through mysterious and dangerous lands of breathtaking beauty, and fights terrific monsters in the context of awesome towers and citadels, to achieve his goal.

Perhaps one of the most visionary aspects about Tolkien's work is how he set the stage for a Dungeons and Dragons style video-game. Director Peter Jackson imbibes to the film the same feel present the book, in terms of traversing a diverse variety of landscapes, while encountering a diverse variety of creatures, friend and foe alike. Watching the film, it's easy to become mesmerised by the fantasy that is unfolding purely based on the cinematography.

Like with Joanne Rowling's Harry Potter (or for that matter, Stephen King's It), this film does not live up what I imagined, but it does a great job of presenting what Jackson and his co-workers imagined. The special effects are spectacular and meticulously done, perhaps even better than those observed in Harry Potter. There are no cop-outs here and every place that it matters, the effort and the expense have been evidently put in. The soundtrack sometimes overwhelms the dialogue, of which there is a lot, interspersed between the action sequences. Do not miss seeing this on the big screen. This is how movies should be made.

Source

Read more »

Action, Best Sellers, Box Office, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}

The Lord of the Rings : The Two Towers

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is better than its predecessor, and that's a rare occurrence when it comes to Hollywood films.

The story begins where the first film left off: Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) continues on his quest to Mordor to destroy the powerful ring in the same fires of Mount Doom from which it was created. Aiding him, directly and indirectly are, fellow Hobbits Samwise Gamjee (Sean Astin), Meriadoc Brandybuck (Dominic Monaghan) and Peregrin Took (Billy Boyd); Gandalf (now) the White (Ian McKellen); Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen); Legolas Greenleaf the elf (Orlando Bloom); Gimli the Dwarf (John Rhys-Davies); and Treebeard the Ent (voice of John Rhys-Davies). Against him are Saruman the White (Christopher Lee) and Sauron the Dark Lord, whose spirit is intertwined with the ring. And a creature whose intentions are ambiguous (quite literally) is Smeagol/Gollum (voiced by Andy Serkis).

The main goal of this episode is to showcase the unleashing of the Saruman's forces to conquer middle earth. The movie actually ends on a positive note, with our friends having the upper hand in the two epic battles--between Saruman's 10,000 strong army and the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Rohan at their Helm's Deep fortress; and between the Ents and Sarmuan's war machine in Isengard--as well as several minor ones.

The cinematography, along with the computer graphics, is awe-inspiring. Gollum is animated brilliantly, so much that I thought he was more convincing than any of the real actors. The CGI in general is state-of-the-art; the only time I could clearly discern the computer generated images was when they had the battle with the Wargs, There is a lot of humour in the film, which shows that nothing in life is worth taking too seriously. The soundtrack, which is reminiscent of old Westerns, is excellent.

It's hard to fault a film that is as well-made as this one. In my view, The Two Towers is best judged on its own merits. While it would help to be familiar with Tolkien's works (including The Hobbit, which really fills in a great deal of the background material), this tale can stand on its own if you use your imagination.

The reason Harry Potter, Star Wars, Star Trek, are such big successes is because of the mythology they create. The Lord of the Rings, which predates these works, is no exception and is one of the richest. The film itself can be described only in superlatives. Go see it.

Source

Read more »

Action, Best Sellers, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}

Spiderman 3

The Spiderman movies have definitely changed the story from the comic book. Watching the first of the film , I wasn't happy with the depiction of Peter Parker as more self-centred and vain, which is unusually in the context of the comic books. At this moment, Peter Park goes through so much crap that it's a wonder he doesn't commit suicide (it's kind of like Jack Bauer in 24).

Some factual points that were changed, which I'll agree was necessary to make a decent movie, are as follows: The Venom costume is an alien being acquired during the Secret Wars battle with the Beyonder (which was one of the best "cosmic" series Marvel has put out). Spiderman doesn't want to kill villains; even when he is beaten and pulverised, he holds back from taking the ultimate step (in fact, it is rare to show people dying in the comic books). Harry Osborn is more like the depiction of Normie Osborn (the son of Harry and Liz Allan) who is friends with the daughter of Spiderman (Spidergirl). Gwen Stacy is killed by the first Green Goblin (Norman Osborn). The people of New York have rarely been on the side of Spiderman. J. Jonah Jameson has always had a point in saying that it is people like Spiderman who create the villains. And so on.

