Tag: Jennifer Connelly

Danger Zone? Take My Breath Away? Great Balls of Fire and You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feeling? (Technically)

The original Top Gun had a pretty stacked soundtrack, especially when it had at least two very famous songs that were made for the movie. The latter two already existed, but damn it, we had pilots singing them, so they were memorable too.

I personally hadn’t seen the original Top Gun until a couple of weeks ago. And yet, I knew everything about what happened in the movie. I knew how it would end, I knew who would die (spoilers?), I knew how the volleyball would game. Top Gun has been completely culturally osmosised, which I am going to count as a word here. But really I wanted to finally watch it to make jokes like they do in Flight of the Conchords, how everything is like Top Gun.

Like a lot of people, I went in expecting the sequel film, Top Gun: Maverick, to be utter shit. Sequels several decades later, based on a movie that had a very weak plot, aren’t usually allowed to be good, let alone better. But I guess everyone agrees, Maverick is a better film than the original.

Never get into a four way with jets. Unlike, I guess, you are a jet too?

Remember how Top Gun ended? Maverick (Tom Cruise) said he wanted to stay at Top Gun and teach pilots? Well, apparently that didn’t last long, because he became a test pilot instead, so he can fly experimental new aircraft. He has a need for speed. And for putting his life on the line. But its modern day, and he has to get on with the fact that most of the planes are going to be drones now, and they are wasting money on new pilot planes. Apparently Iceman (Val Kilmer) being one of the main admirals is the only reason he is still on the payroll.

But now he has to go to one final outpost. He has to go back to Top Gun, because he needs to train former Top Gun graduates, most of which are firsts in their class. The best of the best. Even though he crashed and burned as a teacher, he is the only one who they have available left to teach them, as the only one who has similar experience flying under these conditions. It is a complicated plan, to take out a nuclear bomb facility before it is turned online. It involves going fast and low, twists and turns, avoiding anti-aircraft missiles, and some tight up and down maneuvers at the end. Also they have to have two different direct hits on the target, with basically only two shots overall to get both hits. Great.

Maverick, reluctantly agrees, because he also doesn’t want to quit flying, not yet. And he can still have fun with this. But things will sour and overcomplicate when he finds out one of the pilots in the program is Rooster (Miles Teller), son of Goose, whom Maverick still feels responsible for his death even though he was cleared of wrong doing. And for sure, Rooster hates Maverick, and thinks he is going to not go on the mission, even if he has earned it, if Maverick pulls him for guilt.

Lives are on the line, guilt is in full force, and a 60 year old man is going to have to prove he can make some hard decisions this time.

Also starring Ed Harris, Glen Powell, Greg Tarzan Davis, Jay Ellis, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, Lewis Pullman, and Monica Barbaro.

Still legally obligated to post a mustache picture if they show up.

Is Top Gun: Maverick better than Top Gun? Yes. But you have to understand, and this will be hard for a lot of people. Top Gun is not a great movie. It can be memorable, and exciting for the time, but it technically wasn’t even a great movie in the 1980’s even if it made a lot of money. It was a propaganda tool, with a cool soundtrack, and a really, really, dumb plot.

So Top Gun: Maverick should be easily a better film. Does it rely on nostalgia? Yes, it starts off with Danger Zone again. I was worried all the main hits would be replayed, but they only did half of them. One of its issues was taking its time dealing with the fact that the first film ended with him going into teaching, and the sequel clearly not wanting that to be the case, so that he could come back decades later. They had to have him fail and run away, and some other suspicious backstory they crammed in with new actors/actresses over the run time of this film.

I will say, him becoming a test pilot definitely feels a lot more true to his character, so I will give the sequel that. Having to deal with the complicated decision of sending his former best friend’s son to his potential death, or refusing to let him go even if he earned it, was a great decision to grapple with. It did carry a lot more weight than I was expecting for this sequel film.

And yet, some of the decisions in the sequel feel hollow. After all, having a whole film where he is told he needs to know when to let go and to move on, when to let someone else to take the controls and fly, and his character struggling with that acceptance the whole film? Again, makes sense. Buuut, if they throw it all away for One Last Mission™ then did it really matter? It reminded me of the last Bad Boys movie, making something actually interesting with Martin Lawrence being a pacifist, just to get rid of it when convenient and make a generic action film.

Again, Top Gun: Maverick is better than its predecessor. The fight scenes are actually watchable, the maneuvers are exciting, and it is overall more entertaining. That does not make it a top tier film, just an okay entertainment flick.

Third times the charm?

