riddler

Flightplan --- almost a plane wreck waiting to happen

2005-11-14T23:04:00.000+08:00

©Touchstone

Title:
Flightplan (B)
PH Release Date:
November 9, 2005
Actors:
Jodie Foster, Sean Bean, Peter Sarsgaard, Kate Beahan, Michael Irby, Erika Christensen
Director:
Robert Schwentke
Screenplay:
Peter A Dowling & Billy Ray
Editor / Music:
Thom Noble / James Horner
Design / Photography:
Alec Hammond / Florian Ballhaus
Producer:
Brian Grazer
Studio:
Touchstone Pictures

©Touchstone
“If Someone Took Everything You Live For... How Far Would You Go To Get It Back?”

Finally, after weeks of waiting, I finally got to see this movie. As a humungous fan of Ms. Foster, I reserve all the right to make a review of it and nobody is gonna stop me! Not even my virus-filled computer!!!

Mized reviews besiege this thriller, which forced me not to expect too much from this movie, withdrawing my previous assumptions that it’s gonna be great--- cuz Jodie’s in it. But after seeing it, I can say that it’s really GREAT---- cuz Jodie’s in it.

©Touchstone

Kyle (Jodie Foster), a recent widower is on board with her daughter on a flight from Berlin to New York when all of a sudden, Julia, her 6 year-old daughter, mysteriously disappeared, leaving no traces behind as if she never existed. Convincing herself and others that she’s not crazy and that her daughter is in fact really missing; Kyle went as far as blaming an Arab man as Julia’s abductor and messing with the plane system. With everyone thinking that she’s out of her mind, will Kyle be able to hold her belief that Julia existed for the plane crew, staff and passengers to find out that it’s anything but a severe case of delusion?

The script for this movie is good, far from airtight, but tolerable. A lot of pivotal changes could have been made that will make this movie the great thriller that it should be. For starters, they could have made Fiona’s (Erika Christensen) role more crucial, made her a link as to how Kyle will find out the truth. As far as I am concerned, despite the enormous size of that plane, it is quite impossible to miss somebody knowing how close the seats are. Someone will always notice someone, maybe not approach or talk to them, but surely someone will spot them. And if that’s not enough to convince you, someone will surely see anyone who reaches for the luggage cabinets (if that’s what they call it). Fiona could have been that one.

©Touchstone

The direction is better than I expected. It was clean and smoothly done. It captured every inch of the acting prowess Jodie showed in this film. He knew where the strength of this movie lay, and he grabbed every opportunity to use it. The pacing for the first hour of the movie was nicely done, it sorta appeared rushed after that but I believe it’s really more of the script’s problem. It just turned too predictable and ordinary, that no good direction can save it.

The editing of the movie is another good thing in this movie. The production design is good as well. A fabulous plane if I may add. Never been on a plane so I don’t think that such things, like a fab bar and the like actually really exists, but I would definitely not turn down a chance to experience riding in it. The music is average, it could have been much, much better. The cinematography is good enough, although sometimes it looks as if they’re not inside a plane cuz it just seemed to big, but how would I know, I’ve never been in one.

©Touchstone

Jodie Foster shines, sizzles, kicks-ass in this movie! She never lost her thriller-charm! Nobody does it better! Although I find it extremely difficult to believe that the role she played was originally written for Sean Penn, I am delighted that it didn’t end up in his hands, not that he’ll ruin it, but I wouldn’t wanna miss the chance to see her in any new movie this year. She rarely makes movies these days, which is really a shame cuz she’s one of the finest, if not the best.

Sean Bean makes a convincing captain who seemed to be having more problems dealing with his constipation rather than his flight scare, but I was really persuaded that he was worried, may it be his bowels or the plane. Peter Sarsgaard is like a split-image of Paul Rudd, with the latter being more good-looking and talented. He is one of the weakest aspects in this movie. I found him infuriating, not his character, but him. He looked and acted like a drunken-bastard suffering from a jetlag. Couldn’t they find anybody else? Erika Christensen was rightfully cast, but unfortunately the role wasn’t developed well enough. Hopefully we’ll get to see more of her doing more challenging roles next time. The rest of the extras who I heard stayed for the gig for more than 5-months did well, lucky them, all they did was sit, chat and stare at real actors and get paid for it for more than 100 days. I guess they didn’t mind being on that much-delayed flight.

©Touchstone

With a handful of Asian thrillers coming out with almost exactly the same themes and ending, it’s nice to see a movie that attempts to bring back the times of Hitchcock, even if they fail. I cannot compare this movie with Red Eye cuz I haven’t seen it, but in comparison with Panic Room, you can say that it was close to being its identical twin. It’s impossible not to sense a feeling of déjà vu after seeing Jodie Foster lock herself in one of the rooms.

For Jodie’s performance alone, it’s worth the watch. This gem of an actress will be sure worth your precious buck. What do you know, after watching it, you may even ask for a return flight.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 15%
Screenplay – 15%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 80% = B

The 40 Year-Old Virgin --- deserves to be put on a pedestal

2005-11-05T13:15:00.000+08:00

© Universal

Title:
The 40 Year-Old Virgin (A-)
PH Release Date:
September 2005
Actors:
Steve Carell, Catherine Keener, Paul Rudd, Romany Malco, Seth Rogen, Jane Lynch, Leslie Mann
Director:
Judd Apatow
Screenplay:
Judd Apatow & Steve Carell
Editor / Music:
Brent White / Lyle Workman
Design / Photography:
Jackson de Govia / Jack N. Green
Producer:
Steve Carell et al.
Studio:
Universal Pictures

© Universal

“I'm very discreet... but I will haunt your dreams”

With the high price of cinema tickets today, it’s hard to decide on what movie deserves are violet buck. That is why I am here. But even I get a little confuse sometimes especially since the advent of 4-in-1 DVDs. If you really think about it, why spend a hundred bucks for a single entry to one movie when you can buy the multimovie DVDs in Quiapo and watch more than one movie as many times as you want, with as many people as you like at your own time? It is in this light that I have decided on this dogma: Thou shall watch movies in cinema only if it’s 3d filled, OPM and/or for free.

However, despite this creed, when I heard about this film, I knew that I got to see it straight from the movie house. And I don’t have a single contrition about that decision. I saw this flick more than a month ago, and watched it again yesterday (for free, thanx to Ate Kors). And somehow I was surprised to find the movie just as great.

© Universal

A couple of comedies regarding virginity have emerged for the past few years but none of them has ever tackled it with an adult man as the center of the story. Most of the time it’s about kids trying to get lucky after the prom with a happy ending completely bullocks for people of their age. Not that I loved the ending of this movie, but the way this flick was handled in its entirety exudes warmth that separates it from its wacko-for-bucko predecessors.

The movie revolves around the life of Andy Stitzer. A man who spends most, actually all of his out-of-work time at home together with his kick-ass videogames, limited edition toys and trombone. He’s a decade away to experience mid-life crisis but the one thing a man, according to the American standards should have experienced is something he has never successfully done before. With his natural shyness and life more predictable than Joan Rivers’ plastic surgery schedule, it seems that Andy may have to skip that whole aspect of life. Not until his co-workers: Cal, David and Jay came in, that Andy might finally get the chance to meet Pussyliah.

© Universal

Director Judd Apatow is in a way almost a veteran in the field of comedy but has never directed a full-length movie before until this one. In a lot of ways it is quite obvious, but the great thing about comedy movies is that when you’re able to make your audience laugh so hard they tend to miss the mistakes that you’ve made. The shots are okay, however, he is not very detailed that if you’re a keen moviegoer, it’ll be impossible to miss the bloopers. For example, when the drank girl puked shrimp sandwich on Andy’s face there was only a very minimal amount that can be found on the left side of his mouth, but the next scene showed Andy’s face covered with puke; a minuscule mistake, nonetheless a mistake.

Judd may be novice in directing, but he is certainly not a neophyte in writing. Together with Steve, they were able to make Andy’s character very interesting and consistent at the same time. They were also able to intertwine physical comedy with pure talk, which made it more fun to watch. The story despite its fairy tale ending still managed to standout because it’s something that has never been done before. They also managed to include lines about life that given enought time to ponder on makes utter sense.

© Universal

The editing of the movie needs some work. The music they used was very funny, apt to the desired reaction from the audience and mood at the moment. The design was pretty simple and the cinematography was nothing special as well. But nevertheless, they all blend perfectly well with the movie, and that for me matters the most.

Steve Carell nailed this part as if it’s his first-time: with full energy and intense determination. He was very consistent and right on the money all throughout. He surely deserves more than Hollywood gives him credit for. And after this flick, I’m pretty sure he’ll get what’s right for him. Catherine Keener played her part very naturally. Paul Rudd is one those few could-have-been leading man but successfully managed to do what he do best—comedy. He’s your average American, and he played this role as if he’s been that person his entire life. Jane Lynch was another standout in this flick, a simple but landmark performance. The rest of the cast was great.

© Universal

Like I’ve mentioned in the beginning, very few comedy/rom-com/non-CGI flick deserves to be seen onscreen. Now that times has never been more difficult, it is imperative that we should be practical in dealing with our hobbies such as watching movies. But it is more imperative to see a movie that will not only bring tremendous joy to you, but will also make you think about the complications that surround relationships and adult life in general. So go watch this flick now, and I’ll stop putting this pussy on a pedestal.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 17%
Screenplay – 18%
Direction / Execution – 17%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 87% = A-

The Brothers Grimm --- it's been a long time coming...

2005-11-04T07:54:00.000+08:00

© Miramax

Title:
The Brothers Grimm (C+)
PH Release Date:
August 2005
Actors:
Matt Damon, Heath Ledger, Monica Bellucci, Jonatahn Pryce, Lena Headey
Director:
Terry Gilliam
Screenplay:
Ehren Kruger
Editor / Music:
Lesley Walker / Dario Marianelli
Design / Photography:
Guy Dyas / Nicola Pecorini et al.
Producer:
Bob and Harvey Weinstein et al.
Studio:
Miramax Films

© Miramax

Show us the way, Grandmother Toad or I’ll smash your slimy green body into tiny green pieces!

Honey, you ain’t dreamin. The wanker is indeed back to bring you your weekly dose of movie crap after two months of absence. I apologize for my sudden disappearance on the face of the blog world but believe me when I say that the amount of break I had is certainly needed to stop me from bashing these movies with no real cause, which I’ll still end up doing otherwise. On with the show ei?

I saw this flick more than two months ago and I’ll try my best to recall as much as I can even if this means I would have to trash down some more recent precious memoirs like that of… never mind.

© Miramax

The movie is supposed to be an imagined biography of the brothers who gave life to most of the classic fairy tale stories we have today. Crappy as it may sound, but given the time they were born, they’ve come up with quite a number of great works spawned from a true artists’ brilliant imagination. Sad to say, the movie failed to show this, and fell greatly short from any level of the authors’ brilliance.

Okay, granting that it shouldn’t be taken seriously (which will be truly evident when you see this movie), I don’t think it will be much to ask to have at least a concrete idea of what they plan to do, accomplish and present. Aside from the fact that they want to incorporate the different fairy tales made by the Grimms into the plot (that somehow worked), there is no clear design for the movie as a whole.

© Miramax

I have not seen any movie of Terry Gilliam. They say he is a visionary of grandeur. Looking at this movie, I do not defy such title. However, for a visionary like him, how come he didn’t notice that his plot is way out of the rail and that he needed to stop working on the visuals and actually start digging for substance.

The way they presented the characters may be whimsical for some, but somehow, I found their personalities anything but refreshing. They were so typical for a buddy movie. I was expecting a little bit more.

© Miramax

Visually, the movie is spectacular. The production design is excellent together with art direction and costumes. It was finely edited, too bad there’s nothing much worth pondering on.

Matt Damon played Wilhelm Grimm with a performance as ridiculous as the movie itself. Heath Ledger is very enjoyable to watch. I no longer wonder as to why a lot of celebrities and even a studio backed out of this project, it is simply because it was a disaster waiting to happen. Good for them.

© Miramax

As a whole, the movie has some really magnificent scenes that will surely be enjoyable for the kids and adults as well. It has a brand of humor not exactly dismissible on a single exposure. However, despite all this, a movie, no matter how great it looks will always lean on its plot, and to be honest, there’s nothing much of that in here. If you are to see it, be careful not to fall under the spell of boredom.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 10%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 14%
Acting – 17%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 70% = C+

The Great Raid --- a not-so-great movie

2005-08-14T11:32:00.000+08:00

© Miramax
Title:
The Great Raid (B-)
PH Release Date:
August 10, 2005
Actors:
Benjamin Bratt, James Franco, Joseph Fiennes, Connie Nielsen, Martin Csokas, Logan Marshall-Green, Cesar Montano, Max Martini
Director:
John Dahl
Based on the books by:
William B. Breuer and Hampton Sides
Screenplay:
Carlo Bernard & Doug Miro
Editor / Music:
Scott Chestnut / Trevor Rabin
Design / Photography:
Bruno Rubeo / Peter Menzies Jr.
Producer:
Bob and Harvey Weinstein et al.
Studio:
Miramax Films

© Miramax

The most daring rescue mission of our time blah, blah, blah…

Normally, given my unscrupulous taste in movies, one would not expect me to watch this flick. Why? For a lot of reasons. First, it’s a war movie. Second, it’s a war movie. And third it’s a war movie. I haven’t included the fact that Benjamin Bratt is in it. So, as you may have expected it was not quite a fancy for me to do this but I had to since this kind of opportunity may not come again, that is to see conceited Pinoy actors work as extras in a big-budgeted real Hollywood movie.

When I first heard that Cesar Montano would be doing a Hollywood movie, I didn’t think that he was going to work with the likes of James Franco and Joseph Fiennes. They’re not A-list stars but man, when I did found out…. All I mumbled was this sh*t’s for real. Some may not consider it as completely a Hollywood break since it’s a movie set in our country and mildly about us, so it will require them to hire Filipino actors, but man, the fact that the Weinsteins are producing it, means it’s legit.

© Miramax

The movie is set during the latter part of the World Ward II. A minute number of soldiers were assigned to rescue 500 POW in Cabanatuan, who’s been resident captives in than hands of the callous Japanese for three years. The said task was dubbed to be impossible cuz not only were they outnumbered and outpowered, they’re battling with time since an abolition order was already launched.

The battalion, led by Lt. Col. Mucci (Bratt) will have to find the best way to save their POW before they get fried. Together with their strategist, Capt. Prince (Franco), they’ll do the most impossible mission ever with the help of Filipino Guerillas led by Capt. Pajota (Cesar Montano) and save Major Gibson (Joseph Fiennes) and the rest of his crew.

© Miramax

Weird as it may seem not only to you, but to myself as well. I did find the movie pleasant. Unlike some of the comments for this movie, I didn’t find it boring at all. It was not perfect but definitely more than a mediocre. Some may find this view biased since it’s a Filipino film, believe me, there’s no way that I am going to compose this sh*t for the mere sake of carrying our own chair… I’ll get nothing from it. I just did like it. It was not that astoundingly exciting movie, but it was worth watching.

One good element that you will find in this movie that can hardly be seen in war movies such as these, is the fact that almost everything was real. This is probably the most historically factual war film to date. Which leads me to the downside of this flick, its lack of good characterization. Because its focus is on giving a precise account of the events that transpired during that time and including all the major players there was not much too remember or hang on to except that. If the movie focused on the romance between Connie and Joseph’s character and used the rescue as a mere backdrop, then this movie will fair better.

© Miramax

First time director John Dahl did an okay job overall. Nothing special but good enough. The cinematography is far from great but passable. I would say the same thing for the editing. However, I did like the production design. They captured Manila very well. Music wise, I loved how they used it on the scene when the dead members of their society were presented to Connie’s character.

One thing that I really didn’t like in this flick is the fact that Benjamin Bratt is in it. I never liked him and I’m pretty sure I never will. He’s the weakest element in this movie. The trying-hard-to-be-oldie accent pissed me off beyond limits. What the f*ck were they thinking, casting him for such role.

© Miramax

I could say entirely the opposite for the rest of the cast. James Franco was convincing. Joseph Fiennes proved that he deserves to be one my favorites. Connie Nielsen just wrote her name on my list. Logan Green needs to get a better role that this one cuz he's really good. Cesar Montano was Cesar Montano nothing different. He did well and I hope others noticed him. They say Zoren Legaspi was supposed to play the role of Captain Pajota but backed out due to inability to leave he family, how sweet and how tragic. Opportunities like such doesn’t come very often.

If you keep your eyes glued on the screen, you’ll find a lot of Filipino extras in the movie. Bembol Roco, Alvin Anson and Paolo Montalban to name a few. The latter I failed to catch but his name is on the credits.

© Miramax

I recommend people to see it mainly to get the chance to watch Filipino thespians working together with real Hollywood actors. It’s not a great film nor is it a mere trash. It has some great moments and some not-so, but as a whole it delivers as a war flick. This is definitely not for the kids so better keep them out. Not because it’s the usual raid that we see on the TV and tabloids, but because it’s too violent for them. God, I’m so lame.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 16%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 78% = B-

Charlie and the Wonderful Factory --- let's BOogie!

2005-08-06T20:01:00.000+08:00

© WB

Title:
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (A)
PH Release Date:
August 3, 2005
Actors:
Johnny Depp, Freddie Highmore, David Kelly, Helene Bonham Carter, Deep Roy, Noah Taylor, Christopher Lee
Director:
Tim Burton
Based on the book:
“Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” by Roald Dahl
Screenplay:
John August
Editor / Music:
Chris Lebenzon / Danny Elfman
Design / Photography:
Alex Mcdowell / Philippe Rousselot
Producer:
Brad Grey et al.
Studio:
Warner Bros. Pictures

© WB

"Improvisation is parlor trick, anyone can do it.... Chewing gum is really gross, chewing gum I hate the most"

Despite my terribly busy schedule and laborious deadlines, I took some time off to see this movie. I have been waiting to catch sight of Johnny back on the big screen and having Freddie Highmore (Finding Neverland) as his companion is considerably a bonus. Not to mention the man behind the lens has a reputation of his own: that of a slick, bizarre and artistic type of director. Did the producers make the right choice of giving an edgy character like Willy to Tim Burton (Batman, Sleepy Hollow)? Or was it the perfect option for this adaptation of the 1971 Gene Wilder-top-billed-classic?

The story is based from the book by Dahl who wrote the screenplay for the first movie: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. The film adopts the original name from the book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which some people, including me, may perceive as a twist in the focus of the story. Instead of Willy Wonka being the center of attention, it will be Charlie Buckett to which story will revolve.

© WB

During the first half hour of the movie, the story seems to follow the trail of my supposition with it focusing almost the entire time on Charlie and his family. However, when Willy Wonka began to appear, everything changed, and quite honestly, it seemed that Charlie’s character was a bit shrugged off. Despite the film’s failure to fully maximize on the emotional attachment of the audience to the boy that they superbly made on the beginning, it still stands out as one of the most quirky and enjoyable flick in movie history.

If one will see this film without any idea as to what he’s getting himself into; his immediate assumption will be he’s seeing a Potter flick. Not a bad guess since the movie exudes the same atmosphere like that of Rowling’s book but this one, in a really, really weird way is more affective. I honestly cannot believe I’m ever gonna say anything like that from a Tim Burton film but I was on the verge of crying for poor Charlie, for God knows how many times. If not for the smooth antics it pokes out one at a time, I would have forgotten that I’m watching a Burton movie. That was of course, all in the beginning, when Willy was still out of sight, but after he appeared, I think you know what happened. It was a ticket to idiosyncrasy for Tim and oh do I think he enjoyed it!

© WB

I have not seen the original movie (or seen the book), and I am begging anyone who has copy to please lend me on A.S.A.P. A lot of people consider that one a classic, especially since Gene Wilder is in it. But he’s not the reason why I wanna see the original. I wanna compare the song and dance numbers from this movie from that one, and of course, weigh Depp against the old Willy. Heard some tracks from the old ones and I just didn’t find it as good.

The movie’s screenplay follows a pretty predictable pattern. Despite my lack of prior knowledge about its storyline, somehow I already knew what was going to happen from the get-go. I do not take it against the writer since it was based from a children’s book (I assume) and the fact he was able to make Willy Wonka as refreshing as one can possibly imagine already deserves a SOVA from me. The lines were spot-on, jest-oriented but ingested with no-nonsense outlooks and insights about life. In fact, I think the subject matter may seem sugarcoated in the beginning, but if you try to look deeper, it’s anything but sweet. It’s bitter, real and made to hit any American parents’ most unused spot.

© WB

The visuals were so Tim Burton from start to finish. Despite the bright colors, somehow the darkness still radiates from it. Tim manages to depict a quirky yet believable ambiance, something one cannot possibly find in The Cat in The Hat. The timing was perfect for me, not a single misstep. The delivery and the flow of conversation plus his dead right shots were more than a film enthusiast or a simple moviegoer can ask for.

Musically, this movie rocks! Danny Elfman melodically wrote his name on my list. The songs were great. Some of them were based from the original while others sounded completely different. Some people may not agree, but the fact that he was able to mix and use different kinds of music for each Oompa-Loompa scenes was really impressive. From U2 to Queens, you’ll hear it all here! And the lyrics may seem stupid, and principally written to humor you, there’s more to it than one would initially realize.

© WB

It’s predecessor’s design is said to be one of the most memorable from earlier cinema, something that I cannot attest or protest to since I have not seen it, but if it was that good, I can say that this version’s would put up a good fight. I’ve never seen a much more colorful non-animated movie. And it was not just about putting all the bright colors to make it glow, the look harmonizes with the whole feel of the movie which makes it more enjoyable and convincing. Plus, the good cinematography caught them all just right. And the fine editing managed to compress them all without looking rushed.

I was shocked how some people reacted negatively to Johnny Depp’s performance. I think he did everything just right. I guess people were just expecting him to be nasty but nice ala Gene, but c’mon, Tim and Johnny together and you’re looking for decorum? This is the tamest they can possible get! And it will not be Johnny if he boxed himself merely on Gene’s performance and not allowing himself to let go and create the character on his own. I loved his performance and I’m sure a lot of people did as well. Was it his best? Arguably. Was it as eccentric as Michael Jackson? Hardly!

© WB

Freddie Highmore is the new “it” boy in Hollywood. Not because he starred in that completely idiotic movie about a stupid alien but because he simply gets the role all child actors would hope for. It may not be a franchise like Harry Potter (whose star is considerably old), but it’s a movie where he acts side-by-side with great actors not to mention working with Weird Burton. Definitely more than a boy his age would ask for. I just hope he'll continuously give superb performances and for him not to be the next Haley. Let’s cross our fingers shall we?

David Kelly and the rest of the oldies gave great performances. Helena was also good. And of course, the worth mentioning of them all, the face that occupied almost an entire ship. The man in red, blue, yellow and a lot more. The one nobody will indeed miss, Deep Roy. Yup, he portrayed the Oompa-Loompas, and man was he good at it. He may be intimidating, but he’s really funny at the same time. Believe me, just one look and you’ll flinch to laugh.

© WB

This film may be about a poor boy, an eccentric man and a gigantic chocolate factory that all falls under a predictable pattern, but there’s no possible way that one can compare it to a pointless candy. Filled with great humor, visuals and insights this movie will surely cater to any cotton candy enthusiast or the popcorn junkie, but I’m afraid the enthusiasts will need a little guidance for some visuals and dialogues, but nonetheless it will surely be enjoyed by all.

How did it end? Find out for yourself, besides, the best kind of prize is a surprise! Consider it one. Whoa! What an entry short and sweet!

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 17%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 20%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 91% = A

Pinoy Blonde ---- too much higlights fried the movie

2005-07-15T00:07:00.000+08:00

Title:
Pinoy Blonde (B)
PH Release Date:
July 13, 2005
Actors:
Boy II Quizon, Jeffrey Quizon, Ricky Davao, Iza Calzado, Jaime Fabregas, Eddie Garcia, Tessie Tomas, Tonton Gutierrez, Michael de Mesa, Mark Gil, Ara Mina
Director:
Peque Gallaga
Story and Screenplay:
Peque Gallaga and Lore Reyes
Producer:
Akiva Goldsman et al.
Studio:
Unitel Pictures

“I have a very bad feeling about this, Star Wars, George Lucas”

In moviemaking by and large, rarely comes a satire that’s not merely after laughs nor the nuisance, but made to educate or at least acquaint an audience to his nation or simply to himself. You’re probably wondering why on earth am I talking so seriously when I’m about to discuss a film that is supposed to be not be taken as such. For those who don’t know how to think, it’ll be impossible to discern the beauty hidden underneath the jest and lampoons Pinoy Blonde has to offer, but for me and the people of my degree, there may be difficulty but absolutely no improbability.

The ingenious team of director Peque Gallaga and Lore Reyes returns to the big screen after a long time of much needed separation thanks to their superfluous venture Magic Kingdom that was found anything but enchanting. This time they made a film with a very dim potential commercially, something that few movie companies dare to carry out, except Unitel that brought us Crying Ladies. After the outfit’s lost from Santa Santita, they produced this project that is more likely to become a flop than their previous venture.

Two Quizons are the lead star of the movie, and I am so thankful that Vandolph is not one of them (he has a cameo role that was so predictable). It’s the story about cousins, both are film school dropouts who spend most of their time, creating scenes in their heads, uttering petty lines from popular movies and bickering over who’s the better director: Brocka or Bernal. They continue to find the answer to this strenuous query as they deliver a mysterious package to an old, seemingly empty and haunted Hotel Marikopa where they’ll experience reality for the first time.

I was not able to watch the movie from the very beginning, which may explain why I found it difficult to adjust myself to its milieu. Few minutes later, I grasped the idea of what this movie’s all about and what it plans to accomplish. It’s definitely not your typical Pinoy film, the visual style is a combination of American, French and Mexiacan/Spanish approach. It is more of a mockumentary rather than an actual feature film. The setting, the look, the pacing; all of which resembled those of a documentary.

Gallaga and Reyes had good intentions and a great message to spread across, however, since they said it themselves that it’s not your typical Pinoy film, the viewers may not be able to enjoy or like it which has been proven by the less than handful of people inside the cinema with us. The not-so intact storyline also brings the moviegoer to a confusing state that he/she will not be able to get out of till the end cuz the ending, besides the great line from Sharon’s movie, was anything but terrific.

The script was good at best. It had a lot of special moments, and surprisingly, this moments were those that didn’t borrow lines from neither local or foreign films. I especially loved the “Ako naman si Marilou Diaz-Abaya, eto naman si Laurice Guillen” scene. More of these, that more Filipinos, their target audience can actually relate to will lead to a better understanding and appreciation on the part of the audience. This style of filmmaking is something that is made to address the intellectuals or those of higher society. But the movie’s message is more of directed to the typical mass audience or Filipinos who do not find this type of movies not even worth buying in pirated, let alone see in a cinema.

The movie has a lot of good animation scenes. How I wish they used a better camera for the “real” scenes cuz it seemed to old for my eyes. The music is very much Pinoy Rock with the main theme song from the Radio Active Sago Project. Am not particularly a fan of such type of music but I don’t hate it as well. Nevertheless, it was still music to my ears and that’s all that matters. The editing was good, cinematography was better than my expectation and the production design was nice too.

Boy II needs a lot of work, he made the movie look more artificial. Jeffrey on the other hand, was good but not as compelling as I anticipated him to be. In contrast, Ricky Davao was unbelievably great. His best acting feat so far. Jaime Fabregas rarely goes in front of the camera but this role was definitely worth it and he gave one hell of a performance as well. The movie had so much cameos and small roles that it would take me forever to describe their performances one by one.

