By Chris Pandolfi

A Romcom for Auld Lang Syne

Garry Marshall’s New Year’s Eve is ostensibly a sequel to last year’s Valentine’s Day, a film I was very critical of for its surplus of subplots, overabundance of characters, and ceaseless intercutting. I described it as “a romantic comedy with Attention Deficit Disorder.” I could easily make the same argument for New Year’s Eve, and yet I feel much more forgiving this time. It’s mushy, routinely implausible, a little too coincidental, and often times highly predictable, and yet I found the subplots a lot easier to keep track of, I could invest in more of the characters, and in some instances, I was genuinely touched. Yes, this is yet another instance of me going easy on a romantic comedy. If you’ve read my reviews, then it’s your own fault for not seeing this coming a mile away.

Unabashed star vehicles, both films are a series of intercut vignettes taking place over the course of one day. All feature a number of characters whose lives are, to some degree, interconnected. But there are some key differences. For one thing, whereas Valentine’s Day took place in Los Angeles, New Year’s Eve takes place in New York City. This makes perfect sense. Where else to be on the last day of the year than in New York, specifically Times Square? Furthermore, although the film once again features Jessica Biel, Ashton Kutcher, and Hector Elizondo (a veteran of Marshall’s films), they play different characters than the ones they played in Valentine’s Day. The biggest difference is that, while the previous film focused almost exclusively on romantic relationships, this one expands its horizons to include family and friends.

The best place to start is with Claire Morgan (Hilary Swank), who has recently been appointed Vice President of the Times Square Alliance. Quite simply, her job is to make sure the ball in Times Square drops on schedule. She wants to make a good impression, although she’s understandably edgy. There to support her is her friend, a security guard named Brendan (Chris “Ludacris” Bridges). As would be expected, things don’t go smoothly; as the ball is being raised into position, several of its 3,000 LEDs suddenly go out. Everything grinds to a halt. Claire is forced to make a speech to the spectators on Times Square, and while it was a bit sentimental, perhaps even out of place, it was nice to hear. After a while, it becomes apparent that the only one who can fix it is a Russian electrician named Kominsky (Elizondo), who everyone refers to in nervous whispers.

Meanwhile, a professional caterer named Laura (Katherine Heigl) is busy preparing for a New Year’s Eve bash. Into her life reenters a music superstar named Jensen (Jon Bon Jovi), who’s set to perform at a concert in the middle of Times Square. The two were supposed to get married a while back, but he got cold feet at the last second and split. He has been regretting his decision ever since, and he wants her to give him a second chance. Understandably, Laura isn’t as ready to put the past behind her. Hovering around Jensen like a cat in heat is Laura’s sous chef, Ava (Sofia Vergara). Her bouncy enthusiasm is exaggerated enough to be amusing but not so exaggerated that she seems like a hyperactive child.

And now, a quick rundown of the remaining subplots. A courier named Paul (Zac Efron) helps a timid woman named Ingrid (Michelle Pfeiffer) cross off items on a list she has made. Paul’s best friend, a lovelorn New Year’s hater named Randy (Kutcher) becomes trapped in an elevator with a young woman named Elise (Lea Michele), one of Jensen’s backup singers. A single mom named Kim (Sarah Jessica Parker) must find her runaway teenage daughter, Hailey (Abigail Breslin), who desperately wants to have a New Year’s kiss with a boy from school that she likes.

A man named Stan (Robert De Niro) lies in a hospital bed dying of cancer; his final wish is to be taken to the roof so that he can watch the ball drop one last time. At his side is a nurse named Aimee (Halle Berry). A man named Sam (Josh Duhamel) gets stranded in Connecticut after a wedding and is forced to hitch a ride with a family in an RV. He has to make it to New York City in time to give a speech, and possibly reunite with a woman he met on New Year’s Eve a year ago. Finally, two pregnant couples – one played by Biel and Seth Meyers – are on the verge of delivery; it becomes a competition, as the first to give birth on New Year’s Day with a $25,000 cash prize from the hospital. A few of these characters are connected in some way, although I leave it to you to discover how.

Of all the film’s subplots, the one I liked the least was the one with Biel and Meyers. I don’t know – something about turning impending birth into a contest doesn’t sit well with me. Without it, however, we would not have Carla Gugino, which in turn would mean the loss of an outtake played during the end credits. To describe it would only ruin its hilarity. As for the other subplots, they’re about as good as they can possibly be given their brevity and innate implausibility. I’ve long since learned to expect this from romantic comedies, which is why I’ll often accept them for being exactly what they are. New Year’s Eve imparts no wisdom about life and love. It’s just what it is: A lighthearted, uncomplicated, feel-good date movie. Need it be anything more?

