Month: February 2012

As a general rule of thumb, I say hooray to all movies based off of graphic novels. As a rule of my pinky, I usually say “Oh damn it, a movie with Megan Fox.”
Thus the overall rule of my hand is that I had no emotion towards Jonah Hex, except one telling me to continue to put it off until I get bored enough to watch it.

She is why we can’t have nice things.

Josh Brolin plays Jonah Hex, also known as the guy who can’t really die. They tried to kill him, but apparently some nice Indian folk brought him back to life. So he also, having spent time being dead, can now talk to the dead. That’s nice. With his touch, the dead come back until he lets go, and its good for interrogating. For some reason its easier to bring back people who have been dead for a longer time.

He was killed for turning his back on former Confederate leader Quentin Turnbull (John Malkovich), so Turnbull and his assistant, Michael Fassbender, killed his family, scarred his face and killed him. Or so he thought! Then Hex killed him back, or so he thought!

Later he is a bounty hunter, living on the DL. Sometimes screwing Megan Fox. But the US government wants to hire him, because Turnbull is assembling a great weapon designed by Eli Whitney, that can destroy a nation on the 100th anniversary of America. Aidan Quinn plays President Grant and Will Arnett a high ranking officer (hah!).

Trick is to not look him in the mouth.

So this movie has a lot of negative stigma behind it. I guess bad acting mostly being why. And it is true, casting choices didn’t make sense. Why is Will Arnett in a “serious” action movie? Or Malkovich. He was the oddest casting for me, as main bad guy. I don’t think it worked at all. The only decent role would be Brolin as Hex. I’d say Quinn as President, but he really didn’t have many scenes.

But interestingly enough I actually found a lot of the action early on great. It didn’t bog me down with a lot of back story at the beginning, but gradually showed it throughout the movie. Was great to get you right into the story. Unfortunately the action by the end was a lot less interesting than the beginning. So poor ending, poor acting. That is a poor movie.

last movie of the Millennium series! The other two reviews are here and here.

Is The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet’s Nest the ending to a great work, or the third addition to something that probably went on wayyy too long.

Apparently she has gone back to her “scene” ways.

There is seriously NO reason to watch this movie without the other two first. What they hell is wrong with you (hypothetical person attempting to do this thing)? But just in case, my plot outline is going to be very general.

After the events of Film 2, Lisbeth (Noomi Rapace) is in the Hospital, with bullets and stuff in her. So is her dad. An attempted assassination attempt on both of them.

Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) still wants to protect her and gets his sister to be her lawyer for the trial. They want to prove that she has had a life of abuse, both from her father and “the man”, leading her to do certain actions. Like blackmailing rapists instead of going to the cops, and trying to kill her dad in self defense.

Assuming they free her of all charges, can she finally “move on” with her life, and become a normal girl?

And why does she think this is the best outfit to wear at court?

To me, personally (and I remind you again, I didn’t understand why the second one was made) don’t understand why this one was made either. It felt like the “what happens after the show” stuff. I need more details there. Lets say you are watching Psych or something, and by the end they catch the bad guy! Usually by them admitting to it (which is good evidence). That case will probably STILL go to trial, as the person will be all pissed off. They then have to go through a lengthy after process, and hopefully that person is eventually put in jail.

Does that part sound as interesting? No. Because we have already seen all the proof, and know what the final verdict should be. They don’t show that stuff because it would be boring.

Well, that’s what the third movie felt like to me. Sure, some other stuff happens too. It better, since it is 2.5 hours long! We find out a little bit more, but the justification for the movie doesn’t seem to be there.

In conclusion, I don’t see the big deal guys.

Plural? Yes.

I watched Death at a Funeral (British version) the other day, and I realized I wanted to see Death at a Funeral (American version) as well. Obviously the British one came first, but I figured they’d be different enough with the same general plot to do two reviews, but no. They pretty much are the same. Some different jokes, but all the same stuff happens. SO ONE SUPER REVIEW (that counts as two, damn it). Also probably my record for most tags. Two ensemble movies in one. Hooray!

And why not start it off with a naked Alan Tudyk on a roof?