As a movie fan I appreciate the effort laid for the production of the movie and the message of nationalism and liberation that it tried to propel. However, I also found the movie unsuccessful in projecting the message they planned to send across which can be attributed to a lot of factors that even to me may not be known. But still, I recommend it for everyone to see just to help the courageous studio get back their investment. It may also open doors to better understanding of our Pinoy movie culture and enjoyment to those who wants to see their favorite stars play cameo roles. It’s Pinoy Blonde but were not really blonde so you decide if it’s worth the highlights.

Fantastic Four --- is anything but FaNtAstic!

2005-07-10T01:06:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century FOX

Title:
Fantastic Four (C+)
PH Release Date:
July 6, 2005
Actors:
Ioan Gruffudd, Jessica Alba, Chris Evans, Michael Chiklis, Julian McMahon, Hamish Linklater, Kerry Washington
Director:
Tim Story
Based on the Comic book by:
Jack Kirby and Stan Lee
Screenplay:
Michael France and Mark Frost
Editor / Music:
William Hoy / John Ottman
Design / Photography:
Bill Boes / Oilver Wood
Producer:
Stan Lee, Chris Columbus et al.
Studio:
Marvel and 20th Century FOX

© 20th Century FOX

“you don’t know how much I'm willing to give just to be invisible”

It’s time to face another breed of Marvel comic book characters as they try their luck on the big screen. The feedbacks are not that enticing, however, two gorgeous young people in one movie sporting tight suits is more than encouraging for me.

Four unique who found themselves armed with superpowers after they were exposed to cosmic radiation. They had special abilities diverse from one another that led them to approach it differently as well. Reed Richards (Gruffudd) can stretch his body anytime and anywhere he wants to. Sue Storm (Alba) can conceal herself from others and generate force fields. Johnny Storm (Evans) can turn himself into a blazing human being. And Ben Grimm (Chiclis)becomes a rock-like being. Soon, they found out that it isn’t only them who was affected by the radiation but also the man who financed their explore and an admirer of Sue, Victor Von Doom (McMahon). However, unlike the four, he’s out to get everything he wants and with a power like his, only four people can go up against him and battle it out to their last breath.

© 20th Century FOX

I hope you’re familiar with the drill. This review is coming form a person who has never read or touched this comic book. If you don’t know that by now, well, now you do. And If you’ve seen the movie and read some of my works, they you probably know as well that this movie is as trashy as other comic-book movies who’s only after making profit and absolutely nothing else.

The movie was 10 years in the making, funny, cuz it doesn’t seem like it. It didn’t really felt like it was rushed, but it was more of the screenplay seemed to have not been well-thought of. I don’t know about the original story but I’m stripping that off and the script just appears too silly for me. And the inanity doesn’t stop there.

© 20th Century FOX

Instead of getting somebody experienced and actually capable of making sci-fi action movies, they end up with a director whose most famous work is about people getting their hair done (Barbershop). I don’t know what happened to the producers, did they run out of budget? Chris Columbus (Harry Potter 1 & 2) is a producer of this movie and was once eyed to direct it, maybe he saw how much a disaster the script was that he settled for earning cash without breaking any sweat.

Ironically, Tim Story ain’t capable of telling any. The characters were close to being two-dimensional, the action sequences were mediocre at best and the pacing and continuity was simply hideous. I hope he never gets the chance to handle any form of camera again.

© 20th Century FOX

Though the script was flawed in more ways than 10. I believe it had a lot of potential, however, the annoying attempt to make the line resemble to their abilities was truly irritating. I did love on line though, when Ben told Sue how much he’ll give up just to be invisible. That was the only “real” scene in this movie, more of that and better action sequences, no question about it, this movie’s gonna be fantastic.

Th movie wasn't totally that great when it comes to the special effects. but it's tolerable given that they reuire to do much, muc more compared to one superhero movies like Spiderman. The sound effects were okay. The cinematography was not as good as i visualized it. And the editing was bad.

© 20th Century FOX

Ioan Gruffudd should have been replaced. He just doesn’t work as that character. He didn’t get the essence of him or the charisma to be their leader. I have nothing against him besides his froggy look but I really didn’t find him appropriate for the role. He could have stretched further more but he wasn’t able and capable to. Jessica Alba is gorgeous in blonde and how I hope she stays that way. Though at times, her I-ain’t-no-hollaback-girl approach to acting gets into my nerves, a simple smile or a view of her wearing that tight suit makes everything alright.

Chris Evans is hot as hell as well. Needs a lot of work when it comes to cracking jokes, but he’s definitely more than just a pretty face…. He’s got that one scorching body to go along with it. Michael Chiklis was the tough guy he’s supposed to be, but I don’t think he was complete able to get sympathy from the audience but I know how hard it must have been for him (or his double)to wear that suit. Julian Mcmahon was back to being Cole again and I loved it. Not that his character in Nip/Tuck is kind, but in this one, he offers no surgery. The chemistry of the characters was below average. Am sorry but it really was.

© 20th Century FOX

Fantastic Four offers one hell of a good time for people who don't think and are only after glossy images. In other words, kids and wannabe kids would love it. Girls would go crazy over Chris Evans close-to-nude scene which the movie failed to equate for the male audience, leaving us with nothing more than a tight suit to drool over. How sad. I’m not gonna be a hypocrite and say I didn’t enjoy the movie even to the tiniest bit cuz I did that’s why it didn’t get such a low mark but if I was to judge this in screenplay and direction alone, I could have given worse. If you are to watch this movie and plans to do the same, I have, but one reminder to you—prepare for the preposterous.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 15%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 10%
Acting – 14%
Technical Aspect – 16%
Total: 67% = C+

War of the Worlds ----- cheesy, sloppy, but oddly entrancing

2005-07-05T06:10:00.000+08:00

© Paramount

Title:
War of the Worlds (B)
PH Release Date:
June 29, 2005
Actors:
Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Justin Chatwin, Miranda Otto, Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman
Director:
Steven Spielberg
Based on the Novel by:
H.G Wells
Screenplay:
Josh Friedman & David Koepp
Editor / Music:
Michael Kahn / John Williams
Design / Photography:
Rick Carter / Janusz Kaminski
Producer:
Kathleen Kennedy et al.
Studio:
DreamWorks and Paramount Pictures

© Paramount

"The last war on earth won’t be started by humans"

Cruise is back for another sci-fi extravaganza together with no less than his Minority Report director Steven Spielberg. I’m sure by the title alone you pretty much have an idea of what this movie’s gonna proffer. It’s a family flick full of flying cars, burning houses, but did you guess fried human beings? Yef, all that plus more in this bizarrely directed, oddly acted (by an eccentrically in love superstar) drama/comedy/disaster movie by two pre-anopausal film giants.

Ray (Cruise) is your typical Spielberg father figure, irresponsible, separated and estranged from his own kids. As her ex-wife (Otto) leaves him with an incredibly strenuous task of looking after their children as she heads for Boston, Ray takes the responsibility the best way he knows how, by sleeping it over. The next day, he woke up with his son nowhere in sight, searched for him and instead found something way beyond what his mind can imagine.

© Paramount

I suppose it’s a must that you be warned that this review is from somebody who has never read or understood any works of H. G Wells. Science stuff was never my thang and books are just as sickening. Moving on, well, I’m a fan of Tom, Steven and Dakota but that doesn’t mean I’m gonna be nice. Was I ever?

If you know me personally you are aware how much I love Steven, for the simple reason that he’s the only director I knew when I was younger. Loved most of his works, except the most recent one (the terminal) but still he’s one of my faves and there’s no changing my mind about it. However, despite this, I thought this movie was his sloppiest work ever. He’s an incredible storyteller but man, what happened in this movie? Even if the direction was flawed, I still can’t believe it was that bad knowing he’s behind the camera.

© Paramount

The story was terribly simple for him not to completely realize it. Yes, the premise was weak and awfully outmoded but Steven always finds a way. How come he seemed to have never found the one for this movie? Is it because the movie was made under an enormously short amount of time and rushed? This didn’t give the writers or Steven, much time to analyze what they wanna do and project on screen. I’m not saying that the direction is awful, no it’s not! Steven is not capable of doing anything as such. But, I never expected shoddy cameraworks from him. He’s usually very detailed when it comes to his scene but this time he wasn’t.

Spielberg’s direction has one extremely powerful asset--- great pacing. There was no dull moment in this movie, you’re intrigued from start to finish and I mean from start to finish. A lot of questions will be left unanswered, which brings me back to how sloppy Steven was in this movie, he won’t get away with this one.

The script has little potential, I think it’s a mediocre work but because of the powerplayers behind this movie it rose up quite a lot of notch. A person who’ll read it on a personal time will end up, like in the movie, bloody.

© Paramount

The wonderful pacing was backed-up by those incredible CGI effects. At this point, we can probably compare it to Independence Day. I say Indi is better. I dunno if this is because of the cinematography or the production design but a lot of the stunts looked like they were all done in a studio or worst, in Paris Hilton’s Barbie house (which is her house). It’s this bizarreness that made this movie gripping and at the same time worth puking. The sound effects were not so fascinating or appalling though.

Tom Cruise didn’t feel like he’s acting. His character is crazy and I think at the moment he is as well. Honestly, I see not much difference. I was waiting for him to actually start saying “I love you Katie” over and over again during that scene from the human-sucking, blood-spraying alien mode of transport. Or worse, do another crazy you-know-nothing scientology crap against my depressed aunt (Brooke Shields). Sadly, none of these can be seen, however, he had enough scenes that reflect the same quality of his madness.

© Paramount

The little girl who loved Sam is still a little girl but has come a long, long, way since she had to endure hours of shooting with an old man with no sense of humor (Sean “dour” Penn). Well, she didn’t exactly take herself away from crazy people since Tom is playing his Dad but at least we’ve seen tremendous growth and the brightest future ahead of her. Dakota's eyes can match even a Meryl Streep acting. I swear! I just hope she doesn’t end up as bitter as Haley Joel Osment when he didn’t get Harry’s role. But since she’s with Tom--- let scientology handle that.

Tim Robbins was crazy in this movie. Don’t worry he’s not with Susan so at least the ultimate team ain’t in progress. But funny though, I was waiting for him to get out of the house and start shouting while holding his streamer that says “Get out you bloodsuckers!”. To bad it didn’t happen. Miranda Otto looked pregnant. And the guy who played Tom’s son? Never mind him.

© Paramount

There’s a big chance that after you see this movie, you’ll go out and wonder what the f*ck was it all about. The answer is simple. You’re a typical moviegoer who wants everything spoon-fed. You want the movie to say everything that goes on screen to you, word by word as it happens. Well, I’ve got news for you---- time to grow-up! But if it’s about science stuff that you’re wondering about, it’s okay, I have none to little background of it as well.

A riveting and uniquely absorbing movie that’s way too cheesy to be true. It’s funny even if doesn’t try to be so. Few movies get to do that. It’s safe to bring the kids with you on this movie then, observe how they react to stubborn characters on screen who looks like them. It’s definitely not the best Spielberg or Cruise movie, but the movie has an odd factor in it that needs to be seen by everyone. I don’t care what the movie tagline says, but I think the last war on earth will be started by humans from elsewhere… no, not from EUROPE!

Grading Sheet:
Story – 16%
Screenplay – 13%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 80% = B

Hitchhiker's Guide to iNsAniTY... do panic!

2005-06-25T02:11:00.000+08:00

© Touchstone Pictures

Title:
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (C)
PH Release Date:
June 22, 2005
Actors:
Martin Freeman, Mos Def, Sam Rockwell, Zooey Deschanel, Bill Nighy, Alan Rickman
Director:
Garth Jennings
Based on the Book by:
Douglas Adams
Screenplay:
Douglas Adams and Karey Kirkpatrick
Editor / Music:
Niven Howie / Bernie Leadon and Joby Talbot
Design / Photography:
Joel Collins / Igor Jadue-Lillo
Producer:
Gary Barber et al.
Studio:
Touchstone Pictures

© Touchstone Pictures

“Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.”

What can be worst than having your humble home bulldozed? The end of the World! This is exactly what happened to Arthur Dent (Fremman), good thing his friend Ford (Def) sorta knows his way across the universe, with a little help from a hitchhiker’s book. Just when Arthur thought that life as he knows it is over, he finds out that the oddly-named Trillian (Deschanel) is alive. However, things are meant to be not smooth-sailing especially when the egotistic brain-dead self-kidnapped President of the Universe (Rockwell) is hanging around with you on a stolen ship. Will Arthur and the rest of the gang survive to find out the truth about life and everything else, even if they don’t have the anti-depressant to treat Marvin the paranoid android?

© Touchstone Pictures

If you’re gonna ask me what I think about the movie a minute after I’ve seen it, I would have given two simple words to describe it all to you ----- IT SUCKS! This is the worst movie I’ve seen this year, and I’m not exaggerating. Not because the story or the screenplay sucks but because it wasn’t given the due respect it deserves for being such a wonderful book (not that I’ve read it… wahhee). I’m judging by the lines I heard from the movie, a lot of them, with much better execution, would be anything but a far cry from brilliance.

So generally, the movie didn’t suck as much. The story and screenplay is promising. Potential was never a question with this one. Normally, I would have loved this movie. There were tons of good lines and catchphrases to feast on. British comedy isn’t exactly my fetish but I love the way they can make a fool out of themselves without appearing too conscious. They’re naturally silly and I admire that about them. This one is as imprudent and unruly but as a movie in its entirety, it didn’t come across as such.

© Touchstone Pictures

The direction should take most of the blaming. He’s terribly out of his element. This guy should be directing MYX, or something that does not require him to actually think, conceptualize, characterize or in plain terms, direct. The movie was as off-key as William Hung, the only difference? The latter is actually funny.

If I was a fan of the book, or at least if I have read the book, I would have been terribly disappointed. I really don’t know what happened to Douglas Adams and he allowed this movie to be released despite such Paris Hilton-slim resemblance to his works brilliance, oh I’m sorry, Lara Flynn Boyle-slim (again, I haven’t read the book… wahehe).

© Touchstone Pictures

The effects and production design of the movie was so 80’s sitcom. ET never looked as dreary as this one, ugly maybe, but monotonous; no. Good thing, Marvin the paranoid android was such a pleasure to watch and if he seemed tedious in any way it’s because the character calls for it. The sound wasn’t too fabulous as well, but I did love the song. And oh, the animation was good.

Aside from the hideous direction, the acting comes in second in our to-blame list. I mean, who are these crazy Brits? Mos Def looked like that guy from Top of the Pops. Martin Freeman is in no way as good as Martin Sheen or Morgan Freeman. Zooey Deschanel, she’s that girl from Britney’s movie, not much improvement if you ask me. And Sam Rockwell just took his name out from my hotlist with his own bare futile hands. The only performance worth raving for was Alan Rickman’s. And you wouldn’t even get a glimpse of him. It’s crazy how he’s the one who wasn’t there but who’s actually in there. All his lines were right on the money, I never thought of him as a comedian, he proved me wrong.

© Touchstone Pictures

If you’re in any way planning to see this flick, I’m telling you now to change your plans. This movie does not deserve to be seen by any normal human being, and by normal I mean, those with actual brain. I gotta be cruel to be kind, cuz it’s the only way I can save you from nearly two hours of torture, believe me, it almost killed me. It’s not the type of movie you’d like to be associated with. After seeing it, you’ll say exactly the same thing I uttered before leaving the cinema--- “so long and thanx for nothing!”

Grading Sheet:
Story – 15%
Screenplay – 14%
Direction / Execution – 10%
Acting – 13%
Technical Aspect – 13%
Total: 65% = C

Batman Begins... and how i wish it never ends!

2005-06-20T21:53:00.000+08:00

© WB

Title:
Batman Begins (A)
PH Release Date:
June 15, 2005
Actors:
Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Katie Holmes, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer, Ken Watanabe, Morgan Freeman, Gus Lewis
Director:
Christopher Nolan
Story:
Based on characters created by Bob Kane for D. C. Comics
Screenplay:
David S. Goyer & Christpher Nolan
Editor / Music:
Lee Smith / James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer
Design / Photography:
Nathan Crowley / Wally Pfister
Producer:
Emma Thomas et al.
Studio:
Warner Bros.

© WB

It is not what you say that defines you, it's what you do….

When watching any flick, I try to make sure that I don’t put in a lot of or any expectations for the simple reason that it’s usually not met, therefore avoiding much unwanted disappointment. I did the same with this movie for weeks. In fact, I didn’t plan to watch this one at all after seeing the not-so attractive trailer (they didn’t show my Katie in the earlier trailers). But after great reviews and feedbacks from those who’ve seen it, a week before its showing, I’m as excited as any comic book fan on earth. And to be honest they went way beyond my expectations.

© WB

I kept on trying to remember as to where I’ve heard the director’s name. I seek for any information regarding his previous works and there it hit me. He was that Brit guy who made one of the most talked-about movies of our generation--- Memento. I haven’t seen this one but I’m preparing for it. They say you gotta be primed from all aspects of your being before you see it. Only a genius can see this movie once and understand the entirety of it. So the director’s got a noir reputation, this is gonna be exciting.

And the hell it was. I loved it. Every aspect of the movie I embraced so dearly. This is the best comic book adaptation yet, and the best comic book-based movie since Spiderman 2. It touches the characters beyond the mythological and scientific factors. It’s serious but it doesn’t bore a bit. It’s gripping from start to finish and emotionally charged. It’s art and commercial in one. It’s a beginning everyone’s supposed to see.

© WB

The movie goes where no other Batman movie has gone before--- where everything truly began. It delves into how a young boy who’s scared of bats became the human being of their kind. What’s extremely wonderful about it, aside from the fact that we get to see how he really developed into the Caped Crusader, is that it’s so believable. It was not repulsive at all.

I love Tim Burton’s works including the Batman movies. However, I gotta say that I love Christopher Nolan’s version more. I don’t know if it’s because the movie offers more than an exciting fight-scene between the Dark Knight and a villain, or it is because the whole idea seemed to be very real and not as fanciful. Yes, it may not have an Oscar-winning production design (at least not yet) but the story is great enough that a simple background will do.

© WB

There’s magic about how mentally compelling Christopher Nolan’s works are. I’ve seen Insomnia and even a narcoleptic won’t be able to sleep while watching it. He shows characters like they are in front of you, as if they are part of the world you belong in. Not a single thread of doubt that they exist. He makes sure that you are involved in every aspect of the character’s development. He’s promulgating a no-audience left behind policy . Wahehe...

© WB

The screenplay works well. The lines were good, a little more comicish in terms of discourse compared to Spiderman. Some profound dialogues which weren’t too cheesy for my taste.

Another proof of how great this film truly is, the two music geniuses: James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer working together in this one. That rarely happens and I’m so glad it’s for this project. The cinematography’s good and the editing’s fine as well. One thing I found quite off though is during the hand-to-hand combat scenes, the shots seemed to be all over the place. Aside from that it’s all good.

© WB

At first, I doubted Christian Bale’s capacity to play the title role. Yeah, I know he’ll do everything for the sake of a movie, he already proved that going beyond skinny in The Machinist. Somehow, I just didn’t think he has the “it” factor to play the caped crusader, turns out he’ll be the only Batman worth seeing. Michael Keaton’s too emotional and Val Kilmer is too stoned, Bale is just perfect. I have one weird observation though, during some of the scenes between him and Katie he suddenly turned into Tobey Maguire, and it’s Peter and Mary Jane all over again. It’s funny but he needs to work on that one in case he’s doing the sequel God, I do hope so!

© WB

Katie Holmes was at her best in this movie. She’s showing emotions so stop mocking my baby! Wahehe. Sorry Tom, she was mine first! Michael Caine is so perfect as Albert, a little stockier but it’s passable. Chris Cooper is so stupid to turn down Gary Oldman’s role, having an Oscar doesn’t make you a God so I hope you don’t get any good projects after the last work you did, which was like a century ago.

Liam Neeson never fails to amaze me, I guess he really felt his fight scenes with the Dark Night, something he’ll never be able to be, poor him, they should have given him the role when he was younger. The landmark performance goes to Tom Wilkinson, whew! And in case you’re wondering who that weirdly-eyed young man playing the psychologist/scarecrow is, it’s Cillian Murphy, the guy from 28 days later and the Girl with the Pearl Earring. Morgan Freeman was great as always. Ken Watanabe was a bit amusing.

© WB

In case you didn’t catch what I said earlier, it’s the best comic book-based movie yet! I don’t care what others say, this is the finest of them all. Spiderman 2 comes in close second. This movie will cater to every kind of audience except maybe for children cuz it’s quite traumatic and mature in nature. But otherwise you’ll have a ball. I did. If anyone’s in need of a companion in seeing this one, don’t be shy and ask me, I’ll be more than willing to oblige. To face fear you must become fear, don't be the one preyed on... see how it all begins...

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 18%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 19%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 91% = A

Mr. & Mrs. Smith --- B-movie gets A-list treatment

2005-06-10T00:24:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century Fox

Title:
Mr. & Mrs. Smith (B-)
PH Release Date:
June 8, 2005
Actors:
Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Adam Brody, Vince Vaughn. Angela Basette, Kerry Washington
Director:
Doug Liman
Story and Screenplay:
Simon Kinberg and Jez Butterworth
Editor / Music:
Michael Tronick / John Powell
Design / Photography:
Jeff Mann / Bojan Bazelli
Producer:
Akiva Goldsman et al.
Studio:
20th Century Fox

© 20th Century Fox

Finally, the movie that started all rumors of an illicit affair is finally out. People have different reasons why they watched this movie. Some wants to simply see Brad or Angie or even Adam. Some wants to see an action/rom-com type of flick. Mine in particular is simple: just to see the one thing that can lead me close to the truth. And believe me, the truth is so in here!

Two assassins from two competing agencies, John and Jane Smith were married 5 or 6 years ago, and as any ordinary couple that lives in a mansion with no offspring, they found themselves alone with each other and terribly estrange from one another. Determined to make the marriage work they seek counseling, however, it isn’t the long expensive hours of sitting on the psychologist’s chair where they’ll find out each other’s secret, but on the field.

© 20th Century Fox

If I am Jennifer Aniston, I have all the reasons in the world to believe that he left her for the interrupted girl. First, he wants a baby, she has the baby. Second, he needs time, she’s got time. And now, this movie. They were like born to be onscreen together. Never a dull moment when they were with each other. If you see them for the first time in this movie, it’ll lead you to believe that they’re an item.

Angelina’s role was first cutout for Nicole. Fortunately, she’s out being a Stepford during that time, cuz this movie is far from what she’s all about. It’ll be a big risk for her, not entirely what she needs. Catherine Zeta-Jones was next on line, but failed to commit to the project. Finally, they gave it to her with some drawbacks; Brad may not be able to play the opposite role. Good thing everything worked out fine and we’re left with the wonderful opportunity to savor their sizzling chemistry together.

© 20th Century Fox

Despite the fact and the obvious attempt by the director to draw the full intention of the viewers to its stars, yours truly didn’t succumb to his effort, but to be quite frank, I almost did. The two won’t let you think about how crazy, dumb, and senseless the script is. Yes, the first half of the movie was teasing, exciting and made a good foundation for the flick but during the other half it became totally dim-witted. It was filled with never-ending mindless action sequences. The more shots taken, the more plot holes left behind. And believe me, they were quite a handful. (e.g. Who is Adam Brody? What are these two agencies? How come they are willing to risk it all, send dozens of troops, bomb houses and etc. for the sheer sake of extracting these two from the face of mother earth aside from the fact that they’re married rival assassins?)

© 20th Century Fox

Doug Liman went from dull and boring (The Bourne Identity), to lackluster and monotonous, not quite much of a leap. He’s just extremely privileged to have these two starts on board to cover-up for his inability to tell a story. He makes a lot of good action sequences, most of them copied, but they’re high-class. However, action scenes doesn’t make a movie sensible, it just keeps the audience dumb for some time.

The editing is okay, photography’s a lot better. Sound is fine. I did love the song choice for Brad. But aside from that everything ain’t nothin’ more than tolerable.

© 20th Century Fox

I’ve already stressed the unquivered truth that the team-up works. Now let’s give emphasis on the individual output. Brad is simply aging gracefully. He’s no way near 40. His sex appeal is unprecedented and he knows exactly what to do with it. The only thing the role asked from him is to look good and act cute, not much of a challenge if I may say so. Angelina’s got that something that nobody else in Hollywood possesses. She’s got that spunk, that attitude, that bad girl aura that makes her uniquely appealing. She can command every grown man to act like a little boy if she pleases. She showed that same intensity in this movie and I’m already sucking my thumb as I write, not that I qualify as a grown man. Adam Brody and the rest of the actors were nothing but extras. Adam showed nothing more than his usual tongue-tied antics.

© 20th Century Fox

If we’re in the middle of the Jen & Brad divorce trial and the judge accepted a copy of this movie as actual evidence, we all know what the verdict’s gonna be. This is the best example of how two A-list stars can make a B-movie worth seeing. This is Hollywood at its Hollywoodest. The two were just totally fun to watch despite the fact that midway through it started to suck. It’s a date movie and action-flick rolled into one so everyone can relate. There’s a new duo in town, and there’s no way they’re gonna let you leave your Eyes Wide Shut. Pave the way for Brangelina.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 14%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 74% = B-

Sin City --- the city that won't let you sleep....

2005-06-07T00:46:00.000+08:00

© Dimension

Title:
Sin City (A-)
PH Release Date:
June 1, 2005
Actors:
Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Nick Stahl, Rosario Dawson, Elijah Wood, Brittany Murphy, Jaime King, Benicio Del Toro, Devon Aoki, Alexi Bledel, Michael Clark Duncan, Josh Hartnett, Michael Madsen
Director:
Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller
Story and Screenplay:
Frank Miller / Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller
Editor / Music:
Robert Rodriguez / John Debney et al.
Design / Photography:
Jeanette Scott / Robert Rodriguez
Producer:
Elizabeth Avellan et al.
Studio:
Troublemaker and Dimension Films

© Dimension

“Walk down the right back alley in Sin City, and you can find anything...”

And hell I totally did! Wow. It was quite the movie I expected from start to finish. No more, no less. The movie is composed of three stories intertwined by that one city where everything took place. A conurbation where almost anything, as long as it’s iniquity, can actually transpire.

© Dimension

The story of Marv (Rourke) revolves around his search for the killer of Goldie (King). After the special night he spent with the prostitute, he awoke with her dead body right by his side. When he finally found the murderer, it didn’t became as easy as he thought the payback would be. Dwight’s (Owen) struggle to save the Ladies of Sin City from utter annihilation is the core of the second story. A war is verging between the authorities and the prostitutes and the only way to stop the truce from expulsion is to make sure that Jackie Boy’s (del Toro) head will never be found. And lastly, as every city has its own good cop, Sin City finds it in the persona of Hartigan (Willis).He paid the price of being true to his oath by spending 8 years of his life in prison and putting his entire name in shame. Now, he must find the girl he saved a few years ago and find a way to keep Nancy (Alba) away from the same bastard he once protected her away from.

© Dimension

Unless this is the first time you’ve read a crap of this kind, you must have known that I haven’t read or seen any of Frank Miller’s work. I have very little interest with reading books, and not an inch of which for comics. But despite that fact, I still watched this all-CGI movie and learned that comics may not be as bad as I think they are.