Although Chris never officially studied film, film theory, or even journalism in college, his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Creative Writing has taught him to appreciate story, character, and the imagination – all aspects that apply to the movies, and if there’s anything his years of living in Los Angeles has guaranteed him, exposure to movies would be at the top of the list. He has always appreciated the art of filmmaking, but it wasn’t until 2006 that he began writing reviews on various websites for new releases. Still residing in L.A., his reviews can be read at his website, http://www.atatheaternearyou.net.

Article Source: Chris Pandolfi
Movie Review: New Year’s Eve

By Crista White

Generally speaking, any movie where the lead male character also plays the part of a woman is a really bad idea. With the exception of ‘Tootsie’ and ‘Mrs. Doubtfire’, I stand by this statement EMPHATICALLY. I don’t think we need to look any further than the recent ‘Madea’ phenomenon–which, by the way, I am at a loss to understand–to prove this point. And let’s now give Adam Sandler a warm welcome as we add him to the list of contenders in ‘Jack and Jill’.

THE GOOD: The movie starts out with some promise as we meet several sets of twins who share their feelings of growing up with a double entity, with some of the comments being laugh out loud memorable. Then we segway into meeting Jack (Adam Sandler), a big time ad executive living with his wife (Katie Holmes) and their 2 children in a stunning Los Angeles mansion. His current biggest problem consists of trying to get Al Pacino to star in a Dunkin’ Donuts commercial….until the arrival of his twin sister Jill (also played by Sandler), which puts everything into perspective. Jill is, as you can imagine, not much of a looker, but top that off with a heavy Brooklyn accent, really bad clothes and makeup, and an obnoxiously loud voice, and you have—well, what you have is an episode of Jersey Shore, really—but more to the point, it’s a disastrous holiday visit that Jill is spending with Jack and his family. What starts out as a 2 day nightmare quickly escalates into what I’m sure Jack felt was FOREVER…..I know that’s how it began to feel for me personally after about 45 minutes. To be fair, there were some honestly funny moments, although they rarely came from the expected sources. It’s not that I dislike Adam Sandler, per se. But I don’t really buy into the mentality that something is funny just by virtue of him showing up for it. He had his moments here and there, but what really got my attention was the hilarious cameo by Johnny Depp—yes, you read that right, he is actually in this movie; believe me when I tell you that I will be covering THAT point in-depth coming up. Not only was he eye candy as always, but he got one of the biggest laughs in the movie from me. Another pleasant and unexpected surprises was watching Al Pacino getting jiggy with it in a dance scene. How much they had to offer Don Michael Corleone to move like that is probably beyond mortal comprehension.

THE BAD: We have a lot to cover in this section, so let’s get started, shall we? First of all, I CANNOT comprehend how anyone managed to talk megastars like Depp and Pacino into appearing in this movie! Are they BFF’s with Sandler? Are they edging their way towards bankruptcy and need some spending cash? Have they decided that they are so well loved and respected as actors that no one will care if they appear in a stinker now and then? Please help me understand it. There were plenty of other cameos in the movie that I didn’t question AT ALL—for Jared from Subway, and Vince the ShamWow guy, this movie was probably the best they could hope for. Even David Spade, who was dressed up as a skanky woman probably felt like this was a high point. But Depp and Pacino?? Payment for something was being redeemed here somewhere, mark my words. The other glaring problem with this movie was the “Adam Sandler in drag” thing. Yes, I realize it’s comedy and really, what makes an uglier woman than a man with a wig and spandex? It just felt too over the top, and, as much as the writers want you to see Jill as a good hearted, misunderstood, and underappreciated human being, all you can focus on is her lack of social etiquette and that grating whiney voice. And so yes, when Al Pacino not only takes notice of her but becomes obsessed with making her his one and only, it’s a tough sell. Something tells me that if they had just cast a slightly homely woman to play the part, the believability factor would have skyrocketed, and it might even have been funnier.

THE UGLY: Although there’s certainly nothing enjoyable about seeing a beautiful man like Johnny Depp wearing a Justin Bieber t-shirt, the clear winner in this category goes to Jill for her first experience with eating Mexican food. Lots and lots of Mexican food. Please, don’t make me explain this nightmare to you in any greater detail.

