Michael's Weblog

Movie Review of “Poseidon”

There are quite a few sequels that one questions why they are made. There are just as many remakes about which one can ask the same question. “The Poseidon Adventure” was not the best movie in world. Yet, it was a decent watch, with Gene Hackman and Ernest Borgnine doing well enough jobs in their roles and the story played well. A happy ending and the movie was all right.
In this remake, Kurt Russell and Josh Lucas star along with Richard Dreyfuss, Emmy Rossum and Jacinda Barrett. When the ship is hit by a ‘rogue wave’, this group of survivors leaves the main hall to find a way out. Bravery and stupidity reign as they must get past flames, explosions and leagues of water. This group would make Navy Seals look like elementary school swimmers for their abilities at staying underwater. The plot is made more complex by Robert Ramsey (Russell) and his daughter Jennifer (Rossum). Jennifer’s boyfriend has asked her to marry him and they haven’t told her overprotective dad yet. The movie tries to give these characters a past and some depth, but it never really happens.
This movie is nothing special, not even as good as the original even if the stunts and special effects have been upgraded. In the end, there’s little here that the original didn’t give. It’s a good disaster movie though and worth a rental.

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

Overall, I give this movie a B-.

Movie Review for “American Dreamz"

It isn’t surprising at all that someone tried to finally play off the success of “American Idol” with a movie. Unfortunately, “American Dreamz” will never approach the success of “Idol”. Hand-picked contestants are brought together to try to win it all. This movie has everything it should, sex, ruthlessness competition and even terrorists. However, it has trouble figuring out whether it’s a straight comedy or a spoof of “Idol”.
Hugh Grant plays the show’s host, Martin Tweed. Mandy Moore plays the hot blond contestant, Sally Kendoo, that Tweed seduces. Dennis Quaid plays the inept President Stanton, who is probably the worst President ever, real or fictional. No, he is, without question. Even his acting sucks. I can’t say whether it was him or the writing, but you can’t say he had anything to work with. It was as if he wasn’t even trying.
Everything about this movie was ready for it to be a hit. That is until you actually see it. Nothing about this movie itself is worth mentioning in a good way. This probably the worst movie I’ve seen all year and maybe in quite some time. It’s one of those rare movies that I say is just not worth watching even if you’re a huge movie fan like me.

Acting – C-
Director – D
Writing – D
Cinematography – C-

Overall, I give this movie a D+.

Movie Review for “The Sentinel”

I have to say before I get into the review for “The Sentinel”, I am a huge ‘24’ fan and love the way Kiefer Sutherland plays Jack Bauer. Fortunately, and perhaps also unfortunately, Kiefer brings little of Bauer’s character to this film. “The Sentinel” is about a Secret Service agent and a plot to kill the president. Michael Douglas plays Pete Garrison, a legend among Secret Service agents. Kiefer plays David Breckenridge, one of Pete’s protégés, with whom he is not exactly friendly anymore.
When Garrison is accused of being responsible for the plot against the President, it is ironic that it was Breckenridge that he put on the case. Breckenridge is known as the man who will follow the clues to the truth. All trails lead back to his mentor Garrison. Eva Longoria plays Jill Marin, Breckenridge’s new rookie partner. Kim Basinger plays the First Lady, no brains but lots of beauty, a perfect role for Basinger (much like the one she played in ‘LA Confidential’ for which she received a much undeserved Oscar).
This movie has its moments certainly, but more often than not it just doesn’t live up to Douglas’ and Sutherland’s abilities. It’s one of those thrillers that is worth the watch, but not one that will stay with you for long. It’s a good rental when nothing else looks good.

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

Overall, I give this movie a B.

Movie Review for “Joyeux Noel”

Foreign films are certainly a distinct animal when it comes to reviews. Some people simply won’t put up with dubbed movies or even more so sub-titled movies. This is unfortunate because many really good movies are in a foreign language with sub-titles. “Joyeux Noel” (aka ‘Merry Christmas”) is one of these films. Based on true events, this movie takes place during World War I. French, German and English are all spoken with some regularity in this movie. This makes absolute sense as it involves French, German and Scottish soldiers.
“Joyeux Noel” is an inspirational story about a Christmas Eve on the front lines. A group of soldiers find out just how similar they all are when they come together to celebrate Christmas. It also shows some of the realities of war since they are all disbanded and, to some extent, disciplined for fraternizing with the enemy. I truly enjoyed the mixture of languages (I speak French as well as English, but not German). The movie wasn’t difficult to follow even when I had to depend upon the sub-titles. The acting was excellent, the scenes very well laid out and the story (even if borrowed from reality) was presented with excellent speed and fluidity. If you’re one of those that rarely sees a foreign film, this is one to see. If you never do, maybe you should try this one.

