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.

star trek

i have never been a huge 'star trek' fan. not that i don't like it, i've just never gotten into it. i've always been more of a 'star wars' guy. that being said, the trailer for the new 'star trek' movie got me really excited.

this movie is good; it is really good. probably the best movie i have watched this year, and a great summer blockbuster. it it instantly accessible for anyone who hasn't watched any 'star trek' in the past (i hadn't).

j.j. abrams crafts the perfect combination of action, humour, and plot. the story isn't far fetched like most epic sci-fi movies tend to be, and is a major strong suit of the film. there really are no weak suits to this movie. this being a largely esemble piece, the acting is outstanding from all the crew members of the USS Enterprise. simon pegg is hilarious and probably my favorite performance, though they all are note worthy. i can see this film being the catalyst for a lot of these young actors to go on and do great things in future projects. what is interesting is that i did not realize that it was eric bana of 'munich' and 'incredible hulk' fame that was the bald tattooed villian.

i recommend this film to all people: people who like good movies, casual fans who like action packed funny blockbusters, and for families. contrary to some belief this is not just for 'trekkie nerds.' while i do think they'll be happy with this film, i would consider abram's version to be a reboot of the franchise, where my generation can enjoy it.

if the sequel(s) are just as good as this one, which i imagine will be the case, i would say that this film is on trek (get it...) to be my generation's 'star wars.' i honestly feel the first installment in on par with those films.

do not wait for it to come to dvd, it is so good on the big screen!

gomorrah

gomorrah is a italian mafia movie set in naples and the surrounding area where the huge crime organization the comorra operates. this is not your glamorized hollywood mafia movie with tons of action. it is shot in a documentary style and is one of the most realistic movies i have watched in quite some time. i felt like i was learning about italian culture and the crime that emcompasses the area, as i watched it.

the trade off with an extremely realistic movie was the lack of action, which i absolutely have no problem with. however, i could see an average movie goer losing some interest in the middle. despite this, i felt the story was fantastic. from the exciting first scene, the movie then built to it's shocking conclusion. likewise, everything in between was fantastic.

the direction was superb as was the acting. the two mischievious kid characters were a bit old for the parts they were playing and it was noticable in the underwear weapon firing scenes. this may have slightly affected any sympathy that viewers may have for them, though i found the fact that they were extremely annoying as my justification for not feeling bad for the trouble they frequently get in.

on the other hand, the story of the other two very young boys who join up with opposing factions of the criminal underworld was very eye opening. those scenes had me reminsce of 'city of god.' this film is like 'city of god,' only more refined, more realistic, and more realized. it's not that this film is any better than 'city of god,' it just goes in a different direction.

watching this film you get the idea that the director truly knows of all the dark dealings that occur in naples, and walking out of the theater was almost like getting a history channel lesson and a good story all at the same time. likewise, the story included enough twists and turns and shocking moments to keep me entertained. not enough can be said about this movie; it is truly a masterpiece that will be definitely hold up to the test of time and be watched for years to come.