This film clearly panders to anyone who thinks bodily functions and racial stereotyping are the hallmark of comedic greatness, so if you have a 10 year old boy living with you–or your husband just acts like one–by all means, make an evening of it. Otherwise, save it for a rental night when you are looking for some lowbrow humor–and the need to see Al Pacino bust a move.

The Trophy Wife gives this 2 1/2 trophies.

Jack and Jill has a running time of 91 minutes and is rated PG for crude and sexual humor, language, comic violence and brief smoking.

http://www.squidoo.com/trophywifetwocents

Get a trophy wife’s view of things!

Article Source: Crista White
Movie Review: Jack and Jill

Movie Review: The Descendants

By Chris Pandolfi

It’s Hawaii, but It’s Not Paradise

The Descendants, adapted from the novel by Kaui Hart Hemmings, shows that people can always surprise us, no matter how well we think we know them. It tells the story Matt King (George Clooney), who may live in Hawaii but doesn’t live in paradise. His wife, Elizabeth (Patricia Hastie), lies in a coma in a Honolulu hospital following a boating accident; only after finding out that she will never reawaken, only after deciding to take her off life support, does he finally learn that she had been cheating on him. He found out from, of all people, his seventeen-year-old daughter, Alexandra (Shailene Woodley), who fought with her mother after catching her with another man. Even now, as she lies in a hospital bed with her mouth agape and an air tube sticking out of her throat, Alexandra remains angry and rebellious – a boarding school party girl who’s first seen as a belligerent drunk.

The details of the affair are for the most part not discussed. The best we get is a close friend telling Matt that Elizabeth was unhappy in the marriage. We, of course, will never know what share of the blame she deserves. It is clear, however, that Matt has been distant from his family. If he were engaged, it wouldn’t be a matter of missing the telltale signs of an affair, which are very hard to hide; it would be a matter of her not wanting to cheat on him at all. He’s a lawyer by trade, and a successful one at that. Despite this, he isn’t one to let himself or his family spend money recklessly. According to his opening narration, Elizabeth considered this stinginess. He considers it the best piece of advice his father gave him: Give them enough money to do something, but not so much that they do nothing.

He never had to be so actively involved in the life of the younger daughter, ten-year-old Scottie (Amara Miller), who seems understandably confused by it all. He was always the backup parent, the understudy. Now that Elizabeth is dying, he has no choice. Although his primary reason for retrieving Alexandra from boarding school was to give her the chance to say goodbye to her mother, there’s no escaping the fact that he also wanted help raising Scottie. He even tells her at one point that he has no idea what to do. I was torn between admiring his honesty and wondering why he got married and had children in the first place. I would not classify him as a workaholic, but he’s definitely not a family man. Even during the periods where he gets along with his children, it’s obvious that the connection is weak.

Matt has more on his plate than the impending death of his wife. He’s the trustee of his family’s ancestral lands, a beautiful patch of virgin soil where Elizabeth and Alexandra used to go camping. He’s under pressure to sell the land, which will be developed into a luxury resort and commercial complex. Obviously, Hawaii doesn’t have enough of those already. It’s a family affair, with most of those involved being his cousins. The most prominent is Hugh (Beau Bridges), with the long, windblown hair and a vocabulary partially influenced by surfer dudes. They’re all the descendants of a Hawaiian princess and a missionary, who married sometime in the nineteenth century. Many of them feel entitled and would like Matt to make the sale. The select few that don’t are pretty much in line with the entire population of Hawaii.

Eventually, Matt learns the name of Elizabeth’s lover and decides to confront him – and allow him the opportunity to say goodbye to Elizabeth. So begins a cross-island search for a realtor named Brian Speer (Matthew Lillard), whose wife, Julie (Judy Greer), could not be sweeter. Along for the trip are Scottie, Alexandra, and Alexandra’s friend, Sid (Nick Krause). Sid has the appearance of an idiotic beach bum, and indeed, he possesses the uncanny ability to say the wrong thing at the wrong time. Case in point: He’s punched by Elizabeth’s perpetually angry father (Robert Forster), who can never address Matt or Alexandra without resorting to personal attacks. That being said, Sid understands the situation better than Matt gives him credit for.