Well, that is a weird phrase to apply to this situation. But it is one I have heard quite a lot.

After all, this is our third Spider-Man actor in 18 years. The problem with that phrase is that it implies the other times were not charming. But damn it, most people still talk highly about Spider-Man 1 and Spider-Man 2, especially the sequel. Just because the third one was a dud doesn’t taint the whole.

And for The Amazing Spider-Man? Shit, I liked the first one, and the sequel was disappointing, but Andrew Garfield was still pretty good as a Spider-Man.

People have just really wanted Spider-Man to go back under some amount of control to Marvel, so that we can see him interact with other heroes. Which is fair. But I want Spider-Man: Homecoming to be just a great movie on its own right, not flashy with in universe references.

I also hope this Spider-Man can just hold everything together.

This film begins with the events of Captain America: Civil War, from Peter Parker’s (Tom Holland) perspective. To see how he got to Europe, his sweet suit, and his life afterwards. His life is to be put on hold, waiting for a new “assignment” from Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), with Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) as his go to man to report any issues or problems.

And this keeps Peter busy. He patrols the streets of Queens in the afternoon/evenings after school, under the guise of a Stark Internship, so that his Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) doesn’t get too concerned. This does put a strain on his social life however. He cancels most of his extracurricular activites, hangs out with his best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) less, and he is even about to miss parts of the Academic Decathlon! Besides being smart and enjoying it, it annoys him more because it is run by Liz (Laura Harrier). But don’t worry, Flash Thompson (Tony Revolori) still picks on him.

Speaking of busy, eventually he runs into some thugs who are selling alien technology weapons they made! Turns out when NYC was fucked over by aliens those 8 years ago, a lot of alien tech was lying about the city. Adrian Toomes (Michael Keaton) was in the salvage business, but Tony Stark in an effort to help the city made his own special Damage Control division that won a government contract to clean up any superhero mess. This puts Toomes out of business and enraged about the rich getting richer. So he decides to keep some of the tech, and with his small band of workers and tinkerer friend Phineas Mason (Michael Chernus), they decide to take salvage and turn it into cash in the form of new, high tech weapons. Hooray for capitalism!

Spider-Man cannot let this happen on his streets, as innocents will get hurt, and apparently this is not a problem that the avengers have to worry about. Oh well, I am sure he can handle some thugs and alien weapon technology and gear no sweat!

Also, unsurprisingly, starring a whole lot of other people! We got a whole lot of classmates (Zendaya, Abraham Attah, Angourie Rice, Tiffany Espensen, Michael Barbieri, Jorge Lendeborg Jr.), Thugs (Bokeem Woodbine, Logan Marshall-Green, Michael Mando), and others (Donald Glover, Kenneth Choi, Hannibal Buress, Martin Starr, Jennifer Connelly).

If you think that list is big, wait til you see Keaton’s personal trainer list!

There are a lot of praises I could sing for Spider-Man, and a lot of them come from story and plot decisions. It isn’t an origin story, because he already exists and we already know it. It does not mean that we don’t get Spider-Man doing things for the first time.

For instance, his first real villain in The Vulture, outside of just petty criminal stuff. We find out that he is not the wall crawler swinging through Manhattan like previous films, but mostly in the much smaller building complexes of Queens. So we have his first time at extreme heights, and we get to see how he handles fighting crime in a suburb, without the ability to swing around with ease.

Speaking of villains, they knocked it out of the park with The Vulture. We get a backstory for Toomes, reasons for his life of crime, reasons for why he feels he is in the right, morally gray shit, we got it all. They gave us what we have been wanting, and it is an excellent villain.

Holland is still good as Spider-Man, but we already knew that from Civil War. The large swaths of side characters fill their niches and no one really feels wasted.

And finally this Spider-Man tries to be very different from the previous iterations. No Gwen Stacy or MJ right away to get you all romantically fluttered, we get LIZ. We get a diverse looking school. We get nerds and a neighborhood that feels like a goddamn neighborhood. And a lot of the characters are new just for this film, with plans to take this film in its own direction, regardless of comics. I give it props.

But strangely enough, I barely laughed in the film. I did a few times, but I was alone. The movie theater was silent, it was no where close to being as wise cracking as I’d imagine a Spider-Man movie to be. I also think it relied too heavily on Iron Man/Happy characters to make sure everyone knew it was fitting in.

And Spider-Man’s suit? Well, it was a bit annoying. Turns out it is super high tech, and most of the known Spider-Man powers aren’t actually his, but suit based. Like Spider-Senses. I am not sure what powers he actually got. Some super strength and acrobatics skills, with some sticking to walls?

