Month: November 2011

This is NOT a review of the books, or a comparison of them. Also, these reviews will be SLATHERED with spoilers. So, there is the warning.

Harry Potter is Daniel Radcliff, Ron Weasley is Rupert Grint, and Hermoine is Emma Watson. There are some other people, but who cares after the main three. The goal of the series was to have all the actors play the same role for all 7 (At the time, but now 8 ) movies! Lets see how that worked out.

It doesn’t.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone

This first movie is very very simple. It has to get you caught up on the backstory (or origin), who the bad guys are, how the world works, etc. So you can consider this movie to be like the first movie of a superhero series, if it makes it easier. Like all good superheros, Harry Potter also lost his parents at an early age. While most superheroes still find themselves in a good situation, loving family, Harry gets the short end of the stick and has to live in an abusive house. The people in the house are the only real non magic users we learn about in this series, so I kinda just have to assume all British people are like that.

Logic!

Blah blah. Big scary hairy guy tells him he is special. Steals him to a witch school (where no Muggles are allowed. Hmm. Seems kind of racist. Flaw in the series? I’m not saying Muggles and Wizards are different races. But the people in the movie do. Really, to compare it to superheroes, they are like Mutants. Since two non-mutants can still make a mutant baby.

At mutant orphan school, he is picked on by Alan Rickman, is talked about behind is back, and learns to do magic. Like normal middle/high school. Some gay old man takes a special interest in him, and the rest is history.

Oh yeah. And some guy with another dude on his head tries to kill him through a series of weird games and three headed dogs to get to a stone that lets people live forever. That part was just weird though.

Really, this just looks like some sort of artsy statue.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Year 2! Life at home still sucks. School doesn’t. Turns out homeboy can talk to Snakes. That’d be amazing to me, you know, if these same people weren’t also flying around, shooting off spells and shit.

Some famous book guy replaces guy with two heads who tried to kill Harry as a teacher, and he also is inept at the job. Also, people are dying. Giant Basilisk in sewers? Oh no, evil dude who is dead kinda went to school here, had a diary (hah…) and tricked Harry! Don’t worry. The diary dies by the end, and all the kids are no longer stone.

What is going on here? Is he looking away so he doesn’t become stone? Why doesn’t the basilisk just bite him?

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Year 3! Home sucks, school doesn’t. Another new teacher, also inept, also suspicious. This one involves wearwolves though!

Oh. And shit. Dangerous criminals escaped from Prison. That sucks. More magic learning, more hall sneaking, more no good doing. Also, time travel. They got everything under the sun pretty much in this movie. Even that Dumbledore guy seemed confused by it all. HEY WAIT.

THAT’S A DIFFERENT ACTOR! SHENANIGANS!

Thankfully the actor change wasn’t this significant.

Richards Harris died before the third of eight movies! All of their plans, ruined! Guess they shouldn’t have picked such an old actor for such a long project. Oh well, enter Michael Gambon.

I can’t even remember if Voldermort is in this movie. I know it has animal rights stuff. But I think this one just has his lackies.

Oh yeah, and the escaped convict is Gary Oldman, not actually a murderer, and Harry’s godfather. So his last remaining “family” even though that word is a big stretch still.

Why so serious, Black? This works because Oldman is in the Batman movies too.

So, I know they wanted authentic purposes. But I find the kids in the first movie to now just be creepy, based on their age. The first movie, when compared to the others kind of moves at a lot slower pace. Afterall, its the origin movie. With everything getting explained, it might bore future watchings. The second movie I usually just call a continuation of the first. Still a bunch of little kids. Still a bunch of explaining.

The third movie I think is the first to take on its own complete story and tell it well. It is interesting, and all of the components are interesting too, not confusing. Confusing is an easy adjective to give to movies dealing with any form of time travel too, so that is a great thing to pull off.

Obviously I remember the least from the second movie so it must not have had much of lasting impression on me, right?

I decided to try this movie out when I was browsing Jeremy Sisto‘s imdb page. The other was the dreadful Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Undead, but I figured with a title like Into Temptation, how could it be bad? If anything, might just be some super awkward soft porn thing, and I could have a hilarious review because of it.

Complete with Catholic priest role playing.

In the story, Jeremy Sisto is a Catholic priest, in some lame part of some city. He saved his Parish from going away, or something. He also is a bit unconventional, talking on subjects other guys wont touch. Trying to add jokes to his sermon. What have you. But in the first few minutes, a woman (Kristin Chenoweth) comes in for a confessional. She is a prostitute! Of course she was also raped by her step-dad, has lived a life of sin, and is also going to kill herself on her birthday.