One of the strengths of The Descendants is that it doesn’t have an emotional arc. It runs the gamut from solemn to hilarious to heartbreaking to inspirational, much like life itself during times of stress and uncertainty. The best scenes all take place in Elizabeth’s hospital room, where various characters have one-sided conversations of surprising depth and power. What they and the rest of the film so expertly demonstrate is something so true and yet so often glossed over in the movies: People are imperfect and complex. When tragedy fractures a family, there will inevitably be a long and difficult process of healing. There is no one way to go about it, and there certainly isn’t a fixed time for everything to work itself out. There’s no guarantee that anything will work out at all. But if there’s love somewhere within, perhaps it’s possible for life to go on.

Although Chris never officially studied film, film theory, or even journalism in college, his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Creative Writing has taught him to appreciate story, character, and the imagination – all aspects that apply to the movies, and if there’s anything his years of living in Los Angeles has guaranteed him, exposure to movies would be at the top of the list. He has always appreciated the art of filmmaking, but it wasn’t until 2006 that he began writing reviews on various websites for new releases. Still residing in L.A., his reviews can be read at his website, http://www.atatheaternearyou.net.

Article Source: Chris_Pandolfi
Movie Review: The Descendants

Movie Review: Killer Elite

By Joel Massieand Mike A. Massie

More intricate than a typical Jason Statham actioner, Killer Elite successfully maintains a surprising degree of intrigue and intensity, not through an overly clever storyline, but with an air of unpredictability within its characters. It’s obvious that nothing will turn out the way it seems, but with a cast comprised of so many vicious killers, keeping track of which ones are the real heroes becomes an entertaining quest. While the plot bogs itself down from time to time with an abundance of twists and a location change every five minutes, the seasoned actors will hold your interest – at least until the next adrenaline-filled action sequence can take over.

The past has a way of catching up with you. No one knows this better than Danny Bryce (Jason Statham), a former mercenary who’s forced out of retirement to save his old mentor Hunter (Robert De Niro). When an exiled oil sheik kidnaps Hunter, Danny must carry out the tyrant’s request – track down and kill the three British S.A.S. officers responsible for the murders of his sons. Gathering his old partners Davies (Dominic Purcell) and Meier (Aden Young), Bryce begins his lethal task while Spike (Clive Owen), the equally exacting enforcer of the secret watchdog society “The Feather Men”, attempts to stop him (this movie is based on Ranulph Fiennes’ novel The Feather Men, and not the 1975 Sam Peckinpah movie, The Killer Elite).

Like The Bank Job, Killer Elite is one of the least Jason Statham-like Jason Statham movies produced so far, thanks to a complex story, sinister political undercurrents, the slightest bit of a nonfiction basis (at least a few of the names are real), and strong supporting roles. An extremely protracted fistfight in a darkly lit hospital, where both lead characters take a tremendous beating (but manage to shake it off in the very next scene), impressive stunts (including the ever popular parkour), and destructive car chases ensure that the fundamental aspects viewers expect from Statham are still present. It’s actually unfortunate that he can’t quite rid himself of those inclusions, although his acting abilities probably couldn’t singlehandedly support a serious drama.

“I’m done with killing,” nobly states Danny, bearing his true self as a mercenary with a conscience, a hitman with a heart of gold. Rather than observing the effects death and carnage have on trained assassins, like Munich (with a similar political tie-in), Ronin (also starring De Niro), or more recently, In Bruges, this espionage film prefers to have characters describe their feelings to the audience. It’s blatant and unconvincing when Danny is scripted to explain that killing is simply his occupation and that it doesn’t define his ethos or disposition. These tired themes weigh heavily on the fun of the adventure sequences, which already take a backseat to the slow but nonstop chase, hunt, and plotting of hit list targets; when De Niro is given a chance to off a few baddies, it’s to the sound of applauding fans. It’s obvious what sparks enthusiasm from target audiences. Killer Elite does boast hostage situations, secret British societies, spy games, government conspiracies, tricky assassinations, covert operations, a partially sympathetic antagonist, and trigger-happy operatives – all the ingredients for an entertaining thriller – but little of it is unexpected.

- The Massie Twins (GoneWithTheTwins.com)

The Massie Twins are identical twin film critics who have been professionally reviewing movies full time for over 5 years, appearing on TV, radio, online and in print. They are members of the Phoenix Film Critics Society and the Internet Film Critic Society and their work can be seen at GoneWithTheTwins.com.

