where the wild things are

i was not one who read 'where the wild things are' as a child (it was more my older brother's generation's book), but i was very familiar with the work and i am always interested in anything spike jonze does. he has such an inventive mind, and the group of directors/writers he associates with are all equally innovative.

being a short book that needed to be adapted into a full length film, jonze adds some great depth and background that does not compromise the story at all. it helps make the film much more than a mindless kid romp. deep inside it really is a story about adolescence and how kids interact with others in the real (and often unreal) world. parallels in the monster's personality's mirror situations he struggles with his regular life.

the film is very funny at times, very scary at times (i thought for a minute he really was going to get eaten!), and very heart warming at others, which is everything a thoughtful summer kids tale should be.

the world and the monster's look absolutely sensational. i credit jonze and his team with creating a perfect visual rendition of the book. the characters are greatly voice acted too, with the exception that k.w.'s voice is a bit too chill/surfish for the rest of the gang. other problems are that some of the interactions between the characters in the middle of the plot feel a little strange, and i didn't understand where the director was going with them; some situations were just a little wonky. another slight problem i had was that i felt the kid was a spoiled brat and was only likable in the most dangerous of situations when you didn't want him to die.

otherwise, i really enjoyed this film. it definitely made me reminisce about the days when me and my friends were create absurd wonderful stories out of our minds and then act them out as if everything was real. i look forward to building an awesome snow fort as a result of this film (though the fort in 'snow day' trumps the one in this movie). due to its scary parts and deep themes 'where the wild things are' is primarily suited for adults who need to remember their youthful days, though i do not doubt that kids will like this film too.

the informant!

both steven soderbergh and matt damon are great. this movie has them teaming up once again, and the hilarious trailer and website had me real excited for it.

i had a great time watching this movie. i had a slight fear going in that a lot of the funnier scenes would be spoiled being in the trailers but thankfully this film was chalked full of really funny stuff. the way damon would narrate his character's thoughts was ridicolous and laugh at loud funny. these completely random moments often occurred during very crucial serious points of the film, which made it all the funnier. off hand, the polar bear contemplation along with the observation of the ants are my favorite moments the character has in thought. the whistleblower plot was interesting enough to keep the story moving. it did tend to drag a bit toward the middle/end but i did not have any trouble keeping attention to it. the best and funniest scenes of the film are when damon begins to do his undercover work.

i loved the way, the 90s feel was pulled off by the very yellowing tone used by the camera, and damon's hair along with his wardrobe. damon is fantastic along with the rest of the cast. i was particularly happy to see arrested development's buster bluth, tony hale, in the role as damon's lawyer; as always he was hilarious.

this was a great late summer movie. it was really funny, had a decent plot and good acting. i definitely recommend it to soderbergh or matt damon fans, or even cohen brother fans, because it had shades of their funnier work in it.

district 9

i was extremely excited for the release of this movie. finally it looked like something bold and fresh would be released in the sci-fi genre. the brilliant viral campaigning for this film, along with peter jackson's name being attached as a producer, definitely helped hype up the attention it received.

let me first say that this movie is worth nearly all the attention it has received. it is truly a science fiction masterpiece, and one of the best films of the past year. neill blomkamp has crafted an exciting, completely original movie that is also a thinly veiled allegory and social commentary on the injustices of south africa. the documentary style helps create a sense of realism that normally would not exist in an alien action movie. i was enthralled throughout the entire experience, it was both unpredictable and original.

this was the first time in quite some time that my emotions were so well captured (anger, disgust, redemption) in a film. and the strangest part was that most of these emotions were sympathetic towards the aliens. that is the genius of blomkamp.

without giving anything away, the movie has two halves. the first part is mainly documentary style explaining the circumstances surrounding the terrestrial beings presence in johannesburg leading up to the turning point for the main character. the second half of the film is more action oriented. both parts work equally well, and i was not bored at any time.

sharlto copley, a fellow director friend of blomkamp is magnificent as the lead character. he plays a naive south afrikaner who is oblivious to the immoral actions he and his crew engage in. the scenes involving him in his office were similar to the humour present in the tv show 'the office,' and he also reminded of the character murray from 'flight of the conchords.' i was completely shocked by the fact that this was copley's first acting gig. he was phenomenal.

not enough can be said about district 9 and copley's performance. neill blomkamp has earned my full and undivided attention for any future projects he works on. however, i have that feeling that despite what he does from here, this will always be remembered as his masterpiece.

funny people

judd apatow has had his name on nearly every big comedy that has come out in the last few years. that being said it is strange that 'funny people' is only his third time actually directing a film. his other two movies, '40 year old virgin' and 'knocked up' were well received and very funny, so i along with many others were looking forward to 'funny people.'

this film is much different than apatow's previous projects. it is much more of a serious comedy (dramedy is the term) and deals with some very dark subject matter. people expecting to go see a light-hearted raunchy tale with a standard plot will likely be disappointed.

i, however, was not disapointed with this movie. i am not exactly a fan of adam sandler's previous comedies; my favorite role of his is 'punch-drunk love.' but i found him very funny in this movie as the terminally ill comedian superstar who seemingly has it all but really has nothing. seth rogen, jonah hill, and jason schwartzman also do great jobs as up and coming comedians struggling to make it big. while watching i really felt like i was getting insight into the lives of standup comedians, and i found it rather fascinating and personal. chemistry wise, rogen and sandler both work well together on screen. it is also worth noting that apatow's choice to use spielberg's cinematographer janusz kaminski makes a world of difference in tone and seriousness when compared to apatow's previous works.