So in both movies, the patriarch of the family dies. The main guy (Chris Rock, Matthew Macfadyen) lived with his folks and is an inspiring writer, which is bad because his slightly younger brother (Martin Lawrence, Rupert Graves) already has made a best seller. Jealousy!

We also have their cousin (Zoe Saldana, Daisy Donovan) is bringing her new fiance to the funeral, hoping her own dad will approve of him. This makes the fiance (Alan Tudyk, James Marsden) nervous, and he takes some Vallium to calm down. But it really isn’t Vallium. Her ex is also there (and trying to win her back…Luke Wilson, Ewen Bremner), now a friend of the family, along with another friend of the family (Tracy Morgan, Andy Nyman) who has the unfortunate job of looking out for the wheel chaired uncle (Danny Glover, Peter Vaughan).

Got all that? Too bad. A few problems go wrong, delaying the actual ceremony, which is perfect for the real main plotline. The midget who no one knows turns out to be the secret gay lover of their dad (Peter Dinklage, Peter Dinklage) with picture proof, and threatens to show everyone unless he gets a nice sum since he was left off of the will. Yes blackmail, and midgets.

I am sure I tagged some people and didn’t mention them. Honestly I lost track. Here is Loretta Devine, who you would have guessed was in the American version without looking it up probably.

Somehow, both of these actors naked on a roof was the easiest “same scene” from both movies to find.

So, these movies both feature large ensemble casts, with a few different plot lines so that they can all build up and get crazy by the end of the movie.

But which is better? I have heard from multiple sources that they think the British version is WAY better than the American. They also said this before watching the American though. After watching both though I find that…well they are both okay. I didn’t find one vastly superior to the other. Honestly, I probably would have been fine with either of them if only one of them had to exist!

So watch whatever version you choose, knowing full well that if you choose the British one for any other reason than it being the original, then you are probably a racist.

When I first saw Happy Feet, I loved it, minus the ending. Had an interesting plot, great jokes, some surprise pop culture references, songs/dance, and even some scary moments. Just the end was dumb and preachy, and felt super deus ex. Ending I hated!

I’ve seen it a lot the same, and I still think the same thoughts. That is good.

So what about Happy Feet Two? Well, as long as it doesn’t go preachy, and have a plot other than “baby penguin does something different, isn’t accepted, and eventually is accepted” then hell yeah, lets do this thing.

These penguins are unfortunately “bringing fluffy back”.

Mambo (Elijah Wood) and Gloria (now Pink, since Brittany Murphy died) have a child! Yay! He just isn’t as good at dancing or singing yet (damn it…). Thanks to Ramon (Robin Williams, who also still does Lovelace too) the kids get separated and taken back to his land (where he wants to find love, preferably with Carmen (Sofia Vergara)).

There they find a new penguin that everyone loves. Sven, the flying penguin (Hank Azaria! And German-ish). While they are out and Mambo is looking for them, some ice sheets melt and move around! They crash into each other and Emporer land is now surrounded on all sides by large ice cliffs, and they are trapped in a valley. No way out!

Noah the Elder (Hugo Weaving) is still in charge, and he tries to keep calm with Seymour (Common. That big rapping penguin played by Fat Joe last movie. ANOTHER ACTOR CHANGE!), after figuring out escape is impossible. I would like to note that still having Noah be alive and in charge is weird, since Mambo’s parents are NO WHERE in this movie. I can’t believe that they got old and died, if that old one is still there. They are just ignored then.

Eventually the day is saved, and not by the methods that you might guess. Somehow the power of dance must be involved, after all. They even noted the Deus Ex feel of the last movie, and I thought they were about to fuck me over on that again, but don’t worry, it doesn’t work.

But the real stars of the the movie are Will and Bill the Krill.

I think it’s obvious which one Bill is.

The krill are voiced by Brat Pitt and Matt Damon, respectively. Will is a Krill who wants to get out of the swarm, discover the world, live in the now, become a predator and escape the bottom of the food chain! Bill is his friend who reluctantly goes along with him, trying to bring him back to his senses and is gay?

