I have been torn about watching this film for years. This internal conflict was due to my great interest in Howard Hughes and my distaste for Leonardo Dicaprio, so it took me until now to watch the film.
As I said, I have a great interest in Howard Hughes, but too many times films focus on the insanity at the end of his life, which is irrelevant in comparison to all his accomplishments. I have the same problem with films about Kennedy that feel his assassination is the only note worthy moments of his life, when it is the least irrelevant. There is NOTHING for us to learn from either of these events.
When the film starts out, Dicaprio seems to be none other than himself, which is one of the problems I have with him, but as the film progresses you get more of a feel for who Howard Hughes was. Having read Howard Hughes biography, I was rather surprised by some of the extremely notable events that took place in his life that I didn't recall.
Overall, this is an excellent overview of Howard Hughes life and accomplishments. It does give glimpses of the insanity that eventually consumed Howard Hughes, without making it the focus of the film or neglecting his numerous accomplishments.
P.S. Is there any DiCaprio film in which he doesn't show his ass? It was in this film. I also caught a few minutes of The Wolf of Wall Street ( which seems like a pretty good film, but I have avoided due to lack of interest on my part and Dicaprio's involvement), which also prominently shows his ass.
Monday, April 14, 2014
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Dinner for Schmucks (2010)
I reviewed Jeff Dunham's filmography, and it listed that he made a movie, Dinner with Schmucks. It also listed that he had a dummy called Diane, which I had never seen, but that dummy was said to appear in this film. As I began to watch the film, I recall seeing Jeff Dunham's name in the opening credits, leading me to believe he played a significant role in this film. I was mislead.
Jeff (himself) doesn't even speak in this film, and his dummy Dianne only has about 2 lines. Not only that, but Jeff and much more prominently his dummy only have a few seconds of screen time, mostly as background characters, making their appearance in this film completely insignificant.
The role Steve Carell plays is vastly different than anything else I have ever seen him do, though I am not a big fan of Steve Carell (though I have nothing against him either).
I usually enjoy seeing Paul Rudd (whose name I didn't know until I looked it up just now, but whose face I am very familar with, since he appeared in several episodes of Friends), as he often appears as an every man, so I see myself in his place. I used to feel this way about John Cusack, though his films in the 80's were much more outlandish. I orginally planned to watch every film John Cusak made, ran out of steam with his 90's film. I haven't seen many John Cusack films in over a decade, and while he has diversified characters, I feel less motivation to see his films.
This film is okay, but I feel like it's like an episode of Three Company, where something goes wrong, and is handled poorly and a small action on the part of one of the characters would clear up the situation, but no one does so (at least 'til the end). It's the similar kind of situation, with various situations occurring based on that concept. It gives you an embarrassed feeling though out the film, a feeling that I wish I could do something about, but the character's don't do so (to keep the plot alive).
I don't feel particularly sympathetic for Steve Carell's character and only feel like Paul Rudd should get away from him. Even at the end of the film those feeling don't change. It's like Steve Carell's character is just source of comedy, and it seem like a person such as him couldn't really exist, though they surely do, to some degree.
Jeff (himself) doesn't even speak in this film, and his dummy Dianne only has about 2 lines. Not only that, but Jeff and much more prominently his dummy only have a few seconds of screen time, mostly as background characters, making their appearance in this film completely insignificant.
The role Steve Carell plays is vastly different than anything else I have ever seen him do, though I am not a big fan of Steve Carell (though I have nothing against him either).
I usually enjoy seeing Paul Rudd (whose name I didn't know until I looked it up just now, but whose face I am very familar with, since he appeared in several episodes of Friends), as he often appears as an every man, so I see myself in his place. I used to feel this way about John Cusack, though his films in the 80's were much more outlandish. I orginally planned to watch every film John Cusak made, ran out of steam with his 90's film. I haven't seen many John Cusack films in over a decade, and while he has diversified characters, I feel less motivation to see his films.
This film is okay, but I feel like it's like an episode of Three Company, where something goes wrong, and is handled poorly and a small action on the part of one of the characters would clear up the situation, but no one does so (at least 'til the end). It's the similar kind of situation, with various situations occurring based on that concept. It gives you an embarrassed feeling though out the film, a feeling that I wish I could do something about, but the character's don't do so (to keep the plot alive).
I don't feel particularly sympathetic for Steve Carell's character and only feel like Paul Rudd should get away from him. Even at the end of the film those feeling don't change. It's like Steve Carell's character is just source of comedy, and it seem like a person such as him couldn't really exist, though they surely do, to some degree.
