Showing posts with label thrillers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label thrillers. Show all posts

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Review: Moon (DVD)

It has been a long time since I've actually reviewed a movie on here, and for good reason - it's been a long time since I've actually sat down and watched a movie. Trying to get through all the Oscar movies is a bit of movie overload, so right after it every year I seem to need a post-Oscar movie break, so I just slow down a little on my movie watching, but the Netflix keep coming in and I have a couple of good movies saved on my DVR AND I'm plugging away at watching "Pushing Daisies" at night, and once that's done with, I'll get back to watching more movies.

And this brings me to the movie I watched this afternoon, "Moon." I hadn't heard of "Moon" until I watched the BAFTAs which are Britain's equivalent of the Oscars, and it won the award for Best Debut by a Brit for Director Duncan Jones (who PS is David Bowie's son!) I didn't quite know what to expect but I thought this movie was great.

It was kind of in the same vein as "Alien", with a dash of "District 9", a good portion of "2001: A Space Odyssey" and the tiniest part "The Parent Trap" minus the humor and musical number.  The plot concerns Sam Bell, played by a fantastic Sam Rockwell, who faced quite a challenge with this part and was phenomenal. Anyways, Sam Bell works for Lunar, a company who mines Helium from the Moon and sends it back to Earth, providing 70% of the Earth's power. He is up there all by himself and towards the end of his three year contract with the company. He can't wait to get back to Earth to see his wife and new little girl, until when he's out harvesting and gets in a crash. Suddenly he wakes back up in the infirmary under the care of the station's talking and emoting robot, GERTY, voiced by none other than Kevin Spacey, who nurses Sam back to some sort of health. When Sam heads out to the Harvester he crashed into, he discovers the dying body of none other than himself. I'm not going to give the rest away, but the mystery was enough to intrigue me, and even though I could see what was coming for the most part, I loved the whole "is he going crazy? is this really happening? what is going on?" vibe of the story. In the end, not everything is revealed - you're left to either pick up on the subtle clues or to draw your own conclusions, but the movie doesn't make you think super hard, which I appreciate, especially on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

I really like this psychology approach to science fiction. When most sci-fi recently has been fighting aliens on foreign planets or transforming robots that have wars with each other, there have been refreshing science fiction like "Moon" or "District 9" that go into the psychology of the characters or who offer up messages - it's smart science fiction.

Sam Rockwell was brilliant in this movie. I have maybe only seen him in one or two other movies, and he's always a good actor, but this movie is HIS movie. Literally, the cast only has 10 people in it, and 8 of them are only shown on video monitors for a few minutes combined, and the other 1 is just the voice of a robot. Without giving too much away, Rockwell acts against himself for the majority of the movie (thus "The Parent Trap" similarities) but never once do you think he's not acting with nobody there.

I probably would've never seen this movie if it didn't pique my interest on the BAFTAs but I'm glad I watched it, and now I'm highly recommending it to you too.


Patrick Approval Rating: 9/10


"Moon" @ imdb

Monday, February 15, 2010

Review: The Lovely Bones

Let's start this review by tackling the age old book vs. movie argument. It's always said "the book is better than the movie." Well of course it is! Reading a book is like producing or directing a movie in your own head. As a matter of fact, I usually approach reading books in a very cinematical way, imagining it as a movie. When I read "The DaVinci Code" I read it as a movie. I visualize the book as it were a film. So when I see the movie, of course it will disappoint because my movie was my own creation and thus much better than anything Ron Howard could've done. Please. Even the Harry Potter books - books I adore, and even though I enjoy the movies, the movies pale in comparison to how I feel about the book. And it goes the other way too, once you've seen a movie based on book, it will forever change your vision of that book should you ever re-read it or read a sequel or something. It's just the way these things go.

Now I've heard and read people who have read "The Lovely Bones" thought the movie was awful and horrendous and blame director Peter Jackson for destroying this beautiful novel. As someone who has not read the book, I thought the movie was pretty good! So what if it lacked any real character development and was just a study on grief and the afterlife, but isn't that a good enough topic for a movie? I thought afterlife explored by the main character, Susie Salmon, played by Saoirse Ronan, was pretty cool to look at despite being overtly CG. And the whodunnit mystery of who killed Susie Salmon is thrilling. Oh please, her death is not even a spoiler alert. You find out within the first two minutes she's dead and within the first five who killed her. Nay - you find out the answer to both of those questions in the trailer for the movie.