Yep! I think so, or at least he wants to raise a family with Bill, tons of children, not caring if they are both male. The scene after that he even sings Wham! making it seem very likely that Matt Damon has now played a gay Krill in his life. Definitely a bucket list check off.

But seriously, these two krill are awesome. Their story is woven through the rest of the story, at first you are unsure of why, but once it fully connects at the end, you will see why their journey is overall worth it and integral to the story.

Song wise, there seemed to be a bit less. Only the first song intro featured mash ups. One song in the movie at least was entirely original too, and was my least favorite. The first movie though had a whole lot of songs in the first bit, and then felt like it had nothing until dancing at the end. This one spreads them out a bit more, and the final song is “powerful” and almost made me cry in happiness.

The movie also has a lot more going on with the Elephant Seals, who were pointless in movie one, but also bring out a better ending and a very sad part about 1/3 of the way through.

Hey look. It is Sven! But what dark secrets does HE hold?

The sequel has a lot more plots than the first movie, a change I loved. Thankfully they don’t change who the main character is in this movie, and you know it is still mostly about Mambo. Overall though I felt like the songs in this movie were drastically weaker than the first. Improvement in that area would push the rating to the top, but everything else is great.

Especially the krill.

For world building purposes in movies I generally like it if the characters have last names. Just makes it feel more “Real” to me, or at least gives the false impression that they spent some more time working on the plot.

But sometimes, movies can say fuck character names in general and go a more simpler route. For Faster, we get characters like Driver, Cop, and Killer! Yeah! Fuck names!

Guess which name he gets!

Dwayne Johnson is…the driver. Yes. Correct. He gets out of prison at the start of the movie, and he is mad. So mad that once he gets out of the gate (of course on an abandoned desert road?) he just starts running. He runs to a car, drives said car, and then kills a telemarketer. Damn.

Mike Epps plays the guy who got him the car, and with that car, a list of names of people who helped put him in jail. He was double crossed after a heist with his brother. They shot him in the head! But it ricocheted around his skull in one way, out the other, avoiding his brain, so somehow he survived.

At the same time, the cops Carla Gugino and Billy Bob Thornton (who is of course about to retire) are looking for him/trying to figure it out. Also also Oliver Jackson-Cohen plays the Killer, who is (re?)hired to kill the Driver, before he enacts revenge on all of the people who have mostly changed their lives around.

Like Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who is now a traveling Evangelist. And the last name on the list. But who actually shot him and failed at being an assassin?

And why does BBT look so sad when he is about to retire?

The movie is a pretty simple plot, so it will have to rely on at least decent acting or surprises along the way to keep interest. It kind of delivers on small scales. I think I have heard of people surviving shots to the head the same way. Maybe I have heard of that just in movies though.

I think the ending was decent given the premises too, was acceptable. I also liked that they tried to give the other non-Rock characters some story lines too. I really didnt like BBT or the other cops involvement though. Felt like a weaker plot line of the movie.

But hey. The movie is called Faster. What can you expect. Its not like they are going to one up it with an unrelated movie called Fastest, right?

I could say a lot about this movie, but it is one of the more simpler movies to understand.

Sure some history might help, but Frost/Nixon is about two people. David Frost, and Richard Nixon.

The entire movie is just their floating heads, talking.

But seriously. Frank Langella plays Richard Nixon, who just had the Watergate scandal and has since resigned from being president. Michael Sheen plays David Frost, a British TV reporter who likes to interview people. At the time of the movie I don’t think he was as famous as he is right now. A lot of the fame came from his interview with Nixon, as he was the first reporter to really get a crack at it after the resignation.

Do you want your movie reviews to be a history lesson? Didn’t think so. That is what watching the movie is for.

Eventually the interview happens over a few parts. After the first part, Nixon is walking all over Frost. He is a big time guy, carries a lot of power behind his voice, and can steer the topics his way. But it is up to Frost to man up, so to speak, take control of the interview, and get Nixon to talk about the scandals!

Sam Rockwell and Kevin Bacon are also in this movie, but you shouldn’t be watching it for them.

