Resident Evil 2: The Apocalypse... of my sanity!!!

Title:
Resident Evil 2: The Apocalypse (B-)
PH Release Date:
September 29, 2004
Actors:
Milla Jovovich, Sienna Guillory, Mike Epps, Jared Harris
Director:
Alexander Witt
Story & Screenplay:
Based on Capcom game; Paul W.S Anderson
Cinematography:
Christian Sebaldt
Producer:
Paul W.S. Anderson et al.
Studio:
Constantin Films and Sony

My name is Riddler, and I remember everything, and I mean everything!

Milla Jovovich is back in the big screen as Alice, not from Wonderland, but from Raccoon City. Kicking off where the first movie left off, Alice awoke and found out that the virus have spread all over the city. She then explores the ruins of the city and found Jill Valentine (the bida in the videogame series) and together they searched for Angela. They faced Nemesis and the bloody story just keeps going on and on and the one-hour and a half felt like the infinity of utter nausea.

I am not a big fan of videogames the only games I got addicted to were Bust a groove (I would never ever runaway—freezin’!!!) and Red Alert (building…). Aside from those two, I consider video games as a mere waste of time (okay, here comes the death threats). So if I didn’t see the first installment of this hopefully not 3-part series, I would have had no idea what this movie was suppose to be all about, but I do, and it sucks!

I like Resident Evil, I thought it was edgy and not so Hollywood in some ways. It’s hard kicking and intense plus it was well written and the ending was good. And of course Michelle Rodriguez was there. I didn’t have high expectations for this movie and I’m glad that I didn’t cuz If I did you’ll consider this review discreet.

I was trying to recall where I heard the name Paul W.S Anderson when it hit me, yah, the writer and director of “whoever watches, they lose”! How can I forget? I’ve got to say he’s pretty good in making bad sci-fi movies.

Milla Jovovich and Sienna Guillory were the only things that glued me on my seat, if not for them I would have asked for my money back. The movie was so exaggerated, too perverted and completely annoying. It’s bad writing at it’s finest. It was so bad that your most absurd predictions actually happen on screen. The twists and the turns were totally riffed and there’s no untying it. I’ll give you one sample and tell me if it ain’t just plain idiocy. They were trying to runaway from the zombies and their next stop was…. You got it! The cemetery! How stupid can that be!!! And suddenly from only getting infected through contact and transmission, it became dead walks the earth? What the fuck was that all about!!! I’m way way way smarter than that!!!!!!!!!!!

Aside from the bad writing, bad direction was also a problem in this movie. You can also add bad editing and bad music just to make the recipe right. My head was spinning in some of the fight scenes and it was painful! And Mike Epps infuriating presence in the screen aint helping at all! His jokes were like something my great grandpa (as if I’ve met him) would say in the middle of a Bingo game.

So let’s review the recipe to make a bad sequel, first get a bad writer, then choose a bad director, afterwards, get a bad editor, a bad musician and bad supporting actors and everything will turn out as appalling as you designed it to be. Please, if you wanna maintain your sanity, stay away from this movie, watch Fahrenheit 9/11, it will certainly test your brain cells. It’s a bad Hollywood movie (even if it ain’t from Hollywood). And in this movie, evil truly resides.

The Bourne Supremacy--- bourne to be seen...

Title:
The Bourne Supremacy (A-)
PH Release Date:
September 22, 2004
Actors:
Matt Damon, Franka Potente, Julia Stiles, Brian Cox, Joan Allen
Director:
Paul Greengrass
Story & Screenplay:
Based on Robert Ludlum novel / Tony Gilroy
Editor / Music:
Christopher Rouse / John Powell
Design / Photography:
Dominic Watkins / Oliver Wood
Producer:
Frank Marshall et al.
Studio:
Universal

They should have left him alone--- but they didn’t, so get over it!

We’re back on the life of the amnesiac Jason Bourne and it’s exciting than ever. After his collision with the agency he used to work for and finding love in the first installment of this Ludlum 3 part series, he’s in hiding, but not for long. He’s been linked into the assassination of two CIA agents, and Pam Landy (Joan Allen) is out to find the truth behind it. As he dug deep into the reason behind the plot against him, he discovers more about his past and his real identity.

I have been waiting to see this film for more than two months and well I think it was worth the wait. I honestly didn’t like Bourne Identity that much. It’s boring, nebulous and just wasn’t amusing enough. But this one, man the right elements to make a good action thriller are in here: from dominating non-CGI effects, smashing cars, and pulsating chase scenes.

Paul Greengrass went back to the times when action movies have real life action and its impression is simply incomparable to CGI effects (computer generated images you idiot!). Despite the fact that there was a point in the movie where the too wobbly handling of the camera really got into my nerves, I still think that it was the right option. It’s not too vivid but very intimate.

Story wise, I haven’t read any Ludlum books (it’s a known fact that I’m not that much of a reader), which made me ignorant of the whole story, but despite that, I have to say, without bragging, that it was quite predictable. It can only mean two things: one, the actors were so good that it just reflected real life and generated my idea of human nature. Two, I’m just too smart for this stuff. I think we all know what the answer is (it’s a given ---no. 2)

However, despite the predictability, the amazing visual work pulled it off very nicely. And the rare decent sound effects made it more effective. The cinematography and photography were also good. And the editing isn’t far behind.