All Sisto knows is the necklace she wears, as she gets out of there before he can see her face and talk to her.

So the movie is more or less Sisto trying to find Kristin, on his journey to the underworld, in order to help save her. Along the way he gets some spiritual advice from a higher up Catholic Father, played by Brian Baumgartner, or Kevin from The Office.

Turns out he doesn’t always talk like “that”.

I’d say most of the movie is relied on Sisto’s acting for it to work. Everyonce and awhile we get a small scene with Kristin, who is usually alone, and we have to rely only on facial gestures and mannerisms. What this movie ends up being is a journey for Sisto’s character to be himself, a better man, and help others along the way, while finding out how to be a better priest. It was a very interesting movie, if not slowly paced. It also didn’t focus much at all on the religious aspect of it all, which is surprising. Pretty decent flick.

Hey look. Another movie about a book I have not heard of!

The River Why is a simple movie. It asks the question, Why? It, being the river.

I wish this was about a large moving stream that spoke to the main character, much like a 5 year old child would speak to anyone.

“Why?…Why?…Why? Why? WHY? WHY? WHY?”

The story is of a fishing prodigy, Zach Gilford, who grew up in a fishing household. His dad, William Hurt, a famous fly fisher, and his mom, some lame worm fisher.

Once he leaves home due to tension at home, he lives on his own in the woods, with the ideal schedule of sleep, eat, fish. All day every day. Soon he meets Amber Heard, some crazy environmentalist lady being all naked and fishing in a lame way, and his life begins to change.

This is actually a coming of age story, with a bunch of fishing in it. Despite rising to a small amount of fame, eventually the guy finds out there is more to life than just fishing. It also comes with some philosophical backings, with the people he meets along the way.

It may or may not end with a big/long catch. Just sayin’.

It is a slow movie, but decent. I of course know nothing about fishing, because I am not a wild man in the woods (yet!) and I think I learned nothing about fishing in the movie. Fly fishing still confuses me with what they actually do. But damn it, it was kind of interesting.

Restitution. I have hard time spelling that word sometimes. Not at all relevant to the movie, just figured I’d let you know.

This is a weird low budget movie.

Featuring all of the stars of yesterday! Mena Suvari, of American Beauty, and Tom Arnold, of Tom Arnold.

Is it just me, or does he always look confused nowadays?

The main character however is played by Mark Bierlein, who I am ashamed to give the IMDB for. But the dude is a writer, actor, and producer. He was an actor in this movie and Street Boss. He was a producer in this movie and Street Boss. He was also a producer, in this movie and Street Boss. At least he does what he loves, I guess?

At least his movies seem to be set in Michigan.

This movie was super low budget. Blood looked bad, and I cringed when I heard the potted plant crashing noise. Just a dumb sound effect. As for the story. Eh. Dude gets framed for murders at the beginning of the movie. A year later some other dude comes to investigate it for a book. Turns out lot of people in the town are in on the conspiracy, and more people die because of his search.

His neighbor is Tom Arnold. The other dude’s lover is Mena Suvari. And yeah.

I hated the ending. There was a lot of unexpected action scenes at the end, which felt stupid as well. The explanation for everything, I thought was dumb. But for reasons I can’t explain without spoilers. Most of the movie was slow too.

They were going for this big “Whoa! Twist!” stuff near the end, but really, just felt dumb. I will note that an actor in this movie is named Jimmy Doom. How awesome is that name?

He played the role of “Hillbilly”.

The Change-Up is the R-rated attempt to make an enjoyable “change bodies” movie. Most of the time these sort of movies are family oriented and always have the same message. Always.

Your life is better than you think it is, switching is a bad idea, and don’t do drugs.

Presumably the last message is implied. The Change-Up offers the same morals, minus the drug part. It might condone them, actually.

“Drug use?! By golly gee wizz, that is bad stuff!” – How I think Ryan Reynolds actually talks.

So, the beginning of this movie is pretty bad. We have to get through the parts where they are all, rawrr my life sucks. Even a dumb poop joke scene. Gross and unnecessary. Adult oriented shouldn’t have to mean lamer jokes, but eh, they happen. The “Change Up” part is equally ridiculous, but pretty much anything they could have came up would have failed too, so that doesn’t matter.

Reynolds is friends with Bateman. Reynolds likes to party, lives alone, sex all the time, actor/model. Bateman has a family! Daughter and twin babies, married to Leslie Mann, and works in a law firm. Pretty smart, trying to make partner. Olivia Wilde is his assistant, who he kinda wants to bang.

For some reason.