If director Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller decided to be faithful to the whole “comic” idea, I thought it was a great move. However, I think it will be better if they didn’t tamp in all of these three stories in one movie. It gave them very little time to characterize well. They might be all short stories, but man, you wanna see more of these characters do all the crazy things they do. But then again, if these three stories were made into individual movies, the bore factor may kick in, so alright, I’ll take the 3-in-1. (Just shows how terribly indecisive I am)

© Dimension

Not all directors get the chance to work with such a tremendous amount of talent. They are very lucky that the studio allowed them to work in the film to the fullest. They’re making all the calls which I think helped a lot to make the movie consistent. Even if one of the scenes was directed by Quentin (I forgot what scene it was), it didn’t take away what the movie was all about, and besides, Quentin surely knows what gore is all about.

The stories were not that complicated. Comics, as far as I know, need not be intricate but they have to be profound in dialogue. And this one was profound from start to finish. A simple request of getting a robust car is done with words and intensity that only a comic book may possess, and to my surprise, it worked oh so well in this movie.

© Dimension

If I was to have the arduous task of picking which story’s the best, I would have to say Marv’s. Yeah, it went over the board a lot of times, incredibly unbelievable if you may categorize, but it was just a knockout. Among the three, this is the most comic bookish. The other two were not bad at all, Dwight’s was a little shallow compared to the two but still gets your blood running fast and Hartigan’s more emotionally packed.

The option of using CGI has its own pros and cons, especially if the film is supposed to portray reality at its veracity. But if you aim to project a completely different world, something strictly stripped out from the comic book, CGI may be a fine option, and I believe it was for them. This is the second flick I’ve seen made entirely around the green wall, the first one (Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow) didn’t leave me completely staggered but this one quite did. I can’t believe how extremely difficult it must have been directing with nothing but a fluorescent color surrounding your actors, it’s totally risky, it can make your or break you and it made this movie. I was convince that Sin City does exist, it was a city like many others but in a lot of ways is just nothing quite like any inexistence.

© Dimension

The whole playing around with colors was very cool. I was extremely amazed by how slick it was done. Now you see color, now you don’t. Such a feast for the eyes. The music played around with the whole story as well. And I know that it would entail a lot of camaraderie between the director and cinematographer to have a decent photography, so I guess Robert Rodriguez didn’t have quite a difficult time convincing himself what shots to be taken and how to shoot it. wahehe…

© Dimension

The biggest star amongst all of them was Mickey Rourke, never noticed him before, and the answer is simple: they just don’t give him respect as an actor cuz he's not a moviestar! Imagine, he’s one, if not the central character in the film and you can’t see his face in the main movie poster. If I were him, I’ve gone berserk, I didn’t know he was one of the main characters until I saw the movie cuz even in the trailer he’s barely discernible. This kind of crap makes me wanna puke. It lessened my respect for the directors of this movie, cuz they had the power to made the choice, they’re also the producers. But leaving that idiocy alone, this man gave one hell of a performance. He didn’t portray the character it was him from start to finish. B-R-A-V-O! Second best for me, which may come to you as much of a surprise as it was to me, was Elijah Wood. No dialogues, all facial expressions, the character was marked. I loved his character and I can’t believe how good it was in this movie, all his efforts for the LOTR trilogy will not equate for this stint. It was whew! And since I have used a tremendous amount of space already I’m just gonna give a quickie for the others left.

Bruce Willis was so Die Hard, but it worked. Clive Owen was at his best look. Jessica at her sexiest. Nick at his yellowest. Rosario at her spunkiest (the term!). Brittany at her stupidest. Jaime at her most unrecognizable portrayal yet. Benicio at his serenest. Devon has never been more alluring. Alexi totally no Gilmore. Michael Clark was Michael Clark. Josh Hartnett was Josh Hartnett except this time we're on the same page, we don't get the role. And finally Michael Madsen at his most irksome acting stint yet. Ha! That’s enough.

© Dimension

This movie is not advisable to be seen by people who find cannibalism as the goriest thing in the world, or those who simply can’t stand seeing a man being eaten by his own dog.(Ha, never seen such a lovely sight). Much of that kind in this one, totally distancing itself from others if I may say. It’s pure style with some substance and a lot of gore. Your eyes will either love or hate what you see, but you can’t help but be in awe wondering how they did it oh so well. So would you stop reading this crap and take your ass out to the movies cuz I dare you to enter the world of Sin City.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 16%
Screenplay – 16%
Direction / Execution – 17%
Acting – 19%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 86% = A-

Madagascar --- definitely better than a zoo trip!

2005-05-30T14:52:00.000+08:00

Title:
Madagascar (B+)
PH Release Date:
May 27, 2005
Voice Actors:
Ben Stiller, Chris Rock, Jada Pinkett-Smith, David Schwimmer, Cedric the Entertainer, Sacha Baron Cohen, Tom McGrath, Chris Knights
Director:
Eric Darnell et al.
Story and Screenplay:
Mark Burton et al.
Music:
Hans Zimmer
Producer:
Karey Kirkpatrick et al.
Studio:
Dreamworks

“I like to movie it, move it…. physically fit, physically fit!

Saw the trailer, didn’t like it. Forced to see it cuz it’s the only animated movie to be release this summer. There’s no way that I’m gonna take my little sis to watch somebody get beheaded by a blue fluorescent lamp. I was prepared to be disappointed. I am pretty sure that this movie is no Shrek or the Increbiles, instead, it’s an excuse for its stars to actually have a movie that their kids can watch. I was wrong and a bit right.

The story revolves around four animal friends who “work” in the Central Park Zoo. Alex the Lion (Stiller) is the star of the show, addicted to steak and fame, whichever comes first. His best friend is Marty (Rock), a zebra who wonders about a lot of things including whether he is a black horse with white stripes or a white horse with black stripes. Gloria (Pinkett-Smith) is the ghetto hippo, preggy and fab at the same time. And finally, Melman, a giraffe addicted to medication. All’s well and sound until the psycho penguins decided to escape from the zoo, Marty, longing to experience the life in the wild attempted to go to Connecticut via riding a train in Grand Central. It didn’t all went according to plan and they end up in an island called Madagascar where Shaggy’s ancestors reside. I would love to tell you more but I’d end up ruining it all for you so I’d rather stop here.

What a surprise this movie was! During the beginning, I was trying my best not to laugh at their “sitcom” jokes but as it progress I couldn’t hold it no more. I just had to laugh. And what’s even more surprising is that my little sister was laughing her head off as well. She barely understands English, in fact she speaks like Ethel Booba, her English is so small (waheehe), so it definitely caught me off guard. My sister loved it and I did as well.

The story is nothing amazing, what I did love about it is that it didn’t became another Spirit. It was not about self-discovery. And these animals, despite having the abilities to act and speak like humans were not capable of falling in love. I would hate to see another horse love story. It makes me wanna eat Tapsilog. However, it is quite obvious that almost all of these characters were based from the actors themselves or from a role they already played, which is nothing cool or praiseworthy but it worked.

Not a single dull moment in this movie, the director and writers make sure you wouldn’t have the time to think so hard about the story cuz there’s nothing really much to think about. After watching it, it barely left any message to me except to move it, move it and be physically fit (if you watch the movie you’ll know what I’m talking about and you’ll go as gaga as I did).

The animation was very good. The vibrant colors add more to the lively story and movement of events. It was like reading a really dazzling colored book. The music was brilliant as well, what do you expect from Hans Zimmer? And the closing credit is to die for. Don’t dare miss it.

Stiller’s versatility in comedy is his main asset on why every movie he did succeeded. You watch, you get convinced, now you listen to him and the same thing happens. Sometimes it makes me wonder when can he possibly go wrong? I think he’s the most bankable actor today, Cruise comes in close second. At first, I was afraid Chris Rock wouldn’t be as funny as he’s usually been cuz if he was censored in the Oscars here he is bound to be bleeped. And I thought he wouldn’t be able to deliver the same kind of comedy that he does so well, but he did well. That voice alone is something to laugh about.

I like Jada Pinkett-Smith, I don’t think she was awful but, given the chance, I would not have chosen her to play Gloria I think Queen Latifah could have done a better job. I dunno, it just felt like she lacks the attitude to pull it off. Now David Schwimmer is a different story, there was not much effort in his part. He’s used to playing this dorky, weak characters. He did for 10 years and this time it’s nothing different. And in case you’re wondering if Shaggy played the role of the King of Lemurs, no it wasn’t him.

A movie of pure entertainment value and a little substance. Movies are not made to teach lessons, so parents should not depend on flicks to do their role. This movie recognized that, it doesn’t provide your daily dose of good will but it is a rare treat for the whole family. This is the best family movie to come out this year and you’ll be stupid to let this one pass. I’m so glad I didn’t. Just don’t think about it too hard and take it for what it is. So what are you waiting for… go ahead and move it, move it!

Grading Sheet:
Story – 14%
Screenplay – 15%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 19%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 81% = B+

La Visa Loca -- close to being denied....

2005-05-28T03:00:00.000+08:00

Title: La Visa Loca (B)
PH Release Date: May 25, 2005
Actors: Robin Padilla, Rufa Mae Quinto, Johnny Delgado, Tessie Tomas, Noel Trinidad, Isay Alvarez, Robert Seña, Marissa Sanchez, Ricky Davao, Raymart Santiago
Director: Mark Meily
Story and Screenplay: Mark Meily
Editor / Music: Danny Anonuevo et al. / Vincent de Jesus
Design / Photography: Norman Regalado / Lee Meily
Producer: Tony Gloria
Studio: Unitel Pictures

© Unitel

A green card for greener pastures… that’s what most Filipinos are looking for, but that isn’t Jess’ main priority. His focus is more on just getting a visa to finally set foot on the modern-day promise land, which he knows for a fact to be not quite easy. With his insistent girlfriend and his diabetic dead father on completely opposite sides he’s finding a really hard time figuring out what to do and struggles to find some ways to get the visa that he’s been longing for. Will he get it??? I wouldn’t dare say… you may end up not choosing to watch this movie.

When I first heard that Sharon Cuneta and Robin Padilla will be teaming-up again, I instantly thought of my beloved aunt who now resides in Japan. She’s a real fan of hers and she’ll absolutely love another “Maging Sino ka Man”. Much to her dismay, and my delight, they’re not teaming-up as a screen couple but as producer-actor. Yup, Sharon is one of the executive producers and Robin plays the lead role. I am not a fan of his, but because Mark Meily left quite a good impression on me story wise in Crying Ladies I decided to watch this movie (primarily because Sin City was moved to the 1st of June… screw them), thinking that it may be worth it. I wouldn’t say it wasn’t completely worth it but I wouldn’t say that I paid less for what they offered.

Crying Ladies, for me, is one the best movies made since the turn of the century. Though I had a lot of problems with Meily’s direction, the story stands tall. I couldn’t say the same for La Visa. Somehow the story, no matter how incredibly relatable and Filipino-like, seemed to be repellent. This time the problem is not with his direction, but more of the screenplay and characterization.

It is as humorous if not more than Crying Ladies, but it’s not as emotionally stirring. I just didn’t feel the connection with any of these characters, except during the highest points of the movie: the beginning and the climax. Other than those two parts mentioned, they’re all detached from those watching them.

© Unitel

I don’t blame the actors for it but more of the writing. The constant laughs and the parodies clouded the emotions they needed to exude. The intentions were good, I get it, we all did, but Meily needs to realize that moviemaking is different from writing an episode for a politically and socially relevant version of Bubble Gang. If he wants to make such a difference, do it in Mendiola, don’t make such a good story suffer! It wasn’t like these with Crying Ladies but this one, it just went way too overboard. Like that feeling one gets when something is suppose to be funny, but because it’s the same kind of jest you’ve been witnessing all-day long, you end up feeling bored or even barmy.

Another problem I had is with his “pasyon chorus”, oh my god! What the hell was he thinking! This is not going over the board instead completely making a 360°. Once is tolerable but five friggin’ times??? The whole thing felt fake, not mentioning that the lyrics were not that pretty. Wow…. Before I wrote this, I was actually thinking of saying that this movie is nice… but the way it’s been goin’.. I doubt it…

The music is good especially during the opening credits, which is also visually stunning. The cinematography is okay, some off lights but passable. Editing was not much of a problem, maybe if they were given a better material they could have come out with something better.

© Unitel

If there’s one thing that made this movie somehow work, it’s Robin Padilla and Johnny Delgado. It is rare and I mean once in a blue moon type of rare, that we see Binoe does something completely out of his element. Away from the usual bad boy image, cop-gone-rogue type of image. In this one he’s totally not himself. The same old charisma he had for years but this time its just different. Too bad the character isn’t enough to be completely lovable. It was a good performance. Johnny Delgado, as always is just a knockout, not physically but acting-wise. He simply rocks. He’s probably the best in the country today. He has this unique quality of making you feel and connect with whoever it is that he plays. Rufa Mae didn’t have enough exposure but she did fine.

I don’t blame the movie in its entirety as the cause of my not-so-great feedback, I think the overhyping did kill this movie to me and it will too to some. It’s not the high-class comedy everyone’s been promising, it’s just a regular parody that sometimes gets it right but in an exaggerated unappealing way. Yah, you’ll have a couple of good laughs and some important issues to take notice of but somehow it just wasn’t enough. And the ending just made it more unlikely. It was completely off the tone of the movie.

The one scene that I did love was the climax. It will be crazy to tell yah how it was but it was great. The finest moment of the movie. The beginning was quite good as well. I do recommend this to everyone for the climax alone. This kind of movies rarely come, it may not be as perfect or better than we expect and hoped, but at least it’s something out of the ordinary “kilig” movies we only see these days. I mean seriously, just how many love stories are there that we haven’t heard of? So, in conclusion, this movie actually is nice. And at the current state of the Pinoy movie industry, nice is very, very good.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 17%
Screenplay – 15%
Direction / Execution – 15%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 80% = B

Star Wars strikes back with a vengeance.....

2005-05-21T03:43:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century Fox

Title:
Star Wars Episode 3: The Revenge of the Sith (B+)
Release Date:
May 19, 2005
Actors:
Ewan Mcgregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Christopher Lee, Samuel L. Jackson, Frank Oz, Ian McDiarmid, Jimmy Smits
Writer and Director:
George Lucas
Music:
John Williams
Cinematographer:
David Tattersall
Producer:
Rick McCallum
Studio:
20th Century Fox

© 20th Century Fox

“may the force be with you”

The third and the final installment of the prequel to the earlier concluded six-part saga has finally come to an end. I was NEVER a Star Wars fan and prior to this movie, I’ve only seen one part of the series. Gaining good reviews and breaking box office records, does this film really live up to all the hype it’s been getting? or is it that all there is --- pure hype and a contrived response to show Lucas that his moneymaking ideas are worthy of praise?

© 20th Century Fox

I never saw Episode 2, after the disappointing turnout on my first attempt to be enlightened about the series courtesy of Episode 1, it convinced me that it will be much better to put the two and a half hours of my unequally exhilarating life to much better use. In complete defense of myself, I did attempt to rent a copy of it a week before the release of Sith but I can’t find one, so spare me from the charge of being judgmental cuz to be honest, it’s one thing I am widely known for. Wahehe...

© 20th Century Fox

In this chapter, Anakin Skywalker (Christensen), now on his verge of being a man, tagged along Obi-Wan Kenobi (McGregor) to rescue the pedophile-looking supreme chancellor of the republic in the hands of the Separatists. But first, they must pass the hand-cutting Count Dooku (Lee) , and the army leader General Grievous (Wood). The two succeeded in their primary mission but failed to capture Grievous.

When they arrived home, Padme (Portman) surprised the curly-haired chosen one of the soon arrival of their first baby. The happy moment turns catastrophic as Anakin started to have dreams of Amidala dying of childbirth, due to his previous clairvoyance record, he started to be bothered and completely distraught for what he considered will be the worst time of his life. Phedopile comes in, make his evil moves to draw the young man into his pants, I mean arms, I mean side. And unless your completely unacquainted with this cult-friendly series then you probably know what will happen and how things all came about.

© 20th Century Fox

I’m not as ecstatic with this movie as some critics are, however, I do believe that it is a good film. Miles better than the Phantom Menace. Why? First, this movie despite occurring in a galaxy far far away, was very believable. The humanity of the characters finally came about unlike with the menace where its characters were as emotionally uncharged as R2-D2. Second, there were not much irritating battle scenes that will turn-off even the maker of Matrix Reloaded. And third, the story is more juicy than cheesy.

George Lucas, have so much faith in this project as a whole and extremely proud with this movie. He finally realized that he is actually supposed to show the slow amalgamation of Anakin to the dark side and his complete submission. That in order to achieve that believable effect, and make this movie as deserving of all the hype it enjoys, he must shy away from making another children’s book adaptation and make an emotionally charged sci-fi adventure. He succeeded and he’s enjoying all the perks this simple concept has given him.

© 20th Century Fox

Lucas, despite having both written and directed the earlier five movies, did manage to direct the action scenes well, but when it comes for him to turn it down and concentrate on the story itself, he slowly sinks, but smartly, before the movie does completely, he’ll save it with another action sequence. This caused me, and may cause you some really awkward feeling as you watch the movie and you start to think there’s something really wrong but you can’t pinpoint on it. You don’t know if it’s the phasing, the editing or simply the script and direction.

© 20th Century Fox

But I do applaud him for making such a brilliant conclusion as to how Anakin became Darth Vader. I didn’t like the screaming at the near end of the movie, thought ‘twas such a terrible cliché. I do wonder though, how come Yoda uses a stick when he walks and does it as if he can no longer do so without them but can fight like a young gremlin on the loose? It’s completely weird and kinda crazy at the same time.

Aside from the grand visual effects, viewers will also feast their eyes on some incredibly beautiful production design. The music is quite impressive as well. The cinematography offers nothing new, but well done enough to have its compelling moments. The only problem I have is with the editing, which I don’t solely blame for some of the discomfited scenes of the movie.

© 20th Century Fox

Ewan Mcgregor outshined everyone in this movie, even Natalie Portman. Speaking of which, she’s as pretty as ever but has lesser exposure than expected. Hayden Christensen did have great moments, but the number of his incredibly out of his depth look and actions clouded them. He is very inconsistent. I was surprise though to see how big he has grown, from being that skinny white boy in Life as a House and Higher Ground, he’s now the hunky, and I mean hunky, jedi non-master.

Revenge of the Sith, is not a perfect movie, but it is considerably one of the strongest part of the series and the finest amongst the prequels. It is very different from the earlier two Star Wars for the simple reason that it’s more mature. This leads me to the point that this may not be the best movie to bring your children with. Not only does it possess violent scenes such as cutting a head off with a glowing blue fluorescent lamp, but story wise it becomes dull and terribly serious.

© 20th Century Fox

Now, don’t get me wrong, this Star Wars has a lot of values to share but the only way yur children can understand them is if you take the time to explain it to them. I’m not convince that it’s a great family movie, because the possibility of it becoming a great family disaster is pretty high. Watching it with a barkada can also not be the best idea especially if they don’t appreciate CGI movies. But there’s one thing I am sure of, that whoever said that Lucas will not be able to end this series with a bang, in the words, of master Yoda, wrong you are so.. Lucas just had his revenge and it's coming in millions...

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 15%
Direction / Execution – 16%
Acting – 15%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 59% = B+

© 20th Century Fox

The Amityville HORROR..of a movie!!!

2005-05-16T00:01:00.000+08:00

© MGM

Title:
The Amityville Horror (C-)
PH Release Date:
May 11, 2005
Actors:
Ryan Reynolds, Melissa George, Philip Baker Hall, Jimmy Bennett, Jesse James, Rachel Nichols
Director:
Andrew Douglas
Screenplay:
Scott Kosar
Editor / Music:
Chris Wagner / Steve Jablonsky
Design / Photography:
Jennifer Williams / Peter Collister
Producer:
Michael Bay et al.
Studio:
MGM

© MGM

“There’s something really strange going on in this house…. (oh really??!!)”

And there’s something really weird about how this movie was sorta put together. That line, though fits the moment, felt like something I’ve heard from every slasher/horror flick I’ve seen since I was little (as if i'm tall now). Yes, it’s remake but that doesn’t mean everything that they do needs to follow what they based it from.

The story is pretty slick, because they have the power to say that it’s based from a true story. I have no time to research on whether in fact the premise they used is legit. So let’s just assume that it is. It doesn’t matter anyway cuz they weren’t able to use it effectively.

© MGM

I haven’t seen the original so I cannot compare whether it’s better or worse. And to be honest, I really don’t care. The fact that the characters presented in this movie are just plain stupid does it for me. I mean c’mon. If you have all the clues that something really bad is going on, why would you stay on that house for 28 days!!!! Your daughter talks to herself and becomes suicidal, your husband acts like he’s ready to butcher your kids and the priest runaway mad after attempting to bless the house. Aren’t those clues enough to actually make you say that “There’s absolutely something wrong in this house”, then get packing and leave.

Another crazy thing about this movie, is that the ghost inside the house (Jodi) seems more of an enemy than a friend, but I presume she’s suppose to be since she’s the little girl. I dunno. I’m going mad just thinking about this movie.

© MGM

As a director, Andrew Douglas, is a very talented copycat. If Xerox gets him as their CEO, they’ll probably regain their long lost popularity. Eveything he did was anything but original. As if every single thing that pops up in his mind (doesn’t matter whether it’s from another horro flick) he uses right away. He doesn’t even think twice, stupid fella. Sorry for the language but I really am pissed for wasting my time and money on this shit. I should have known better.

© MGM

The only thing nice about this movie which I am terribly surprise became the outcome was Ryan Reynolds and Melissa George. Okay, Ryan may not be the most reputable actor around, but he did his thing pretty well. No Van Wilder trying to be Jim Carrey thing, just him trying act in a horror movie. I love Melissa George from the moment I laid eyes on her way before she became part of Alias. This british beauty knows how to act, I just wish she can be given better roles than this. Such a waste of facial talent if that doesn’t happen wahehe.

Technically, the movie’s music sucked. Evrytime a scary scene comes up you know exactly when it’s gonna happen and how it’s gonna happen. It’s more premature than my first time (just kiddin’… wahehe). The production design is okay but the editing felt rushed. Needs a lot of improvement and too bad, there’s no more room for that cuz I guess the director though that when he first saw it, "this is it! my master piece". It was one hell of a masterpiece alright.

© MGM

Some moviegoers probably did like this movie. I for one have a fucked-up bone in my body with the same sentiment. Why? Because somehow, the movie worked for being a copycat. But I’m telling you, it may be a good waste of time, but a waste of time still. Not to mention money! You’ll gain nothing for watching this movie and I don’t think that in any way the entertainment factor can cover-up. Saw the verdict is out, it’s a horror movie and nothing short or more than that.

Grading Sheet:
Story - 12%
Screenplay - 10%
Direction / Execution - 10%
Acting - 15%
Technical Aspect - 14%
Total: 86% = C-

© MGM

As Good As It Gets in one's fancy....

2005-05-14T01:38:00.000+08:00

Title: As Good As It Gets (A-)
Release Year: 1997
Actors: Jack Nicholson, Helen Hunt, Greg Kinnear, Cuba Gooding Jr., Skett Ulrich, Shirley Knight
Director: James Brooks
Story and Screenplay: Mark Andrus / Andrus and Brooks
Editor / Music: Richard Marks / Hans Zimmer
Design / Photography: Bill Brzeski / John Bailey
Producer: Bridget Johnson et al.
Studio: Columbia Tristar

“You look at someone long enough you discover their humanity”

This may generally be true but in some cases it’s the complete opposite. Try to look at Madame Auring more than a minute and you’ll realize how much of a fiend she is. Kidding aside, a word of warning to you, this is a perceptibly bias review. I’m sorry, it’s difficult to critique this movie cuz I love it so much but I am doing it anyways... here it goes…

Nicholson plays the Academy Award® winning role of Melvin, the ultimate chauvinist from hell. Nasty and cruel will be an understatement for this man who also happens to be an obsessive-compulsive romance novelist who lives in the same building as a homo (Greg Kinnear). Melvin, as obvious with his weight, loves to eat, and finds only one place to his approval and one waitress to stir up his appetite (Carol). One fateful event, leads to unwanted changes for Melvin that may or may not just be good for everybody.

The movie was engaging from the very first frame. Even I, could not believe how terribly entranced I was by Jack Nicholson, whom I never liked before because of his “DOM” image. But pushing that persona aside, this is the role of his career. Nobody and I mean nobody, could have played this character as effective as he did. This was made for him. From that alone, the movie established a great deal of support for their not so tight script.

I know you’re thinking about it, so let’s just throw it out there. The story was way too farfetched. Yes, I agree. As good as things may, it can’t possibly get as good as this. People just don’t change overnight, especially if someone is that ill for a very long time. People don’t open up that easily (especially Americans), it takes a lot of time to find some comfort to confide to someone. These facts were terribly ignored which leaves me nothing else to do but ignore it as well. Yup, somehow, because the movie worked so well, that you don’t think it’s in any way necessary anymore to criticize it. It’s a longshot but it was effective.

My only gripe is that Greg Kinnear’s character wasn’t as much as a focus. Yes, it’s only a supporting character but he was essential and I kinda felt that they overlooked him reaching to the conclusion. As far as nasty lines are concerned, I got more than I bargained for. And I mean, a lot more.

James L. Brooks’ brand of comedy is not something that most people will agree to but in this one he made it work. Still some skeptics, but they cannot deny the fact that they felt extremely displeased because the movie was awfully successful even if it’s the opposite of what they believe in. Great characterization. Some dragging points but presumably because they were a lot of highlights, that the normal scenes felt boring.

The musical score of this movie is terrific. Thumbs up to the always-great Hans Zimmer. The editing was good as well, but other than those two everything else were ordinary. It’s a character-driven movie so it doesn’t matter as much. But maybe, a few better shots may have given a better feedback.

Jack was not the only one on the top of his game in this movie. Helen Hunt gave a powerful, well-restrained performance. Although, I must say, the sitcom feel of her acting kinda steps in from time to time. Greg Kinnear, for me, gave the best performance in this movie. This is his best and possibly the one he should have won the Oscar for. Other actors can play this role, but they will not be as hard-hitting and believable as Greg. I’m not a fan of his, but he just turned me into one. Cuba Gooding Jr. was also funny, but everytime I saw him, I kept thinking about the snow dogs he usually hang out with.

Far from reality, but as every bit engaging as a true-to-life story. It’ll make you laugh, make you cry, at “best”, even make you curse. Sarcastic movies rarely make it in the world of cynicism but this one made it through with flying colors and two acting Oscars in its belt. Best seen with friends and an equally crazy lover. And if you’re having too much reality for a Friday night, get a dose of Melvin and you’ll hunger back for more actuality, even double of what you usually settle for. It doesn't get as good as that.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 18%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 20%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 89% = A-

Kingdom of Heaven --- one hell of a movie (in a good and bad way)

2005-05-04T22:58:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century FOX

Title:
Kingdom of Heaven (A-)
PH Release Date:
May 4, 2005
Actors:
Orlando Bloom, Eva Green, Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson, Liam Neeson, David Thewlis, Martin Csokas, Edward Norton
Director:
Ridley Scott
Story and Screenplay:
William Monahan
Editor / Music:
Dody Dorn / Harry Gregson-Williams
Design / Photography:
Arthur Max / John Mathieson
Producer:
Ridley Scott
Studio:
20th Century FOX

© 20th Century FOX

“It is not what you are born to be, but what you have in yourself to become”

If you think that’s the only aphorism you’ll find in this movie, you’re awfully mistaken. This film was close to becoming a 2 and a half hour special episode of the 700 Club. But notwithstanding that fact, I actually found this movie pleasant, and as far as current bioepics are concerned, pleasant is good.