It is a decent film, just again, not as great as I had hoped it would be.

No Way. No way at all. This can’t be the theme of every big movie I watch since I’ve had a kid.

But it feels like it is true. Every film is about a guy trying to protect his family and his daughter while everything crumbles apart. Why do films just want to make me feel sad, those bastard films?

American Pastoral of course based on a book that people love, but I never heard of it before it became a movie because I suck. The films with this theme seem to come out every other week, specifically targeting to try and make me cry and think about potentially painful events in the future.

Oh no, what does this dinner scene mean? Where is the daughter? DOES SOMETHING BAD HAPPEN?

It begins from the point of view from some old people at a reunion and the narrator (David Strathairn) finding out that his old hero “Swede” (Ewan McGregor) had just died. He always looked up to Swede, an athletic star, went to the war in WW2, married a beauty queen (Jennifer Connelly) and became a success in the community. He took over his father’s (Peter Riegert) glove factory in Newark, New Jersey, but still chose to live in the country side for his wife to become a small time rancher. That is where they would raise their little daughter and have the best of lives.

After the narrator moved away though, that is when things started to turn and Swede’s life began to crumble. And the whole thing centers around his daughter, Merry (Dakota Fanning), a simple girl with a big heart.

A big heart and a big stutter. Her psychologist (Molly Parker) believes the stutter is a way of forcing herself to have a disability, as her parents are perfect and she could never live up to them. Molly has a big heart though, such a big heart that she just wants to love everything and have peace. This love is so strong that eventually in her teenage years she now seems to hate everything. It is Vietnam and no one seems to care about the lives being lost. They need a revolution and her parents are just living their lives like people aren’t dying all over the world, what the fuck!

She wants anarchy, she wants protests, then people will be safe. That is what her New York City friends are teaching her. Eventually a terrorist attack on a post office in their small town puts their already hectic life into pieces. As explosions tend to do.

Also featuring Rupert Evans as the Swede’s brother, Uzo Aduba as the main assistant at the glove factory, Valorie Curry as a mysterious NYC friend, and Mark Hidreth as an FBI agent on the case.

You can cut the teenage angst here with a knife, and honestly, the teenager would probably like that.

American Pastoral in its heart has a deep and moving story and at points a slightly scary one as well. I had no idea where it was going, except that it would end with heartbreak and fill me will feels.

Despite that, it also felt almost superficial. The cameras were strong and the sets well created, it also felt fake. Despite good acting, the story felt disjointed. The events were important, but they felt like they were lacking some sort of real cohesion to tell the full story.

McGregor did a fine job as a first time director that is for sure. He took what I have been told is a great book and turned it into a probably faithful adaptation. But despite not reading the book it is extremely apparent that it is a situation where the book has to be leagues better because of how much depth is missing from the film. It is obvious that depth is out there somewhere and just not showing itself on the screen.
A decent film, but one that just feels a bit lacking.

I am horrified by this film and yet, underwhelmed.

A score of “religious” movies have come out recently. A month ago we had Son Of God, God’s Not Dead somehow elevated from made for TV B-Movie status to a wide theatrical release and next month is Heaven Is For Real.

But Noah is something completely different. It is directed by Darren Aronofsky and he was given complete directorial control over the picture. That’s right, the guy who directed The Fountain and Black Swan is taking on the Bible.

This won’t be a simple story and in all likelihood, it won’t be like anything you read before.

Hah. The joke implying that I have actually read a book before.

For one thing, the entity that created the world pre-flood is always referred to as “The Creator.” I won’t tell you all the differences because that would ruin the fun.

Let’s just say that the Adam and Eve story is basically the same, and the Cain and Abel happened the same way too. Noah (Russell Crowe) is a descendant of Seth, the third son of Adam, while the vast majority of civilization is a descendant of Cain.

These men have pillaged the world, draining it of its natural resources and animal friends. Noah has tried to protect his family from their corruptness, keeping them to a mostly nomadic lifestyle. Then he gets a vision. He believes the world will be cleansed by water and he must build an ark to save the animals upon it.

But if Man is the problem, can he save others? Is he even allowed to save his family or himself?

Jennifer Connelly plays his wife, Logan Lerman, Douglas Booth and Leo McHugh Carroll are his three sons, Emma Watson his adopted daughter he finds along the way, Anthony Hopkins his grandfather, and Ray Winstone his main enemy.

There is also a very strange massive man wet dance number in the middle.

Here is a pro-tip. Don’t drink a lot of fluids in theaters while watching Noah. It is a movie about a giant flood, which also occurs about halfway through the movie. Given the length of the movie, you might have some uncomfortable feelings before you reach the end.

