Day: November 13, 2011

Wooo. Another movie in theaters! I don’t like movies in theaters normally. People are there. Yuck. Similarly I tend to like movies way more than normal on a big screen, so I can’t necessarily think straight.

I am pretty sure though that after seeing Immortals the big screen factor didn’t come into play at all.

It hit me like a spear in the head.

The movie starts off with some fake Greek mythology, alright. Fine. Theseus, played by Henry Cavill, is pretty bad ass. That is him with the spear. Mickey Rourke, a King, wants to fuck everything up, find some bow, and release the Titans. With the help of a thief (Stephen Dorff) an Oracle (Freida Pinto) and occasional god tamperings (like Zeus / Luke Evans), they must try to stop the King before he releases the TItans. Or else everyone will die?

First off, for an action movie, there was a whole lot of not action. The main character himself didn’t seem to be that good. He could get the jump on a big group, kill some, and then bam. Get captured. He kept failing against big groups, it wasn’t funny. At least twice. The only amazing things he really did were two one on one fights. He even found the magical bow, and lost it almost instantly. The plot had a lot of holes in it, but if I told about them, it would provide more than one spoiler. But the bow? I guess just by saying it is magical or powerful, it can do anything? Sure it made its own energy bolts. But when he somehow sent arrows so quick four of them hit four targets at the same time. But later? These arrows make powerful explosions that go through stone walls. Way different properties out of nowhere.

So instead of action, they had the bad plot with bad acting. Because of the holes, I kept getting confused at what was going on. Confused may be a strong word, because it was simple. But still. You know.

I also didn’t find the visuals to be good at all. Everything just felt brown. I think a less realistic CGI or something might have helped the movie a bit. Which yeah doesn’t make any sense. The ending? Besides the confusion gained from the plot holes, it just didn’t make overall sense. I cannot tell if they are just trying to set up a sequel, or what.

It does feature some nice God on God action though. Even though this scene also was pretty stupid.

Of course when I first heard of the movie Larry Crowne, I thought of The Thomas Crown Affair and was for some reason disturbed. How dare a main character have a name that is spelled the same and spelled differently. There is no room for that in my movie world. But I haven’t ever seen the latter, just Larry Crowne now. So I guess Larry Crowne is better on that merit alone.

That other movie was a remake? I don’t believe it.

Tom Hanks plays the titular character and he just got fired from his big box store. Why? No college education, can’t advance. Well shit. There is only one solution. Sell a bunch of your valuables, switch to a Scooter, and go to a local college. Take economics, speech, computer classes to get far in the business world, and TAKE BACK THE NIGHT! He can thank Cedric the Entertainer, his lotto rich neighbor the help.

He meets people in school too. Including a scooter gang he gets to join, run by Fez. His teacher for 8am Speech, Julia Roberts, hates her life. Because she is married to Bryan Cranston, and as we know he makes meth. Well, that wasn’t addressed in the movie, but he did like them big titties.

More or less, this is a story of how a guy can start his life over. Getting that knowledge, meeting knew friends, and seducing his college teacher. What? For shame Tom Hanks. She is married.

Half of the reason people take college classes is if their teacher is cool. It is a bonus if that teacher has a good voice to listen to. I think that also explains why so many people are in George Takei‘s Economics class.

If anyone can take Tom Hanks phone away, it is George Takei.

It was an interesting movie. Kind of a feel good ish flick. Happy ending. But nothing in particular was that spectacular about the whole thing. Disappointing in that regard, cause its Tom Hanks! I need some more epic, sir.

You know, the title of the movie is way to easy to joke. It is obviously asking for it. It can’t not be intentional. Good Dick? Gahh.

“Good dick? I know nothing of it. But give me a second and I will find something “great”, baby.”

Alright, so the beginning is a bit creepy. Main dude Jason Ritter is working at a video store. Clearly living the life. A girl comes in, Marianna Palka, rents some porn and leaves. He is INFATUATED with her. He uses the computer to find where she lives to accidentally run into her and ask about coffee. He lies about why he is there (aunt in the complex) and continues to try to ask her out.

She continues to say no. This continues up to a point where he lies about his aunt’s death and for sympathy she invites him in, but even has a knife just in case.

Just in case what? Rape. Holy shit, jokes aside, but Flynn from Tangled may be right! This guy is a creeper and that girl should stab him.

Somehow eventually he pseudo moves in. The girl clearly has no interest in him or sex with anyone, and is super weird. But for some reason this guy is super patient and relentless and doesn’t understand the meaning of no.

The rest of the movie is him trying to, more or less, erode her down like a river, until she likes him too. Also to try and figure out why she is so weird.

I refuse to google “Good Dick” to find a picture of this movie.

Tom Arnold also has a small role near the end, but is a pretty good one.

If you get past all of the weird creepiness, it is an interesting story. I think it tried to be real, but just felt like the opposite. If there is anything I have learned, it is that big romantic movie gestures just get the cops called in real life. But damn it, the ending is so interesting once you find it out! Ahhh. What a dick movie.