It's difficult for me to reconcile what I know of Spiderman's history with a movie story that does its best and I admire that. A problem with the movies is that they can't intersect with the other characters from the Marvel Universe. It would be great to have movies like the Secret Wars or the Infinity Gauntlet, War, and Crusade series where a bunch of the Marvel superheroes get together and the stories make more sense (for example, explaining the origin of the Venom symbiote), but I guess that would be a logistic and budgetary nightmare.

Halfway through the movie, the story gets in line with what you'd expect from the book. The rejected symbiote bonds with a humiliated Eddie Brock to become Venom, one of the coolest villains to be introduced in the later years. The Sandman is a villain who is ambiguous. And Spiderman has a run of bad luck and is pummeled constantly but triumphs in the end against all odds.

I once wrote a review of the Batman series where I connected them to a lot of the comic books (I own a huge number of Spiderman comic books) and some other reviewer criticised my review. The perspective I offer is fairly unique: it is based on an experience I can't ignore or negative, and I think it helps place the movie in context of a long history of the books. So if you're interested in the saga of Spiderman beyond what you see in the three movies, I recommend buying some of the great story arcs of Spiderman just to see how complicated and mythological the creations are.

Source

Read more »

Action, Best Sellers, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to translate a book into a movie. The problem has to do with one's imagination: words in a book conjure up images that are highly personal and subjective, and any attempt by a third party to lend form to them ends up disappointing. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is no exception in this regard, but fortunately, the imagery presented is awesome and wondrous in its own right.

The film is made strictly by the book: Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), a young boy mistreated by his foster family, learns that he is special and comes of age... in the Hogwart's School of Magic (!) where he learns wizardry, plays Quidditch and fights an evil despotic wizard (who does not turn out to be his father).

While the movie stays fastidiously true to Joanne Rowling's book, perhaps one of the best adaptations ever, the adage that a picture is worth a thousand words doesn't hold true here. For the most part, from the initial victory of the baby Harry Potter upto the Quidditch match, a lot of the details are skipped. What we're presented with is a jump from one scene to another (sometimes too quickly) that illustrates with painstaking effort the magical realm that Rowling has constructed in her series. For example, while the opening sequence shows Professor Albus Dumbledore (Richard Harris) turning out the lights in a street, Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith) changing to her true form from being a cat, and Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) bringing Harry on his flying motorcycle, we're not really shown the celebration of Lord Voldemort's fall. This isn't criticism but just an observation; in fact, I think doing this is especially okay if one is familiar with the Harry Potter books, but it does impart a sense of urgency in the beginning portions of the film.

I marvelled at how technology enabled the film makers to make possible the wonders of Harry's world, including Diagon Alley and Gringotts Bank, the moving pictures, Hogwarts Castle, the Sorting Hat (Leslie Phillips), the ghosts in the Castle (including a cameo by John Cleese), Fluffy the three-headed dog, the ugly troll, and so on. I believe that it is technology that makes the Harry Potter film authentic, in the same way as in the X-Men or the How the Grinch Stole Christmas movies, by letting at least the imagination of a few people come to life as vibrantly as possible. Most of what I imagined and what was projected on the screen weren't really colinear, but it was still cool, incredibly so at times, to watch.

The movie, however, picked up with the first Quidditch match where Harry, on a broomstick, plays the position of a Seeker after the Golden Snitch, a particularly hard-to-catch ball, which is key to winning a game. The inspired depiction of the game meshed with my imagination extremely well, and from there on, the story of Harry's second encounter with the dark Lord Voldemort (Richard Bremmer) enfolded in a less fragmented and more cohesive manner. The final confrontation, and what Harry and his friends have to do get there, is a delight to watch.

For those paying attention, the main change from the book has to do with how Hagrid's dragon is disposed of and the resulting consequences. The ghosts also play a smaller role here though given the movie's running time, I'm not surprised parts like those were omitted.

The actors playing the young leads give decent performances, with Emma Watson as the know-it-all Hermione Granger standing out. The adult actors aren't given much time but they all present solid performances. The score by John Williams is simple but effective. The set design, cinematography, and visuals are impressive. Director Chris Columbus does a great job of bringing to the big screen the Enid Blyton-like atmosphere that Rowling's books exude.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a great movie to watch. I viewed it from the perspective of someone who is intimately familiar with the books, and I believe there is strong merit to watching it being completely unfamiliar with the story, a choice I do not have given that I've read the four books a few times. Definitely check it out on the big screen and make sure you goto the bathroom before.

Source

Read more »

Action, Best Sellers, Hot Movie, Review,

{[['']]}