Rushmore (1998)
I thought I had put this movie on my list because of the death of Harold Ramis. I recall reading an article and finding out that Bill Murry didn't talk to Harold for nearly a decade. Some how the name of the film Rushmore was mentioned, and I thought that Harold Ramis had some involvement in it. It appears I was wrong.
I was surprised to see that the film was co-written by Owen Wilson. I am not a huge fan of Owen Wilson, though I have nothing against him. I have seen a few of his films, but they don't really stand out to me. I have gained some respect for him, now knowing that he has writing to his carrer.
Luke Wilson appears in this film, and while he has very little screen time, I am glad to see him in a film. I have seen so little that he has done. Only Idocracy comes to mind.
As always, Bill Murray gave a good, though some what unremarkable performance. It was more unremarkable because the character didn't call for it and it didn't appear to have any ad-libing that I noticed.
It was a decent distraction for two hours, but I didn't bring anything away from this film.
I was surprised to see that the film was co-written by Owen Wilson. I am not a huge fan of Owen Wilson, though I have nothing against him. I have seen a few of his films, but they don't really stand out to me. I have gained some respect for him, now knowing that he has writing to his carrer.
Luke Wilson appears in this film, and while he has very little screen time, I am glad to see him in a film. I have seen so little that he has done. Only Idocracy comes to mind.
As always, Bill Murray gave a good, though some what unremarkable performance. It was more unremarkable because the character didn't call for it and it didn't appear to have any ad-libing that I noticed.
It was a decent distraction for two hours, but I didn't bring anything away from this film.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
The Descendents
I had never heard of this movie, but when talking about the South Park episode Going Native, a co-work told me that that episode was a parody of the movie The Descendents. While the connection between Going Native and The Descendents to be tenuous at best, it is certainly a wortwhile movie (has George Clooney ever made anything else?). While this is a great film, the over lying theme is not a happy one, but there are a great number of entertaining moments and well as an engaging story.
Also, the soundtrack is and incredible tour deforce of Hawaii music, which can easily serve as a great introduction to Hawaiian music, but does just as well as a great collection of music for those more familiar with Hawaiian music. The soundtrack easily stands on it's own even without the film.
This is also a great overview of real Hawaii. Not the Waikiki (which does not appear in this film) tourist trap, tacky grass skirt (not Hawaiian at all) coconut bra (which no Polynesians ever wore) and Mai Tai version of Hawaii that tourists often envision, but shows what every day life looks like in Hawaii as well as what the population of Hawaii really looks like.
On a side note, I really love the South Park episode Going Native, and often feel like Butters does in that episode, and even more, feel that the ridiculousness of the "Native" haoles is funny and something that needs to be pointed out (though not relevant to people who haven't spent a significant amount of time in Hawaii). Every day I am told by haoles "I am from Hawaii", when clearly they don't know the first thing about Hawaii.
Also, the soundtrack is and incredible tour deforce of Hawaii music, which can easily serve as a great introduction to Hawaiian music, but does just as well as a great collection of music for those more familiar with Hawaiian music. The soundtrack easily stands on it's own even without the film.
This is also a great overview of real Hawaii. Not the Waikiki (which does not appear in this film) tourist trap, tacky grass skirt (not Hawaiian at all) coconut bra (which no Polynesians ever wore) and Mai Tai version of Hawaii that tourists often envision, but shows what every day life looks like in Hawaii as well as what the population of Hawaii really looks like.
On a side note, I really love the South Park episode Going Native, and often feel like Butters does in that episode, and even more, feel that the ridiculousness of the "Native" haoles is funny and something that needs to be pointed out (though not relevant to people who haven't spent a significant amount of time in Hawaii). Every day I am told by haoles "I am from Hawaii", when clearly they don't know the first thing about Hawaii.
Escape from Tomorrow
I had heard that this film was filmed in Disney World, but that they had not been sued by Disney (so far, as they have said), which is what peaked my interest (the Disney World part, not the suing part).
The film doesn't really go anywhere. For the half of the film, it seems more like a family vacation (with both the good and the bad) and almost a travelog of Disney World.
What kind of movie this is cannot even be defined. It could possibly be called horror, but the horror elements are extremely infrequent, and more odd than scary, though somewhat creepy at times. It's extremely difficult to sort out what is supposed to be real and what is imagined, which is often an engaging challenge in films, but once the film is over, it seems that most of those odd sequences really have no bearing on the plot and could have been done without.
There is a bit of a side plot which kind of goes somewhere, but it's not particular rewarding.
It's also impossible to say why it was filmed in black and white. Perhaps to give the film more of a home movie feel, but that is a bit of a stretch. On the other hand, it may have been an attempt to avoid conflict with Disney (as in emphasising that it is not trying to profit off of showing off the park) and hence avoid legal action.