Orlando Bloom stars (but not necessarily the center of it all) as Balian, a name I wasn't able to remember not because of my inabiltity to store key information but because the character was so weak. I honestly had to wait for the closing credits which by the way was weirdly arranged, just to catch his name and the rest of the supporting cast. He is suppose to be this man in mourning towards the suicide of his wife, and tries to find some salvation for her by accepting his father's offer who's none other than a baron of guess what city--- Jerusalem: the Kingdom of Heaven. He finds out it's all a fluke but finds himself defending that city afterwards. There's a lot more going on in this movie but it would take me years to tell them all, so i say just watch it.

© 20th Century FOX

Ridley Scott is an extremely great visual director. Most of the time he knows what he’s making except for some moments when he just completely lose idea of what he’s doing. That scene where Orlando got somewhat lost in the sea and resurrected from the shipwreck and gallivanted along the obviously draining dessert was just appallingly told. I don’t know if they ran out of films but it was so hurried that it appeared comical. It completely lost the whole momentum of the movie that he worked terribly hard for to establish.

I did not watch this movie because of Orlando, or to make it clearer, I didn’t find this movie nice for the sheer presence of Orlando. In fact, I think he needs a lot of work, but if his sole purpose is to induce the female in body and mind to see this flick, it worked. The I’m-so-helpless-I-wanna-cry-on-your-shoulder look that he has will surely make girls go gaga all over him. Believe me, I saw it. But in complete fairness to him, the effort was there, though it wasn’t enough.

© 20th Century FOX

I do find it completely weird how I like the first part of this movie so much cuz I am not a great fan of Liam Neeson (don’t be mistaken, I recognize that he’s a good actor) but those scenes where he was included were the strongest points of the movie. It was not predictable, it was well-phased and well shot. And then came his death and the dreaded sea sailing scene followed. Another standout was Edward Norton's character. I didn't know it was him since he's trying to be the man in the iron cast and all, but it's him playing that part of King Baldwin IV. I think it would have been so much better if the story revolves around him more: his sickness and true concern for the welfare of others, is a sure nice premise.

© 20th Century FOX

The fight scenes were great. It’s definitely different from Gladiator and it’s good to know that some combat scenes that came with obvious conclusions were abridged. I mean, it’s tough enough to sit through a 2-hour movie let alone see a battle go on forever when you know exactly how it’s gonna end. The production design, cinematography and editing were all good. The sound sometimes feels prematurely directing that it becomes humorous, just like what happened to that single and quick love scene. C’mon, that’s what fans wanna see. He was spared in Troy why not flaunt it now?

The supporting cast was good, though a much attractive and charismatic female may have made the scenes much more believable and interesting. Brendan Gleeson loves being hated. Jeremy Irons loves being the powerless good man. David Thewlis gave an "Alan Rickman" type of performance which was nothing less than great. And Velivor Topic was not much of a topic in the entire duration of the flick.

© 20th Century FOX

This movie is a sure visual treat. I am not sure as to what the message of this movie really is, cuz I was lost with all of the exchanges of proverbs. It tried to discuss a lot if issues that are important, but are not as easy to understand and digest especially when it comes in the form of a two and a half hour movie. The intentions were sincere and great, if it's simply to make people aware of these issues with religionn then they succeeded, but if they're trying to do something beyond that, i'm afaraid they failed. The pathway to heaven surely is difficult, the movie didn't reach it but it's cetainly not on its way to hell.

Grading Sheet:
Story - 17%
Screenplay - 14%
Direction / Execution - 18%
Acting - 18%
Technical Aspect - 19%
Total: 86% = A-

The Interpreter --- needs further translation....

2005-04-22T04:12:00.000+08:00

© Universal Pictures

Title:
The Interpreter (B+)
PH Release Date:
April 20, 2005
Actors:
Nicole Kidman, Sean Penn, Catherine Keener, Max Minghella, Jesper Christensen
Director:
Sydney Pollack
Story and Screenplay:
Scott Frank, Charles Randolph & Steven Zaillian
Producer:
Kevin Misher et al.
Studio:
Universal Pictures

© Universal Pictures

“Vengeance is a lazy form of grief”

Oh, c’mon! If given the chance to drown somebody who killed someone I love, there’s no way I’m holding back. Sometimes, the only way to get serenity, is to put to rest the one who caused your agony, or at least make them feel the same anguish they brought you. If karma won’t come to them, then be the karma that will bring them down. I’m going nowhere here, oh right, the review.

In the movie, Kidman plays the role of a UN interpreter Silvia Broome, born in America but raised in Africa. Accidentally, she overheard a threat to the life of Motoban leader Zumie to whom she is somehow connected with. Sean Penn's character, is out to find the truth behind her claim, judging her entirely different from the way she does it. He looks, she listens. What started to be considerably a rumor, ends up to be their only lead to a convoluted plot.

© Universal Pictures

The movie to say at least is promising. It is a good flick. The first half spells a great political thriller that seemed of very new concept because of the gorgeous backdrop of the UN NY Office. The crew is very lucky to obtain permission to shoot inside one of the most guarded buildings in the world, cuz it brought life to the movie and made it more believable and interesting.

The story did work during the beginning. It was spanking new, gripping, and commendable, frame-by-frame. However, the movie started to falter during the final 30 minutes on its way to the ending. After the blast, the movie seemed to have been too shattered by the explosion that its characters seemed to have turned stupid all of a sudden, doing things that are way far out of their dispositions.

© Universal Pictures

I honestly think this movie was rushed. They were trying to avoid losing the interest of the viewers so they tried to hurry down the conclusion. They succeeded on not losing the viewers interest, but they were also successful in disappointing them and turning the good impression it made to utter frustration. I won’t say that it fell into the cracks of second-rate thrillers, but in this time where free TV offers the same degree of intelligent thrillers, the challenge to be great is higher and the movie failed to reach its peak.

Legendary film director Pollack can still handle the lenses so well despite his age. It’s important to note that he has been making movies since the 50’s, that’s why Eastwood said, compared to him he’s just a kid. If Clint regards me as such, I’m oughta be worried, cuz he’s like putrefying, that will make me what???? A lot of the films he made I haven’t seen yet so I don’t know how to compare this one. It is certainly of different degree than Tootsie, or Out of Africa. A good script is needed to make a thriller but I do believe greater responsibility and credit lies to the director. He was able to pump up this movie from start to finish, even in the latter parts. However, the homestretch was truly all rush and no essence.

© Universal Pictures

The scoring was great, this is something that TV lacks, and it was wise of them to have James Newton Howard on board to make that clear edge. However, I thought the editing in the final half of the movie, at best, was as good as those seen on TV. The production and design blended well with the movie, but one thing I’m just confused of is that on one scene where Silvia finds out that Zumui (not sure) was coming, the representative of Motoba’s sign was Philippines. What’s up with that??? It was really weird, it was shown pretty clearly and it just doesn’t add up. Since when did our country become a part of Africa??? I don’t remember Jinky Oda sitting as our president. And oh, if you try to be more observant, you’ll notice that the seat of our country’s UN rep is actually in the middle row of the middle column. That was a nice thing to learn.

Nicole Kidman is as captivating as before. You just can’t take away your eyes from the screen everytime she’s on it. It may not be an Oscar-worthy performance because of the character but she sure delivered the goods and I ate them all. Sean Penn is good, he’s character is trying to be compassionate which I believe will not take him much effort to do since he was so concerned about pointing out how great Jude Law is. I really can’t get over this one. It was just totally uncalled for and it destroyed my view of him drastically. He’s a great actor but get a life! According to a cast list I saw online, Richard Gere was part of the movie but I never saw him. Not on a cameo role, nothing. His name was also not in the credits so I guess they just made a mistake. But I don’t know, take a good look and tell me if you see him.

© Universal Pictures

A pumped up thriller that sadly, runs out of gas on the way to the finish line. A socially relevant movie that may not directly point out important issues of our time but touches them with complete care, which for me is more than enough. Not a moment of boredom and incredibly entertaining almost till the last frame. It’s one of the better modern thrillers around and I say a must-see. That is the truth, and it needs no translation.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 16%
Screenplay – 16%
Direction / Execution – 17%
Acting – 19%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 59% = B+

Thelma & Louise --- a uniquely poignant buddy road movie

2005-04-20T08:49:00.000+08:00

© MGM

Title: Thelma and Louise (A-)
Release Year: 1991
Actors: Susan Sarandon, Geena Davis, Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Brad Pitt
Director: Ridley Scott
Story and Screenplay: Callie Khouri
Editor / Music: Thom Noble / Hans Zimmer
Design / Photography: Norris Spencer / Adrian Biddle
Producer: Ridley Scott and Mimi Polk
Studio: Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer

“I’m not sorry that son of a bitch is dead, I’m just sorry that it’s you who did it not me.”

Whew! What did I do??? Wahehe.. Such strong words ei? Believe me there’s to this movie than fierce words and female angst. It’s a story of friendship, love, but most of all self-emancipation.
It revolves around two friends. Thelma (Davis) , the naïve one, married to a bigot husband who treats her as a housemaid more than a housewife. And Louise (Sarandon), a highflier waitress with a dark Texas past. The latter decides to embark on a journey one weekend and convinced the former to come with her. Fed up with her husband and hungry for the world she rarely knew, Thelma decided to come with her. A bar incident forced the two to change their small trip to a hurried departure. As they drive their way to Texas, they meet a handsome young lad named D.J (Pitt), who caused Thelma some fun but ignited more trouble. The two women from Arkansas now became the modern Jessie and James of the Southwest.

© MGM

The beginning of the movie was a little peculiar for my taste. The acting, the direction, everything was unrefined and odd for my vision and feel. But as the movie went along, my senses went along with the ride. I prepared myself for the feminist outlook of it but I wasn’t ready for the whole 90’s flava of this flick. Man, those clothes! I see these characters look at the mirror, try to be pretty and all, when all they primarily need is a good set of new clothes. I mean c’mon, what were they thinking???

Seriously now, I love this movie. Despite being released more than a decade ago, the blow is still there. The beginning of the movie kinda felt a bit dull and ordinary, but as the movie progress you understand as to why it was done that way. Scott makes an incredibly emotionally affixing environment together with Adrian Biddle and his photography. Despite the good editing and brilliant capturing of the striking splendor of the West, the music sucks. Picking up form what Simon said, “There are good and bad country songs”, the ones featured in this movie were the cream of the CRAP.

© MGM

The story of this movie may bear a lot of resemblance to the buddy film genre but the approach Callie Khouri used in the movie made it look like its never been done before. A lesson to be learn by many writers, if you’re gonna write about something that’s already been dealt with, make sure you make it look like it’s never been done before. Now how do you that? By re-examining the faults, re-establishing advances and adding edge that the viewers will not expect. And I certainly did not expect that ending. I heard about it, but as I watched it, I was still convincing myself that maybe I heard wrong, but when they finally did it, man, I cried! It was the strongest moment of the movie and one of the best endings I’ve ever seen in my entire life.

Brilliant may not be enough of a word to describe the performances of both Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis. This is certainly the pinnacle of their careers. Susan carried the character oh so well, especially during the brief transformation from being subtle to fierce on the parking lot scene. Geena Davis handles her character so well, her consistency with the way she conduct the progress of her character from tamed to unfettered. They both do exceptional jobs that asking who did better is like asking how one can put the whole sea in a drinking glass. Too bad they were up against Jodie Foster, probably if not both of them were nominated as Best Actress in the 1992 Oscars and one’s just a supporting role, they’ll both win. If I were given the chance to vote that Oscar year, I’d rather save myself from the burden of choosing between the two and give it to a performance just as great, in that case, Foster’s.

© MGM

Harvey Keitel gave a strong support and yup, that’s him, Brad in his breakthrough role as J.D. The role was so perfect for him. And man, the abs was there to make an impression. Michael Madsen looks really great in this movie. I never thought he's that goodlooking when he was abit younger. A good performance as well.

A brilliant script, a brilliant director and beyond brilliant acting. What more can one ask for except better music??? The ending alone makes this movie an absolute must-see. It’s a great part of the progress of filmmaking and dude, this is history here. If this movie fails to touch you, it is not the movie's fault. You’re simply incapable of feeling anything besides your loins. (why am I a feminist all of a sudden???)

Grading Sheet:
Story – 16%
Screenplay – 19%
Direction / Execution – 17%
Acting – 20%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 87% = A-

Michael Collins --- a great man, a good movie

2005-04-19T15:16:00.000+08:00

© WB

Title: Michael Collins (A-)
Release Year: 1996
Actors: Liam Neeson, Aidan Quinn, Stephen Rea, Alan Rickman, Julia Roberts, Brendan Gleeson, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers
Writer & Director: Neil Jordan
Editor / Music: J. Patrick Duffner et al. / Elliott Goldenthal
Design / Photography: Anthony Pratt / Chris Menges
Producer: Stephen Wooley
Studio: Geffen Pictures and WB

“I hate them for making hate necessary”

Damn! I love that line! I’m perplexed as to why I do not feel exactly the same about the movie. Don’t get me wrong, I like this movie. I believe it is one of those hollywood biographies that remained faithful to the history books. Not that I have a lot of idea who Michael Collins is, but just because there wasn’t much forced improbabilities to augment the dramatic effect. I know this may come as a shock to many of you, but I’m afraid I won’t be able to dig deeper into the authenticity of the movie (yeah right!). However, I can compare this one with a movie top billed by the same lead.

Released almost ten years ago, this movie didn’t make quite a stir as other biographical movies. We know how much the Oscar love biography movies, but somehow this movie didn’t quite ignite as much passion from them unlike its main character. What was the factor that immobilized its ride to the top???

Easy, the movie was released three years after the wide scale success of Schindler’s list. Liam Neeson played the title role and earned praises for his performance as a “savior” during the Ghetto era. This time, he’s also the savior. He even has a much greater responsibility. He’s the key towards the autonomy of Ireland. The range of emotions he needed to convey was wider since the character dealt with not just the depression, but with romance and friendship as well. Simply put, it just didn’t come first.

I love Schindler’s List. It’s one of the best movie ever made. I think that the story of Michael Collins is quite more important, but the story of Schindler was illustrated in a much dramatic scenario. I cried a river for that movie and in this one, I shed not even a single tear. It was touching, it was engaging, but there was not enough dramatic spur to make me cry. It didn’t leave quite as much of a mark, and since people already saw a better film than this, the expectations were much higher, and disappointment came closely behind.

© WB

In comparison to our national heroes, Michael Collins is like a combination of Andres Bonifacio and Jose Rizal. During the beginning of the movie, he was pretty determined to fight for their independence and kill for it. In the final half of the movie, he made a turn into Jose because even if his objective is still self-rule, he compromised his beliefs and settle for what he thought is better than going into war. But at the end of the movie he kinda became Marcelo H Del Pilar, killed by a supporter of the gibberish president of their republic. Rings a bell doesn’t it? I never imagined how much similarity we can come up. He also dies at a much younger age than Del Pilar. He died at 31.

The ultimate strengths of this movie are its cinematography and musical score. It may not be as brilliantly shot as the movies today but it was very well done. I did like Neil Jordan’s direction and writing, but I really felt that it lack that emotional clout it needed to make it that memorable. It was gripping especially in the battle scenes but there’s gotta be more.

Liam Neeson was good. During the first half, I felt awkward listening to his bizarre Irish accent, but as the movie went along the discomfiture waned. Not a better performance than Schindler’s but good enough to establish him as one of the most persuasive actors around. Although I believe Russell Crowe could have done a much better job. Good performances from the supporting cast except for two people whom I thought could have done so much better. First, Alan Rickman, I thought it was a weak performance. The umph factor wasn’t there. In some of his scenes I just wanna hit him in the head and tell him to give more. Another disappointment was Julia Roberts. Yup, my dear Julia. Okay, I appreciate the fact that Julia tried to sing, operative word is try, aside from the catastrophe on that area, she also failed to capture the essence of the role. It was a very blunt performance. Very ordinary, very weak, very forgettable. Maybe another reason for its failure, a movie with a weak performance from Julia is bound to be doomed.

A movie about a man whose love for country and its people goes beyond what he wants and needs. A compelling story need be known by all. See this movie without any Schindler’s list thought behind to preclude any possible discontent. Just enjoy it for what it is and realize the lessons in life that we often ignore. It takes a nation to make a change, but only one man to pioneer it. Watch how he did it.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 17%
Direction / Execution – 17%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 86% = A-

A Guy Thing---- a bad thing....

2005-04-18T06:07:00.000+08:00

© MGM

Title: A Guy Thing (C-)
Release Year: 2003
Actors: Jason Lee, Julia Stiles, Selma Blair, Lochlyn Munro, Thomas Lennon
Director: Chris Koch
Story and Screenplay: Pete Schwaba / Matt Tarses et al.
Cinematography: Robbie Greenberg
Producer: Roger Bimbaum et al.
Studio: Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer

There’s something interesting about Jason Lee and Julia Stiles that enticed me to see this movie. Selma Blair playing the prudish girlfriend again (Re: Legally Blonde), I thought was just the icing on cake. What I didn’t know is that the cake was all icing but no chiffon.

The story revolves around Paul (Lee), an incredibly stupid character who happens to be also so nice and afraid of taking risks. After his bachelor party, he woke-up the next day in bed with another woman named Becky (Stiles). She’s a happy-go-lucky lass who happens to the ex-girlfriend of a steroid dependent police officer. Things get crazy as he found out that the woman he thought he slept with is actually the cousin of her fiancée Karen (Blair). Now, he tries to find ways to keep everything a secret from his girl while at the same time escape the jealous ex-boyfriend from butchering him. And the audience is left with the arduous challenge of who can stand this movie longer.

© MGM

When you have a not so exceptional concept, one must make sure to find a way to recompense through the screenplay. If the screenplay is also not that great, then at least hire a great director to add some much needed flavor. In case there’s still nothing special about the director, hire great actors. And if still no luck, just make an animated movie. At least in a way it’s just proper to ask for people’s money to reimburse for the effort.

I’m not saying that the actors in this movie were bad, cuz God knows how much I adore Julia Stiles. In fact, I think the acting is the strength of this movie. If not for the three, people won’t even waste a nanosec of their time to see this flick. Jason and Julia’s chemistry actually worked which prevailed me from trashing this movie to permanent oblivion. However, the number of times I actually felt delighted by this movie was like a hairpin in a haystack. The haystack is the incredibly maddening minutes where the characters dwell on stupid charade of immense excess.

© MGM

An ordinary concept, a baloney script and a blue-collar director, now what does that spell??? An astonishing travesty that can cause one to kill himself or others. I speak for everyone, this ain’t just a guy thing, even girls would feel exactly the same way I feel about this movie. Now, seeing this movie, that, is a bad thing.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 10%
Screenplay – 9%
Direction / Execution – 10%
Acting – 15%
Technical Aspect – 12%
Total: 56% = C-

First Daughter ---- first-rate disappointment

2005-04-17T14:11:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century Fox
Title: First Daughter (C-)
Release Year: 2004
Actors: Katie Holmes, Michael Keaton, Marc Blucas, Amerie, Margaret Colin, Lela Rochon Fuqua
Director: Forest Whitaker
Story: Jessica Bendinger and Jerry O’ Connell
Screenplay: Jessica Bendinger and Kate Kondell
Editor / Music: Richard Chew / Michael Kamen & Blake Neely
Design / Photography: Alexander Hammond / Toyomichi Kurita
Producer: John Davis et al.
Studio: Regency Entertainment and 20th Century Fox

“…I’m still gonna stay with you, not because I have to, but because I want to”

Oh, how sweet, and how I wish I could be as amiable. But there are tons of reasons that forbid me to be so after watching this movie. If there’s anything that I am glad about, it will be the fact that my decision a couple of months ago to skip this movie was substantiated.

I love Katie Holmes. For me she’s an angel. She’s the sweetest thing that ever ensued from television. Dawson’s Creek is one of my favorite shows of all time. I grew up watching that show, which means I grew up watching Katie. I stood by her even though thousands of people deemed that she can’t act (God, I’m so emo). That’s how much I adore her, but I’m afraid that adulation will not be enough to save this princess from falling from grace.

© 20th Century Fox
Katie plays the role of Samantha, the first and only daughter of the incumbent president of the USA, Mackenzie (Keaton). She’s about to experience her first real walk in the world, alone--- or so she thought. She enters college, a time in once life where one learns how to be independent, something probably she won’t learn since 24/7 secret service is on her tail. A lot of things happened and I don’t wanna transmit any of the burden from what I saw, to you so I’m just gonna cut it short and say that this movie is truly nonsense.

I never thought I’d see a movie cheesier than any Hallmark movies I’ve seen. I mean really, the first half of the movie was like a never-ending conclusion to a rom-com/self-evaluation movie. You know how movies of this type works, the lead ends up telling about what she have learned. This one didn’t settle for one scene alone of never-ending lessons but for the entire half of the movie. And then, what makes it so much more exciting is that the final half felt really felt like a Hallmark movie. Too much drama that’s nothing but plain drama.

Forest Whitaker needs to learn a lot more. Not that I am singling him out, cuz I honestly believe that the script plain sucks. And what’s even funnier is that it took two people to make up the story and another two to write the screenplay. Wow, it did work.

© 20th Century Fox
I feel really bad for all the actors in this movie especially Katie. Man, I do hope she survives this disaster and actually land a good role someday. Michael Keaton was actually good in this movie that came as a surprise. This one won’t pass as rom-com too, cuz the chemistry was not just there. Katie and Marc as a couple is not just convincing. They’re as cold as any straight man would feel towards Madame Auring.

The movie tried to be so nice and all which they succeed of doing, however instead of ending up as heartwarming it became too cheesy to handle. I don’t know about Chasing Liberty cuz I haven’t seen it s I can’t really compare them from one another and speculate who copied who. But if it is almost as the same as some people say, I say watch the one which stars the one you idolize. Press Chasing for Mandy and press First for Katie. As simple as that. As for the ordinary viewers who don’t care about either of the two, you can skip this one without being left guilt-stricken that you didn’t support the first family or your country.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 12%
Screenplay – 9%
Direction / Execution – 10%
Acting – 15%
Technical Aspect – 13%
Total: 59% = C-

Ring 2 ---- makes sense why it doesn't make sense

2005-04-13T12:00:00.000+08:00

Title:
The Ring 2 (B-)
PH Release Date:
April 13, 2005
Actors:
Naomi Watts, David Dorfman, Simon Baker, Elizabeth Perkins, Sissy Spacek, Emily Van Camp, Kelly Stables
Director:
Hideo Nakata
Based on the film:
“Ringu”
Screenplay:
Ehren Kruger
Music / Cinematography:
Hans Zimmer / Gabriel Beristain
Producer:
Michael Macari Jr. et al.
Studio:
DreamWorks Pictures

“fear comes full circle my ass!!!”

The one that started this Jap spooky craze is back for its preordained sequel. This time, DreamWorks hired the same man who brought these movies into life. Hideo Nakata, director of the original The Ring. Will his presence result to a mind-blowing sequel? Or will it be as dumb and dull as the original Ring 2???

It’s hard to say. I saw the first The Ring two and half years ago and I can’t compare it to the original one, cuz the stupid me was able to see Ring 2 and Ring 0 but not the its predecessor. But I did like the movie. The idea of being slaughtered 7-days after watching a shampoo video (the hait combing thing) is definitely better than any slasher movies in existence. However, the script wasn’t really able to establish the movie as sensible. It’s a never ending “How can that be???” and “How come???” I did like Gore Verbinski’s (Pirates of the Carribean, The Mexican) keen visual direction but man, he’s not much of a storyteller. And Hideo Nakata was not that different.

Picking up six months after Rachel Keller (Watts) managed to have a well scene with Samara (Stables), she and son Aidan (Dorfman) tries to start anew. They relocate to Oregon, it may not have the world's best coffee (they’re form Seattle remember?) but definitely away from their dreadful past--- or so they thought. Just a few days after moving in, a mysterious death occurred involving two teenagers and a videotape. Who else can it possibly be??? She then tries to find out if the girl in desperate need of an ambush makeover is really back, only to realize that she’s not making any visits, she’s planning to stay for good (without reservations--- that’s awful).

The movie’s script is a bottomless well of plot holes, that even Samara, with her flexible joints and sticky hands won’t be able to get out of. Don’t you just love it when she tries to crawl out of the well??? Anyways, it was like a work of an amateur, though it actually makes more sense than the first one, she wasn’t able to completely cover the subplots, that oh right, she made herself! She writes about killing somebody and not telling us how it ends up and adds up to the story??? Honey, you’re not a God, you can’t just kill people and throw them on the street, have some decency and burn them.

And man, this girl have some man issues, Naomi’s characters always ends up with a dead boyfriend, or in this one just a potential boyfriend, imagine that! So much for her happy ending ei? And speaking of boyfriend, there was once scene that I found really, really terribly odd, the dinner scene where Rachel tries to talk her son into calling her mommy. The dialogue was good, but man, it felt like Naomi was flirting with his son. That was really funny, and Micheal Jackson was like, “How come she gets to do that and I can’t???”

I thought the characterization was a bit inconsistent, disregarding the fact that Aidan is actually switching characters. And oh, just in case you didn’t notice, Samara’s real mother (yup, she’s adopted) was played by Sissy Spacek. Yup, that’s her in the white dress and the ambush makeover bound hair (too much promotion here). For the first time, we’re seeing the real Sissy Spacek again. Back on her Carrie roots, she wasn’t causing any fire this time though.

I say there was a bit of improvement visually, the eerie feeling was totally there when they want it to be and they’re still able to move me to the edge of my seat. I guess it was a good move in the part of the producers to hire a new director cuz if Gore was given the same script, oh, we’re up for some treat, another The Mexican ei??? Hideo Nakata wasn’t that bad, but not so good either.

Naomi Watts is such a doll. 9 out of 10 of her shots, I have to convince myself that I’m not seeing Nicole Kidman. Probably because they’re both Aussie and they’re really, really good friends that they start to look so much alike. I mean, seriously, they look so identical. She did a wonderful job, well, she’s kinda a second-rate Nicole in a way, picking up roles which Nicole so humbly throws around, but I think she’s a really fine actress. If Nicole is inexistent, she’ll probably do better. I wonder how they end up so close when almost everyone thinks of them as rivals???

David Dorfman is really a creepy kid. If this kid lives next door, I’d probably order my sister not to play with him. He talks old, he acts old and he looks old. He’s not cute at all. But he was very good, I thought the role was right for him. Some camera conscious shots but it was fine. The rest of the cast were really supporting cast, as in like legs of the chair that you can still sit on even if they’re gone (what an analogy). And oh, Kelly Stables deserves an Oscar for her look. I wonder how she looks like on a daily basis. Got no time to look.