the plot of this film kept me engaged the entire way. it is both hilarious and serious all the way through. watching sandler befriend rogen while also coping with his illness and loneliness seemed satisfying enough, but then when you think the movie is winding down, almost a second movie starts where sandler attempts to reconnect with his former girlfriend who now has a husband and two kids. this portion of the movie drags a bit, because it is not as funny as the first half and the subject matter is pretty heavy at this point. however, i enjoyed it thoroughly, because like life itself, this film does not follow any set formula. it has twists and turns where the character's imperfections are illuminated. i feel that the second part of the movie is possibly where most casual fans who came to see a basic sandler comedy might be lost a bit.

i liked this film a lot. it is clearly judd apatow's best movie and one of rogen and sandler's best performances. it is quite artsy for a comedy of this nature, and i found myself thinking about it afterwards, both for the jokes and all the memorable events that occurred. i think that average moviegoers who thought the film was just ok when it finished, will find themselves liking it more and more the more they reflect upon it.

public enemies

i have always held a curious interest about bank robberies and stories of them. who better to tackle the cinema friendly true story of john dillinger than michael mann of 'heat' fame.

johnny depp is a very good actor, and he is in top form in this form here as the charming dillinger who loves fast cars, women, and robbing banks. the gun fights were very intense, and i liked the realistic sound of the guns, like how they echoed and sounded different when they were fired inside as opposed to outside. mann appears to do his research when it comes to these finer details that take a film to the next level.

i could tell i liked this film because throughout its entirety i was rooting for the bad guys (aka the bank robbers). i mean these were people who did some bad things. they commited crimes and routinely shot at the police, yet they were presented as likable characters (except baby face nelson) so i, along with the rest of the audience, was hoping down in my heart that dillinger would just walk away when he got the chance.

i liked this movie quite a bit. the camera angles and shots were all spot on, and i felt the two main stars, johnny depp and christian bale were directed well. some people did not like mann's choice of using high-def cameras, but i did not mind it. i prefer film, but high def camcorders do not make me like a film less.

this is a good summer flick. it's got everything going for it: a great cast, a seasoned director, good source material with plenty of action and plot development. it did run a little long, and i feel more time should have been spent with the emotional development of bale's character. those minor complaints aside, i rather enjoyed this movie. i do not think it is a masterpiece that will sweep the academy awards, but it is one of the better movies i have watched this summer, and i recommend it to any movie lover.

harry potter and the half-blood prince

i love the harry potter books so watching the latest installment on the big screen at midnight was a special treat. this is one of my favorite books in the series (though i feel they are all tremendous).

i came into the movie realizing that being a lengthy book, aspects of the story might have to be cut out or compressed. i was completely ok with that, and felt the director did a good job at it. i did feel however that the relationship stories with ron/hermione, and harry/ginny was definitely overplayed and got old after a while. i felt too much time was spent on that part and not enough on the half-blood prince story. this made the revealing of who the half-blood prince actually was at the end of the movie much less shocking than it was in the novel.

some scenes towards the end of the movie slightly disapointed me. while i found scene where harry and dumbledore travel to the cave to be completely terrifying, i wish the director would have stuck with the images and details from the book, (for ex. crystals and seashells instead of the book's goblet and basin). i felt the images in the book would have elevated an already haunting scene to new levels. Yate's decision to not really have a real hogwarts battle at the end of the movie made it feel less climatic.

those few gripes aside i liked this movie a lot. it was very dark; i'm surprised that it only got a PG rating. despite it's extremely dark subject matter, i found the movie to be very funny at times. it was acted well, and the direction and cinematography was also done very professionally. i had the thought while watching this film, that if all the potter films were directed this well and were this dark (similar to lord of the rings) i would like them better.

i recommend this film to fans of the book series and fans of the film.

angels and demons

i went to see 'state of play' at the dollar theater but the reel machine apparently ate the film so instead we saw 'angels and demons.'

this movie is much better than the at times dull 'da vinci code,' and it seems dan brown's first novel with robert langdon translates much better to the big screen. that being said, the movie is simply ok. it's a watchable summer film, but it remains largely forgettable. tom hanks and the leading woman in the film don't have very much chemistry and interactions between them come across as a little awkward.

another awkward part of the movie was the pacing and urgency of the characters. with every hour they had before another catholic bishop was murdered, it seemed everyone spent the first part of the hour leisurely figuring out the location, taking time to do trivial things like when tom hanks washes his face. then, when the location is determined, suddenly everything goes into high urgency mode and they race to save the victim with only minutes to spare. being a book adaptation one could tell that certain details were cut out and other details were crammed into the dense dialogue. all these different things created a wonkiness to the film that made it much less believable.

ron howard is a talented director (watch the great 'frost/nixon' and it is immediately apparent), and so the cinematography is great as the vatican shines as the film's set. the plot has enough twists and turns to keep the audience interested. this film is mediocre at best. after watching it you will not feel that your time spent was a complete waste of time, and i do not suggest going far out of your way to see it. my suggestion is to wait until it's a rental.