Removing the Disney element of the film, would make this film only run about 20 minutes long and pretty much make it an unremarkable film.
The film doesn't really go anywhere. For the half of the film, it seems more like a family vacation (with both the good and the bad) and almost a travelog of Disney World.
What kind of movie this is cannot even be defined. It could possibly be called horror, but the horror elements are extremely infrequent, and more odd than scary, though somewhat creepy at times. It's extremely difficult to sort out what is supposed to be real and what is imagined, which is often an engaging challenge in films, but once the film is over, it seems that most of those odd sequences really have no bearing on the plot and could have been done without.
There is a bit of a side plot which kind of goes somewhere, but it's not particular rewarding.
It's also impossible to say why it was filmed in black and white. Perhaps to give the film more of a home movie feel, but that is a bit of a stretch. On the other hand, it may have been an attempt to avoid conflict with Disney (as in emphasising that it is not trying to profit off of showing off the park) and hence avoid legal action.
Removing the Disney element of the film, would make this film only run about 20 minutes long and pretty much make it an unremarkable film.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Gatchaman (2013)
I have been waiting for the new Gatchaman live action film for a long time. I believed it was never going to be produced, and then next thing I know, it's appearing in the movie theater's in Japan.
While I read that reviews had panned the film, I still was curious to see what they had done with the film.
I found the teams costumes to be somewhat confusing. There was a bit too much "detail" in them, a lot of padding and plates, even on the helmets.
I am confused as to the choice of the actors in these roles. None of them had a "cool" look. It almost appeared like the just took the first 5 people they found off the street.
Also, none of them looked like the original characters, nor did they act like their counter parts. Ryu is one of the worse examples, as he was a heavy set guy in the original, but he was completely normal in this film. Also, I am wondering why they chose an actress with short hair to play Jun. I am not completely against short hair on women (only in a VERY few cases), but it took away from the feel of the original series.
That being said, I would LOVE to see more pictures (or even a poster) of Jun in her Gatchaman costume. That was VERY hot and I am surprised there aren't more pictures of her out there.
Jo (George) didn't feel like his orginal character at all. Instead of the tough guy rouge, he looked like a truant school boy.
The only person who looked like their original character was Dr Nambu.
None of the Gatchaman team looked like they were a force to be reckoned with. Not to say that the original team was made up of muscular guys, but still they looked very weak in this film.
Also, the look of the soldiers of Galactor's army was completely different. They looked more like the alien army force in Half Life 2, with an odd light scheme on their helmets. One interesting aspects of the original animation was the army of Galactor made up of ordinary guys in identical uniforms, some times caught doing ordinary things. In the movie it was impossible to tell if the soldiers of Galactor were humans or not. And they were all extremely powerful, able to withstand a barrage of bullets from the (human) army.
Berg Katse was also rather odd. Instead of being the person in charge shouting out orders and then running away once they began to lose, Berg Katse confronted Gatchaman and was able to easily defeat him (with balls of energy, what is this Dragon Ball Z?) Though I surely missed some of the exposition, I don't see why Berg Katse was revealed as a transmophing woman in the middle of the film (the big secret that clues alluded to through out the run of the animated series, only revealed at the very end), then remained female, fighting as such, and apparently stronger than Gatchaman.
And once the fighting commenced, Gatchaman got beaten up pretty fast, and all their equipment and masks got damaged right away. If they are going to have all that equipment, I would think it would be able to stand up to more of a beating than that.
Also, the mechs were pretty much missing. While I can understand some awkwardness with having each memeber of the team having their own vehicle, the vehicle that Berg Katse is operating looks too organic, not like his typical mechanized monster of the week.
It felt more like a Power Ranger's episode, fighting monster like bad guys inside their spaceships with cave like interiors.
One of the most off setting things is the interior of the God Phoenix. It is merely a bubble screen that surrounds the whole team, showing the clouds passing by. While that would be the ultimate cockpit from a pilots point of view, it looks like a blue screen set to the audience. Even worse, it makes it look like the whole team is just sitting in chairs, lacking of any type of consoles to operate, completely looking the whole "high tech" aspect of the team.
One other thing that was lacking was the "transforming" that took place in the original series when the characters instantaneously changed into their "bird style" costumes. While there is no scientific explanation of how this could happen, it was one of those great superhero moments (This looks like a job for Superman!) signifying they were jumping into action.
Also, there was a lot of talking that took place and not enough action. It seemed like the team spent more time with some kind of drama then actually engaging the bad guys. It felt like filler.
All in all, this film felt like a combination of Power Rangers, Kamen Rider and Dragon Ball Z, with a glossing over of Gatchaman.