Article Source: Joel Massie
Movie Review: Killer Elite

By James W Farmer

15 – 92mins – Horror/Thriller – 26th August 2011

The first Final Destination (the one with the plane) was a very original piece of work that had most of us enjoying some horror and gore in a novel and new way. By the time the second came out (the motorway pile up) in 2003 it could still be classed as a popcorn movie but they really raised the ingenuity of the death scenes making it a reasonable way to waste an hour and a half. By number 3 (roller coaster) and 4 (Nascar) I didn’t see the point in them anymore as you had to sit through an identical plot for 5/6/7 death scenes that, if truth be told, were not great. So when I heard the announcement of a fifth, I really didn’t get it. Perhaps they are jumping on the 3D bandwagon like everyone else?

As expected it duly delivered not a lot in the way of entertainment. In Final Destination 5, a group of co-workers set off for a weekend of team building exercises. However on the way to their destination, a bridge that they are crossing collapses and kills all of them. Unbeknownst to the audience this was just a premonition of the event (ironically I never saw it coming…) and after a commotion Sam (Nicholas D’Agosto) manages to convince some of his fellow employees to get off of the bus. The bridge then collapses and their lives are saved. Over the next few days though the survivors start to die in strange circumstances as Death tries to restore order to the world.

The only way I thought it might work as a rehashed concept was if they immediately got into the story of the survivors trying to live but it is a good 20 minutes before the bridge collapse and even longer before they realize that Death is stalking them. The trailer also hints at if they kill someone else then they will steal the time their victim had left and balance out the books. Unfortunately although playing its part in the plot, so much more could have been done with this idea and it felt rather wasted.

The problem is that with no story to tell due to its appearance four times before (and lets face it if you are going to watch Final Destination 5 then there is a strong probability that you have already seen some or all of the prequels) the film is relying on the death scenes to drag it to above average movie status.

This film leaves me asking myself what’s the reason for watching it? I already know what’s going to happen and I basically know how it is going to end so the only reason to go and watch the film is purely for the death scenes which are a mixed bag. On the positive, they do remain a challenge to work out how the characters might die with Steven Quale throwing in many varied possibilities and it also leaves you with a bit of suspense and that cringe worthy ‘ooo that looked like it hurt’ feeling coursing through your body. However the scenes never live up to the standards set in previous films and I don’t think any would make my top 10 Final Destination death scenes list. Given that you have to sit through the writers setting up the movie and trying to make us care about the characters, it hardly seems worth it. Why not just give us a 10 minute film with all the deaths to save wasting more time than is necessary.

It is clear that the 3D factor was a large reason in the return of this movie and it certainly goes over the top during the film especially in the opening credits which are 3 minutes of things being throw at you. As a person who does not yet see the point in this 3D malarkey, the effects based around this concept are pointless when watching it in 2D which I think will be a large contingent of the audience so why do it?

It never captures the enjoyment or even black comedy (think BBQ death at the end of the second) factor that the first two had and when compared to 3 and 4 well, they are all as equally poor so the less said the better. If you feel like going to watch this then may I recommend choosing something else to save you from wasting your time.

PS. Has Death never heard of a heart attack?

Rating: D-

For further reviews feel free to check out: http://www.fanaticalaboutfilms.com

Article Source: James W. Farmer
Movie Review: Final Destination 5

Street Style of 'Black Swan' Star Mila Kunis

By Tess Ferrton

Whether wandering the streets of Los Angeles on her own time or shot between filming on her latest film, Mila Kunis is the epitome of casual cool. Often seen in jeans and a t-shirt, the doe-eyed beauty has a fashion style that not only suits her well, but inspires fans to don the worn-in look as well.

Keeping it Short

Typically caught running errands Kunis is often spotted in short jean shorts in a light wash. When the temperatures don’t agree, she is even more often seen in cropped boyfriend jeans in a light wash with distressed patches and rips along the hips, thighs and knees. This look is easy enough to emulate. The super-comfortable boyfriend jeans are still here for another go around. If you already have a pair, you’re set, if you don’t, now’s the time to pick up a pair.

On Set

From still shots of Kunis on set, her wardrobe is much dressier. Her film wardrobe style may not be her own, but it still looks fantastic on her. A few notables are a pair of very tight dark wash skinny jeans that really look like jeggings. Paired with nude-tone heels and a nude color blouse and she’s dressed up in a flash. Another look seen on Kunis is the now back in style flair jeans. She wore them forever on That 70s Show and now she’s doing them again, even if it is for a film. The last trend-worthy fashion seen on Kunis is the skinny jean cargo pant in army green. When they first became a trend they were cropped and paired with heels, now they’re full length, but still super skinny to avoid bulk and tucked into boots.

