Review: Alice in Wonderland (Theatrical)

I'll start this review off discussing my stance on this 3-D craze that has attacked movie theaters (and America's wallets) as of late. I want to remind everybody of the 50s, during a time that I feel like everybody has forgotten, when all movies seemed to be in 3-D. Not that I was alive back then, but doesn't anybody remember those pictures of conservative 1950s audiences wearing 3-D glasses at the movies and being shocked at the giant bugs popping off the screen? Remember how the movie version of "Kiss Me Kate" was awkwardly in 3-D? And remember how that fad ended? And remember that it became a joke or theme park novelty (thanks Muppet Vision!)? So then why is it a big deal all of a sudden again? Sure I appreciate the novelty of 3-D, but I'm just waiting for this to all blow over in a couple of years. I don't particularly like it or think that it even adds anything to a movie and it hurts my eyes when things move around the screen quickly. The true test for me is when I see "Avatar" on DVD. Whereas I thought the 3-D aided that movie in placing the audience in a completely different world, I feel like now it's just being thrown on any movie, and that bothers me.

I could have liked "Alice in Wonderland" in 2-D, I'm sure. Perhaps I would have liked it even more than I did, as I felt like it was a generally blah movie altogether. I definitely feel like it didn't add anything to the story or the movie going experience except for having all the kids in the theater comment on how they could touch everything. Which also brings me to the awful movie going experience we had seeing this. I couldn't believe the young children who came, never mind the idiot family who showed up (a group of like 7, in a sold out showing) five minutes before the movie started, WITH A BALLOON AND AN INFANT. WHYYYYY. That angered me so much. So the balloon waved in the corner and the baby cried a lot and then I punched them all in the face.

OK, so back to the movie itself. I couldn't believe it was a Tim Burton movie, because it lacked a lot of...something. Creativity? It just seemed like a watered down Burton, or a commercialized Burton. Which I guess it was. A Disney-fied Tim Burton. Maybe he's lost the knack he was known for - that quirky off beat dark movies that actually had some heart and imagination. This movie seemed like it was just created in the vein of his other movies, to make someone some money because they knew Tim Burton and Wonderland would be a good match. Sure the movie looked like a Burton film, with the twisted greenery and the pale complexions and the general lack of eyebrows (except Anne Hathaway's White Queen) but maybe it just didn't live up to the expectations I had for what the movie could've been.

I thought the plot was way too contrived, with Alice going back to Wonderland and everybody there kept telling her she has been brought back to save them but she keeps denying this saying "they've got the wrong Alice" for no reason except to make the plot longer until Alice realizes she is that Alice. Le duh. I even found Johnny Depp to be oddly disappointing. I wanted him to be more...well, a tad more "mad" as the Mad Hatter and especially as compared to his cartoon counterpart he was kind of boring. And let's talk about the awkward hip hop dance he does which seems totally incongruous to the rest of the movie, but it's as if Depp said "I want to do a crazy dance at the end" and everybody was like, "You're Johnny Depp. Do what you want." I am not sure what the kid sitting next to me said when the dance started, but I choose to believe he did say "Hella Awkward." Which it was.

Maybe it was all the CGI of the movie that let me down a little. I didn't think it would bother me, and it kind of threw me back to the brilliant sequences of "Mary Poppins" or "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" with the live action characters cohabitating with animated characters on screen. But whereas those movies made those scenes feel magical, "Alice" left me with the sense of the CGI being a copout. It might as well has been an entirely animated movie. Oh wait, didn't that already happen once in 1951? And even though that "Alice in Wonderland" may not be one of my all time favorite Disney movies (it's still one of the best, but just not one of the top 10 favorites), this "Alice in Wonderland" pales in comparison.

I just think this was a case of a movie not living up to the expectations I had going into it because of the movie's premise, concept, director and cast. "Alice" should have been everything I thought it would've been, but it wasn't. I was entertained, sure, but I was also bored, unimpressed, and wished it wasn't in 3-D.

Please stop the 3-D trend. K-thanks.

Patrick Approval Rating: 6/10

"Alice in Wonderland" @ imdb

Review: The Blind Side (Theatrical)

This movie is nominated for Best Picture?... Really?...Really.

When I first saw the trailer for this film attached to some movie I saw last summer, or fall, or whenever - regardless, I scoffed. I thought "What a sentimental piece of dreck!" And I continuously scoffed at it until it opened and it turned out to be a huge hit. And even as it played in theaters, I scoffed at it and vowed I would never see this movie because it looked cheesy and stupid. And after it started picking up steam and awards talk happened, I thought...really? This movie? And I scoffed some more. Then as it was shockingly nominated for Best Picture, I reluctantly thought "Well now I guess I have to see it. Maybe on DVD." And here we are, roughly three months since it's original release and I ventured to the theater to see the movie. THE MOVIE THEATER?! HOW IS IT STILL PLAYING!? THIS MOVIE?! SERIOUSLY?! HANABHBBJAHjnqskjnauyBIN.