The movie was creepy and terrifying and intensely cringeworthy at points. It covers some horrific events in the life and death of this little girl, and Best Supporting Actor nominated Stanley Tucci is Kreepy with a capital K. I think that was probably his character's name. Kreepy McKreeperson. I even didn't hate Mark Wahlberg as Susie's grieving father. I mean remember when he was Marky Mark? And now he's acting in Oscar nominated movies? He's come a long way.


Patrick Approval Rating: 7/10


Saturday, February 13, 2010

Review: The Hurt Locker (DVD)

After I saw "An Education" I figured why not continue my streak of Oscar movie seeing, especially on this nice long weekend, so I Redbox'd it up at Stop & Stop and rented what I guess is being called the frontrunner for the Best Picture win, "The Hurt Locker."

Firstly, I had to lookup what a hurt locker is, and apparently it's soldier speak for getting messed up real bad. As in when you do get messed up, you're stuck in a locker of hurt. So calling the movie "The Hurt Locker" is kinda like also saying if you're in the army in any way, you're also in somewhat of a permanent hurt locker because you're just asking for pain, especially the guys who this movie is about. It's about a US Army bomb squad in Iraq in 2004 who risk their lives to diffuse bombs that have been placed by insurgents by literally walking up to a bomb and diffusing it with their bare hands. Let's just say the movie is way intense. Here I was last night after a long day of work, seeing my second movie of the day, and I was tired- but I was literally was on the edge of my couch during several scenes, flinching at the possibility of what was coming. It had me right from the first frame all the way until the last in its poweful grip. It's shot almost like a documentary so you forget you're watching a movie - it feels so vividly real and scary. "The Hurt Locker" is a classic suspense thriller, where you know the dangers these characters face and you watch them do it, and it can either end one of two ways - the live, or they die. I loved how director Kathyrn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal could have just let the story run the film, but they didn't. We were given glimpses into who these guys were and why they were doing what they were doing and how they felt about their jobs. Some were conflicted, some thought they were sure of it, but not be, and some did it because it made them feel alive to be so close to death. Not only did we get these clues through dialogue but simple shots with just a closeup or a quick look.

Sidenote: I always enjoy seeing actors I didn't know were in movies pop up in random bits. Like I remember hearing Evangeline Lilly (Kate on "Lost") was in this, but by the time she actually popped up in the movie I was so into it I forgot about her and I was like "OH YEAH!" Other notable cameos included Guy Pierce, Ralph Fiennes, and the Ice Truck Killer from "Dexter." He was one of the most exciting to me because I can't recall seeing him in anything else except for when he scared the pants off me as the serial killer from "Dexter's" first season.

Well, did I enjoy this movie? Yes! Yes I did. Do I think it should win Best Picture? No...no I don't.

Maybe I'm suffering a little "Slumdog" syndrome, where the hype and focus for the big win is for one of the movies I liked, but I didn't like the best. And maybe this just shows that the Academy Award winners don't necessarily mean that movie is the best. I've certainly seen movies that weren't nominated for anything and thought they were better than any movies that won or were nominated. But I think what these awards allow for, and why I get so obsessed with seeing the movies, is that a wider audience becomes aware of and gets to see films that are excellent and should be seen. I may have never seen "The Hurt Locker" if it wasn't nominated for anything, but I'm very glad I did. It's a powerful, affecting movie - a commentary on the war against terror and the soldiers who risk their lives to fight for what and why? But do I think it should win Best Picture? At this point, when I've seen seven of the ten nominees, I'm going to say no. I still think "Up" was the best movie of the year, "Avatar" completely blew me away and made me forget where I was in a theater for a good three hours, and even "Up in the Air" connected with me more than "The Hurt Locker." But it's still a very good movie, and one I'd like to revisit when the Oscar hype is not all up in its grill.


Patrick Approval Rating: 9/10