This laid-back spotlight shunner has an equally no-fuss style to call her own. For an easy guideline, opt for no-fuss pieces that are fitted, yet roomy enough for maximum comfort. Also, solid, simple pieces take precedence over too-detailed, one-of-a-kind pieces. It’s California-chic in a nutshell.

Tess Ferrton is a fashion lover and personal shopper with a flair for finding the perfect jeans.

Article Source: Tess Ferrton
Street Style of ‘Black Swan’ Star Mila Kunis

By Matthew John Campbell

Fright Night 2011 is a remake of a cult 80′s horror film where teenager Charlie Brewster spends most nights watching His favourite show Fright Night hosted by his hero Peter Vincent played by (Roddy McDowell).

Whilst watching one night with his girlfriend Amy he witnesses strange goings on next door, and after some investigating finds out new neighbour Jerry played by (Chris Sarandon), is a vampire responsible for a some unexplained disappearances.

Charlie try’s to tell best friend Evil Ed the school nerd about it and girlfriend Amy, but neither believe him so he turns to the police and after calling on the new neighbours they to put it down to an over active imagination.

Jerry try’s to warn off Charlie, but he turns to the one person he thinks will believe him Vincent and at first even he is reluctant but eventually comes to the aid helping Charlie, after Jerry goes after ED and Amy.

Fright Night was and probably still is one of the better vampire horrors around, the special effects at the time where good in an era that did not have multi-million dollar budgets, it also has comedy linked in with the horror that gives it that little extra where one moment you may be laughing and the next a little terrified maybe.

Fright Night 2011 follows the original in a fashion in that all the characters seem to be named the same but Charlie s girlfriend Amy played by British Actress “Imogen Poots” is an exchange student and Charlie is popular after ditching best friend evil Ed who is the brains this time around it seems.

Ed is the one who points out to Charlie about the disappearances and whilst at first he does not believe it when Ed says Charlies new neighbour Jerry played this time around by (Colin Farrell) a good choice of bad guy in my opinion is a vampire, he changes his mind after doing some investigative work of his own.

The role of Peter Vincent this time around is played by British actor (David Tennant) and he is a Las Vegas magician come supernatural vampire killer who Charlie turns to as a cat and mouse game plays out between Jerry and Charlies, girlfriend and mother played by (Toni Collette).

Fright Night 2011 looks promising if the trailer is anything to go by, the film seems to have a more updated darker theme to it than the original but as with all classic 80′s remakes I will wait until I have seen Fright Night 2011 before I actually judge on its quality.

A good part of the trailer is when Ed tells Charlie that his neighbour Jerry is a vampire and he responds that Jerry is a terrible name for a vampire

Matthew Campbell

http://synyster-reviews.com/Welcome/

A Movie/TV review site but also about anything and everything.

Article Source: Matthew John Campbell
Fright Night, 2011: A Remake

Watch more free documentaries

I Love Trash is a documentary about dumpster diving. Two friends decide to do an experiment in trash. They rent an unfurnished apartment and arrive with only the clothes they are wearing and a flashlight. They decide not to buy any things for 3 months and instead to find all their needs in the trash. They furnish their apartment lavishly. They eat decadently. They dress sharp, and create beautiful art, all from the trash.

Movie Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

By Joel Massieand Mike A. Massie

After all the theatrical features, multiple TV shows, documentaries, remakes, comics, action figures and more, having all seemingly fizzled out by the early 2000s, it’s odd that 20th Century Fox would try and reboot this franchise with a prequel – of sorts. While the film certainly isn’t necessary, it attempts to fill in the details (as opposed to bridging a gap) on the uprising of an intelligent ape takeover of Earth. To anyone unfamiliar with the major ideas in the Planet of the Apes series, this new chapter will make little sense and seem largely pointless, especially as it ramps up to the need for another film – one that, if made, would probably be far more exciting.