Here is a picture of the real interviews. Everyone is uglier in real life.

“But Gorgon Reviews, why would I want to watch a movie about two people just talkin’? Not only just that, but two people talkin’ about stuff almost 40 years ago. Fuck the past!”

Well, foul-mouthed reader, they talk pretty good like.

I mean, that might be my whole argument. I was captivated some how by all of it. The sense of history being made (or at least the possibility) and the mental chess match between Frost and Nixon for the debate. Had a lot more than those two, producers, agents, bodyguards, PR people, etc getting in the way too. And money. But just watching the conversations was good enough for me.

I have heard about the Waitress movie for awhile. Mostly positive things. And once I got rid of all the opinions from people who thought I was talking about Waiting…, turns out people still overall liked Waitress. I knew not much about it, just assumed because it was about a woman, that there would be a love element!

This mostly being necessary for a review coming out on Valentine’s Day.

And she’s happy!

Kari Russell plays a waitress in a small town diner. She likes to make pies, and is good at it. Did the whole pie thing since she was a child. She is married to Jeremy Sisto though, who doesn’t treat her right. Doesn’t beat her or anything, but he also just seems to be controlling. Won’t let her have a car, doesn’t care about her pies, and doesn’t seem to “love” her.

But she gets pregnant! Damn it, damn it! She won’t get rid of it, but she wants to leave her husband anyways, maybe win a pie contest. Unfortunately her doctor just retired, and all she is left with in the small town is Nathan Fillion. Who is awkward around her.

So Keri has to deal with putting up her husband, secretly going to a birthdoctor, possibly wanting to tap said doctor, and still make a lot of pies for the shop. Her friends try their best, fellow waitresses Cheryl Hines and Adrienne Shell, but even the owner, played by Andy Griffith, seems to give her a hard time every time he stops in for meals (and PIES).

The movie isn’t really about love or her looking for love. No it is about a woman, who wants to just live her life the way she wants to live it, with the unfortunate side effect of getting pregnant with a man she doesn’t love. Nathan Fillion is a nice doctor, but he might not be the answers she needs either.

Although they make such nice pies together.

I liked this movie a lot. As I just said it was nice to see a movie about an independent woman who is not working towards getting a man the whole time. Everyone in the movie does a great job conveying the small town feel. Even though Sisto’s character is a jerk that you will hate, he also does a great performance.

This must be where Sisto first met Hines, since they both are now in the show Suburgatory together. Connections, also, are one of the more fun things you can do with movies and tv shows.

Overall, great movie, with an ending that isn’t entirely predictable. Yay!

The cover of The Resident makes it look like it involves a stalker of some sort. Probably someone who shares the apartment complex. Awesome. I don’t mind creepy thrillers, they are like a lame horror.

Unless of course this movie decides to make it not too creepy or thrillery…just weird and dumb. Which it does. Damn it.

“In before the ‘rape’ talk.”

The plot is very simple, because well, the movie is very simple. Hilary Swank is an ER doctor, and is breaking up with her boyfriend. She needs a new apartment, finds a big one in a complex that is being reconstructed, with only about one other tenant (Christopher Lee, with maybe the smallest/most pointless role in his career).

Also the price is damn cheap, since she’d have to hear construction noises. Jeffrey Dean Morgan, the owner, isn’t bad looking either. EXCEPT HE IS OBSESSED WITH SWANK AND SPIES ON HER AT NIGHT AND SOMETIMES SNEAKS IN AND TOUCHES HER. ALSO HE MIGHT BE DRUGGING HER TO TAP THAT. Very romantic.

Eventually she finds out, freaks out but not with enough time to tell authorities. Long struggle. Eventually he dies. Movie over.

Before I analyze why I hated it, fun fact, in P.S. I Love You, Hilary Swank loses her husband and takes forever to get over him. Eventually she does, and partially because of some “sexy Irish man” she meets, who is played by, of course, Jeffrey Dean Morgan. From love to rape. It happens.

They don’t even make the “whodunnit” part suspenseful.