Matt Damon is really one exceptional actor; he’s definitely better than his friend Gigli. He was Bourne from the beginning till the very last frame. Franka Potente has one of the longest roles I’ve ever seen. Julia Stiles was also good. But I honestly thought two people towered all of them: Brian Cox, and most of all Joan Allen. Maybe because they’re old enough and their finesse in character acting is just superb.

After the movie, I went to the bathroom and I was shocked to find the most number of testosterone carrying human beings in one cinema CR. It’s an obvious fact that this movie is more of a macho movie. It’s fast-paced, which girls definitely don’t like, they like taking it slow (so slow), and no weighty drama. So if you’re looking for a date movie, stay away from this one, unless your girlfriend’s a cowboy. Don’t take your chances. But for soloistas (oh, poor you), see it, and that’s a Bourne Ultimatum.

13 going on 14, that's how it is!!!!!!!!!

Title: 13 going on 30 (B)
PH Release Date: Sept. 15, 2004
Actors: Jennifer Garner, Mark Ruffalo, Judy Greer
Director: Gary Winick
Story & Screenplay: John Goldsmith & Cathy Yuspa

For some, 13 feels just like yesterday, for me it’s not!

Jennifer Garner stars as Jenna Rink, a 13 year old who possesses all a 13 year old has, a nice dress and the boobs to fill it out, or in that case doesn’t have. She made a wish and out of all the age in the world she chose to be 30 (they just need something to flow with 13, so pathetic, who wants to be 30, 21 will be more convincing). And after a don’t cry out loud moment she awoke in an apartment she never saw before with a naked man in her shower. She tries to figure out stuff and in the end learned her lesson. Can this be more hackneyed?

Typical and predictable clearly précis this movie. There was nothing in this one that you haven’t seen before. It was like watching a less funny Legally Blonde, a less smart Pretty Woman and a less romantic romantic movie (can’t think of any). Aside from the ending, there was nothing surprising about this movie. The ending itself wasn’t surprising but the way it happened was.

I would have marked this movie as completely undesirable if not for Jennifer Garner’s charm. She just makes you smile and makes you giggle. Seeing her playing on the somewhat weak side is very nice. No ass-kicking biatch in this movie, instead you’ll find a thriller-grooving babe. However, as far as I am concerned, she’s not yet in the ranks of Julia and Cameron who just sparkles the screen with their charming smiles, but I have to say that acting wise, Jennifer is far better than the latter.

Mark Ruffalo also came as a surprise, I curse myself for underestimating his skills, I commended him in Collateral and I have to say his versatility is really outstanding. He pulled that boy-next-door act pretty well. However, if we’re talking about chemistry between these two, I don’t think there were any. Nothing. Not enough to at least make me snap out of my seat and kiss the one seating next to me.

There’s nothing much to contemplate with, with regards to music, except that all of them are like a gazillion years ago and some of them I haven’t heard and don’t plan of hearing ever again. Editing, cinematography, direction, everything else in this movie is as regular as my bowel movement (eew, top that!)

Overall, it was a sometimes funny, sometimes irritating but most of the time watchable movie. I’ll bluntly say that I was disappointed because I expected way too much, especially the trailer being so cute and funny and all, but most of the funny parts in there are like half of the movie already. I’d say watch it if you just feel like wasting time or have an excuse to sleep on a date with your girlfriend. As for the girls, you’ll have an excuse to pick up a fight.

The Terminal---- hop aboard

Title:
The Terminal (B+)
PH Release Date:
Sept. 8, 2004
Actors:
Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Stanley Tucci, Diego Luna, Chi Mcbride, Zoe Saldana
Director:
Steven Spielberg
Story & Screenplay:
Andrew Niccol & Sacha Gervasi / Sacha Gervasi & Jeff Nathanson
Editor / Music:
Michael Kahn / John Williams
Design / Photography:
Alex McDowell / Janusz Kaminski
Producer:
Laurie MacDonald, Walter F. Parkes, Steven Spielberg
Studio:
Dreamworks

“Life is waiting---- but not for you”

Tom Hanks stars as Viktor Navorski, a funny, compassionate man who most of the time acts smart but looks like a moron, which is not far from the character that he played that just captured our tenuous hearts (life is like a box of chocolates strike a chord?). Upon arriving at the finely emulated JFK Airport, his country, the republic of Karkoszia, premeditatedly underwent a military coup. This encumbered him from getting out of the Big Apple and bequeathed the foundation of the entire story. He moseyed around the terminal, befriended the three stooges, fell for a flight attendant and incensed a balding supervisor--- all in a delayed flights work.

Just when you thought that Spielberg would jump from an old genre to a new one, well, it doesn’t happen. He remains to be my favorite director (Hi, I’m Dawson Leery) because he’s the only director who I admired every single work except that one Tom Cruise movie, I didn’t like that one. But despite that, he’s undeniably one of the most if not the most talented director around, the ultimate storyteller since Lola Basiang, And he remains to be for me after watching this movie.