Turns out, it was everything I dreamed it would be. Super sentimental, cheesy, eye rolling worthy - and yet I still enjoyed it. I enjoyed it in a way I thought maybe sometime, five years down the road I could rent a movie like this and curl up on my sofa and watch it at home and I may enjoy it. I don't understand why the audience we saw this with LOVED IT! I'm pretty sure the woman behind me was crying at the end, and the black couple in front of me were riotous throughout. The movie was entirely predictable with a story that seemed to go nowhere until a forced conflict appeared in the last 15 minutes of the movie that gets resolved as quickly as it comes on.

Sandra Bullock was nothing special. I hate saying that because I like her a lot, but to think she's the front runner to win Best Actress for a film released in the year of 2009 above all other actresses in all other movies for THIS MOVIE?!  WHY! Don't get me wrong, she was hugely entertaining in "The Proposal" and I loved her in it, so what if in this movie she's kind of serious for maybe a combined four minutes total when she tears up a little bit on screen. Hand the lady an award, please. Meanwhile Meryl Streep is tackling some very big (no pun intended) shoes with Julia Child and Gabby Sidibe is dealing with issues no person should ever deal with as Clarice Precious Jones, so I'm sorry Sandra Bullock, you don't deserve to win for this movie. Not this year. Comic actors have done the drama route before and it's been marvelous for some (Jim Carrey in "Eternal Sunshine" for instance) but "The Blind Side" does not do you justice.

And I haven't even began to discuss the craptastic message of the film. I assume it was meant to be one of hope and inspiration, a twisted Cinderella tale- boy ripped from the streets and becomes successful NFL player. But to me it played as "poor black boy saved from the dirges of his social position thanks to a nice white Christian lady, because poor black boys can only be saved by white ladies and their families, and especially if those families are Christians, because only Christians do good things." I didn't realize there would be religious undertones or overtones, let alone as prevalent as they were featured. Did a mega-church help fund this movie or something? The cross Sandra Bullock wore around her neck seemed to gleam every time her character did a good deed. And I'm not dissing religious people, or Christians, because to each their own, and it's cool and all, but when a movie appears to be about a woman who only does good in her life because she's Christian and that's what they do, rather than doing good because that need comes from deep within her, well I kinda get irked. It's not to say the woman Bullock is portraying wasn't a good person deep down and that's where the need came from to help poor Michael, but the Christian philosophy was continually shoved in the audience's faces and I didn't think it was a good enough justification of character.

I compare this movie to "Precious," a movie I adored, which is roughly about the same thing (poor black teenager overcomes their home roots to triumph) but whereas Precious found her inner strength from a place deep inside her, Michael finds his inner strength...well...he never actually seems to find it. He finds a way to smile a little bit more only because these white people have been so kind to him. That's not a well deserved payoff of a character's triumph, it's a movie called "The Blind Side." Woof.


Patrick Approval Rating: 5/10


The Blind Side @ imdb

Review: Crazy Heart (Theatrical)

"Crazy Heart" vs. "The Wrestler." That's all I kept thinking going into this movie. I knew it starred someone who all the talk was about for Best Actor and the story line was about a person who had been famous and successful and who had since fallen from grace and kept on keeping on the road to self-destruction. I knew the main character fell for a girl who was messed up herself and had a kid, and though she wanted to be with him, she knew he was bad for her. On paper it just sounded a lot like "The Wrestler" from last year starring Mickey Rourke, but in reality it was different. Obviously. It's a different movie.

Jeff Bridges plays Bad Blake, an old country singer who's broke, down on his luck, and can't seem to make his way back up from playing in tiny saloons and bowling alleys. He meets Jean, played by Maggie Gyllenhaal (too many letters of the same type), a reporter writing an article on him who he basically charms and begins a doomed from the beginning relationship with. So the two fight and get on and off and he keeps drinking and she keeps worrying and I keep wondering where this could possibly go. I knew if it was anything like "The Wrestler" I was going to walk out being all mopey and sad. But just when you think it's going down that road, it doesn't. Things kinda turn around for Bad Blake- maybe not in the best possible way - but the movie ends on a fairly good note whereas with "The Wrestler" I was all "Behhhhhhhhh" and sad.

I did like how the movie was almost a country musical. The songs by T-Bone Streep, nope...I mean T-Bone Burnett sort of commented on the place Bad Blake was in his life, but still could've been taken out of context to work as the bluesy folksy classic country hits they could've been. I don't particulary like this type of music but I found myself tappin' my toes quite a bit and Jeff Bridges is quite a musician! So is Colin Farrell, which was a big surprise to me. Who knew. Remember when he was always on coke?