Since the flood occurs so early, the second half of the movie is mostly human drama aboard the ark. Because of the drama, the ending does seem to drag on a little bit.

I thought Noah was awesome. The movie was visually stimulating. It was beautifully shot and the CGI elements weren’t terrible. The acting from the leads felt great on all accounts. In particular, I really loved the story of how Man came to be from the Creator in six days. It is a famous tale, but the way it was shown from start to finish in this movie was pretty unique.

However, at times I still felt the movie was just a tad bit too long. There are also certainly going to be people upset with the movie due to its loose interpretation of the source material.

Noah was definitely a much better movie than I thought it would be. It told a good story, wasn’t pushy with any messages, had great acting, and was visually pleasing.

One thing the movie could have used? More puns. Just imagine this ending. The family finally makes it to land. The wife says “Now we can spread out and repopulate the earth!” Her husband turns to look at her and says: “Yeah, I Noah.”

Winter’s Tale has the honor of being the only movie released this week of four that is not a remake. No, but it is based on a book that came out from the 1980’s (The three remakes all come from 80’s movies too!).

This one also had the most advertising of the four, with a trailer that just…well, was just weird. It looked messy, or vague. It was either about magic, or religion, or coincidences. Really had no idea going in.

Yo, Colin, why is your hair so weird in this movie?

Winter’s Tale is definitely a hard movie to really describe. But let’s just say some of the basics.

Peter Lake (Colin Farrell) came to America from (German?) immigrants who weren’t allowed in. So they floated him in on a tiny boat.

He grew up on the streets, so he became a master thief, raised by Pearly Soames (Russell Crowe), who now wants to kill him. Apparently Peter isn’t evil enough.

While on the run, Peter decides to rob one last house. There he finds Beverly Penn (Jessica Brown Findlay), a sick girl who is literally too hot. Her sickness is killing her, because she is so hot, she can literally melt the cold winter snow around her. She is so hot, she has to sleep on the roof of her house in a tent, or the whole thing might burn down and kill her. She is so hot, she is a virgin, because sex would be her hotness squared.

Anyways, she is sick, Peter is in love, Pearly wants to kill him or her (he is kind of unsure), people are agents for angels and demons, miracles and chaos, the universe loves everyone, and eventually Peter goes 100 years into the future.

Kevin Corrigan (and later, Kevin Durand, but much shorter time frame) plays a lackey, William Hurt plays Beverly’s dad, Jennifer Connelly is the future adult female, and Will Smith is the man in the very very black shorts, Lucifer!

See? She is wearing white. That’s how you know she is innocent.

A-ha! This movie is slightly religious and magic based! A-ha!

That means nothing to me though. Because to me, this movie was a lot of confusing. Unfortunately anything that might be considered a plot hole or vague area can be wiped away with “magic” which plays a huge deus ex machina element. So I won’t complain about the inconsistencies that I saw.

The acting itself was okay mostly. I thought Connelly was terrible in it though. Thankfully her role was much smaller.

I think the movie wanted to go for this huge, philosophical and magical plot line, but just never reached its extremely lofty goals. I can’t tell if it was meant to be a comedy, but moments had me laughing out loud with how “bad” it all was, including the drawing of the red haired girl that was floating around. The vaguest, most nondescript image ever, leading to such big conclusions.

To me, this just goes to show my point. Colin Farrell is still a 50/50 hit or miss good movie actor. No middle ground, just good or bad.

Darwin Darwin Darwin.

Who would have thought a movie called Creation was a biographical-ish movie about Mr. Charles? Seems pretty silly. But I guess it is about his struggles with discerning natural selection, and his “battle” against Creation.

Alright why not, his life is probably riveting.

Oh, I see what they did there.

Charles Darwin (Paul Bettany) loves him some biology. And family! Especially his daughter, Annie (Martha West). She loves to hear stories, and thankfully he has a whole bunch. Because fifteen years prior, he went on this fantastic voyage to the Galapagos Islands. So since then he has been home, working on his discoveries, and trying to figure out this dang evolution thing.

His wife Emma? She hates this shit. Emma (Jennifer Connelly) is more religious than a Chinese fruit basket, so she doesn’t like the potential implications of the findings of his research. She thinks she will be in heaven and he won’t make it if he publishes the book, and they will be separated throughout eternity.

Turns out also that daughter he loved died awhile ago, weak genes or something, and he is just moping. Doesn’t want to kill god, doesn’t want to make wife mad, but can’t just ignore this stuff. So most of the movie is him trying to properly grieve over the death of his daughter and rekindle his marriage, with some Galapagos island stories, a monkey, and other science.