As far as I am concerned, this movie didn’t fail to scare me at least once, but I don’t think it was enough for me to really like it. There’s just more time that it makes no sense than it actually makes sense. Too much preparation may have killed this movie, not taking yourself so seriously sometimes is really essential. I mean c’mon it’s a fictional horror flick, cut the audience some slack. It did come in full circle, no, not fear, but bewilderment.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 14%
Screenplay – 13%
Direction / Execution – 14%
Acting – 16%
Technical Aspect – 16%
Total: 73% = B-

Le Divorce - say NO to custody of this movie

2005-04-12T05:14:00.000+08:00

Title: Le Divorce
Release Year: 2003
Actors: Kate Hudson, Naomi Watts, Jean-Marc Barr, Stockard Channing, Glenn Close
Director: James Ivory
Story and Screenplay: Diane Johnson / James Ivory et al.
Music / Cinematography: Richard Robbins / Pierre Lhomme
Producer: Ismail Merchant et al.
Studio: Fox Searchlight

That’s the bad thing about love, you end up getting hurt the only way to escape it is if you die (or kill yourself)

Hmm… something I somehow agree on. What? It’s true. How I wish I have the balls to do it (yes I have them but they’re not made for such purpose). Despite the fact that I was able to relate to that one line, this movie was a complete waste of time. It was two hours of agonizing incomprehension. Not that I am incapable of understanding, but the movie certainly went all over the place and I mean all over without really making itself clear at any point.

This all happens in France, okay it’s not in French and even if some lines were, there were subtitles, just in case you’re thinking that it’s the reason why I didn’t understand it, cuz poor riddler no nothing more than English. It was about two stepsisters Isabel Walker (Hudson), a young chic lady about to try his luck in France and Roxy (Watts) a poet who was about to be deserted by her so grateful French husband. Wait, before I continue I’m gonna tell you everything now so you won’t have to waste your time seeing it. It’s enough that I have to sit thru this for two hours (riddler cares).

I don’t know how to decipher this cuz I have at most very little knowledge of France and its people, that’s why I dunno if men on that side of the planet are that worth it to be tagged as pigs. I can hardly believe what I was seeing in this movie. And the family was even supportive of it. But somehow despite the situation of Roxy, the movie failed to draw sentiments form the audience. I say it’s not Naomi’s fault but the script and the director’s. Don’t worry though, the writer found a way to make this guy pay, just to show that justice exists. “He’s a very bad guy, he must be punished” maybe that’s what went on the writer’s mind so she kills the character and throws him in garbage. This is via the husband of the woman he cheated with.

On the other hand, Roxy had an affair with the 70 yr.old uncle of her sister’s husband, which by the way don’t look anywhere near 70, he’s like 50 or something. And just like the character, the movie takes on something new that they won’t be able to handle. This film portrayed these characters as stereotypes of the young American women. One who has no direction and a poet who ends up trying to kill herself but fails. What is it with people that they think writers always kill themselves??? And that American women are mere whores without any sort of refinement? I dunno this movie is crazy and I’m getting crazy just thinking about it.

And oh, by the way, on, the side, they also tackled a fight over a painting and insanity. This movie tackled a lot of things and I greatly feel for the actors in this one. I love Kate and Naomi. In have high respects for Channing and Close but I don’t know what came into their minds doing a movie like this.

Just so I won’t waste any more of your time and my time as well, just don’t see it. I’m pretty sure in the first 30 minutes of it, you’d start to feel like you’ve been watching this movie for three years. Yeah, it delivers quite a few laughs but it cannot compensate for the length of boredom you had to endure. A comedy of manners that just have no manners. I already signed the divorce papers for this movie, siting irreconcilable differences. Don’t make the same mistake that I did. Watching a movie is a commitment and this one’s offering no pre-nup.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 14%
Screenplay – 9%
Direction / Execution – 12%
Acting – 15%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 67% = C

Election --- political satire at its best

2005-04-11T05:05:00.000+08:00

© Paramount Pictures

Title:
Election (A)
Release Year:
1999
Actors:
Reese Witherspoon, Matthew Broderick, Chris Klein, Jessica Campbell, Mark Harelik
Director:
Alexander Payne
Based on the Novel by:
Tom Perrotta
Screenplay:
Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor
Editor / Music:
Kevin Tent / Rofle Kent
Design / Photography:
Jame Ann Stewart / James Glennon
Producer:
Albert Berger et al.
Studio:
Paramount Pictures and MTV Films

© Paramount Pictures

“You can’t interfere with destiny, that’s why it’s called destiny”

As a matter of fact, that fact matters. And if only Mr. McAllister did take this thought into consideration, he may have had the same pathetic life he had before.

This movie was released several years ago. Reese was not yet an A-list star but was a few years away from her Legally Blonde fame. In this movie she plays a character bizarrely different and somehow the same from Elle Woods. She plays Tracy Flick, the epitome of a high school overachiever. Smart, determined and nerdy but without those big glasses and messed-up hair. She’s been part of every student government project and considerably ubiquitous. In her senior year, as envisaged by everyone, she runs for presidency of the student council---- unopposed. Who would wanna fight a woman who treats this election like the Apprentice???

© Paramount Pictures

Mr. McAllister (Broderick), because of his combined irritation, anger, envy and disgust for Tracy, found the guy who would go head-to-head with her. Paul (Klein) is not much of your average jock because besides playing football and screwing around, he’s extremely nice and caring for his sister. He is the most popular guy in school and his injured legs and inability to play no more makes him more beloved by all, not withholding the fact of course, that he is stupid.

But the competition doesn’t end there as Paul’s dyke sister, Tammy, all of a sudden decided to run for president. Not because she’s interested in politics, besides Rosi O Donnell’s cause, but simply because she wants to get back to his brother and her former girlfriend who’s now his brother’s bitch, Lisa. All these characters were all wonderfully portrayed by the actors and brilliantly depicted by Payne on screen.

© Paramount Pictures

Sideways was a great movie. But Election is much better than Sideways. I never thought High School could be depicted with so much wit and artistry besides the usual cheerleader stuff. Although there was still stereotyping, it didn’t seem too overly done or wearing to see. Taylor and Payne’s team-up is a certified knockout all the time and despite a few glitches in direction overall he was very effective, he was able to mix the suspense with the comedy which is not that easy to do but he did effectively.

The writing is one of the best I came across with. It was such a brilliant script. Despite the oddity of the characters they all seemed so real. You may not relate to them or know someone exactly like them, but you’ll believe they exist. I only found one flaw in the script with regards to Paul’s sister but it’s hardly noticeable except I noticed it.

Everyone in the cast gave stellar performances. Something I never thought I would ever say but there I’ve said it. Even Chris Klein gave a convincing performance. I never considered him as an actor but after this movie, he may have a shot. Broderick is the perfect man for the role, that susceptible look he has is terribly hard to find. Witherspoon never fails to amaze me except for Legally Blonde 2 which is not exactly her fault but more of the writer’s.

© Paramount Pictures

This is one of the best comedies I’ve seen. The best Teen comedy ever! And Payne’s finest movie to date (out of the two of his movies i've seem). This movie will make you laugh, make you sad and make you think. I thought it’s kinda predictable heading towards the end but wait till you see the end of that whole travesty. This movie gets my vote and I believe yours as well.

And like any other dumbass who saw this movie, I’m still wondering what’s the difference between moral and ethics. You bet!!!

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 19%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 20%
Technical Aspect – 17%
Total: 92% = A

Closer --- a crazy but honest look on modern relationships

2005-04-06T06:16:00.000+08:00

Title:
Closer (B+)
PH Release Date:
April 6, 2004
Actors:
Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman and Clive Owen
Director:
Mike Nichols
Story and Screenplay:
Based on the play by Patrick Marber
Editors:
John Bloom & Antonia Van Drimellen
Design / Photography:
Tim Hatley / Stephen Goldblatt
Producer:
Mike Nichols et al.
Studio:
Columbia Pictures

“If you believe in love at first sight, you never stop looking.”

Interesting thought, but it actually makes sense. The same goes with the movie. Some said that this movie came as a disappointment from the previous works of Mike Nichols (Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, Carnal Knowledge) especially since this is his first release after the much-acclaimed Angels in America, which I am yet to see and if HBO won’t show it this summer I’ll be compelled to make that guilt-bound trip to the no-Hook pirates. I have no right to compare any of his works from this movie because I have not seen any of them.

Based on what I saw (dah! in this movie), he’s definitely the type who loves to take time in developing his characters. He divulges in every aspect of the people within his movie. He does it pretty well and he makes directing seem so easy, especially in the beginning of the movie.

The film is written by the same author of the play it was based from. I say it definitely showed that it was a playwright’s work. The lines were provoking and brutally honest, sometimes going way over the board, which if translated into my language--- give me more! At times it does seem too theatrical but it’s all good. Any movie that includes the line: “Now fuck off and die you fucked up slack!” is music to my ears.

I do find one thing weird about this movie. I didn’t feel like Julia Roberts is actually the lead actress. Correct me if I’m wrong, which I don’t think I am but still do in case I am --- wrong, that is, but I felt like the story rotates more about Natalie’s character.

The story works this way. Dan, wonderfully played by Jude Law (I hope Sean Penn’s happy now) met Alice (played by the cunning Natalie Portman) via an accident. Dan, is an obituarist, the job with the real graveyard shift, while Alice is an American who made her way to London to pursue her dream which occasionally is my dream as well, to strip. They “fell in love” had a good thing going right until Dan met Anna, (beautifully depicted by Roberts) a photographer who enjoys taking pictures of strangers especially if they look like me. Weird as it may seem, but these characters seemed to have been gifted with intense sense of betrayal. If treachery has a smell, they’d be the K9 that can locate them

I wish I do have what they have, but as the movie showed, being honest usually don’t work all the time. Dishonesty can sometimes be the sincere way of showing you care and love the person (did I really say this?). This is the type of movie cynics love. It gives them reassurance. Love is not a fluke it’s nil. Just like Dan who seem to think that the newest girl that caught his eyes is the one he’s looking for. Or like Alice, who insists she’s in love with someone as long as she doesn’t feel like leaving them.

Despite being a character-driven film, it seems odd that Anna was not much developed. Larry is such a unique character (intensely portrayed by Clive Owen). He’s the epitome of what an ordinary man usually is and what an ordinary man usually is not. He enjoys being vulnerable, which is definitely not a manly character and he never accepts defeat.

The movie did show a lot of potential but started to stumble on the way to the finish line. Good thing that Damien Rice’s music was there to pick it up and instill that final twist with a little more blow. Disappointing it may be to some (specifically me), but despite all the fuck, suck and cock going on there was nothing of that kind shown in the movie.

Honestly, this is not the type of movie your barkada will love, but if you’re an emotionally charged up brokenhearted lovefool, don’t forget to bring someone with you. Just in case. If you wanna see Natalie Portman do the nasty with the post, watch the movie. And if you wanna see characters make a fool of themselves because of love, or brutally honestly speaking, see your mirage, go… come closer…

The Pacifier --- a traditional waste of family time

2005-04-01T20:25:00.000+08:00

Title:The Pacifier (C)
PH Release Date:March 30, 2005
Actors:Vin Diesel, Lauren Graham, Brittany Snow, Faith Ford, Carol Kane, Brad Garrett, Max Theriot, Morgan York
Director:Adam Shankman
Story and Screenplay:Thomas Lennon et al.
Cinematography:Peter James
Producer:Roger Bimbaum et al.
Studio:Walt Disney Pictures

"this movie is so dumb i have no quotes at all"

Since I’ve been bedridden (for real!!!) for the past couple of days. I needed to find a remedy for my filmtosis (n., a disease caused by the lack of movie viewing pleasure on a Wednesday) So I decided to watch this movie since they say laughter is the best medicine. I’m not a fan of Vin Diesel, or of any man who have boobs bigger than my mother, but I was willing to give him a shot. This will be the first time I’ll see him do comedy (and hopefully some real acting). And I terribly wish this will be the last (Ms. June will kill me).

Vin plays the Navy SEAL Shane Wolfe who hardly recuperated from his first-failed mission. Now, here’s where you immediately know that this is not your regular Vin Diesel movie, because instead of his character dwelling on his lost he immediately grabbed the newest mission and do it without any feeling of remorse towards the family of the scientist who died and his fellow officers as well. Simply put, no big boi drama.

This new mission with the family of the scientist is something he had never done and was not specifically trained to do but because Vin’s character should be the hero, somehow he managed to do it all so well. And I mean really well. With him even directing a play. It doesn’t get any more seamless than that. And with a man being able to handle kids and babies oh so well, he should be the perfect man. That’s when you’re hit with the hard reality that this is a flight of fancy.

If you are still contemplating about how the movie might end you must have been born yesterday or simply hit yourself so hard on the head that even the simple task of picking your nose you can hardly manage to remember how to do. If the latter has not been administered on you yet, I’ll be more than glad to do it for you-- free of charge!!!Adam Shankman directed this movie, and as mentioned in the poster, it was directed by the director of Bringing Down the House. Adam Shankman directed this movie which means he directed Bringing Down the House. Korek!!!!! (with the hastiness of Kris Aquino’s version). One thing I so wish the producer of the next film he directs never do, is put “from the director of the pacifier” cause that will immediately decipehered as a sign of distress.

I dunno what school this director came from, maybe from outer space but man, Joyce Bernal could have done a much better job. Visually he’s not totally bad, but the storytelling, man, he sucks bigtime. I mean, I dunno what exactly he’s trying to do, he attempts to depict an ordinary and predictable storyline into a more ordinary and more predictable movie. How honest of him. If I was to judge this flick on sheer visual development, this movie will receive a staggering D.

I mean c'mon, as if the storyline is so complex that you would have such a hard time to develop it. And mind you, I dunno how crazy this sounds but this sounds Whitney Houston type of crazy for me, it needed four people to write this movie. The more really is the manier but not necessarily merrier. That’s like saying that we need 20 writers to have a really good script.

Vin is typecast to play only two roles. First, an officer, not necessarily a virtuous one, and second, a wicked character, may be a rebel of some sort or a fugitive. In this movie, they can’t claim that he’s playing anything new. Just because he is changing diapers, it doesn’t count as a new role. If you’ll ask me whether he was able to pull it off, c’mon, as if it’s that hard to utter ” eew!” when you see a poo-stricken diaper??? Now, if Vin Diesel was trying to throw some gags of his own, now that’s worth critiquing.

The movie’s fortunate to have such an incredible support cast, from Lauren Graham (Gilmore Girls) to Brittany Snow (8 Simple Rules). I dunno about Brad Garrett because I never liked him as an actor. I have something against hairy men (not really fond of cookie monster). No, seriously, I dislike him immensely (not hate, didn’t your parents told you we should never hate nobody?), I think he’s OA, and overly conceited. I may love Raymond but I don’t like him.

This movie had a lot of potential, casting is good, take away Brad Garrett and his character as well, fire the director, get a new one, choose one scriptwriter and this movie will be better. Instead of taking on so many things at the same time, it would have been best if they used the ever-effective tool in making such comedies work---- babies. And if you think about it, or simply take time to read it, this movie is entitled the pacifier!!! Dah???!!!!

Grading Sheet:Story – 12%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 10%
Acting – 15%
Technical Aspect – 12%
Total: 61% = C

Grace of my heart --- lacks refinement

2005-03-26T06:01:00.000+08:00

Title:
Grace of my Heart (B-)
Release Year:
1996
Actors:
Illeana Douglas, Matt Dillon, Eric Soltz, John Turturro, Bruce Davison, Chris Isaak, Bridget Fonda
Director:
Allison Anders
Story and Screenplay:
Allison Anders
Editor / Music:
James Kwei et al. / Joni Mitchell, Elvis Costello
Design / Photography:
Francois Seguin / Jeaa-Yves Escoffier
Producer:
Daniel Hassid et al.
Studio:
Gramercy Pictures

Grace of my Heart follows the story of Edna Buxton (Douglas), a daughter of a rich family whose dream is to become a recording artist. With that alone, yours truly who’s a frequent visitor of singing auditions (twice is frequent for me), was captivated to watch it.

It all began in a singing competition where she won and was promised to record an album. However, when she arrived in New York, she realized that it was all a dupe. The labels didn’t want no female singers. Imagine, being disowned by your parents and accepting it, thinking that your dreams are finally coming true. Now that’s where our similarity ends. Because if I was her, I would have used my brains. I would have returned to my parents and used their money to release my own album. Why torture myself in the hands of others. But then they wouldn’t have any more story to tell. So okay, lets let it slide.

Because of sheer determination (or idiocy), she decides to reside in the apple, not as big as it is today, but an apple anyway. During her stay, she met Joel Millner (Turturro), a manager who lectured her that she won’t get a recording contract at that time. Don’t ask me why, I was not born yet. That was in the late ‘50’s. And so she agreed, writer she will just be until she’s given the right break.

At first I thought, the love aspect of the movie will be between the two. Apparently not, Edna who’s now named Denise Waverly ends up with another writer, who impregnated her then screwed around; a radio jock who’s already attached and finally to a musician with suicidal tendencies. Her dreams came true but fell short cuz the absolutely beautiful song “God give me strength” flopped. But no worries, she will be able to sell more than a million copies after she made a record immediately after Matt Dillon’s character committed suicide She wasn’t that stupid after all.

Some say this is bigger than any regular movies made by this director named Allison Anders. She usually does movies that show the nature and trials of women. Okay, so this one counts, but I just don’t think it was not well made. The story was compact, a bit dragging at some point particularly in the middle to the conclusion part. In spite of this, instead of dealing with the writer and her reasons for writing, they tried to show aspects of love and the music industry that may be relevant but are way too much for an audience to handle. Thus, losing their interest.

If it’s any consolation, Ileana was pretty convincing. I didn’t actually know her name until I searched for it. I thought she was Toni Colette. The doorknob eyes confused me. Everyone did a great job as well. From Matt to Eric to John. It was a finely acted movie.

Martin Scorcese is the executive producer of this movie for a company that I believe no longer exists. Gramercy pictures, that’s like a studio that makes movies for grams and asks for their mercy to see it. So lame (the name and me). One thing I did admire from this movie is the music. Burt Bacharach, Elvis Costello and Joni Mitchell contributed songs for this one. Shawn Colvin even made a cameo.

Overall, it felt and looked like a hallmark movie. That’s why I thought at first that it was based on a true story. It’s where great stories come to life right? but I saw this on in Cinemax, just a click away from the dreaded movie channel. It’s a fun ride for music lovers since you’ll get to experience the music of what I consider the golden era of modern music. It may not be as interesting for period movie enthusiasts since most of the scenes were taken inside the recording studio. If by any chance you stumble upon this flick, I say watch it, just so you can say to yourself that I made it through watching a movie with such title. That’s reason enough.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 14%
Screenplay – 13%
Direction / Execution – 13%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 73% = B-

Ms. Congeniality 2: Unarmed and Not fabulous!

2005-03-23T06:01:00.000+08:00

© WB

Title:
Ms. Congeniality 2: Armed and Fabulous (C+)
Actors:
Sandra Bullock, Regina King, Enrique Murciano, William Shatner, Ernie Hudson, Heather Burns, Diedrich Bader
Director:
John Pasquin
Story and Screenplay:
Marc Lawrence
Editor / Music:
Garth Craven / John Houlihan
Design / Photography:
Mahem Ahmed / Peter Menzies
Producer:
Sandra Bullock
Studio:
Castle Rock Entertainment and Warner Bros.

© WB

"It’s the first time you open your heart to someone and what do they do, they wreck it up" (or something to that effect)

Perhaps this line could have saved the movie but too bad it wasn’t enough. I was surprised that it was shown earlier here compared to the US so I immediately grabbed the opportunity to see it. Knowing that it’ll line up on my list of superfluous sequels. During the first few scenes of the movie, there was a shed of hope that it won’t be the next Legally Blonde or Charlie’s Angels but that only lasted for a couple of minutes then we’re off to the never-ending consolidations between its characters.

In case you haven’t figured it out, the plot of the movie is that we follow Gracie (Bullock) weeks after her world peace moments as she begins to get her life back as a field agent. However, fame, as so predictably felt, will have a way to catch up on her. Where else but on her very first mission. Now, she has no choice but to live the life she never wanted to have --- as a spokesperson for the FBI.

© WB

She’s not your ordinary FBI representative; she’s not in black suit and leather shoes. She’s on hills. Now what’s the catch? Well, remember Ms. Rhode Island (Burns)? She’s been kidnapped together with Stan (Shatner), the pageant’s emcee. Due to her lack of friends and unwavering issue against crime she tries (operative term is tries--- as if!) to save her with the help and obstruction of her shadow (King)—literally and figuratively (shoot me now!).

Sandra Bullock didn’t appear in any movie last year. Don’t get me wrong I adore her especially after she donated a million dollars to the tsunami victims, but if she devoted her entire time in making this movie (she’s the producer as well—as always!) I guess it was not time well spent or she simply needed more.

© WB

Gracie Hart is such a loveable character. She’s Grace Adler without the gay confidante but in this one she has one. It was refreshing though, to know that her character didn’t have a happy ending, something very bold to do or simply the last thing they resorted to since they can’t hire Benjamin Bratt again. Whatever the reason is, I love that fact. The pain was kinda real, sometimes people do things that make you think they truly care about you, at times you’re right but sometimes they’re simply doing their job or returning the favor. Why the sudden melancholy? I dunno… it was just the right moment. Ha! Ha!

Having said that, I thought that the story was not the main problem of this movie. It’s more of the direction and the strenuous pacing. The whole middle to the end part was kinda in a limbo. It was way too long for me. The jokes were there, ancient at times but somehow still effective but it loses the impact because of the arduous moments the audience spent watching these two characters hit and console one another time and time again.

© WB

I was really routing for this movie cuz I do love Sandra and she rarely do movies and she knows that she’s a movie star and she capitalizes on that (4 shes in one sentence). But people deserve better than this. The attempt to be good was really there, but the script and direction just didn’t follow.

I was kinda surprised that Regina King would take such a role, I guess she also want to be a movie star ha? I did love the Tina Turner but more of Oprah-gone-wild look. And Sandra well, she plays these kind of parts so well that I’m actually starting to think these will be the only roles she’ll be doing for the rest of her movie career.

© WB

The first Ms. Congeniality was a laugh-out-loud, in-your-face slapstick ridicule towards the fanciful world of beauty pageants. This one is more about the daily struggle of a brokenhearted middle-aged agent whom accidentally happens to be the savior of the titleholder. If this is a real beauty pageant, the runner-up may have been the perpetrator.

If you’re a fan of the first and will not be stopped from seeing it, I do not blame you, but I pity you. If you’re watching this out of pity towards Bullock, then go ahead, make your donation. Whatever is your reason for watching this movie, there’s one thing you’ll wish after seeing it, no, not world peace but peace of mind.

Grading Sheet:
Story – 12%
Screenplay – 12%
Direction / Execution – 12%
Acting – 16%
Technical Aspect – 15%
Total: 67% = C+

Girl with the Pearl Earring --- puts the art in art film

2005-03-20T06:01:00.000+08:00

Title:
Girl with the Pearl Earring (A)
Actors:
Scarlett Johansson, Colin Firth, Tom Wilkinson, Judy Parfitt, Cillian Murphy, Essie Davis
Director:
Peter Webber
Based on the novel:
“Girl with a Pearl Earring” by Tracy Chevalier
Screenplay:
Olivia Hetreed
Editor / Music:
Kate Evans / Alexandre Desplat
Design / Photography:
Ben Van Os / Eduardo Serra
Producer:
Andy Paterson
Studio:
Lions Gate Films

“Beauty inspires obsession”

Weird cuz I did find this movie lovely but I am not quite fanatical. The film is based from the novel of the same title by Tracy Chevalier, which is merely a speculation of the history of a painting of the same name. As you would have guessed, I haven’t read the book and I definitely haven’t seen the painting or in case I did, just didn’t pay much attention to it.

FYI The painting known as Girl with the Pearl Earring is known as the Mona Lisa of the North. Believe me, I would love to expound but I don’t know my directions either. Unlike Mona Lisa, the woman in the painting is not smiling nor forcing a smile (depends on what you’re parents told you). Her lips are a little open and she’s sporting a blue scarf around her head. And of course, she’s wearing the pearl earring. I don’t exactly know how much reality there is to the speculation made my Tracy but I would love to believe that it is the story.

Those who have read the book may not be as elated by the story since it’s nothing new for them but it was for me. I completely fell into the trap of this uniquely sexually restrained movie. It’s an art film alright, but without any nudity. Now who ever said that art film is merely a euphemism for soft-porn, here’s the answer—it’s not!!! This film proved it once and for all. There was a little sex scene but it was very light and the rest were steamy non-verbal and non-physical actions.

The movie is about Griet (Johansson), a 16-year old lass who because of their family’s unfavorable fate was forced to work as a maid for the house of Johannes Vermeer (Firth). The girl discovers the oddity and the beauty of the world of his master and the reality of the life he lives in. Aside of course from the fact that Colin looked like a rockstar with his grungy hair. He is somewhat controlled by his patron van Ruijven (Wilkinson) who fancied Griet. As their intimacy gets stronger, the people around started to suspect. Speculation of their relationship emerged and people are not happy about it, especially Catharina (Davis), the always preganant wife of Jan. Which brings me to the weirdness and strength of this movie. Obviously, due to the fact that his wife gets pregnant all the time, he surely shouldn't be able to restrain himself from getting into Griet's pants but he was able to. He found orgasm in combining colors with her. Who said sex is the best thing on earth?

The master painter faced a tough challenge as the patron asked him to portrait Griet and due to the fact that his family relies on his commission he finds a way to portrait her with that accessory that highlights the entire affair. Since all of it transpired in the mid 17th century, people during these times were supposed to be regarded as sexual addicts, it was shown in the pub scene. People should also be more disciplined and that you won't see, instead, you will be a witness one of the henious crimes ever committed by a human being --- throw his garbage on the riverbanks. Tsk.Tsk. I thought the Filipinos has the patent on that sorta thing? And man, if you think markets in the Philippines are too gross for reality, see how they sell pig meat in this movie. I'm pretty sure you'll find it very appetizing.

Reading it now, it doesn't seem to convincing. But it's very simple yet very elegant. Something one rarely see nowadays. The script was not overdone, arguably a little underdone but it works fine for me. It was engaging enough and the message was conveyed pretty clearly. And for a celebrated novel, I didn’t hear no complains about it. There is drama in this movie but not too intense to become a soap opera it was very subtle and peaceful. The tension was there but it was serene. I didn’t feel that it was forced in any way and that I greatly admire.

The characters were nicely developed. Although I thought Cornelia (the evil/savior daughter of the Vermeer’s) needs a little more. But besides that, I’m totally fine with it. I found them all very real.

A surprise for me from this film was Colin Firth’s performance. Man, he’s barely recognizable. This is the best I’ve seen him. I never thought he could be anything more than a second-rate Hugh Grant. I am not a fan of Scarlett Johannson in fact, I loathe her for reasons even to me have not been disclosed. Her work in this movie is fantastic. Definitely far from her tedious portrayal in American rhapsody. She captured the entirety of the character especially in the parts where she shows weakness and vulnerability. The flawless Wilkinson did another fantastic job and so did every one else.

But what completely highlighted this movie, were the amazing visuals. It’s been awhile since I saw the cinematography, art design, costume and make-up blend so well. Each of these complemented each other and with the haunting score, it made it seem oh so perfect. That totally caught me off guard.

The movie gives a distinctive taste of film, something that does not involve intense sex scenes to put an exclamation point. Just the mere stares and movements give everything you need to know. If simplicity is really beauty, then this might as well be the proof.

Criteria for judging:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 18%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 19%
Total: 91% = A

Robots --- urgently need some greasing

2005-03-18T06:01:00.000+08:00

© 20th Century Fox

Title:
Robots (B)
Actors:
Ewan Mcgregor, Halle Berry, Greg Kinnear, Robbie Williams, Amanda Bynes, Mel Brooks, Jennifer Coolidge, Drew Carey
Director:
Chris Wedge
Story and Screenplay:
Ron Mita et al.
Music:
John Powell
Producer:
Jerry Davis et al.
Studio:
20th Century Fox

© 20th Century Fox

“why be you if you can be new???”

