Michael's Weblog

Movie Review of "Elizabethtown"

Sometimes I can't really explain why I liked a movie. Usually it's movies that critics and the general public don't like at all. "Elizabethtown" is one of those films. I wouldn't say it was a great film, yet I enjoyed watching it a lot. Kirsten Dunst plays a flight attendant (Claire) and Orlando Bloom plays a recently dumped design man (Drew) who will soon be found out as a failure, an immense failure beyond anyone's comprehension. For now, he is a great success.

Drew's father dies and he has to go back to his father's hometown and bring his body back west. Claire attaches herself to him in the form of an annoying flight attendant. The romance that grows from this is odd but surprisingly genuine. I really liked their conversations. Drew's interactions with his relatives, whom he hasn't seen for years, is also great. He expects hate and distaste, but gets nothing but love and affection.

Susan Surandon plays Drew's Mother, who is afraid to go back to Elizabethtown, since she took their favorite son away from them. Yes, when she does, she too finds love even if it is somewhat restrained. This movie is sad, funny, revealing and easy to watch.

Director - B+
Acting - B+
Cinematography - B
Writing - B+

Overall, I give this movie a B+, a good date movie or home rental.

Movie Review of "Rent"

"Rent" has to be one of the most anticipated movies of this 2005 Holiday season. The theme song has played a 525,600 times in different mediums. I have to admit I am not a fan of musicals. It takes quite an effort to produce one that I enjoy, "Moulin Rouge" and "Evita" are two that come to mind. "Rent", however, does not fall into that category.

I didn't like much about this movie. It was too long. The music was too studio (when you're on a rooftop in New York, it shouldn't sound like you're in a recording booth). I was not at all impressed with Adam Pascal. Jesse L Martin, Anthony Rapp and Taye Diggs were all impressive in their abilities. I also enjoyed Wilson Jermaine Heredia's performance as well.

Many of the scenes seemed forced and some of the song lyrics do not fit well into the musical score as well as I would hope for such a production. I liked some scenes a lot though. The cafe ensemble piece was excellent. The protest performance was also very good. However, in the end, there was too much I didn't like and not enough that I did. Add to that, I thought (and was hoping) that the movie had ended twice before it finally really did. This just wasn't an enjoyable experience for me.

Director - C
Acting - B+
Cinematography - B
Writing - C

Overall, I give this movie a C+, if you really liked the play, you might want to see it.

Movie Review of "In her Shoes"

Cameron Diaz and Toni Colette star as sisters (Maggie and Rose) in the comedy "In her Shoes". Shirley Mclaine stars as their grandmother. There are too many things wrong with this movie to say that I really enjoyed it at all. Are we really supposed to feel sorry for Maggie? Selfish and uncaring what others might think or feel, having fun is all that's important, Maggie. I hope not because I couldn't stand the character. Something tells me this isn't what they were going for. Even as she found her niche, I couldn't feel good.

How about Rose? Should we feel sorry for her or maybe glad that she finally takes a stand? I didn't in either case. Was this a comedy? I didn't laugh much at all. Was is a lesson/message movie? All I got was tired and bored. The only character worth listening to was Grandma. Even she had limited lines worth anything.

Sometimes I wonder why they make movies like this. I mean really why do the sisters get along in the end? Because they're supposed to, it's that simple. It's getting on two hours and the film must have a happy ending, so they just make one with no real conclusion why it ends this way. With the number of really good films out there at the end of this year, this one shouldn't be seen.

Director - C-
Acting - C
Cinematography - B
Writing C-

Overall, this is barely a C- movie. Just don't see it.

Movie Review of "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire"

Usually as a series of sequels gets made, even when they continue to be good, filmmakers lose a step and either one of the films isn't as good as the others or doesn't offer anything new to viewers. The Harry Potter series has not yet found that moment. As far as I'm concerned, each movie made in this series has been better than the previous ones.

Not only has the acting improved, although still not great, but so have the plot and the characters. With each movie we learn a little more about each of the main characters. Radcliffe, Watson and Grint turn in solid if not above average performances. really it is the story that drives the film and the special effects keep the viewers watching.

I enjoyed the story-line in "Goblet of Fire". The filmmakers have done an admirable job of turning what is essentially a children's book series into a film that can interest children and adults alike. I'm not a big fan of the books, they are to simple of a writing style for me. I need a little more meat in my literature. However, the films translate beautifully and the producers have done a good job in getting good minds to make the movies.