So Jeff Bridges is front runner for the Oscar? Eh? Alright. I can see it. He made it look easy, almost like he wasn't even acting at all. Which might be the key to him playing this part because it doesn't seem like he's much different than Bad Blake in real life. Well, maybe he is, but he made me think he was Bad Blake regardless. He's very good. With seeing this film, I've now seen all Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress nominees. While I'm still partial for Best Actor to Colin Firth in "A Single Man" who crushed me with a single hearbreaking scene, Bridges does carry the whole movie, and he's good, so I'll be OK if and when he wins. Maggie Gyllenhaal is good, but she won't win Best Supporting Actress this year (Hello M'oM'o.) Plus Gyllenhaal always bothers me always bothers me a little bit. Maybe it's because of all of her Ls and As in her name, but I think it more likely has something to do with her sloopy shoulders she always seems to show off when she wears a lot of strapless tops.


Patrick Approval Rating: 8/10

Crazy Heart @ imdb

Review: An Education (Theatrical)

I woke up this afternoon from a much needed nap to some obscure Olympics happening on the telly and lounged around for a bit before I ended up feeling stir crazy and needed to get out of my apartment. I tentatively and spontaneously ventured to what may be my new (old) favorite movie theater, Images, in Williamstown, where I caught the matinee (and thus cheaper!) showing of the Best Picture nominated "An Education." What a pleasant way to spend a restless afternoon!

The movie was a joy: charming, funny, romantic. Throughout the movie in my head I kept saying "Swinging 60s baby, yeah!" a la Austin Powers, which I know makes me super cool, and I'm just glad I didn't say it out loud. And since I'm a big fan of this era in history, I appreciated this coming of age story of a 16 year old schoolgirl (Jenny, played by Oscar nominated Carey Mulligan) who has bigger aspirations to be more than the simple English schoolgirl as the world and womanhood changes around her. She meets David, an older man who leads a life of jazz and nightclubs and gambling, and is taught the ways of life (both the good and the bad sides) by him, thus the film being titled "An Education." Makes sense right? Well there is also a lot more to the plot, and it goes from a cute romantic comedy to a heartbreaking drama in a matter of moments, but I'm not going to ruin the movie if you haven't seen it. It's one of those where when you finally see what's coming you get knots in your stomach. But unlike say, "A Single Man" where that knot in your stomach never gets resolved, this one does - but maybe not in the way you'd expect (or want.)

I can't quite place what genre the film falls in. It feels almost like a contemporary costume drama, mixed with a romantic comedy, with a twist of drama. Regardless, the movie wasn't perfect for me - it seemed to lack a reason for being made. Don't get me wrong, I liked it and enjoyed it and thought the performances were good - but I didn't come out of it being wowed. I thought, well that's a good story, but what was it's purpose? You get what I'm throwing at you? No? Well that's OK. I still recommend it, because I think it's a good film, maybe I just didn't "get" this one.

Carey Mulligan is a natural actress, and carries the entire film. It's her story and she drew me right in with her subtle acting. Peter Sarsgaard does a fine job as her love interest, David, and I continue to think he's one of today's most under-appreciated actors. I also think he has too many A's in his last name, and find it amusing he's married/dating/with Maggie Gyllenhaal and she also has one too many A's. Most amusing for me however was Alfred Molina as Jenny's uptight dad. This part could've been a cliche villain of the story, but not only did I find his off-color remarks hilarious, but he also had quite a bit of heart in the character, which was refreshing for a role like this.

I can knock off another Best Picture nominee from my list now. Though I really liked "An Education," I think this is one of those movies that if there wasn't 10 nominees, this one would not be nominated. But y'all should still see it anyhow. It's cute.

Patrick Approval Rating: 8/10

An Education @ imdb

Review: A Single Man (Theatrical)

Wow. So this movie happened and I kind of went home from the theater feeling numb. Now after I saw "Precious" my body ached with pain, but after "A Single Man" I just wanted to curl up in my bed and hug my teddy bear. If you don't know, the movie is about George, a middle aged college professor played by Colin Firth whose lover of sixteen years, Jim, was killed in a car accident eight months before the action takes place. And on this day the movie takes place in George's life he has decided to kill himself because he is a lonely, miserable, single man who feels like he is drowning underwater and cannot breathe through his loneliness. At school that day he meets a young student who has an interest in him and comes on to George, who at first pushes him away, but through persistence, the boy, played by Nicholas Hoult, gets to George and...well...I don't want to spoil the rest of the movie, because I think you should all see this one.