This is definitely a first weekend movie.

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

Overall, I give this movie an A-.

Movie Review of "The Constant Gardener"

While it’s been a while since the film came out, I just saw “The Constant Gardener”. It’s not because I didn’t want to see it, because I did. In fact, very much so, since I loved the book by John Le Carré. At once I was pessimistic about someone writing a good screenplay due to the this complex novel’s story and excited about the possibility to see it on the big screen.
Ralph Fiennes plays Justin Quayle, a British Diplomat in Kenya. His wife, Tessa Quayle is played by Rachel Weisz. Danny Huston, Billy Highy and Peter Postlethwaite are also a part of the very good cast. I only wish the writing and direction was there to produce something better. This movie disappoints on almost every level. Fiennes and Weisz do fine jobs with what they’re given. For that matter, the others do as well. However, this film lacks suspense, intrigue and characterization.
In the end, it seems like one big ad against the drug companies. It’s everything that “Syriana” and “Thank you for Smoking” weren’t. Those movies worked as stories. The audience cared about the characters. This movie had none of that. I really was never pulled into the plot and never really cared what happens next. So much more could have been made from an excellent book.

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

Overall, I would not recommend this movie. I give it a C-.

Movie Review of "Thank You for Smoking"

“Thank You for Smoking” looked, at first glance, to be a documentary. It may be a commentary piece, but it’s far from a documentary. This movie is 100% satirical comedy. If the audience thought the commentary was simply about the Big Tobacco companies, they need to look again. It also makes a big point about journalists.
Aaron Eckhart plays Nick Nayor, the talking head for the Big Tobacco companies. Robert Duvall plays the Captain, the most infamous of the tobacco head honchos. Katie Holmes plays the journalist, Heather Holloway, out to get the story no one else has and is willing to do whatever it takes to get it.
There is certainly a lot in this movie about the unethical nature of big business, and in this case particularly cigarette companies. Some of it may be exaggerated, but much is an accumulation of what has been done and said over the years. When Nick Naylor finds he’s been bested by the even more unscrupulous Heather Holloway, he fight back and once again wins. As he tells his son, if you argue correctly, you’re always right. This movie has just enough wit, social commentary and good acting to make it work all around. A great movie to see.

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

Overall, this is a very good. I give it a B+.

The end of Windows?

I just wrote an entry concerning OS X running on Apple boxes and the possibility of OS X running on Wintel boxes. It made me think about something that I've talked about for a long time. Is Microsoft actually looking to stop developing Windows?

Now, before you think I'm crazy or just stupid. Let's look at some facts.

1. There's been hints of this in speeches by Gates numerous times. Never anything obvious or an outright statement as such, but it's been there.

2. Microsoft has taken 3 times longer to develop Vista than they originally thought it would. That's a lot of R&D dollars to recoup. Do they really want to start thinking about doing that again?

3. Apple and Microsoft have been working together for quite some time to get Vista to work with the new Intel Macs.

4. There's absolutely no doubt that Microsoft sees web services as their real source of long-term income. This includes most software they now produce being websidized. This word I just made up means not just making them web-enabled, but making them web-based programs. I'm thinking monthly fees and better control of fighting piracy. It wouldn't be perfect, but you could tie software licenses to MAC addresses that get checked routinely.

5. People are already starting to switch away from Windows. Sure, it's an incredibly slow switch, but it's happening. At the very least, they are looking at alternatives for the first time.

I think the most obvious point is #4. Why develop the difficult part, an OS, when you can simply develop the software everyone uses no matter which OS they use?

Yet, I can't say this is anything more than a hunch. Step one would have to be OS X and Windows running on the same machine. Well, this is already happening and with a Vista - Mac Intel combination, it will simply be strengthened. Step two would have to be OS X on Wintel boxes. I argued against this in the other blog entry as a bad move on Apple's part and I still contend, for now, it would be. However, three years from now, it could be a good move, if the writing is on the wall about no new Windows EVER.

So, I say all this and I know it still may seem crazy talk. Even if remote, I think it's a possibility. The two things that may prevent all this from happening? Gates' refusal to cede the Operating System control to anyone else. Microsoft's fear that they will still have to compete with Apple on the software end of things; they might just lose that battle too.

Finally, will the US ever let Apple gain control of the OS market? Even if this all occurred, it would take decades to complete the transition. During this transition, one set of people that would benefit would be Linux proponents.