I saw a trailer for the canceled Gatchaman CGI movie, and that was extremely faithful to the original, and would have made a better movie.
While I read that reviews had panned the film, I still was curious to see what they had done with the film.
I found the teams costumes to be somewhat confusing. There was a bit too much "detail" in them, a lot of padding and plates, even on the helmets.
I am confused as to the choice of the actors in these roles. None of them had a "cool" look. It almost appeared like the just took the first 5 people they found off the street.
Also, none of them looked like the original characters, nor did they act like their counter parts. Ryu is one of the worse examples, as he was a heavy set guy in the original, but he was completely normal in this film. Also, I am wondering why they chose an actress with short hair to play Jun. I am not completely against short hair on women (only in a VERY few cases), but it took away from the feel of the original series.
That being said, I would LOVE to see more pictures (or even a poster) of Jun in her Gatchaman costume. That was VERY hot and I am surprised there aren't more pictures of her out there.
Jo (George) didn't feel like his orginal character at all. Instead of the tough guy rouge, he looked like a truant school boy.
The only person who looked like their original character was Dr Nambu.
None of the Gatchaman team looked like they were a force to be reckoned with. Not to say that the original team was made up of muscular guys, but still they looked very weak in this film.
Also, the look of the soldiers of Galactor's army was completely different. They looked more like the alien army force in Half Life 2, with an odd light scheme on their helmets. One interesting aspects of the original animation was the army of Galactor made up of ordinary guys in identical uniforms, some times caught doing ordinary things. In the movie it was impossible to tell if the soldiers of Galactor were humans or not. And they were all extremely powerful, able to withstand a barrage of bullets from the (human) army.
Berg Katse was also rather odd. Instead of being the person in charge shouting out orders and then running away once they began to lose, Berg Katse confronted Gatchaman and was able to easily defeat him (with balls of energy, what is this Dragon Ball Z?) Though I surely missed some of the exposition, I don't see why Berg Katse was revealed as a transmophing woman in the middle of the film (the big secret that clues alluded to through out the run of the animated series, only revealed at the very end), then remained female, fighting as such, and apparently stronger than Gatchaman.
And once the fighting commenced, Gatchaman got beaten up pretty fast, and all their equipment and masks got damaged right away. If they are going to have all that equipment, I would think it would be able to stand up to more of a beating than that.
Also, the mechs were pretty much missing. While I can understand some awkwardness with having each memeber of the team having their own vehicle, the vehicle that Berg Katse is operating looks too organic, not like his typical mechanized monster of the week.
It felt more like a Power Ranger's episode, fighting monster like bad guys inside their spaceships with cave like interiors.
One of the most off setting things is the interior of the God Phoenix. It is merely a bubble screen that surrounds the whole team, showing the clouds passing by. While that would be the ultimate cockpit from a pilots point of view, it looks like a blue screen set to the audience. Even worse, it makes it look like the whole team is just sitting in chairs, lacking of any type of consoles to operate, completely looking the whole "high tech" aspect of the team.
One other thing that was lacking was the "transforming" that took place in the original series when the characters instantaneously changed into their "bird style" costumes. While there is no scientific explanation of how this could happen, it was one of those great superhero moments (This looks like a job for Superman!) signifying they were jumping into action.
Also, there was a lot of talking that took place and not enough action. It seemed like the team spent more time with some kind of drama then actually engaging the bad guys. It felt like filler.
All in all, this film felt like a combination of Power Rangers, Kamen Rider and Dragon Ball Z, with a glossing over of Gatchaman.
I saw a trailer for the canceled Gatchaman CGI movie, and that was extremely faithful to the original, and would have made a better movie.
Phantom of the Paradise
This years (2013) Simpson's Treehouse of Horror episode's opening secquence is made up of a multitude of scenes from horror movies, a huge percentage of which I had never even heard of. There was one scene with 4 or 5 "phantoms" from the various versions of Phantom of the Opera, inculding one who looked kind of scifi. After doing a little research, I found it was from the movie "The Phantom of Paradise" a 1974 film directed by Brain De Palma and featuring Paul Williams (song writer). This I had to see.
The film is extremely quirky. The phantom costume is made up of a bird-like mask and a voice synthesizer. There are a few instances where events happen that have have explanation, like how the phantom is able to break through brick wall.
This film has a kind of Rock Horror feel to it, but the music and the atmosphere are not quite on the same level as that film.
The film is extremely quirky. The phantom costume is made up of a bird-like mask and a voice synthesizer. There are a few instances where events happen that have have explanation, like how the phantom is able to break through brick wall.
This film has a kind of Rock Horror feel to it, but the music and the atmosphere are not quite on the same level as that film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)