The story is about a wizard contest that should only have three contestants, but Harry Potter gets included even though he's not even older enough to be in it. This angers Ron because he is jealous of Harry's fame, even if, in reality, Harry would rather not have it.

This is the first movie where Harry, Ron and Hermione start to mature. We begin to see more of a love interest between Ron and Hermione. Harry gets his own love interest, which I would expect to see in a future movie.

How the contest ends isn't nearly as important as how it is played. A subtle message to all those kids watching and an excellent one at that. It's one of the things more people should appreciate about the books and the movies. They all have subtle messages of wisdom to impart to kids, something that is much needed in both those mediums these days.

Director - B+
Acting - B-
Writing - A-
Cinematography - A-

I give this movie a A-, first weekend movie.

I give this movie an A-, a first weekend movie.

Usually as a series of sequels gets made, even when they continue to be good, filmmakers lose a step and either one of the films isn't as good as the others or doesn't offer anything new to viewers. The Harry Potter series has not yet found that moment. As far as I'm concerned, each movie made in this series has been better than the previous ones.

Not only has the acting improved, although still not great, but so have the plot and the characters. With each movie we learn a little more about each of the main characters. Radcliffe, Watson and Grint turn in solid if not above average performances. really it is the story that drives the film and the special effects keep the viewers watching.

I enjoyed the story-line in "Goblet of Fire". The filmmakers have done an admirable job of turning what is essentially a children's book series into a film that can interest children and adults alike. I'm not a big fan of the books, they are to simple of a writing style for me. I need a little more meat in my literature. However, the films translate beautifully and the producers have done a good job in getting good minds to make the movies.

The story is about a wizard contest that should only have three contestants, but Harry Potter gets included even though he's not even older enough to be in it. This angers Ron because he is jealous of Harry's fame, even if, in reality, Harry would rather not have it.

This is the first movie where Harry, Ron and Hermione start to mature. We begin to see more of a love interest between Ron and Hermione. Harry gets his own love interest, which I would expect to see in a future movie.

How the contest ends isn't nearly as important as how it is played. A subtle message to all those kids watching and an excellent one at that. It's one of the things more people should appreciate about the books and the movies. They all have subtle messages of wisdom to impart to kids, something that is much needed in both those mediums these days.

Director - B+
Acting - B-
Writing - A-
Cinematography - A-

I give this movie a A-, first weekend movie.

Movie Review of "Saw 2"

I'm not going to say much about 'Saw 2'. If you liked the first one, definitely see this one. If you didn't or have no desire to see this kind of movie, this movie has nothing to offer you.

There two movies are violent and bloody. People are killed in cruel and punishing ways. However, 'Saw 2' has a nice twist to its ending. The best part of the movie was this twist.

One of the characters from the first movie, who obviously survived, is kidnapped again. So, 'Saw 2' adds an element of the characters should know what's coming. However, through a combination of her not saying and the others not believing, it all happens to them anyway. This group is caught in a house where gas is slowly killing them. However, each begins to die off in truly sadistic fashion before the gas can kill them.

An antidote for the poison is in a safe they are all told that each has a number to the combination in the back of their minds. So, mistrust and hate rule the house. They have no qualms about killing one another or letting others get killed. It was a gruesome, but interesting, case study on human torture and survival. The end was good. Two twists that make you wonder what you would have done in the same situation.

Director - Average
Acting - Average
Cinematography - Slightly above average
Writing - Average, but a very good ending

I give this movie a B-, if you like gore and horror see it, if not absolutely don't.

I give this movie a B-, if you like gore and horror see it, if not absolutely don't.

I'm not going to say much about 'Saw 2'. If you liked the first one, definitely see this one. If you didn't or have no desire to see this kind of movie, this movie has nothing to offer you.

There two movies are violent and bloody. People are killed in cruel and punishing ways. However, 'Saw 2' has a nice twist to its ending. The best part of the movie was this twist.

One of the characters from the first movie, who obviously survived, is kidnapped again. So, 'Saw 2' adds an element of the characters should know what's coming. However, through a combination of her not saying and the others not believing, it all happens to them anyway. This group is caught in a house where gas is slowly killing them. However, each begins to die off in truly sadistic fashion before the gas can kill them.

An antidote for the poison is in a safe they are all told that each has a number to the combination in the back of their minds. So, mistrust and hate rule the house. They have no qualms about killing one another or letting others get killed. It was a gruesome, but interesting, case study on human torture and survival. The end was good. Two twists that make you wonder what you would have done in the same situation.