Apple hardware, Windows and Dell

Why is it that everyone seems to think that Apple will inevitably choose to put OS X on standard Dell type boxes?

I know the biggest argument they all make for this. It's that hardware that people already have will not have to be replaced if they do. I say that's a bunch of BS. It makes absolutely no sense.

First, let's look at how often companies replace their machines. I know this varies widely, but in large corporations it isn't odd at all for them to have a three to four year replacement cycle on Wintel machines. So, 1/4 to 1/3 of the machines is new every year. So, my question is what's better for Apple? Having these companies buy Apple machines that run both Windows and OS X? Or having them buy OS X that works on their current machines? Second of all, what's better for the companies? Buying OS X and having it run great on current machines, but having the Windows version on them out of date? Or buying a brand new Apple quality machine that runs not only the latest version of OS X, but also the latest version of Windows? It seems to me in both instances that it's better to buy the Apple machine. Now, this certainly depends on two things. One, that the Apple machines run Windows just as fast, if not faster, as Dell/HP/etc. Second, that the price point they are getting is nearly the same.

On the first point, I think it's beginning to be clear that Apple machines running Windows XP is clearly at least equivalent to the current Wintel boxes in performance. On the second point, one can certainly find lower cost Wintel boxes stripped of every extra for less than Apple machines. Yet, for equivalent products, I believe they are close to the same. The one place where this isn't necessarily true is laptops. I just recently priced out a Dell laptop with specs pretty close to the 2.0 ghz Core Duo Mac laptop. The Dell was definitely less expensive. Still, at the same time, I believe Apple has the quality edge on laptops and the software included for free with Apple's laptops was an advantage. The software would not really be a factor to the corporate world though. However, in the end, one has to consider the fact that getting Windows on an Apple machine will always mean purchasing a second OS, which will create a higher price point.

In the end, I really don't see selling OS X for Wintel boxes as a profitable or good business choice for Apple. Sell the corporate world Windows on Apple boxes. Let them boot into OS X for most of the stuff they need and Windows only when they need to, until one day when they find themselves in OS X all the time. What really needs to happen to make that work is being able to hot-swap between OSes. A single key-stroke to switch between OS X and Windows would be the final key. This must be done, however, without emulation. Each OS must be separate from each other. Let's see if, and I think when, this might happen. Apple could suddenly find itself in control of the Wintel world.

Movie Review of "Lucky Number Slevin"

A little intrigue, a little comedy, a little action and finally a little bit of the bizarre: sounds like the makings for a great movie. “Lucky Number Slevin” has all this and then some. Josh Hartnett stars as Slevin, the lead character in this suspense thriller. Lucy Liu plays the girl next door (literally), Lindsey. The cast also includes Ben Kingsley (The Rabbi), Bruce Willis (Mr Goodkat) and Morgan Freeman (The Boss).
This movie is about a case of mistaken identity and revenge. Slevin is thought to be his friend whom he is in town to meet. The Boss wants the Rabbi killed and the Rabbi wants the Boss killed. Mr Goodkat is a paid assassin, a very good one at that.
There are twists and turns in this movie and a surprise ending. Excellent dialogue and good interaction between the actors, definitely Lucy Liu and Josh Hartnett, add to the overall excellent quality of this film. I was looking forward to seeing this movie and looking forward to seeing it again. Was the twist easy to figure out? Maybe. Was it fun anyway? Absolutely. Josh Hartnett shows off his abilities along with the rest of the top-notch cast, none of whom disappoint.

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

Overall, this is a great first weekend movie. I give it an A-.

Movie Review of "Stay Alive"

The basic thought process for describing horror movie characters these days is that they are stupid. They do stupid things. They think stupid thoughts. They ask stupid questions. That being said, maybe one can begin to understand the events in these movies. “Stay Alive” is about a video game gone bad. Oh, its players don’t start to do bad things. No, they die as they die in the game.
A group of friends including Swink (played by Frankie Muniz) and Miller (played by Adam Goldberg) get together online and together to play this new video game. They found the game among the possessions of a friend who recently died.
Once they play the game and die in the game, they die in the same fashion in real life. It’s as simple as that. If you die in the game, it’s curtains for you. As they begin to realize the truth of this, they try to solve the game, hoping this might end the string of deaths. All along, Detective Thibodeaux (played by Wendell Pierce) believes these kids have gotten involved in something sinister and are somehow directly involved in these deaths. Of course, there’s no way he could believe the truth of it.
Nothing about this movie is special. It’s not horrible either. It’s basically your standard stupid people die in weird ways horror movie.

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

Overall, it’s a decent rental if you want to see a horror film. I give it a B-.