The story was okay; despite the fact that it was too good to be true I still came across a couple of people who thought it was biographical. But if they watched the movie I know they won’t think the same way. I know that sometimes you gotta imagine stuff and alter reality to achieve the story you want, but this movie kinda over altered.

Tom Hanks did a terrific job as always, playing the seemingly stupid guy. Catherine was okay too. I adore Stanley Tucci as an actor and in this movie he proved just how good he is. Chi Mcbride (Boston Public) was still good and Diego Luna remains to pick just the right movies. He’s very intelligent when it comes to taking roles and I think it was a good choice to this cast. I also loved Zoe Saldana’s acting, it was so sweet and natural.

The production design in this movie was superb, undeniably great. It wasn’t a real airport but it looked exactly like the JFK airport (not that I’ve been there). The cinematography was cool too, you know how Spielberg likes it, simple but captivating. The music was okay and the editing was good.

Generally, this movie was a lesser version of Catch me if you can. It was less funny, less real, less dramatic, less acting feat and etc. This is a bubblegum Spielberg movie so just don’t expect too see something really mind-blowing or overwhelmingly moving. It’s simple and nice, but I warn you, it might get a little dry for you in some point, but don’t cancel your flight.

The Notebook----simple touch

Title:
The Notebook (A-)
PH Release Date:
Sept. 1, 2004
Actors:
Ryan Gosling, Rachel Mcadams, James Garner, Gena Rowlands, James Marsden
Director:
Nick Cassaretes
Story & Screenplay:
Based on the novel by Nicholas Sparks; Adapted by Jan Sardi; Screenplay by Jeremy Leven
Editor / Music:
Alan Heim / Aaron Zigman
Design / Photography:
Sarah Knowles / Robert Praisse
Producer:
Mark Johnson and Lym Harris
Studio:
New Line Cinema


“Behind every great article, is a great writer— ehem”

The movie I’ve been promoting for the last 3 months has finally landed on Phillipine soil. This adaptation of Nicholas Sparks’ best-selling novel about a great love that stood an obstreperous mother, a world war and an inoperable ailment, just might be my salvation from the ruinous two weeks of roughly so-so movies. Such a great story of love never fails to bring smiles and tear marks on one’s face.
The story revolves around Noah and Amy, born in completely different worlds; Noah was a worker while Amy is a daughter of a millionaire. What seemed to commence as a summer fling end up too serious. The two fell madly in love with each other, but Amy’s mother show antipathy towards the relationship, and later found the means to completely secede the pair. And blah, blah, blah, as much as I am enjoying this, spoiling this one ain’t the smartest idea.
From the very first frame of the movie, you know what this movie was, the forlorn, wanting sound, that just tickles the drama in you. And that first shot, it was the archetype of genuine beauty, and there were a lot of them in this one. I have to say that the photography was phenomenal, and the simplicity of the production added to that cozy charm of the movie. And that sound, ah, it just makes you wanna steal Kris Aquino’s Kleenex.
The strongest part of this movie was its beginning and ending, it started exceedingly well, and ended just like how we wish it will which made it truly fulfilling. The middle part may get a little boring for some but the mere fact that the director tried his best to discard and compress some of its parts makes it good enough. But the feeling of veracity in this movie is just marvelous, I guess that’s what kept it so interesting, despite the fact that it was so predictable, and a little clichéd.
Ryan Gosling did an okay job; although some of the scenes I notice his acting to be a little OA. But I think Rachel Mcadams really blossomed in this movie. She was effervescent in a lot of ways and she’s so pretty. I actually thought I was watching Jessica Simpson who can act coalesce with Jennifer Garner minus the taekwando. But she did manage to give a few Karate chops. James Marsden was effective too; the too-nice-and-too-perfect-but-I-don’t-love character of his was well played. And the two veteran actors were very convincing as well.
I have not read the novel so it will be impossible for me to weigh it against this movie. One thing I do know though is that it is not the kind of movie that you can call innovative. But that factor isn’t that much of a letdown cuz it was perfectly rendered. Although, it might get a little grating for some, but the fact that such a story despite its banality didn’t fail to move or at the very least touch the audience does entail that it was good.
I had high expectations for this movie; I won’t say that the movie didn’t measure up cuz it did in a lot of ways. I was sorta deeming that it’d be more emotionally packed, but I am glad it wasn’t, wouldn’t wanna leave the cinema crying a river. This is a perfect movie for lovers, a date movie that I think both sex can appreciate. The guys would dare not to sleep for they’ll miss a lot of those Rachel “show-off” scenes. I need to warn you though that it is quite longer than you expect. As for the readers of the book, notwithstanding the fact that I haven’t read the book, I do believe that the book might have been better, bluntly because such a love story is harder to execute on screen than on writing. In reading, you know every inch of the emotions and every single thoughts and actions by the characters. In the movie, you gotta guess. But I think this movie did a pretty fine job, not perfect, but satisfactory. And believe me when I say that you’ll go out of the movie house feeling that true love does exist.