This movie is not good. That is an opinion, but I will say it in a stern voice. There is no possibility that the early tampering with Swank is not done by any other character other than the one who does it. Most of the scenes show him sitting in between walls and shaking. All Swank does is take awkward baths and take, well…some abuse. Until she finds out.

I didn’t find it creepy, just weird. I didn’t find it scary, just weird. I didn’t find it good, just stupid. I felt like very little happened. Even tried to show a whole bunch of scenes over, to show how weird the guy is, and it just confused me more than anything.

I award this movie no points and may god have mercy on its soul.

My original interest in watching Cyrus was not because of its all-star cast (exageration maybe. But at least one person in it was in a Best Picture movie, and the other has now been nominated for best supporting actor, so…). Nope, I watched it because it was previewed on another movie I liked, surrounded by previews of other movies I liked. Very simple idea.

You just have to for some reason not skip the previews.

“But if you skip the previews how will you know what to love!?”

John C. Reilly is not Cyrus! No, his character is John. That is convienient. Jonah Hill is Cyrus, be he comes in later.

John is miserable and divorced, has been for years. And now his ex-wife is getting married, and she wants him to come to it, and go out with them to a party to try and meet people. He strikes out on everyone, and bares his heart and soul to one chick, and even she runs away. But not Marisa Tomei. She was eavesdropping and figured she’d give it a go on that drunk guy.

And they have sex! Hooray! They are also super honest about everything. Except that she has a 22 year old son who lives a home (What a loser!) He finds this out on a surprise visit. Tomei is not there, just Cyrus. He shows him his techno, and hey, they talk about the fact that John had sex with his mom. Fun!

The story unfolds weirdly, with the relationship going pretty quickly, but Cyrus seems to be upset, and plots to get John out of the house. Small things, like stealing John’s shoes, lying to his mom, and other tactics that someone who is 22 shouldn’t be up to. John confronts with his ex-wife over all of this, played by Catherine Keener, but refuses to be as honest in his own relationship.

This builds up until a physical altercation at his ex-wife’s wedding, and possibly an end to this fling of a relationship.

Did I mention the techno?!

The movie definitely doesn’t follow the normal format. If you were to stick this idea into a machine to determine if it’d be a success, you’d probably get a yes! But it would also probably assume there was a lot more jokes in the movie. I think about two scenes in the movie I actually found funny. The techno scene, and a late night threatening scene about being knocked out.

Everything else was kinda of blah. Too real, not too funny, not too serious either. Just was, you know, blah.

Ah ha! A Johnny Depp movie! Not only that, The Rum Diary is the kind of prequel to everyone’s favorite movie from 1997, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. That movie and this one were both written by the same guy, and both kind of about his life. The Rum Diary was written in the 60s or something, but not published until after the FaLiLV movie came out.

So unofficially it is a prequel, but stars the same character 10 years before the events in FaLiLV, and has the same actor playing that character. Yes, 14 years later, he is playing the same role, but supposed to be 10 years younger. Go with it.

What a great way to open a movie.

Lets see what I can figure out of the plot. Depp’s character is mad at the US journalism, so he leaves the country and goes to work in Puerto Rico. He finds a PR newspaper, lead by Richard Jenkins, and eventually gets a job. Then he has to do dumb tourist stories.

Eventually he finds Amber Heard and wants her. He also drinks a lot of rum. Unfortunately the woman is married to a shady business man, played by Aaron Eckhart, a real estate guy. He ends up getting mixed in their business and other journalist stuff, that leads to crazy drunken adventures around Puerto Rico. Also maybe some lessons learned about journalism. Not sure.

Puerto Rico has got style, yo.

It is amazing how little I cared for this movie as I watched it. I kept trying to figure out the point of the whole thing. It is in no way at all similar to Fear and Loathing, a movie that I personally didn’t like much, but appreciated how much effort went into it and how great the acting of Depp was. But this didn’t give me that latter satisfaction. Apparently this movie took about 10 or so years to make, after initial rights and development, first with Depp, then someone else, then Depp again. Now I know why it kept sputtering out of control.

Not sure how different it is from the book, or if the book is way better, but this movie on its own is just dumb.