WILL HE DECIDE TO PUBLISH HIS BOOK THOUGH? I do not know.

Like I said, it is his favorite kid. >.>

Kind of a short plot summary eh? Well I mean, it is pseudo biographical. I think they cut out a lot of his children, and probably just exaggerated how much it affected him. I mean, Charles Darwin, he is a scientist, probably not seeing a ghost of his daughter.

Unfortunately for me, I found this tale to be quite boring. If I wanted a full biography of him, I’d like some stuff as he grew up as well, before his wife, actual life story, not just the important 15 years. I’d also want post book publishing implications.

However much of this is true, I can’t say, but over half of it is just awkward guilt and grieving, so not really what I expected.

I have been told that a Dilemma is having to make a choice between two equally bad scenarios. A dilemma is not just having to make a bad choice or ignore it. My friend wanted me to make that clear for all the readers, but I will leave it up to you to decide if there is any real dilemma then.

But in other news, I have been avoiding this movie because it features prominently the Chicago Blackhawks, as they are in Chicago and fans of the team.

Statistically, they were not fans of them six years ago though.

Vince Vaughn and Kevin James are best friends, have been since college. James is very smart, knows all he can about numbers and statistics, and cars. Vaughn is a great talker, speech maker, and can make any sale. Together the have at dream. To make electric cars less lame, and more reminiscent of the muscle cars of the 50s and 60s. Feel that vroom in your acceleration, while also not damaging the environment. They are in the middle of making a real prototype, and if they succeed, they get a long term contract, with long term benefits. Needless to say, this is a very stressful time.

James is also married to Winona Ryder, together for almost 20 years, while Vaughn is just dating Jennifer Connelly. He wants to propose, but he has a hard time getting to that point. He also used to be addicted to gambling, which has damaged his relationships in the past, including this one a few years prior.

But when Vaughn catches Ryder having an affair with a very tattoo’d Channing Tatum? He initially wants to tell his friend right away, but he is already at a highly stressed point and if anything else happens he thinks he might explode. So instead he confronts Ryder to tell him, but apparently he also once slept with her in college (pre the dating, but still) and never told James. So she is prepared to tell James that the affair was actually with Vaughn, and he has been stalking her for 20 years, trying to get more.

Well thats weird. So Vaughn needs proof first of her affair, and then he can tell his friend! But with his sneaking around, everyone thinks he is gambling again, both men having lots of trouble working for the contract, and even James and Connelly have their own secrets! (No, not another affair). Oh, and Queen Latifah is in this movie too, if only to say things to make everyone feel uncomfortable, like “lady wood”.

Shit gets real.

Remember when I said shit gets real? That is because this movie changes its idea of comedy throughout. It is marketed as a buddy slapstick comedy, and involving cheating women. This certainly happens in the beginning, but a large portion of the movie is much closer on the darker comedy level. Then some more slapstick stuff. I think it would have been much better if it stuck to one (preferably the darker route) than back and forth. My mood kept changing, and it felt weird.

But also a lot of the sillier stuff I didn’t find to be that funny. There is a long scene at a club where Vaughn refuses to dance with his woman, because he doesn’t dance. But then does a large silly dance with James instead. Talk about bad dating material.

I thought it was severely lacking in the humor department overall, but a weirder thing happened while watching. I cared about the characters. What?

9, or by its other title of “Little Big Planet: The Movie” is probably the best looking “animated” movie I have seen on Blu-Ray. Too bad the ending sucked.

Only 10 voice actors were needed for this movie, because as expected, a post apocalyptic film wouldn’t have many characters (I’m looking at you Book of Eli). The main doll is voiced by Elijah Wood, who is much more enjoyable at talking to dogs than being a hobbit. It also features Jennifer Connelly and John C. Reilly.

“Why yes, I do enjoy the path my career has taken post LOTR.”

But the ending is not at all what I expected. Here is a spoiler! When 9 returned to the first room to see the video, he finds outthat the Machine is lacking a human soul. Wait a minute, aren’t all of the dolls made up of a human soul? Yes. Before 5 dies he says the other eaten dolls are still alive, but just in the machine. Huh.

Maybe it is just me, but how does that not make it seem like they were made to be sucked into the machine, so that he won’t be corrupt and can actually make a better future/rebuild the world? Instead, he somehow interprets all of that as a “This is how we can destroy the machine!” leaving just 4 stichpunks and some rain after they succeed. WTF?