Director - Average
Acting - Average
Cinematography - Slightly above average
Writing - Average, but a very good ending

I give this movie a B-, if you like gore and horror see it, if not absolutely don't.

Movie Review of "Derailed"

Some movies are interesting, others are just fun to watch. Still others have a message for the audience. Few movies are all three. "Derailed" is one of those movies. Is it perfect? No, I wouldn't go as far as saying that. But an excellent movie with an even better twist. If you haven't seen it, it's probably hard to not have heard enough to guess at the ending. If you haven't heard, it is a great ending.

Clive Owen and Jennifer Aniston play two people who meet up on a train and end up eventually at a hotel together. They are both married, but are unhappy and depressed. The sudden almost affair ends as they are robbed and she is raped at the hotel.

They don't go to the police because neither wants to explain why they were at the hotel together. This is where one of the lessons comes into play. Not only may it be wrong to have an affair, but chances are good something will go wrong that will cause even more pain to you than the affair itself.

There are incredibly violent scenes in this movie, but they are not overdone, and they fit with the story. Of course, this affair turned mugging collapses both of their lives, as the thief blackmails them. The rest of the movie is about Charles (Owen) doing what he can to make sure they don't lose everything.

My only big problem with the movie's plot is a scene near the end. (Don't read this paragraph if you haven't seen it). Charles tells his wife that he's done something very very wrong, and that all the money for their child's medical needs is gone. Yet, that's all he says. She's in shock, but he disappears and says he'll explain later. Now, in the end, he does get a lot of the money back, but he never explains to his wife what he meant, nor does she ask. I don't think the scene was necessary and should have been cut.

Vincent Cassel is excellent as the bad guy.

Director - A-
Acting - A-
Cinematography - B+
Writing - B+

I give this movie an A-, a first weekend movie.

I give this movie an A-, a first weekend movie.

Some movies are interesting, others are just fun to watch. Still others have a message for the audience. Few movies are all three. "Derailed" is one of those movies. Is it perfect? No, I wouldn't go as far as saying that. But an excellent movie with an even better twist. If you haven't seen it, it's probably hard to not have heard enough to guess at the ending. If you haven't heard, it is a great ending.

Clive Owen and Jennifer Aniston play two people who meet up on a train and end up eventually at a hotel together. They are both married, but are unhappy and depressed. The sudden almost affair ends as they are robbed and she is raped at the hotel.

They don't go to the police because neither wants to explain why they were at the hotel together. This is where one of the lessons comes into play. Not only may it be wrong to have an affair, but chances are good something will go wrong that will cause even more pain to you than the affair itself.

There are incredibly violent scenes in this movie, but they are not overdone, and they fit with the story. Of course, this affair turned mugging collapses both of their lives, as the thief blackmails them. The rest of the movie is about Charles (Owen) doing what he can to make sure they don't lose everything.

My only big problem with the movie's plot is a scene near the end. (Don't read this paragraph if you haven't seen it). Charles tells his wife that he's done something very very wrong, and that all the money for their child's medical needs is gone. Yet, that's all he says. She's in shock, but he disappears and says he'll explain later. Now, in the end, he does get a lot of the money back, but he never explains to his wife what he meant, nor does she ask. I don't think the scene was necessary and should have been cut.

Vincent Cassel is excellent as the bad guy.

Director - A-
Acting - A-
Cinematography - B+
Writing - B+

I give this movie an A-, a first weekend movie.

Movie Review of "Mean Girls"

There is usually more than one reason to see any particular movie at any given time. I watched "Mean Girls" for two reasons, one it was on a movie channel with nothing else on and two because I had seen a few good movies lately with Rachel McAdams, so I thought I'd have a look at this one.

McAdams plays a stuck up, I'm better than everyone else 'plastic girl': Regina. Her two best friends Gretchen (Lacey Chabert) and Karen (Amanda Seyfried) adopt the new girl in school Cady (Linday Lohan). Cady just happens to have been home schooled and knows nothing of High School politics. She is used by the popular and not so popular against each other. However, without really trying, she herself becomes one of the 'mean girls'.

This movie is sadistically funny at times and simply trivial at other times. It's definitely an over the top look at what amounts to a teenage preppy girl gang in suburbia. Overall, it was enjoyable to watch and funny.

Director - B
Acting - B
Cinematography - B
Writing - B

Overall, I give this movie a B, a fun rental.