After the change, there is some pretty funny stuff that happens. You can probably guess a lot of it. Each person screws up the others life, tries to coach them on how to be successful. Unfortunately Reynolds also has some dad issues, and Bateman has marriage problems, so with their powers combined, they are able to help fix both. By the end, they yes, learn to love their life, and make appropriate changes in their lives for future successes.

At least in the Unrated version, there is a lot of boobs. Some are creepy boobs though. Leslie Mann is naked in this movie a lot though, which was very surprising.

I really couldn’t tell if I wanted to give this a 2 or a 3 rating. It had parts enough to annoy me for the 2, yet some very funny parts for a 3. So I think in cases like this, I tend to just go the higher rating route. It still could have done a lot of things better though.

Here at Gorgon Reviews, we sometimes like to change up the review format. For instance, this review will basically be a question and answer format for the movie Chop Kick Panda.

Question 1: Is this just some poor man’s ripoff of Kung Fu Panda?

I dunno! I will let you be the judge. Here is the cover.

As you see it is very different. This Panda is not wearing Pants.

Question 2: So it is a CGI movie about a martial arts panda?

Well. Kinda. First off, despite the cover, it is not a CGI movie. The movie looks as if it was made on a flash animation program for some quick computer thing. Yet instead of a quick video thing it is a full movie (of 40 minutes in length).

The amount of the movie that is actually martial arts is hard to say. In this place, Serenity Falls, the Panda is a janitor who had some lessons at a dojo. For some reason he has a kid, who he tells he is the best thing ever to. Movie even begins with a weird self dialogue about how great and legendary he is (like KFP). In fact, he is so legendary, that even his legend is legendary. They say that about 4-5 times in the movie, which means about once every 8-10 minutes.

So yeah. Some tiger wants some special amulet in the dojo? And tries to get it during a sleepover thing there. And yeah. That is about it.

Question 3: Hmm. That sounds kind of lame. At least there is lots of cool fighting?

As far as I could tell when I watched it, there was about zero fighting. A lot of off screen fighting. A couple on screen jabs. And that was the movie.

Question 4: But…but…the title! It says — Wait. Chop Kick? What the fuck is a Chop Kick?

Good question. I assume it is similar to the Kick Punch, but more Asian.

And less robots!

13 in a few ways reminded me of the movie Mean Guns. Okay. Barely. But lets just say people die, and there is money available in both movies.

Ice-T isn’t in 13. But 50 Cent is.

The beginning of this movie is pretty slow (and arguably the ending). Sam Riley, some no name, is an electrician at some dude’s house. Dude dies though. For some reason or another, he opens his mail and sees a message with a key, telling him to go to a lockbox. He does, finds another message and a train ticket. At this point, he is like, fuck it, lets do this shit. Despite not knowing anything, he keeps going along with the checkpoints, getting frisked, searched for wires, etc. And you know what? He is fucked.

He is now taking part in a weird “tournament” where very little skill is required, just luck. A group of about 20 or so individuals, complete with numbers on their shirts (guess which number is our main guy?) pretty much play russian roulette. They are made to stand in a circle, each with one bullet, spinning chambers and all, and pointing their gun at the person in front of them. When a light goes on, they shoot. If they survive, congrats! If not, well dead.

Why is this? Because of gambling! Lot of people are watching these games, making very high stake bets. I couldn’t really understand most of the betting terminology though passed around. Each shooter has a handler to help them through the rounds, and someone who represents them for bets and what not. 50 Cent had brought in Mickey Rourke to participate. They have an interesting side story themselves.

Jason Statham brought in his brother (for the fourth time) and Alexander Skarsgård ends up helping main guy. At the same time, David Zayas is playing a detective looking for this underground gambling ring (he is good at being a detective I guess). So overall, there are three rounds, each with increasing bullets. At the end, 2 people are randomly selected to stand face to face in a duel, with 3 bullets.

Yes, this is all for gambling. Yes people die. But hey, if you survive until the end you get lots of money too. That makes it okay?

I will admit, I think this poster is pretty cool.

So the acting isn’t the best. But you probably expected that. This is a pretty low budget movie. It is probably too long at 90 minutes. The scenes to get to the gambling arena place took awhile. But the tournament, I just described it, doesn’t take that long either. So the ending after the tournament, if not completely expected, is kinda of slow too. Nothing unpredictable happens after it either. So that kind of sucks. This is one of the times I would have preferred a 75~ minute movie or so. Or, if they wanted, they could have had a lot crazier good acting, in regards to how the different “contestants” were handling the pressure of the game.

But this movie if anything was interesting for the majority chunk of it, and I like that it tried something new, if not horrible to think about.