It’s easy to say but tough to pull of. Much like this movie, the attempt to be cool was there but just not enough oil to push through.

The story is nothing new. It’s your typical Cinderella story, only this time, the shoes ain’t glass, it’s metal. Rodney (Mcgregor) is a robot from a poor robot family who grows up via hand-me-downs and spare parts of their relatives. If raising a child these days is that easy, I think there’ll be no adult walking today. Why would you want a kid to grow up if in fact you can maintain their cuddliness and no attitude behavior? Good thing, Rodney is not like that, largely because his (or it) parents raise but does not grease him well and because of his icon --- Big Weld (Brooks). He wants to be an inventor like him and when he finally had the chance to meet him, he was caught in a sudden robot revolution--- a thing that most robot fear of --- UPGRADES!!! Now I dunno what’s wrong with getting shinier and better but somehow they find it wrong. They say they can’t afford it which kinda makes sense cuz we actually dunno how they earn a living out there. Now it’s up to Rodney and his new found friend including Robbie Williams’ hilarious character and Cappy (Berry) to stop the evil upgrader Ratchet (Kinnear).

© 20th Century Fox

I didn’t have high hopes for this movie after the relatively low ticket sales in the US. Not that $37 M is not a strong debut, but it is for an animated movie. Probably because of the A-list but with poor box office appeal stars of the movie (e.g. Halle Berry). But I have to be honest, it was a little better than I thought.

In case you don’t know, this movie is set on a world where everything that exist are made of metals. There are no humans or sign of real life in this movie, which I highly identify as the movie’s flaw. The idea of Robots living on their own without human supervision is plain absurd and uninteresting. Unlike Monsters Inc., this movie tried to shy away from beings without fully establishing the world they made. All they did was present allegories of human behavior that is somewhat amusing, but overall makes no clear sense.

For example, they make new robots by of course; building new ones, but how did the other robots existed? How come they can talk? How come they don’t seem to run out of batteries, if in fact they are run by energy? This movie tried so much to be a heartwarming fuzzy feel movie when well in fact it is simply a slapstick flick of pure style and no substance. During the final minutes of the movie, it stuck with being like that. And it was so much better!

© 20th Century Fox

The movie needed not to attempt to be smart. They were armed with good jokes, funny impersonations and a talented group of voice actors. However, somebody wants to be Brad Bird but ain’t incredible enough to be one. The complete first hour of the movie was really boring and predictable except for some nice cracked jokes. The last 30 minutes though was good cuz despite the predictability and cheesiness it started to become what it was meant to become. A funny animated movie not to be taken seriously. If they simply made fun of themselves form the beginning off to the final frame, then it won’t be as crappy.

The visuals of this movie are really quite impressive. It was very vivid which helped the fast-paced element of it. If this movie was done any slower, I would have slept by the first 1/3 of it. The editing though has some hitches.

© 20th Century Fox

Ewan Mcgregor was as dull as his character. Halle Berry was as inconspicuous as her supposed movie career and her slightly exposed character. Bynes’ character made more mark than these two and especially Robbie. The character can’t possibly be as foolish as him. Kinnear did fine but I would have like somebody else to play it. I dunno who, I’m not obliged to name names.

If you’re looking for a movie to bring your kids to before that day when you can’t go out or take a bath or swim because somebody is dead. Or that day when your wounds wont heal because he’s not around. Then, watch this flick. It’s a good waste of your minutes. However be equipped to perform much needed tweaking and greasing.

Criteria for judging:
Story – 12%
Screenplay – 15%
Direction / Execution – 16%
Acting – 18%
Technical Aspect – 19%
Total: 80% = B

FLASHBACK: Sweet Home Alabama --- too much saccharine sucks

2005-03-12T06:16:00.000+08:00

© Touchstone Pictures

Title:
Sweet Home Alabama (B)
Actors:
Reese Witherspoon, Josh Lucas, Patrick Dempsey, Candice Burgen, Jean Smart, Fred Ward, Mary Kay Place, Nathan Lee Graham
Director:
Andy Tennant
Story and Screenplay:
Douglas Eboch et al.
Producer:
Neal H. Moritz et al.
Studio:
Touchstone Pictures

© Touchstone Pictures
“It’s funny how things don’t work out…. It’s funny how they do”

I first saw this movie maybe less than two years ago. I didn’t quite liked it, maybe because during that time I couldn’t really relate to everything that’s been going on to Melanie’s life or maybe because I just don’t wanna admit the fact that I am like her on a lot of ways. Ashamed of her past, running away from it and pretending to be somebody else, qualities that we share or maybe all of us share. I believe each of us have the tendency to be pretentious, maybe not in gigantic ways like her, but in little ways. (this is bound to be a dramatic entry waheheh).

I love Reese Witherspoon. Ever since I saw her in one of my most favorite movie Cruel Intentions, I completely fell in love with that chin. She rocked in Legally Blonde and although the sequel botched I still love her… chin. Plus she’s the wifey of Ryan Pilipy (wahihi). In this movie she plays Melanie Smoocher, no wonder she pretended to be someday else, you’re like the resident guard of kissing booths with that surname. Carrmichael do sounds better. She’s the new “it” girl of fashion and she’s marrying the son of the mayor of New York City. Just how great can her life be? Well, it’s all merriment for our girl. She can’t marry Andrew cuz she’s still wedded. Her husband don’t wanna sign the divorce papers which forced her to come back to the home she grew up in… where else but the place with a country anthem—Alabama.

© Touchstone Pictures

There she found some old folks that seemed to have never grown up and bound to die in their old ways. This is what’s funny about this movie everyone is stereotyped and they don’t seem to be able to get out of it. Jake, still refuses to sign the papers so Melanie tried to find a way to make him sign, and it worked. Putting people down, still is the best way to go up, wahehe. And when Jake finally did sign, she started to feel or realize how she misses the life she used to have and the only man she ever loved.

Candice Bergen played the role of Andrew’s mom. She was really funny. I loved every bit of her scene. And I loved that scene when Andrew said that everyone gets ashamed of what they parents do sometimes and she answered back “I’ll assume that’s a rhetorical question”. Very funny.

© Touchstone Pictures

Now I remember what made me dislike this movie. It’s because of the ending. It’s too good to be true. C’mon, with all those lies how can somebody have a happy ending! I did love the twist in the end but the ending just sucks. It’s funny cuz I didn’t like My Best Friend’s wedding cuz it didn’t end up happily ever after for Julia and now I saw this film and I want it to have a cruel conclusion. Haha! This boy is hard to please. It was really a smooth ride the entire time but the ending really scrwed it up for them. It lost the sense of reality, how can we relate to the story if ends up so nice?

Reese did a great job, she may not be the prettiest girl among the flock but she’s definitely one the most talented. Josh Lucas was pretty convincing, and you gotta love the accent and his blue eyes. Man! Where can you get that? Patrick Dempsey did play the part well too.

© Touchstone Pictures

I honestly have no idea why I have to write a review of this movie But I did felt that this movie can make you think and reflect on what you do in your life, whether you’re from the city or otherwise. As for me, I can’t say I have a sweet home Alabama but I do have things I run away from—love for example. Dah!

Pitch Black----rapt in its own darkness...

2005-03-07T06:16:00.000+08:00

Title:
Pitch Black (C-)
Actors:
Vin Diesel, Radha Mitchell, Cole Hauser, Lewis Fits-gerald
Director:
David Twohy
Story and Screenplay:
Ken and Jim Wheat and David Twohy
Editor / Music:
Rick Shaine / Graeme Revell
Design / Photography:
Grace Walker / David Egby
Producer:
Tom Engelman, Anthony Winley
Studio:
Universal

In the middle of the controversial meet-up of Vin Diesel and Andrea del Rosario, I decided to watch this movie. Due to my lack of resourcefulness I didn’t realize when I made a review for Chronicles of Riddick that it is actually a sequel for this movie. Now I’m caught up in the middle. Just how can I possibly decided which is worse? I’ll save the verdict for later.

From the moment I heard Vin Diesel’s straight from the grave tone, my action-flick alert immediately kicked into high gear. I remember the first line very clearly. “They say most of the brain sets down on cry or sleep, all but the primitive side------ the animal side”. Ohhkaaayyy. If these words were uttered by my former Biology teacher (who sadly have no life besides teaching the study of life) I would have instantly considered it a science trivia. But when Vin said it, I immediately thought it was bogus. Just shows how much credibility he possesses.

The movie’s all about this sorta shipping plane and its passenger who unexplainably encountered some technical problems that led to their crash into a planet which is surrounded by sand and three suns. It’s too hot, there’s no water, they have no ship and they have a felon on the loose. Just how grim can their situation be? But there is hope; they found a nerd’s camp in the middle of the desert and nobody seems to own it. Oh, wait, if the ship is here and nobody’s here, where did they go? I wanted to raise my hand and say they evaporated. But they did not, apparently there were creatures of the dark, and the convict they planned to kill end up to be their knight in swimming goggles.

I heard it straight from Vin, that the hardest part in making this movie is not the action sequence, but the contact lenses. Yes, my friends he’s wearing contacts here! He’s such a big boy to blubber over a pair of gels in his eyes. Just how difficult can it be? Does the color make it much harder? Given the chance I would love to try it, just to see how I’d look like if I have glow in the dark eyes.

This movie is poor in everything. If there’s one thing commendable about it, is its characters’ consistency--- in being stupid. Just imagine, you know that there are creatures of the night ready to make a meal out of you and what did they do? They waited for the suns to almost all be out before they drove their solar powered car to get the energy they need to run the ship. And you know what happens next.

This is no better than any crappy slasher movies. One by one the petty characters start to die until the love team is the only one they have left. It’s quite enjoyable to watch as each of them gets masticated by the odd looking no-name creatures of the no-name planet. If I’m the king of the universe I would have named the planet Sandy and the creatures Munchies for obvious reasons—it sounds cute.

If I’m still in touch with my favorite high school teacher and she reads this, she might go to Lacuna’s and have the procedure performed (Eternal Sunshine remember???) to effectively wipe me out from her memoirs. She was pretty defensive when she read my not-so-great review of Riddick and said that Vin did that movie cuz it’s where the money is, apparently it’s not. Surprising, but yes. Moviemakers are starting to be smart enough to know that Riddick don’t deserve another chance. It only bagged a little over $60M in the US, if I’m not mistaken.

I did like one thing about this movie, Radha. She’s very pretty and well she can act, hopefully she’ll be given a role where she can really show it. The direction sucks as much as the editing does. It’s almost close to the way we make action sequences here. If that’s the case, it surely is alarming.

To answer my query earlier, I think this one sucks more. Because at least on the Chronicles of Riddick, there was an attempt to characterize, I didn’t say they succeeded, but at least they attempted.

photos © by USA Films

a million dollar knockout punch

2005-03-05T08:02:00.000+08:00

Title:
Million Dollar Baby (A)
PH Release Date:
March 2, 2005
Actors:
Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank, Morgan Freeman
Director:
Clint Eastwood
Based on:
FX Toole’s Rope Burns
Screenplay:
Paul Haggis
Editor / Music:
Joel Cow / Clint Eastwood
Design / Photography:
Henry Bumstead / Tom Sherif
Producer:
Clint Eastwood
Studio:
Warner Bros.

“girly, tough ain’t enough….you have to fight your way into this world, and fight your way out of it.”

Fresh from the somehow surprising Oscar upshot, I prepared myself for sheer disappointment before I saw this movie. Scorcese’s epic is number one on my list for 2004 movies, and I didn’t expect this one to take its place. It almost did, but didn’t quite.

The story rotates around three characters: Frankie Dunn (Eastwood), a boxing trainer/manager who acts like a seven year old kid wanting to be molested by the priest everytime he goes to church. Maggie Fitzgerald is too old and awfully amateur to box, her life is much like Cinderella’s, and Frankie was her fairy grandfather who she religiously appealed to be her trainer. And Morgan Freeman’s character, used to be a champ derailed by a fight that caused his eye loss. He still works in the ring, but as a spit wiper (too much for climbing the hierarchy). All their lives are trapped in their own bewildered past and a boxing gym that seemed to be as rotten as their lives are.

The story began in a boxing match of Frankie’s budding superstar boxer. It’s also where Maggie first attempted to nab him as trainer, but unlike every man Clint’s age, he turned her down. But Maggie won’t be stopped especially when she found encouragement in Morgan. Few rounds of drama and laugh, Frankie agreed to train her and they make an invincible team that took the world of female boxing by storm. Did they go as far as winning a belt? You would have to watch it to find out…

I liked the movie, not loved it, but liked it. It was very simple yet so real. It’s a different kind of from rags to riches story cuz it’s not your typical they live happily ever after ending. The characters were very well developed and they’re not conveyed as if they beg for your mercy, they were presented like any person in their position should do, just hope.

I know a lot of people may disagree with me but I really found Clint Eastwood’s acting odd. I’m not saying that it was bad, I think he did a terrific job, but it was really weird. It is as if he’s a member of the SONFEX (Society of No Facial Expressions). It’s really strange, I felt like he had his face done or at least had BOTOX. But I salute him for doing such a great job as a director. Although my vote is still for Martin, he comes in second. He was able to start soft then slowly it becomes riveting and heart pounding at the same time. The scenes were cleanly executed, nothing special shot-wise but he captured every moment using slow close-ups together with his own poignant score. Yes, if you don’t know, he also made the score, he produced this movie, he’s the lead actor and he’s the director. He surely made the most out of it since he wasn’t able to write it.

On the writer’s note it was a well-made screenplay. Witty, stupid (in a good way) and didactic at the same time. I’d say it’s as strong as every aspect of the movie, which brings me to the movie’s strength. Every aspect of it worked perfectly well with one another. From the script to the actors to the director to the technical aspects. I had a couple of really good laughs not because they’re anything especial but I think just the chemistry of the actors worked so well. This is one of the few low-budgeted Hollywood movies that won Best Picture and it only took 37 days to shoot, which if in our local movie industry, will absolutely be normal.

I’m really glad that Hilary got this role. After, the Core, I never thought she’ll ever make a movie again, let alone win another Oscar. But I never doubted her talent, just her career judgments. Good thing she bagged this one. I do hope she learned her lesson. And another thing, she’d better fire her stylist so that we’ll be assured that she’ll no longer look like a Christmas delicacy (the violet backless down-to-her-crack gown) the next time we see her on the Red Carpet.

It’s a definite must-see but it may not be for everyone. The guys can watch it for their dying Idol but if you’re a woman who only watches movies to see topless hunks or eye-candies, you may need to reconsider, especially since Clint is the exact opposite of that. But there is one thing I can assure you; he’s not taking any of his clothes off. Whew!.

and the winners are.......

2005-03-01T08:02:00.000+08:00

The 50 bald men have all been handed out to their respected but not all deserving winners. It is one of the shortest Oscars ever but just as enjoyable.

Chris Rock may not be as effective as Billy Crystal or Whoopi Goldberg because unlike them, he didn’t try any tricks and just stick with what he do best, rip those stars apart with his assertive stand-up. His funny antics and incredible guts may not be as high as when he hosted the 2003 MTV Movie Awards, probably because his more restricted here, the fact that a couple of Robbie Williams’ racist jokes were removed gives it perfect sense.

Now, let’s head to the winners’ den shall we?

It’s 3 biopics and 2 small character movies… sorry, no Hobbits this year…
Who might win:
Million Dollar Baby --- a knockout!
Who should win:
Finding Neverland --- bloody brilliant!
Who will win:
The Aviator --- 11 nods and a movie about Hollywood, how sure can you possibly get?
Who won:
Million Dollar Baby--- Apparently, not sure enough. It’s very good but I just don’t believe they deserve it. this is way too much of a reimbursement for Eastwood.

Best Director:
Scorsese’s about to beat Peter ‘O Toole’s record, courtesy of a man almost his age…
Who might win:
Alexander Payne for Sideways --- remember Robert Polanski?
Who should win:
Martin Scorsese for the Aviator --- simply because I want him to die with honor…
Who will win:
Clint Eastwood for Million Dollar Baby --- battle of the stales… and he’s gonna win…
Who won:
Clint Eastwood--- I knew it! But somehow I was still hoping that the Academy will finally recognize Scorcese. Eastwood may have made 25 movies, but they’re not all as good as Martin’s. And besides, in their particular entries, Scorcese really did a much better job.

Best Actor in a Leading Role:
Four of them did exist; the other one’s rotting as we speak…
Who might win:
Leonardo DiCaprio for The Aviator --- if looks can vote….
Who should win:
Johnny Depp or Jamie Foxx --- really can’t pick…
Who will win:
Jamie Foxx for Ray --- well-earned....
Who won:
Jamie Foxx for Ray --- I never though there will come a time when I’ll say this… I really wished Leo won. I’m not a fan of his but I really love his work in The Aviator.

Best Actress in a Leading Role:
It’s a rematch, Annette vs. Hilary… whoever’s wearing the gloves is gonna bring him home…
Who might win:
Annette Bening for Being Julia --- is she gonna win against Hilaryt his time????????
Who should win:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby --- I don’t think so!
Who will win:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby --- richly deserved....
Who won:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby --- this one’s right, the only thing wrong in this picture is the fact that she’s wearing the worst dress of the night. Come on, you’re up for an Oscar and you come in that???

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:
No Owen last SAG Awards, Actors voted for Freeman, but Owen won the Globe, who’s gonna win this one?
Who might win:
Thomas Haden Church for Sideways --- definitely not routing for him...
Who should win:
Morgan Freeman for Million Dollar Baby --- give the old man the statue
Who will win:
Clive Owen for Closer --- I’m a fan but I oppose….
Who will win:
Morgan Freeman --- Thank God the Freeman finally won! I’m a fan of Clive but the SAG voters do agree with me…

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:
Same story, Blanchett won SAG, Portman won Globe, this one’s gonna be tough..
Who might win:
Cate Blanchett for The Aviator --- she gave better performances than this one…
Who should win:
Natalie Portman for Closer --- yeah baby!
Who will win:
Natalie Portman for Closer --- I have faith….
Who won:
Cate Blanchett --- I’m a fan of hers, but I don’t think she deserves this one. Poor Natalie, maybe you’ll get nominated again and win the next time for Star Wars Episode 3.

Best Original Screenplay:
A wide array of choices…
Who might win:
The Aviator by John Logan --- won’t be surprise if it wins…
Who should win:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind by Charlie Kaufman --- the genius needs the recognition…
Who will win:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind by Charlie Kaufman --- tough call but I picked one…
Who won:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind by Charlie Kaufman --- man! He finally won! I’m so happy for him!!!! You go Charlie!!!

Best Original Screenplay:
Competition is much tighter…
Who might win:
Million Dollar Baby by David Magee --- they’re almost there…
Who should win:
Finding Neverland or Sideways - both are so great...
Who will win:
Sideways by Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor --- no objections here
Who won:
Sideways by Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor --- good for them!

Best Foreign-Language Film:
Never seen any one of them, no right to judge but I’m gonna do it still…
Who might win:
The Chorus (France) --- it’s better than A Very Long?
Who should win:
The Sea Inside (Spain) --- never been to that part…
Who will win:
The Sea Inside (Spain)--- simply because it’s the only one I’m familiar with…
Who won:
The Sea Inside --- congratulations!

Best Animated Feature Film:
2 Dreamworks and 1 Disney, sorry Steven, ogre ain’t getting any…
Who might win:
Shrek 2 --- ah.. cuz there’s only three to choose from?
Who should win:
The Incredibles --- no explaining needed…
Who will win:
The Incredibles --- hell yah!
Who won:
The Incredibles --- yippee!!!!

Achievement in Art Direction:
They all deserve to be here….
Who might win:
Lemony Sniket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events --- it may end here…
Who should win:
A Very Long Engagement --- this one’s very unqiue…
Who will win:
The Aviator --- too big budgeted to be ignored...
Who won:
The Aviator --- and they deserve it…

Achievement in Cinematography:
There’s a rotten tomato in here…
Who might win:
The Passion of the Christ --- they may pity this one…
Who should win:
A Very Long Engagement --- truly great….
Who will win:
The Aviator --- don’t ask me for no reason…
Who won:
The Aviator --- did you even doubt it??

Best Film Editing:
This one’s gonna be tough…
Who might win:
Million Dollar Baby --- it’s all there….
Who should win:
Finding Neverland or Collateral
Who will win:
The Aviator --- safest choice….
Who won:
The Aviator --- and the right choice!

Best Original Score:
Howard Shore is not here… there must be some typographical error…
Who might win:
The Passion of the Christ --- may God pity them….
Who should win:
Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events or Finding Neverland --- really gotta push the latter in….
Who will win:
Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events --- it's all theirs....
Who won:
Finding Neverland –-- at least they got one!

Best Original Song:
Heard three of them… at least that’s more than two…
Who might win:
Learn to be Lonely from The Phantom of the Opera --- ha!
Who should win:
Believe from the Polar Express --- love this song…
Who will win:
I have no idea….
Who won:
Al Otro Lado Del Rio from the Motorcycle Diaries – and Beyonce didn’t sing this one waheheh…

Best Visual Effects:
Who’s the best faker???
Who might win:
I, Robot --- I, speechless…
Who should win:
Spiderman 2 --- just because…
Who will win:
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban --- Jackson ain’t around…
Who won:
Spiderman 2 --- I can’t believe they did won! Yahoo!

Overall, the evening pulled a lot of surprises. And I don’t think Sean Penn will particularly appreciate what I’m saying here. I really can’t believe he was pissed with the Jude Law joke of Chris Rock. Man! How lame can he be?

I feel really bad for Michael Mann and the rest of the Aviator crew. They spent so much money expecting they’ll win an Oscar, and one can predict that they might bag it since they captured most of the awards, but they didn’t. Poor Martin, go back and make something they can never resist. Prove them that you can do it!

Riddler--- Out!

Lemony Snicket's unfortunate movie

2005-02-24T08:02:00.000+08:00

Title:
Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events (B)
PH Release Date:
February 23, 2005
Actors:
Jim Carrey, Meryl Streep, Emily Browning, Liam Aiken, The Hoffman Twins, Timothy Spall, Billy Connolly, Catherine O’ Hara, Jennifer Coolidge
Director:
Brad Silberling
Based on the novels:
Bad Beginning, The Reptile Room and The Wide Window
Editor / Music:
Michael Kahn / Thomas Newman
Design / Photography:
Rick Heinrichs / Emmanuel Lobezki
Producer:
Jim Van Wyck
Studio:
Paramount

“we’re very concerned, but not concerned enough to have a good ending…”

Funnyman Jim Carrey is back on the big screen. After playing a man who’s crazy about Kate in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, he takes probably the most challenging and unlike him role of a man who (in the most discreet terms) can be describe as utterly crazy and pure evil. And he’s not up against any heroes alright, neither is he making another appointment with God, he is up against what might be his biggest adversaries yet---- the Bauedelaires children. A young inventor, a bookworm and a cavity free baby just what are the chances of Count Olaf to realize his wicked plans?

Based on the novels I haven’t read (that’s breaking news), this series of unfortunate events may just be the biggest adventure you’ll see on the big screen--- or not. What started to be a brilliant movie just burst into tiny bits like that freakin’ doorknob.

Going into the cinema, I expected a movie that if not better than any Harry Potter films, at least of par. It definitely had the same eerie feel and maturity as the Prisoner of Azkaban and perhaps as lavish or more lavish production wise, but the resemblance ends there. The protagonists: Violet, Klaus and Sunny are just not as engaging as Harry, Ron and Hermione, except for Sunny (The Hoffman twins) who like the kid in Meet the Fockers never fail to make you smile or laugh. Violet’s (Browning) character is too stupid to be an inventor, and Klaus Aiken) could have been a good character if portrayed by a better actor.

The story is not bad at all; I dig all the craziness and wickedness of the picture. It’s definitely a good concept that was very well introduced but as the movie goes along, the pieces just don’t’ add up together to form any good sense. The characters were there, the plot is well made but a lot of the questions needed to be answered were just left behind. I do not know if they’re reserving these for the series’ future but it was most definitely not a good move. To achieve a wide permanent audience, they must first be able to make sure that they make this movie engaging enough for all of them so they would come back. Just like what was done with the first Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings.

Brad Silberling (Moonlight Mile, City of Angels) is probably one of the most-talented young directors around. I am a huge fan of a lot of his work. I don’t believe that it was his fault; it was more of the screenwriter’s. He managed to depict this crazy world where children are barely heard and eccentric characters are everyday people. He managed to tell a good story for the first half of the movie and I think he did his best to end it well but the script just won’t allow him to.

The production design of this movie is way too fabulous. At some points, though not entirely, that it was better than the Prisoner of Azkaban. They created this wonderful imagination into reality and there was not a nanosecond that I thought it was faked. It felt so real. The music is great. The editing needs some improvement but a lot of cool choices. The cinematography is very good as well but could have been better. But what gives this move the edge is really the art direction. It really is unbelievable.

Jim Carrey could have not been more perfect for the role. I don’t see anybody else playing Count Olaf. There can only be one self-absorbed and wicked actor in this whole wide world and that is he. This is the perfect role for him cuz it gives him the chance to fully release himself. It’s almost as if there’s no boundaries in this role. That he can do everything he desires, go as crazy as he wish and have as much as fun as he wanted. And he definitely did. And I believe the audience will too. I did.

Meryl Streep is so fun to watch as Aunt Josephine. Most of the time you see her in roles that features her as this very strong character. This time she plays exactly opposite of that. She plays an obsessively paranoid woman who sees every appliance inside the house as a murderer. She’s that paranoid that she lives over the edge of the clip with a house that can go down faster than a speeding bullet. She played it well but it’s not exactly one of her best performances but she was fun to watch.

Emily Browning is okay. I guess the character is really not as winning as Hermione but she gave a fair performance. Which is probably the best I can give for Liam Aiken’s performance. He’s not in any way as good as Neeson or in any way as charismatic as Clay and he can’t carry the character. Most of the times I found him irritating rather than appealing. Which is probably what I can say the least for The Hoffman twins. They were the absolute belles of this movie. I loved every sound they made and every flinch of their hands. They probably gave the most consistent performance. Ahehe…

A fancy austere farce that will be very enjoyable in beginning, but in the final minutes will be anything but pleasant. Not exactly something that you would like your kids to see since it becomes a little brutal but with guidance it will be a treat for children. It’s a lot funny, and a lot enjoyable, it’s just really unfortunate that it did have an unfortunate ending and unfortunately if you watch it you would have to see the unfortunate ending unfold, how unfortunate!

soaring high with THE AVIATOR

2005-02-23T11:59:00.000+08:00

Title:
The Aviator (A)
PH Release Date:
February 23, 2005
Actors:
Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, Kate Beckinsale, John C. Reilly, Alan Alda, Alec Baldwin, Jude Law, Gwen Stefani
Director:
Martin Scorsese
Story and Screenplay:
John Logan
Editor / Music:
Wayne Wahrman / Howard Shore
Cinematographer:
Robert Richardson
Producer:
Charles Evans, Michael Mann et al.
Studio:
Miramax

“some men dream the future, he built it…. now, see how he did it.….”

Leonardo and Martin teams up once for the second time to bring into the big screen the life of the aviation tycoon Howard Hughes. What I expected to be three hours of never-ending drama became three hours of spellbinding storytelling.