So the story is good, but the movie as a whole is great. Everything from the cinematography to the score to the acting is quite close to perfection. It's hard to believe the movie was directed by a first time director, nevermind a director who is normally a fashion designer. Tom Ford directs the movie like a pro, and his designer eye lends itself beautifully to film. Whereas I feel sometimes film is all over the place and I don't quite get it, I got everything single thing in this movie. When I saw Stephen Sondheim lecture at Williams a couple weeks ago one of the things that really stuck in my head was when he said "Art is a conscious effort" and I think Tom Ford really took that to every frame, every shot, every composed moment in this film - it was all a piece of art that was consciously thought about, and I ate that up like the rice and beans I had for dinner tonight. The bleak colors and tinting to George's world when he was alone and lonely, and how the film and colors would literally subtly brighten up every time he made a connection with another person made me squeal with joy. It just worked! And the opening credits! Oh my, how amazing they were. A naked Colin Firth sinking deeper and deeper into this murky water while this pounding, driving score played. Beautifully sad.

The music overall was amazing - I'm not sure who wrote it, and I'm too lazy right now to look it up, but I could feel the darkness of the film in the music. I don't often notice the music of a movie, which is usually a good thing, it's not supposed to stand out - but maybe when it does stand out and makes an emotional impact, the music is super awesome. And it was in "A Single Man." OH! And the acting - well I haven't even touched on that yet! Colin Firth is so far my favorite to win, even though he probably won't. His best moment in a movie full of amazing ones was when he hears Jim has died - I could see his heart break on the screen. His chest heaved up and down and I was sucked into his pain. So much so I didn't even notice it was Mad Man's Jon Hamm on the other end of the phone! But Amy picked up on that. Firth really made George real, taking in each last moment of his last day of life - even when he creepily smelled a stranger's dog and said it smelled like buttered toast. Umm...sure it's creepy, but actually kind of really true. Sometimes my Sydney dog at home smells like toast too. Not that I smell her on purpose, but it's noticeable. She's cute and so it's forgivable. Also the scene where George tries to kill himself and cannot find a comfortable way of doing it KILLED ME. Not literally, but I was stifling laughter because it shouldn't have been funny, but it most definitely was. I think the other people in the theater just didn't have a sense of humor. And why Julianne Moore isn't nominated for an Oscar this year when she was nominated for every other award for this movie is beyond me. Her character Charley, George's hag, was absolutely pathetically in love with George and a big giant bitch because she couldn't do anything about it. The scene where she is spending so much time applying and perfecting the makeup for just one of her eyes so she can look pretty for George when they meet that night killed me. It's so tragic.

Obviously, if you can't tell by now I loved and adored the movie even though it made me tense and forget to breathe on occasion. It's a downer, with no happy ending, so don't go into it expecting to leave feeling "light in your loafers" but it comes highly recommended for me. I can't wait to revisit this one.

Patrick Approval Rating: 10/10

"A Single Man" @ imdb

Review: Invitcus (Theatrical)

I was hoping for something extraordinary to see for my first movie of 2010. I started 2009 off with Slumdog Millionaire, which was just a little known movie that nobody saw or cared about. I wanted to see Invictus, but felt sort of ho-hum about the film. I've always appreciated seeing those feel good losers become winners "sports" movies, a la Friday Night Lights or Remember The Titans or hell, even The Big Green. ( I think The Mighty Ducks fits in there too, actually. Anyways, Invictus falls right in the same category, but possibly because it's directed by Clint Eastwood and stars Oscar winners Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon and is getting all sorts of buzz for those three people, the film is supposedly elevated to above those other movies that fall into the inspiration sport movie film.

Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed it, but the movie was absolutely nothing special, and not even anything I hadn't seen before. Granted those movies didn't involve Nelson Mandela, or rugby for that matter, a sport which I know NOTHING about except that it's super violent and involved a lot of grunting. Morgan Freeman as Mandela was very good. I mean

1) who doesn't love anything with Morgan Freeman in it? He could narrate a documentary about penguins walking on ice and make it entertaining. Wait a second...

And 2) Who other than Morgan Freeman could play Nelson Mandela? Nobody. He was perfect for the part, and suprisingly funny!

Matt Damon, an actor who I've never fully appreciated probably because I don't really like the Bourne movies and I associate him with them, got to show off some mad rugby skills. Talk of an Oscar nom for him for this? Seriously? He was way better in The Informant!, a movie I hated (and fell asleep during in the theater) but thought he was excellent in it. But whatever.

The movie plays out exactly like you'd expect an inspirational sports movie to play out, except because it's directed by Clint Eastwood, the cinematography has a slightly blue/dark tone to the film. It's definitely a departure for him, though he did do a sports movie with Million Dollar Baby, but that was also way more of a drama and character study than Invictus. At least I thought so.

I'm glad I saw the movie as it will probably be nominated for some Oscars and I like seeing all the Oscar nominated movies, but it would otherwise be a movie I'd rather rent on DVD and watch in my own home and wipe my misty eyes at the end when, OBVIOUS SPOILER ALERT, the team wins.

Patrick Approval Rating: 7/10

Invictus @ imdb