I should start off by saying I do not hate foreign movies. Subtitles can be annoying if they are barely in a movie (so if I am not watching fully, I might miss something) but if I know it is all subtitles, I should be fine. One of my favorite movies I’ve seen this year was over two hours and subtitled.

But I am soooo bad at Kung-Fu/Martial Art movies. Sure, sometimes the fight scenes are good. But I feel like half of them tell the same story. Especially a story like what Shaolin offers.

A lot of my Shaolin Monk knowledge comes from Mortal Kombat.

So Shaolin is a movie with China and Warlords. Some dude is bad, some bad things happen. Dude goes to a Shaolin Temple after losing everything, to redeam himself. Jackie Chan is in this movie as a smaller role, as the cook for the Monks. Training sequence, attack from gun people for main dude, but everyone wants to protect him still. Eventually finds redemption, a lot of people die, and somehow Jackie Chan is secretly still good at fighting.

But yeah. It all seems unoriginal. It had beautiful scenery, clothing, homes, etc. The fighting was usually interesting, especially the Jackie Chan fight (I guess because it was less serious? You know how he does it).

“What are you talking about? Jackie Chan only does serious fights!” – Response to Review

So yeah. This could be a fantastic martial arts movie. But to me it is just okay. I promise I won’t review these again, hah.

When I first saw the trailer for The Wolfman, I assumed it would be like all of the old werewolf movies, with nothing really new behind it.

Then I realized I hadn’t really seen any actual older werewolf movies, just a bunch of dumb cheesy ones. Looks like I should give the Wolfman a try!

Alright, so maybe my only werewolf movies are Underworld, Van Helsing, and Harry Potter 3. Sue me.
And yes, I will ignore that other one I just reviewed.

The movie stars Benicio Del Toro, a Shakespearean actor who is sent back to his home for his brothers funeral. Some people think it is from the trained dancing bear that the gypsies had (err) and others think a Werewolf (equally implausible, I guess). Wanting to get some answers himself, he goes to the gypsy camp where he is of course hurt by a werewolf, gaining its curse. Now he has to both try and live with his curse, and try to stop the man who killed his brother. His dad is played by Anthony Hopkins, his brother’s lover is Emily Blunt, and Huge Friggan Weaving busts out the mutton chops for a detective role.

The acting in this movie is fantastic. While watching it though I had no idea why a werewolf would go on a crazy rage killing spree. I always figured it was just for food, but it seemed like the werewolves were killing just for killing sake. It could also be explained by people shooting at them, but eh. Who knows.

The special effects and make up were pretty top notch. Makes sense that the film won best make up. I loved the scenery and music too. Not to mention Hugo’s mutton chops.

But overall I thought it was still lacking. Maybe it was the ending, wasn’t my favorite. Didn’t care about the main dude that much either. Probably because I am heartless, but he went for his brothers widow pretty damn quick. Predictable stuff happened also. But the asylum was also pretty damn cool. But still lacking.

Did I mention Hugo’s mutton chops yet? They’re kind of a big deal.

So I came upon this title by accident. I was on Jeremy Sisto‘s imdb page (who is kicking ass on Suburgatory), and saw the title. I immediately went “OH MAN MUST SEE THIS MOVIE!” I was assuming it was some pseudo sequel thing to what every existentialist worth his lone self would know about, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Yes, the movie based upon the play of the same name, both fantastic.

I already feel like this is a mouthful.

This movie has not much at all to do with that movie/play. They do makes some references to the work, but its not at all related (Yet Tom Stoppard apparently told them to go for it). The play/movie is a personal favorite of mine, full of some great quotable gems, so that was a shame.

“We’re actors! We’re the opposite of people!”

So anyways, this movie takes place in modern NYC. Jake Hoffman is forced to be the director of the play, in a theater owned by John Ventimiglia. Everyone else involved is a vampire. They want to do the play that they made up, which is the name of the movie. All the director really wants to do is win back his ex girlfriend, Devon Aoki, from none other than Ralph Macchio! Sisto is barely in the movie, as a cop guy.

Eventually they realize that their version of the play is actually a true story, with a real Hamlet, and involving real vampire’s during Shakespeare’s time. John V goes around performing the play, turning the actors into vampires and audience members around the world. Similarly, the real Hamlet is out there trying to stop him. The only thing that can stop him is the Holy Grail.

Does this sound ridiculous? Because it is.

It is hard to figure out what is going on most of the movie. They had different play sequences throughout, and it was supposed to be all interweaved and surprising, but it just felt clunky and confusing. For all I know this could be some super meta type of movie that I just don’t get, but I don’t want to get it either. The acting was bad and cheesy, and well, just bad overall. It probably would have been better if I just watched the original movie again.

“We can do rapiers… or rape… or both!”