Howard Hughes Leonardo DiCaprio), he can be summed up in three words: eccentric, playboy and honest. He’s known for his odd behavior and craziness. He cares so much about aviation that he’s willing to go bankrupt for the sheer sake of it. This may not be the reason why some of the finest woman during her time where linked with him including Gene Harlow (Gwen Stefani), Kate Hepburn (Cate Blanchett) and Ava Gardner (Kate Beckinsale), but they sure did love something about him. With all the craziness surrounding him, will he ever be able to come out of it alive?

Honestly, I didn’t expect to like this movie at all. Martin and Leo, just doesn’t work perfectly fine for me. Gangs of New York is not exactly one of the best movies for me. The first time I heard about this movie, I just wanted to say to Martin to just give it up, they ain’t gonna give the bald man to him, I’m sure he will have it too, bout 20 years from now, just like what happened to Peter O’ Toole, but he just won’t give up, now I’m hearing talks bout another team-up with Leo again, well, after watching this movie… do it grandpa!

The story is staggering. I am not completely familiar with Howard since all this shit happened years before me but I could hardly believe that all this did happen. One may say it’s impossible but if you watch the movie there’s no way you would think that. How a man pioneered aviation, battle an airplane company and a senator and make movies while dealing with his own oddity do seem implausible but it was real in this movie.

Martin may not be recognized by the academy but we all know who revolutionized movie directing and continues to do so since the 1970’s. Despite his age, he still manages to exemplify moviemaking at its finest. What I loved about his directing was that it doesn’t lavish in way too much with the emotions of the character. He doesn’t force the audience to get too close with them but simply allow them to look at them, carry your own judgments, and with that it made the viewing pleasurable. Unlike A Beautiful Mind, it's lesser drama and more story. Despite the length of the movie, I did found myself wanting for more. I was that awestruck that I just wanna see everything.

The movie captured the 20’s, 30's and 40’s so beautifully. The production design is as glamorous as the era and the cinematography just made it look so easy and so smooth. I don’t know if all the planes featured in the movie were all real or if some were CGI but if they are, man, they looked genuine to me. The sound was also great and the editing was very good as well. It’s one of the most refined movies last year.

Never liked Leonardo as an actor, I don’t maybe cuz I’m so pissed off with him ever since I saw him in that car scene on a humungous boat. I never thought he would be able to come up with a performance far better than what he gave in Catch me if you can. I adored him in that movie. The one that made me believe that he’s not just a pretty face. This time he proved that once more. He captured every inch of everything of this great man. I cannot believe he is capable of acting that consistent. He was very effective in the breakdown scenes and up to now I’m still in awe. After seeing this movie, I wouldn’t mind if he wins the Oscar. The difference between his performance and Jamie Foxx is that it wasn’t much of an imitation, they both delivered the character so well, Leo as an actor, and Jamie as an imitator. But Jamie has the edge because the figure just died almost a year ago and his lived decades ago.

Cate Blanchett is one of my favorite actresses, however, in this movie, I felt as if she was not herself. I didn’t even felt like she was Kate Hepburn, all it seemed to me was that she was having a language impediment. I found it totally weird. One thing I do admire though was that she was consistent, at least that I give to her. Right now, I am most definitely sure that Natalie Portman should win the Oscar. Kate Beckinsale did fine although this role didn’t really gave her much chance to prove anything acting-wise cuz it was so simple but she did it fine. Alan Alda gave an Oscar-worthy performance and so did John C. Reilly who’s snubbed this year. Gwen Stefani was nothing more than an extra in this movie.

A movie of epic proportions that never seemed to lose energy. A fascinating story that deserves to be seen by everyone. It proves how far determination can take you, that no matter how seemingly impossible it is or how much people underestimate and try to stop you, as long as you believe in what you do, you can get there. It’s one of the, if not the best film last year that will definitely keep you pump up till the very last frame. So come aboard and have a great flight…

Ray --- almost as genius as the man himself

2005-02-22T11:02:00.000+08:00

Title:
Ray (A-)
PH Release Date:
February 16, 2005
Actors:
Jamie Foxx, Regina King, Kerry Washington, Clifton Powell, Harry Lennix, Terrence Dashon, Larenz Tate
Director:
Taylor Hackford
Story and Screenplay:
James White
Editor / Music:
Paul Hirsch / Craig Armstrong and Ray Charles
Cinematography:
Pawel Edelman
Producer:
Howard Balwin, Stuart Benjamin
Studio:
Universal Pictures

“promise that you’ll never let no one treat you like a cripple again, that you’ll always stand on your own two feet….”

Every now and then, comes a real musician. Someone who knows music, creates music and defines music. Ray Charles is one of those few individuals who reached that level of musical artistry. Artists owe to him the privileges they are lavish with today. The music fans owe him the evolution of Soul and Gospel music. But the people of Georgia, owe him the parity within their state today. These and a lot more were captured in this wonderful epic vis-à-vis a musical genius.

Guilt-stricken for the death of his only brother since he was young, Ray Charles Robinson (Jamie Foxx) tried to find his way in the world: a world with no mother, no brother, and no light. His talent with the keyboards will take him places that he never thought possible including the world he wished he never knew, the world of heroine. As he soared high in success he ascended high in addiction. Will he be able to free himself from the guilt of his brother’s death? Will he be able to escape the craving for the substance that served as his diversion from his bothered past? And how far will his music take him?

If it is difficult to reach your dreams when you’re a degree holder, attractive and fit, what more when you’re an orphan, blind and black? Like in the case of Ray Charles. Normally, one would have given up all his dreams, knowing that his handicap would never allow him to achieve those goals. Ray Charles didn’t, and thank God he didn’t…

The movie began with an immediate look on how people perceive blind people, useless and always needs assistance. Then slowly, they presented his murky past in a gradual manner, throwing in scenes of his childhood. It was very effective. That style they used in the beginning. Bringing in flashbacks, as his past continuously haunts him wherever he go. Here we saw how Ray Charles truly was and how his past and inability to deal with it led him to his success and downfall.

The script would have not been able to hold it all alone since there were parts when it falls apart, lures too much into one idea that unlike heroine, do not becoming addicting. It somehow slipped away from its goal during the latter parts of the script, concentrating more on too many things then left them all behind. A lot of the subplots were not resolved, from Jeff, Quincy, to his arrest. Plus, some of the characters were underdeveloped, and completely overlooked.

The scenes with his mother could have been really great but was kinda overused as it went along. You kinda grow tired from all the running around in circles by the character. If not for the beauty of the music, one can fall asleep cuz it became redundant in the latter part. Academy Award winner Taylor Hackford (Teenage Father, 1978) did a wonderful job handling such a delicate script. Although he was not completely successful in saving that part of the movie, he managed to leave me awake.

The movie wonderfully depicted Ray Charles’ time. From the moment of his childhood to the early 70’s. The sound was great especially the music. The editing is good as well. The photography simple but ain’t overly done which is better than attempting way too much. Overall it was very simply done which I liked.

Jamie Foxx gave the greatest performance of his life in this movie. I did not believe he is in any way capable of giving in that much. It was no less than the incomparable Ray Charles from beginning to end. I’m still in awe with just how brilliant he is. Imitation is very tricky. When you do it good it will be fabulous, but if you fail, you fail miserably and there’s no doing that moment again anymore. And Jamie managed to do a fantastic imitation for almost two and a half hours. It was so great that I no longer thought he’s Jamie Foxx until he removed those specs on the final scene. He kinda lost the aura when he removed the glasses.

The actress who portrayed his wife also did an amazing job, very heartfelt performance. But I was truly blown away by the performance of the actress who played Ray’s mother. She was slamming good. She’s very unique, very real acting. She made my favorite scene in the movie truly remarkable. When Ray was trying to learn how to walk alone and she was watching him do it by himself, that scene was superb.

A great story of a great man. This story is already great, but the fact that it did happen in real life makes it so much better. The first half of the movie will give you the time of your life, but as it goes along you may start to feel a little bored but not way too much that you’ll fall asleep. I recommend everyone to see it, even if it is just for Jamie Foxx’s performance or the story alone. There’s so much to learn from this movie and so many great moments. Passing this one out will be a wrong mistake (hahaha!) so what are you waiting for? Hit the road Jack!

Constantine --- a one-way ticket to hell

2005-02-19T08:02:00.000+08:00

Title:
Constantine (C)
PH Release Date:
February 16, 2005
Actors:
Keanu Reeves, Rachel Weisz, Shia LaBeouf, Tilda Swinton, Pruitt Taylor Vince
Director:
Francis Lawrence
Based on:
Characters from DC comics’ Vertigo Hellblazer
Story and Screenplay:
Kevin Brodbin and Frank Cappello
Editor / Music:
Wayne Wahrman / Brian Tyler
Design / Photography:
Naomi Shohan / Philippe Rousselot
Producer:
Lauren Shuler Donner, Akiva Goldsman et al.
Studio:
Village Roadshow and Warner Bros.

“the wager between heaven and hell is on earth…. And the test of sanity happens inside the cinema”

Marvel is a true force in making comic book heroes come to life…. DC comics has been trying to keep pace with them and releasing a gothic like character who’s not from Gotham city and is anonymous to a lot of people is their new response… Once in a while there comes a movie who happens to be as bad as its trailer, at times, even worst….. this is one of them…..

A “new plan” is making waves in the man’s world. It’s Constantine’s (Reeves) job to solve it out. He’s been attempting to buy his way too heaven since he’s bound to go to hell for a mistake he did in the past. He meets Angela (Weisz), a police detective out to prove that her twin sister did not commit suicide, instead, was influenced by some demonic creatures. Together they try to find the pieces of the puzzle with signs revealing themselves to them. Will they be able to put the pieces together just in time before they’re the one who turns into pieces?

The first time I saw the trailer for this movie, all I said was what the fuck? I barely understood what the whole thing was trying to imply. That Constantine is sorta demon hunter who’s about to save the world from those who plan to purge it. I totally said that this movie‘s bound to be a bummer…. And man was I right!

The story was something straight out from a Joss Whedon script (Buffy and Angel) and Constantine is like a character that out of the 7 seasons of Charmed, failed to be featured in any one of them. The story is as old as Madame Auring, good versus evil, heaven and hell. There wasn’t really anything interesting to start with in this movie. It’s doomed from the very beginning.

I hope the writers do realize that their script is flawed, to say in most decent terms. The characters were developed well enough, but the process is way too excruciating for the audience to handle. They tried to make the characters explain everything that’s been going on. Plus, the lines were way too cheesy, they’re trying so hard to make the Constantine character look cool….

Constantine: Do you believe in demons?
Angela: No
Constantine: You should, it believes in you…

Gimme a break… they could have done better than that….

If I’m not mistaken (which I rarely am) this is Francis Lawrence’s first movie. And there’s no explaining needed why this is only his first. What they do need to explain is why they have to make him direct at all. He has no style, everything were like pieces from different action-adventure movies. There’s one from Giant movies, there’s one from the Matrix and others. They were a couple of well-executed scenes but the bad ones were more apparent. He’s a poor storyteller, I don’t know whether it’s his attempt to make the movie dark that’s why he tried to keep the mood of the movie a little monotonous, but it was definitely a wrong move. The movie did become monotonous.

The sound of the movie needs a lot of work. During the beginning, I can barely hear the dialogues, which is very frustrating. The editing isn’t far behind. Scenes were coming from all over the place. The photography is the one thing admirable about this movie. A lot of Gothic sceneries, which were very interesting but also adds to the monotony at times. The visual effects were very good as well. They made Los Angeles look like hell (but I thought that’s hell on earth already?). The cinematography was very average, a better cinematographer may have made this movie more interesting.

When I was younger (about the same size I am now) I admire Keanu Reeves, not because he’s a good actor but because he’s gorgeous. Who wouldn’t wanna look like that? People are divided when it comes to him, it’s either you’re a pro or con, no in-betweens. The cons believe he’s just an overpaid pretty face. The pros oppose them by saying that he’s just misunderstood. Well, after watching this movie, I say he’s more of an overpaid old faced. You’ll see how old he really is in this movie. The facial lines are so making its way. And it’s painful to sit for two hours and see Keanu try to be this sinister character and all. Weisz, as an actress needs a lot more credit, though she did fine in this movie, it was definitely below par of the others she already showcased.

If your instinct is telling you to skip this movie, follow it. It’s one of the movies that need better in every department: better writer, better director, and better actors. I don’t think anybody will enjoy this movie at all. It’s not dark enough for weirdos, and it’s not entertaining enough for the normals, it’s just not fit for anyone to see. If in this movie turned LA into hell, believe me when I say it can turn the cinema into one, and you would have to sit in for two hours of it…

Sideways --- a tasty wine and a main entrée

2005-02-14T07:40:00.000+08:00

© Fox Searchlight Pictures
Title:
Sideways (A)
PH Release Date:
Not available
Actors:
Paul Giamatti, Thomas Hayden Church, Virginia Madsen, Sandra Oh
Director:
Alexander Payne
Based on the Novel by:
Rex Pickett
Screenplay:
Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor
Editor / Music:
Kevin Tent / Rolfe Kent
Design / Photography:
Jane Anne Stewart / Phedon Papmichael
Producer:
Michael London
Studio:
Fox Searchlight

© Fox Searchlight Pictures

“She kisses different, she tastes different and she fucks different….”

A seemingly interesting buddy movie made by an incredibly talented director needs no thinking twice if you consider seeing it. I have been waiting for this movie to come out since the buzz is so great for such a little film. However, due to the unwavering fact that generally, Filipinos don’t appreciate artsy partsy type of movies. Desperate times call for desperate measure, that’s why I ended up roaming the streets of Quiapo to find that green cover with two men inside a wine bottle. And thank god I found one….

Miles (Giamatti) is a junior high teacher and an unsuccessful novelist who finds his two years of divorce recent. Jack (Church)vis a flopping actor who’s getting married in a week but plans to shag away his single hood. Together they travel the grapevines of California, looking for that special wine which eventually became a hunt for women. Miles needs to find someone new but failing to grasp that idea while Jack fucks around when he needs to prepare for his wedding. Will these two realize how much they’re getting them all wrong, doing what the other one’s suppose to do, before they screw everything up?

© Fox Searchlight Pictures

Knowing that it’s American culture at its fullest, I prepared myself to be disappointed cuz as far as I know; I’m not as equipped with all the things that surround them as a nation. I’m a Filipino and relating to the things they say may be quite difficult. I sure am glad that this one tasted just right….

Don’t remember seeing any of Alexander Payne’s movies… (I’m going to see About Schmidt this week) but based on how they describe his style, I believe I will truly like them all. This movie, contrary to my initial judgment, don’t just dwell on American culture… it tackles life in general, for everyone, of any race or culture. I don’t think the characters are in any way unique, cuz for me, they’re embodiment of any adult struggling through life. It showed how most of the time we are more stupid than wise and more amusing than boring. And that’s the strength of the movie it’s exceptional realness.

© Fox Searchlight Pictures

Thanks to the director’s ability not to overdo any scene of the movie. There was no effort at all to be anything, to be smart or witty, nothing. He presented the movie just as it was supposed to be. He allowed the audience to just simply peek at these characters existence, sometimes leading you to judge them but most of the time leads you to associate yourselves with them. Then you’ll get the chance to fully examine even your own existence. How generous you are to yourself and what your true priorities are and whether you’re doing anything to achieve them.

I see nothing wrong with the script. I thought it was outstanding. However, it will be impossible for me to compare it to the novel cause just like any other time, I haven’t read it. The characterization was great. Nothing more nothing less. Gave the audience exactly what they needed. Everything went smooth, except in the middle part, when the characters took a melodramatic turn, which somehow manage its way out of the screen into the audience, making the movie a little boring. Other than that, I saw nothing else worth ranting about except maybe the already brilliant ending. It was totally great, totally remarkable but I thought Payne could have added something more, a little click from the doorknob would do it for me, not leaving too much doubt in mind (really trying not to spoil it for you).

© Fox Searchlight Pictures

Despite the fact that the film is low budget, I have no grumble against any technical aspect of the movie. The cinematography and art direction, though very simple, captured the right mood of the movie. It needed to appear real and clear and it did just that. The sound adds the cool factor to it. The editing ain’t bad at all either.

Paul Giamatti was awesome. He so knows the character oh so well. I couldn’t believe he didn’t get nominated for an Oscar. Damn old Clint! Man, it must have been so frustrating for him especially since he’s not exactly the matinee idol type, and roles like such come oh so rarely. I do hope his work in Cinderella man (Crowe-Zellwegger-Howard-Grazer team-up) will be just as friggin’ brilliant and he won’t get snubbed again. Thomas Hayden, well, during the beginning I was kinda irritated by him, but as the film went along he started to grow on me… however, compared to Giamatti, he’s far less…. Virginia Madsen did very well in this movie. Very subtle performance but effective. Sandra Oh was good, I just really find her face weird that’s why even in some of her serious scenes I kinda ended up chuckling… but she did quite well, not Oscar worthy but good enough.

© Fox Searchlight Pictures

A well written, directed and acted movie. Smooth in approach but punches heavy duty. Certainly a must-see for everyone, especially for those whose in that moment in their life when it feels like it ain’t getting any better, that everyday seems to follow a boring pattern that will probably last until your demise. Because at the end of the movie, it does give you hope: that life, just like any bottle of wine, given the time to flourish… will taste good.

The Phantom of The Opera ---- a ghastly Broadway apparition

2005-02-09T07:40:00.000+08:00

Title:
The Phantom of the Opera (B-)
PH Release Date:
February 9, 2005
Actors:
Gerard Butler, Emily Rossum, Patrick Wilson, Minnie Driver, Miranda Richardson
Director:
Joel Schumacher
Based on the Novel:
‘Le Fantome De L’ Opera by Gaston Leroux
Screenplay:
Andrew Lloyd Webber and Joel Schumacher
Editor / Music:
Terry Rawlings / Simon Lee
Design / Photography:
Anthony Pratt / John Mathieson
Producer:
Andrew Lloyd Webber
Studio:
Odyssey Entertainment and Warner Bros.

“No more talk of darkness, Forget these wide-eyed fears. I'm here, nothing can harm you -my words will warm and calm you.”

The second longest running Broadway show, seen by almost 80 million people worldwide is now in the big screen. Everything seems old except the actors…, will it be as much of a hit as the play? I don’t think so….

Set in Paris during the 19th century, a lovely young woman named Christine (Rossum) finds herself in the spotlight after the lead opera singer Carlotta (Driver) walked out from the rehearsal. She’s an instant hit, thanks to her “angel of music” (Butler) who taught her how to sing. But the “angel” ends up falling for her and found himself awfully jealous as the young maiden showed mutual attraction to her childhood sweetheart Raoul (Wilson). He then contrives an elaborate plan through a play to obtain Christine. Will his plan succeed and live happily ever after with her? Or will he perpetually be the phantom of the opera?

Never seen the play but I do know the story…. Never been to Broadway but I know how it works…… Never been so disappointed after watching a musical in my entire life, until today….

Yes, we do not question the genius of Webber and his eclectic imagination… but we do question his ability to write a screenplay, and Schumacher’s ability to direct. The good thing about the movie is that it was faithful to the theatrical burlesque the bad thing, is that it was too faithful to the theatrical burlesque.

From beginning to end, you just get the feel that it’s way too theatrical. Yes, it’s a musical, but that doesn’t mean that everything you have to say is melodic. And the sad thing is that it incessantly uses the same music and just changed the lyrics…. I know I use to say a lot of times that I do get sleepy, but on this one I really fell a sleep for about 2 minutes… the boredom got me…

Webber and Schumacher just didn’t make the right choice of stickin’ up with the old stuff. They should have kept in mind that theatre and film are way too different from one another. There are so many advantages with moviemaking and they fail to capitalize on that. The ending, they made a boring play adaptation. I don’t know whether they were scared to go out of the box or Webber is just way too toffee-nosed that he insisted on doing his version and discarded any attempts on bringing in something new, whether it’s a new song, lines or scenes.

Schumacher’s direction can be best described as stiff. He’s no Luhrman or Marshall. He uses too much close-ups, poor camera movements and rigid storytelling. Yes, the art direction is good, the cinematography.. not so, that’s why I am wondering why it’s nominated for an Oscar. The score is good as well, but I doubt its chance of winning. The editing, well, the connection between scenes were there, however, I do believe better scene choices could have been made.

Gerard Butler as the phantom just didn’t work for me. His acting is so taut, poor expressions and the voice just ain’t that good. There was only one scene where I found him effective, ‘twas during that watching the monkey music box right before Christine bid farewell. Besides that, ‘twas all, how would I say it—appalling. Emily Rossum, such a lovely girl, very young and fresh, needs a lot of work especially in singing and the acting is still kinda stiff. Patrick Wilson, gorgeous in layman’s terms. May need more work, but if his purpose was to please the audience with his looks, he definitely succeeded. These three, I’m afraid, have no charisma or the chemistry to nab your interest. They all just looked like actors from a mediocre staging of the play. So I guess, when they made one aspect of the movie to be all-fresh, they failed miserably.

Minnie Driver is such an irksome actress. I dunno if it’s because of the way she looks, or her chestnut British accent, but it’s all rubbish. I thought her acting in this movie is way to irritating than her in real life. Yes, the character is suppose to be that way but I don’t think she pulled it off. Miranda Richardson, may just be the only one who gave a laudable performance. However, I don’t think it’s good enough for me to consider a saving grace from all this crap.

If you love Broadway musicals and Andrew Lloyd Webber’s works and expecting to see something exactly like it, then you’ll love this movie. This one’s made just for you. If you love film musicals, I say watch it just so you’ll have something to compare with and since it’s the only musical released in 2004. I won’t categorically advice couples to see this movie because it’s not as romantic as you think. They were able to pull off one romantic scene and I believe it’s only because the song is just exquisite, probably Webber’s best. That scene when Christine and Raoul sang All I ask of you. However, after that scene everything’s back unerringly the way they were before--- boring, overstressed and almost nothing like a mere Broadway phantom for over 2 hours.

FLASHBACK: Life is beautiful but short of aesthetic value

2005-02-06T07:40:00.000+08:00

Title:
La Vita E Bella (Life is Beautiful) (A-)
Actors:
Roberto Benigni, Nicoletta Braschi, Giorgio Catarini
Director:
Roberto Benigni
Story & Screenplay:
Roberto Benigni, Vincenzo Cerami
Editor / Music:
Simona Paggi/ Nicola Piovani
Cinematography/ Photography:
Tonino Delli Coli/Danilo Donati
Producer:
Elda Feri et al.
Studio:
Miramax

"The bigger it is the lesser you see it – obscurity"

Six years ago, an Italian movie made Oscar history by being the only second foreign language film to be nominated for Best Picture (Crouching Tiger made it three), and that’s not it, a crazy little old man jumped around the seats when his name was announced as Best Actor. It was this movie and Roberto was the name of the actor.

1939, near the beginning of the Second World War, Guido Orefice (Benigni) together with his brother traveled to Arezzo. He meets Dora (Braschi), a schoolteacher. He was love-struck and immediately found ways to entice her amidst the fact that she’s engaged to an official he previously had a run in with. Soon they married, had a son, and build his dream to have a bookstore. All’s well until they were sent to a concentration camp, despite her not being a Jew, Dora asked to be included with them to not be away from her husband and son. Guido strived to make it appear as if they’re competing in a game to protect Giosue (Catarini) from all the adversity and revulsion of their situation. Will his antics be enough to protect his son from reality? Will they survive the competition and win the one thing his son so greatly desires--- a real tank?

Failed to see this movie years ago and always find some excuse not to watch it cuz I don’t like Roberto Benigni. I have something against jolly people. But I have to taste for myself whether this movie really deserved all the accolades it received or if it’s nothing but another overly celebrated exotic dish…

Basically the movie is divided into two parts: the romance and the desolation. The romance is from the beginning to almost half of the running time. It introduced the characters, outlined the flow and made the audience feel relaxed with all the quirkiness and freshness of Benigni’s eccentric character. At first, I had a hard time catching up with the subtitles cuz they came in and out so fast but a few more scenes and I coped up. Like I expected, the character just didn’t tickle my prickle well enough, a few scenes made me laugh, smart ideas were presented, the lines were clever but it just wouldn’t get through to me…

The desolation part came as a surprise, I thought the movie was all about the romance but I was wrong. I was starting to think that I may be right, this film can possibly be nothing but an overrated piece of shit, but the second part have proven otherwise. It showed the infinite power of love, how much it can strengthens us when all we have left is hope. It featured a man’s true love for his family and how much he’s willing to give, though at times he doesn’t make the smartest decision, chooses the one he thinks will benefit them the best that will eventually… just watch the movie.

The film is idiosyncratic. It was able to make a comic ambiance under a hideous situation, which kinda worked and kinda didn’t. You see, it was a definite diversion from all the depressing war movies, but just as Guido tried to stop his real emotions of fear, anger, and despondency, I felt the same emotions wedged inside of me. It remained there and until the end of the movie it barely came through. Maybe its because I’m a very emotional person and I need to channel my sentiments through tears, I don’t really know. But one thing I am sure of is that it failed to move me as much as I though it would.

Benigni’s direction was a bit odd. I believe he’s better as an actor. The photography was okay; how I wish it just captured the beauty of the city more, however I wouldn’t really know how Italy looks like during the 40’s. The cinematography was weak. Poor camera movements, at times a little peculiar, at times very ordinary. I’m kinda thinking that these three elements could be the reason why it wasn’t as affecting as I though it’ll be and it can be. Plus, the editing isn’t that flawless either. Much of the movie’s faults really lie on the technical aspects. It’s a good thing the Oscar-winning score was great.

Roberto was good. He was very consistent, gave adequate emotions the entire time and he’s like Tom Hanks in a weird way. I would say he deserve the Best Actor award. Nicoletta’s reserved emotional portrayal is astounding. The kid was very good as well.

Ghetto movies always make me cry (wahehe) but this one barely did, and I won’t say that it’s because the story wasn’t moving enough but just because the movie, in general, failed to achieve that effect. It was a finely written, wonderfully portrayed but feebly made movie. Sometimes great story are just not enough for a movie to succeed, that’s why it’s a motion picture and not a novel. In the hands of a Jeanne-Pierre Jeunet, this movie will truly deliver. But the message remains very clear, that life is truly beautiful! Have as much as fun as you can, for what will come tomorrow is ambiguous. So grab life today, as if there is not one awaiting you tomorrow.

A Very Long Engagement --- a lingering Frech rendezvous

2005-02-02T04:58:00.000+08:00

Title:
A Very Long Engagement (B+)
PH Release Date:
February 2, 2005
Actors:
Audrey Tautou, Gaspard Ulliel, Dominique Pinon, Jodie Foster, Chantal Neuwirth
Director:
Jean-Pierre Jeunet
Story:
Based on the novel by Sebastien Japrisot
Screenplay:
Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Guillaume Laurant
Cinematography:
Bruno Delbonnel
Producer:
Bill Gerber and David Puttnam
Studio:
Warner Bros.

“From the heartache began a journey of hope…”

From comedy to drama…. The Tatutou-Jeunet team-up tries their luck with their adaptation of Japrisot’s acclaimed period novel. A mix of drama, humor and breathtaking cinematography, this movie promises another artsy partsy experience that only French cinema offers best… the hype is astonishing but I’m afraid the movie didn’t quite live up to it….

1920, the First World War is over, but Mathilde’s long search ain’t coming near to its end. Her fiancée Manoche has been missing for quite sometime, believed to be dead together with 5 more prisoners to be executed. But Mathilde’s not giving up, she searches for every clue from everyone related to the prisoners to prove that her intuition ain’t fooling with her. Her search takes her to many highs and lows, sometimes draws her close to him, and at times farther away. As she continues on, the grotesque image of war is shown and her enduring love promoted. Will her search lead her to the truth that will fulfill her dreams? Or will be a reality that will burn them down?

Amelie is one of my favorite movies of all time. It’s the best comedy I’ve seen and remains on my Top 10 list (wherever that is). This fact made this movie a certified must-see for me. The hype is overwhelming, Oscar buzz were everywhere and expectations are immense. Did it succeed in living up with the expectations? Not quite… but it did succeed on quite a few things…

First, in making a reputable adaptation of the novel (not that I have read it) but based on my critics instinct (this is so lame) they followed the storyline well enough.
Second, in matching the same visual excellence of Amelie, of keeping that caliber of art direction and cinematography rarely seen in movies today. With CGI almost ruling the world of moviemaking, this movie’s a proof that we could achieve cinematic excellence without much CGI. Third in being a French film from top to bottom. Fourth, in showing that Audrey can pull off such a role and finally, the most important of all. They’ve proven that Jodie Foster can really speak fluent French.

However, the movie failed in some of the most important aspects. First, in writing. A lot of times I thought that it was too knotty. Exaggeration was mammoth. If the writing was much more simpler, it would have fit perfectly with the whole aura of the movie. Second, in proving Jeunet’s versatility in direction. This movie showed that he's not as equipped when it comes to drama. I dunno if it’s just the material, but I doubt it. The humor was so premature, barely got through to me. Most of the times I found it odd rather than amusing. Third, in touching the audience. Amelie was a comedy but the impact was very strong. This one, as I’ve mentioned barely got through me. It is certainly not me, I was more than glad to welcome any movie especially this one since its “predecessor” is very close to my heart. The only time it thrived on its attempt to affect was that jail scene with Tina, when she read that note from the locket that said “Vengeance is nonsense. Don’t waste your life on me”, or something to that effect. A lot more of that delivery could have made this movie eminent.

If we are rather I am to judge this movie from its technical aspect. This film is definitely an A+. The photography was brilliant. That Sepia like appearance and breathtaking sceneries were too great to miss. The hue was just flabbergasting. The cinematography’s the best one I’ve seen this year, and I would have slit my throat if it wasn’t nominated for an Oscar. The score was beautiful. I thought it gave the perfect mood. It’s frustrating to know that it wasn’t nominated but whatever! But if we’re talking about the direction, well, I say it’s good, but just not good enough.

Audrey’s as exotic as ever. At times I think she wasn’t able to match the age she’s suppose to play, at times I do. Up to now I haven’t decide which is which. The acting could have been better but I think its good enough. Josh Hartnett I mean Gaspard Ulliel, really need not to act that much cuz the role is not that challenging. I kinda found his acting odd. Jodie Foster did a fine job. She speaks French alright! And she’s hot too. I love her. Eat your heart out Meg Ryan, or you can call Hannibal Lecter to do it for you. But I think the best acting came from the one and only moving scene in this movie, I dunno what her name is but she plays Tina Lambardi if I’m not mistaken.

A film of visual and audio excellence. It’s a real French treat. If you love Amelie you’ll appreciate the movie for the elements of that film still comes through in this one. It needs a lot of attention though at times it might fail to hold yours. The subtitles come and go very fast so it needs concentration. If you’re not the type who digs movies that’s melodramatic, skip this one. It’s neither a date movie, nor a barkada type. Prepare to be a little exhausted, the engagement is truly quite long. One thing I failed to mention---- they lived up to the title.

FLASHBACK: Magnifico---- truly magnificent!

2005-01-31T07:07:00.000+08:00

Title:
Magnifico (A)
Actors:
Jiro Manio, Albert Martinez, Lorna Tolentino, Isabella de Leon, Gloria Romero, Celia Rodriguez Danilo Barrios, Amy Austria, Cherry Pie Picache, Mark Gil, Tonton Gutierrez, Susan Africa, Dindin Llarena
Director:
Maryo J. de los Reyes
Story and Screenplay:
Michiko Yamamoto
Editor / Music:
Manet A. Dayrit / Lutgardo Labad
Photography / Design:
Odyssey Flores / Gerry Santos
Producer:
Violetta C. Sevilla
Studio:
Violett Films

"O buhay, walang katapusang dusa" (Life.. a never ending misery)

For the first time in such a very long time, I’m speechless. I don’t know where to begin. I don’t know what to say. I don’t know how I can possibly give justice to this great work of art that’s truly incomparable. It was a true mirage of the real Filipino culture, its ups and downs, and the infinite power of good will.

Magnifico (Manio) is the second born of a poor rural couple. He was born in such a deplorable environment, but he never lost his enthusiasm with life in general. One day, her grandmother (Romero) had an accident and was later on diagnosed with a terminal disease. The naïve boy started to plan his grandmother’s funeral, from the casket up to the interment clothes. The only thing missing is the burial grounds. Meanwhile, his other wish of bringing his handicapped sister (de Leon) to a carnival turned gloomy, when he chose to buy her granny’s medicine instead of paying for the wheelchair’s rent. Will he be able to take his sister to the carnival? Will he be able to raise enough money for the entombment before her granny dies?

This movie was issued two years ago, barely noticed it when it was shown in the cinemas and I blame the Philippine media and the Filipino movie audience (including me) for being so fucking concentrated on the so-so movies that five-edged company releases. We only started to notice it, when aliens started to hail this movie, and the natural Filipino impulse? We claim that it’s ours though we barely took note of it. When will we ever learn? I already did, but I doubt that others will, at least soon enough….

Knowing how acclaimed this movie was, I prepared myself not to expect that much. I wouldn’t wanna be disappointed cuz this caliber of Filipino movies rarely turn up. In the beginning, I felt as if I was watching a French movie. It has this certain artsy partsy frenchie going on; from the camera shots to the whole ambiance. As the movie progresses, unique Filipino movie qualities started to flaunt, conversation scene shots for example. It was very smooth in the beginning, a little slower than I would like it to be, but it worked, cuz it wasn’t forcing the audience to see it. It’s so real that you can’t stop yourself from recognizing the lines as if you’ve experienced them first-hand. And then, the final 30 minutes of the movie came, and I realized that tears were slowly pouring out of my eyes, and it continued to do so till the end of the movie.

Michiko Yamamoto deserves all the awards for writing excellence. I’ve just never seen a much more real depiction of modern rural Filipino life ever! The dialogues were so natural; it’s impossible not to relate to at least a handful of them. It’s real, in the unfeigned essence of the word. Thanks to the director Maryo J. for knowing exactly what to do. I abhor one scene though, which I think was no longer necessary, and she went a little shoddy. It’s tolerable, but that palamig (lemonade) singing scene was certainly needless and OA.

The sound was good enough, at least we didn’t bother to borrow any David Williams classic, at least I think so. The cinematography went a little overboard a couple of times, but allowable. The photography was good, very simple, the way it should be. The editing wasn’t that perfect but definitely better than other Filipino movies.

Jiro Manio is a star. Those chinky (chinito) eyes will definitely go far. Man, he played the role so well that I hope he’s that good in real life. Let’s pray that Pinoy show business won’t corrupt his flimsy mind. Albert Martinez was good, a very subtle yet powerful performance. Lorna Tolentino is unbelievably good in playing poverty-stricken characters that I’m just in awe. She’s definitely not poor, I mean cmon with that skin! Gloria Romero is still a charmer, just like Celia Rodriguez, however, the glitz of the latter still shows. Isabella de Leon is just astounding! Jiro may be a star but this one’s an artiste. She’s beyond great for her age. Amy, Cherry Pie, and the rest of the veterans did an amazing support job that I’d say this is one of the highlights of their careers. Being part of such a great movie, despite of whatever role, is still a part in a great movie. I would work in this movie for free if I were given the chance.

The last film I saw that made me cry as much, was Anak. The only difference between the two, this one wasn’t trying to make me cry. That’s how great the script and the execution were. Drama, or even cinema in general is better tacit. No words, pure action. It’s what makes it different from novels or books. If a film succeeds in making you cry without attempting to do so by uttering petty stagy lines, it is a real film.

This movie is definitely a must-see. Despite its lack of prevailing technology, regardless of its diminutive budget, notwithstanding of its simplicity, this film succeeded. It’s a classic film about love, family, contentment and good will that transcends even the thickest concrete and the highest walls. It’s a bona fide attestation that at the end of the day, the story, is the one that truly matters. And this one’s story, is truly magnifico!

Elektra--- electrocuting ennui

2005-01-29T07:07:00.000+08:00

Title:
Elektra (B-)
PH Release Date:
January 26, 2005
Actors:
Jennifer Garner, Terence Stamp, Goran Visnjic, Jason Isaacs, Kirsten Prout, Will Yun Lee, Bob Sapp
Director:
Rob Bowman
Story & Screenplay:
Based on Marvel Comics / Rob Bowman
Cinematography:
Bill Roe
Music:
Christophe Beck
Producer:
Mark Steven Johnson, Gary Foster et al.
Studio:
Marvel and 20th Century Fox

Born to fight, trained to kill….. if looks can kill….. I’ll be dead by now…

Comic books and superheroes aren’t really my thing, but if it involves a hot lass who kicks good butt, I’m totally down with it. It’s a spin-off from the so-so movie two years ago and well, if not for Jennifer Garner I won’t be watching it but since I already did let’s stop the mumbling and get right into it…

Elektra (Garner) is back from the dead, and she’s out on her own. She works as an assassin and when a high-paying job came she immediately grabbed the assignment. She met Mark (Visnjic) and his teenage daughter Abby only to find out that she’s there to obliterate them. She’s turning back on an assignment for the first time, and the client is not too happy. The Hand sends out Kirigi to take care of the treasure. But before he can do so, he must face the woman gone rouge… Elektra…

Daredevil was an okay movie. I enjoyed it more than some critics did and especially since it’s where I became conscious of the existence of evanescence. The first time I heard that they’re gonna do a spin-off for Jennifer, I wasn’t too ecstatic, knowing that in the movie, she already died. And I believe no no great writer can justify resurrection of any character unless it’s Jesus. And well, what do you expect, I was right…

The movie’s mood was dark from the beginning; I must admit I found it very interesting. Though the lines were trivial, excitement spread out my body (and I mean my entire body). Jennifer was just sizzling hot on that red skimpy leather dress. It’s alias without the gun nor the crazy disguises, but just those weird fork looking blades. That worked for me for a few minutes but after awhile the story started to not sink in! I have tons of questions in mind, and I’m afraid they failed to answer half of them. It was a simple story made complicated by the director.

The script is bad, the story was so simple but yet they found a way to make it so frigging hard to understand! Have they forgotten that they’re making a superhero movie not an art film??? It was so trying to be smart, trying to be dark, trying to be dramatic and just trying so hard to be something it’s totally not. It leaps from one conflict to another without resolving anything. I missed a lot of details because the direction, though it was good visually, the storytelling was appalling.

How much better it could have been if they were able to present some introduction or background to all the members of the quintet. All they did was made them show-off, test or hurt our hero, then later on be killed. All the antagonists were interesting, especially the poison ivy-like girl. Damn, she’s hot! And I love the tattooed man. Unfortunately the movie neglected to do so, like what they did with the rest of the elements needed to make this movie work.

The cinematography is good enough, but the photography is way too out off course. Their trying so hard to make this urban feel that just worked in the beginning but terribly failed as the movie went along. I dunno who’s decision was that, if the photographer was just following the director’s command or he’s doing it on his own, whatever it was, it was bad, plain and simple. The sound was good though. The fight scenes were so passé and so quick. They appeared so choreograph and sometimes lame. There were a couple of them that really worked but in general it wasn’t that strong to generate exhilaration. The visual effects of the movie rocks! It was very well made. Aside from Jennifer Garner and a couple of the antagonists, this made the movie tolerable.

Jennifer Garner is so on her element with this kind of movies. Yes it was like watching Sydney Bristow but you just can’t stop yourself from watching her. There’s something about the way she kicks butt that I find so alluring. She was definitely the star of this movie and no one else. I think that’s what the movie accomplished, making this all about her cuz it is suppose to be all about her. The rest of the actors were so-so. Goran did a not so good job, Kirsten though was god, at least for her age. She looks bratty in all aspect. Terence is old, ad I don’t like his acting. It was a good decision though n their part to acquire nameless actors to cut the cost, the box office hasn’t really been that generous to them, and maybe that’s also the reason why. I mean, if they’d bore the audience to death, they might as well give them some ice candy to drool on.

Elektra is definitely not a movie for everyone. It’s for those who wanna see comic book like characters come to life. It’s not for those who easily get bored. It’s for those Alias fans who wanna see Sydney push further on what she can do, thanx to the visuals. It’s not for those who’s fed up with superhero movies that just doesn’t work (remember catwoman?). If you’re after seeing Jennifer on a skimpy red dress, then go ahead but if you wanna see an electrifying movie, Elektra’s not for you….

Meet the Fockers and be Fockerized

2005-01-20T16:07:00.001+08:00

Title:
Meet the Fockers (B+)
PH Release Date:
January 19, 2005
Actors:
Ben Stiller, Robert de Niro, Barbara Streisand, Dustin Hoffman, Blythe Danner, Teri Polo, Owen Wilson
Director:
Oliver Stone
Story & Screenplay:
Oliver Stone et al.
Editor / Music:
Tom Nordbgerg et al. / Vangelis
Design / Photography:
Jan Roelfs / Rodrigo Prieto
Producer:
Thomas Schuhly, Moritz Borman et al.
Studio:
Intermedia

“Asss… HOOwwWwwwLLLL!!!!!” - LJ

Believe it or not, but I know you’ll believe it, I have not seen Meet The Parents. Yup, you read that right! One of the best contemporary slapstick comedies ever made. I don’t know exactly why but I just haven’t seen it yet. And after seeing this movie, it made me realize how stupid I am to miss its antecedent.

Gaylord Folker (Stiller) is about to marry the beautiful of a former CIA agent (Polo), He was able to surpass the challenge that is Jack Byrnes. And everything is working out perfectly. Or so he thought. Time came for him to introduce his parents, and the Fockers are in every way different from the Byrnes. Will Gaylord be able to halt his parents from being themselves and pursuer their wedding, or will they screw it up and permanently block him out from Jack’s circle of trust?

Reviled by critics but loved by the audience and me, well, I’m kinda stuck in the middle. You see, I enjoyed the movie so much. It was laugh out loud crazy. However, the little critic inside of me is telling me what the fuck am I thinking? It was fun but if you think about it, haven’t I seen these all before???

The screenplay was good enough for me, I thought that it wasn’t that cluttered with all the lame ass jokes. It was nicely paced; it was more like moving in the moment, you won’t think that it’s forced in any way. I just loved the way the characters were presented, they’re definitely somebody you recognize. You can actually consider the Focker couple as your longtime neighbor; the ones who always shout when someone arrives and loves hugging and kissing. Or, I dunno if this is worse or better, they’re the two people petting on your couch during family time aheheh….

The movie was very simple. No spooky or taunting audio presentation. No CGI parody. It was shown, as it is suppose to be seen, and heard, as it was suppose to be heard. Not too much technical efforts because it wasn’t necessary.

Ben Stiller was Ben Stiller. Dares to be hurt and look stupid, your everyday good guy who somewhat, somehow always finds himself in inapt situations. And he played it perfectly. I say between him and Adam Sandler, he definitely pulls it off better. Robert de Niro is a class act. Nobody does it better! Not even Tony Soprano. He’s just so good with playing these tough roles, and it doesn’t matter if they’re real toughie or the softy toughie, he can just play them all so well. Dustin Hoffman, well, I honestly thought he was an odd choice. I have nothing against this guy from Tootsie but I just don’t think he’ll be fun enough for the role. He kinda proved me wrong but I won’t say that he changed my mind (ha? Ahehe.)

Barbara Streisand, the ultimate co-gay icon of Cher. She’s definitely not my generation that’s why I have so little background of her. In fact I cannot remember seeing her in any of the movies I’ve seen. But in this movie, I love her. She didn’t register as a stickler in any way. It was fun watching her. She’s very natural. If she’s not really like that in real life, I say they better give her another Oscar. Blythe Danner is so pretty for her age, half as popular as Barbara but just as fabulous. Teri Polo well, obviously she’s kinda the murky star in this movie. I dunno, but she’s just not that enthralling like the others.

They all gave brilliant performance but the real star in this all-star cast movie, is none other than LJ!!! The kiddo!!! Man, this kid rocks!!!! Or rather those twins rock, I know that some of the talking scenes were CGI made but if they weren’t, man, they’re definitely products of Promil, though I think I should be quite bothered if they do know how to utter that word at their age. The asshole scene is a classic. I never laughed so much in a joke so overly done. It was just too much. I swear I’m still laughing just thinking about that. I say for that alone, see this movie. It’s to die for!!!

A star studded LOL treat that won’t fail to touch you. The ones who despised this movie need to loosen up a bit. Galaw galaw baka mastroke (move a little to avoid stroke). Every once in a while, there comes a movie that’s not to be eternalized, but sternly to enjoy. This is one of those movies. Despite the weak conclusion, it still didn’t strain my view of it. So go take yourself, your friends, and everyone else to the cinema, and get yourselves FOCKERIZED!!!!!

“Asss… HOOwwWwwwLLLLL!!!!!”

Eternal Sunshine of the almost SPOTLESS Movie...

2005-01-20T16:07:00.000+08:00

Title:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (A-)
Actors:
Jim Carrey, Kate Winslet, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Elijah Wood, Tom Wilkinson
Director:
Michael Gondry
Story & Screenplay:
Charlie Kaufman
Editor / Music:
Valdis Oskarsdottir / Jon Kuras
Producer:
Anthony Bregman
Studio:
Focus Features

“I assumed you fuck someone tonight. Isn’t that how you get people to like you???"

Oh, how I wish it’s that easy to say that without expecting a slap or punch on your face afterwards. I’m a huge fan of Charlie as a writer. Who can forget Adaptation????? Or if you’re not familiar, how about Being John Malkovich? Those all came from this one bewildered man who takes himself into his own world and let us share it with them. It is the movie about love and just how much can it sustain.

Joel (Carrey) is a writer. He finds joy in being alone, especially on parties and get-togethers, the only thing that he has in common with Clementine (Winslet) . She works as a cashier in a supermarket and expresses herself by dyeing her hair with relation to her state of mind. After 2 years of a roller coaster relationship, they separated. The impulsive Clem decided to have her memories of him erased and Dr. Howard Mierzwalk (Tom Wilkinson) have the technology to do that. Joel found out and decided to do the exact same thing, but love won’t let them get away that easy. As it continually finds a way for the memory to last, but even if the memory is lost, somehow love always finds his way. Will it be sweeter the second-time around???

When Jim Carrey tries on a serious role, you always find it awkward. Majestic fits as the perfect example. But somehow, Jim found a way to combine comedy with drama to lessen the astonishment, like in The Truman show and like in this movie. One thing I love about the Jim and Kate tandem is that they’re so watchable. You can’t deter yourself from looking on the screen. You can feel their chemistry and how relax they were with each other. And that’s one of the tools that made this movie very enjoyable.

Kaufman has this certain style of writing that’s very unique. He’s an American with this art film thinking. One thing noticeable with his writing is that he usually starts very slow, that it tends to become a little boring. But that’s how he prepares his audience for what’s coming. The next thing you know the character is running around and making turns that sometimes you find yourself left behind.

Gondry gave justice to the screenplay. Though I taught nobody else from Soderbergh or Jones can handle Kaufman's work, Gondry comes in and made this movie truly one of a kind. The running away from the grocery store scene of Jim was just astounding, what imaginative mind and superb vision. He made this movie as controlled as I would like it to be, it was fast enough not to be boring and it was slow enough for me to understand.

The movie is very simple. It has this art film vibe going on. It’s like watching a French film minus the surplus nudity. The cinematography is good enough, fits the movie. The music is very simple as well and the editing is very good.

Jim and Kate are sure Oscar-runners. They’ve already both been nominated for the Golden Globes, even if they don’t win because this year’s competition is way too intense, a nomination will be good enough for me. You will definitely love Jim Carrey in this movie. This is one of if not the best performance ever. Kate had stronger performances than the one in this movie but she rendered this character oh so well that I felt that it did came to life. Tom Wilkinson was good. Kirsten needs more work; I thought Claire Danes could have done a better job. Elijah is okay. Mark gave a much more subtle performance than the usual.

In conclusion, this FILM ROCKS!!!! One of the best films of 2004. Charlie’s brilliance deserves to be known to everyone. It featured love as something more than sexual attraction, that there is such a thing as true love. That love, no matter how we try to hide it, finds its way to the one it seeks. Love is not just desire; it’s deeper than longing. It’s profound and unexplainable. It crosses the ethical and the logical. It knows no boundaries. And to experience love… you have to see this movie, before the sun sets on your mind. (damn, i'm so lame)

The 2005 Golden Globes results....

2005-01-19T07:39:00.000+08:00

The ceremony is over…. The awards have been given… the only thing left to do is to compare notes ahehehe.. but before I do that, have you seen Halle Berry that night? She was smoking hot!!! Nicole couldn’t walk in that peacock dress but I still love her….

Best Picture Drama:

Who might win:
Million Dollar Baby
Who should win:
Finding Neverland
Who will win:
The Aviator
Who won:
The Aviator

I told yah, Miramax know how to do their campaigns…..

Best Picture Musical or Comedy:

Who might win:
Ray
Who should win:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Who will win:
Sideways
Who won:
Sideways

Am I right or am I correct??? Good for them cuz they were robbed from any acting awards…

Best Actor in a Lead Role – Drama

Who might win:
Don Cheadle for Hotel Rwanda
Who should win:
Johnny Depp for Finding Neverland
Who shouldn’t win:
Javier Bardem for The Sea Inside
Who will win:
Leonardo DiCaprio for The Aviator

I’m in a roll here am I not? Ahehehe…. Haven’t seen the performance but I think he won’t outstrip his performance in Catch me if you can.

Best Actor in a Lead role – Musical or Comedy

Who might win:
Jim Carrey for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Who should win:
Jamie Foxx for Ray
Who will win:
Jamie Foxx for Ray
Who won:
Jamie Foxx for Ray

C’mon even if I’m blind like Ray Charles I’m feeling this dawg

Best Actress in a Leading Role – Drama

Who might win:
Nicole Kidman for Birth
Who should win:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby
Who will win:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby
Who will win:
Hilary Swank for Million Dollar Baby

I feel the Oscars calling……

Best Actress in a Leading Role – Musical/Comedy

Who might win:
Annette Bening for Being Julia
Who should win:
Kate Winslet for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Who will win:
Kate Winslet for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Who won:
Annette Bening for Being Julia

I knew it… I haven’t seen Annette’s performance but I had that strong feeling that she might nab this one, well, not strong enough for me to write her in the who will win slot…

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:

Who might win:
Jamie Foxx for Collateral
Who should win:
Morgan Freeman for Million Dollar Baby
Who will win:
Thomas Haden Church for Sideways
Who won:
Clive Owen for Closer

Goodbye perfect score… this was the first award given and when they finally called Clive as winner, I thought I’m in trouble for the rest of the evening, good thing it didn’t end that bad…

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:

Who might win:
Virginia Madsen for Sideways
Who should win:
Meryl Streep for The Manchurian Candidate
Who will win:
Natalie Portman for Closer
Who won:
Natalie Portman for Closer

I’m so happy for her, however, that sando looking dress of her may need some fixing…

Best Director:

Who might win:
Alexander Payne for Sideways
Who should win:
Clint Eastwood for Million Dollar Baby or Marc Foster for Finding Neverland
Who will win:
Martin Scorsese for THE Aviator
Who won:
Clint Eastwood for Million Dollar Baby

WOW!!! I really thought Martin’s dream will finally be a nomination away.. poor Martin I really think this will be the last movie he’ll direct.. I hope the Oscars take that into consideration, like they always do…

Best Screenplay:

Who might win:
The Aviator by John Logan
Who should win:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind by Charlie Kaufman
Who will win:
Sideways by Alexander Payne & Jim Taylor
Who won:
Sideways by Alexander Payne & Jim Taylor

What can I say, I hope they show this movie soon…

Best Foreign Film:

Who might win:
A Very Long Engagement (France)
Who should win:
The Motorcycle Diaries (Brazil)
Who will win:
The Motorcycle Diaries (Brazil)
Who won:
The Sea Inside (Spain)

Apparently, Che Guevarra’s power ain’t enough to win Brazil the Oscar, poor Gael Garcia, he’s been snubbed this year….

Now let’s head to the boob tube…

Best TV Series – Drama

Who might win:
Nip/Tuck
Who should win:
Nip/Tuck
Who will win:
The Sopranos
Who won:
Nip/Tuck

WOWIE!!!! I couldn’t believe they actually won!!!! In your face EMMYS!!!!! I absolutely think this show deserves the award and finally they’ve been recognized.

Best TV Series – Musical or Comedy

Who might win:
Arrested Development
Who should win:
Sex and the City
Who shouldn’t win:
I’m really lost this time…
Who will win:
Desperate Housewives

Well, the speech kinda made me agree....

Best Actor in a Leading Role – Drama Series

Who might win:
Julian Mcmahon for Nip/Tuck
Who should win:
James Spader for Boston Legal
Who will win:
Michael Chiklis for The Shield
Who won:
Ian Mcshane for Deadwood

Ian whoooo????
Best Actor in a Leading Role – Musical or Comedy Series

Who might win:
Charlie Sheen for Two and a Half Men
Who should win:
Tony Shalhoub for Monk
Who will win:
Tony Shalhoub for Monk
Who won:
Jason Bateman for Arrested Development

Third fault… whatever!!! I still think Tony Shaloub deserves the award…

Best Actress in a Leading Role – Drama Series

Who might win:
Jennifer Garner for Alias
Who should win:
Edie Falco for The Sopranos
Who will win:
Edie Falco for The Sopranos
Who won:
Mariska Hargity for L&O

Man, I thought this one’s the bag.. fourth fault and damn! I don’t even see this show…….

Best Actress in a Leading Role – Musical/Comedy Series

Who might win:
Debra Messing for Will and Grace
Who should win:
Sarah Jessica Parker for Sex and The City
Who shouldn’t win:
Marcia Cross or Felicity Huffman
Who will win:
Teri Hatcher for Desperate Housewives

YUP, yup, yup, I’m back on track…. Even if Sarah didn’t win, I’m cool with Teri winning, I think after being a C or D lister fr a couple of years, she finally gets the chance to be on the A list again.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role (General)

Who might win:
William Shatner for Boston Legal
Who should win:
Sean Hayes for Will and Grace
Who will win:
Michael Imperioli for The Sopranos or Sean
Who won:
William Shatner for Boston Legal

Wow… he also won even if I just guessed he deserves the award wahaha..

Best Actress in a Supporting Role – (General)

Who might win:
Emily Watson for the Life and Death of Peter Sellers
Who should win:
Drea de Matteo for The Sopranos
Who should win:
Drea de Matteo for The Sopranos
Who won:
Anjelica Houston for Iron Jawed Angels

Oh, poor Drea.. this old lady shouldn’t be stealing little statuettes!!!

That’s it for me, overall I had more than 50% right…. Hahah that means I’m a certified soothsayer….. ahehe… next stuff my own Oscar nominees….. will write it before Brody gets the chance to talk…