Dr. Will Rodman (James Franco) is on the verge of a revolutionary medical breakthrough at the Gen-Sys lab. His new gene therapy drug ALZ-112 has the potential to cure Alzheimer’s disease, which he desperately wants to produce for the sake of his father (John Lithgow) who suffers from the affliction. Testing on chimpanzees goes awry, and a dozen apes are euthanized to halt research. But Will manages to save a newborn chimp to raise as his own, named Caesar (as in Julius), which matures rapidly thanks to residual experimental chemicals passed on from his mother.

Over time, Caesar continues to advance mentally, doubling his IQ astonishingly rapidly. He even learns basic sign language for communication and wears clothing (vestments he retains through the entire movie that raises plenty of questions that are never addressed). His upbringing still leaves time for romantic proceedings for Will with an oddly well-informed animal doctor, Caroline Aranha (Freida Pinto). As Caesar becomes more aware of the morally corrupt events taking place around him, he lashes out at a neighbor, which lands him in a court-ordered, abusive ape sanctuary. His integration into the new facility is directly equated to human prison, with initiations, gang fights and misuse of power. It’s here that he fully realizes the brutal conditions of human supremacy and conjures a plan to overthrow his captors.

Don’t mess with Mother Nature or the animal kingdom. Rise of the Planet of the Apes appears to be delivering that message, effectively creating a sympathetic hero in the increasingly bitter Caesar. It’s difficult not to pity the monkeys, especially when their leader is bestowed with enough intelligence that reducing him to a pet or property seems inhumane. Ethical questions and responses to animal testing, treatment and housing are all provoked. Toward the conclusion, the film demonstrates how one determined creature can rise above the ranks, organize compatriots, and overcome an enemy with superior intelligence, firepower and technology. But with such a finite number of apes in San Francisco, it still feels unrealistic for the sheer masses of human soldiers to be so nonthreatening. At least the primates possess the surprise factor.

Impressively, the movie ends on a satisfactory note, despite the plot existing solely to build to a known outcome (or another new Apes movie, depending on the box office results). It’s unfortunate that the use of nothing but computer-generated monkeys still can’t fool the human eye, never appearing entirely believable in movement or appearance. Perhaps Hollywood should realize that something about good old-fashioned ape costumes never loses its B-movie appeal.

- The Massie Twins (GoneWithTheTwins.com)

The Massie Twins are identical twin film critics who have been professionally reviewing movies full time for over 5 years, appearing on TV, radio, online and in print. They are members of the Phoenix Film Critics Society and the Internet Film Critic Society and their work can be seen at GoneWithTheTwins.com

Article Source: Joel Massie
Movie Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

Movie Review: The Change-Up (2011)

By Joel Massieand Mike A. Massie

The Change-Up jumps right into bizarre, foul humor to lure audiences in with pure shock. CG babies are employed for uncomfortable laughs, especially as one unloads his bowels into the mouth of an unsuspecting father or rapidly beats his head against the bars of a crib like something out of The Exorcist. Bathroom jokes are taken to the extreme, hoping that raunchiness will smoothly replace cleverness. So too is comedy involving children, which practically borders on child abuse (such as teaching jailyard justice to a little girl and allowing babies to toss around butcher knives or climb into blenders). The trick is all too apparent. But with a plot resembling Freaky Friday for adults, the R-rated laughs are necessary for uniqueness – clearly, the story barely possesses any.

In Atlanta, Mitch Planko (Ryan Reynolds) is something of a failure, having never grown up, living as a high-school dropout in a teen-oriented bachelor pad, fighting bums for furniture, wielding samurai swords for fun, smoking weed, and spouting vulgarities. He’s a man-child, disrespects his father (Alan Arkin), works as an actor in “lornos” (light pornography), and has a penchant for deviant sex. His best friend Dave Lockwood (Jason Bateman) lives on the opposite end of the spectrum. He prioritizes his work at a law firm, hoping to make partner, and never has time for himself. Between his twin babies, young daughter Cara (Sydney Rouviere), and loving wife Jamie (Leslie Mann), he can’t find time to just talk with his family.

When Mitch and Dave catch a baseball game, the two chat over their envy of each other’s lives, which leads to a drunken urination into a magical fountain. The next morning, the impossible happens – Mitch is in Dave’s body and Dave is in Mitch’s body. Thinking the solution is to recreate the previous night’s inebriated mishaps (like Big), they journey back to the fountain, only to discover that it has been moved and that it may take a week or more to learn of its new whereabouts. At first they panic, but then Mitch convinces Dave that they can assume their new roles while waiting – after all, Mitch is somewhat of an actor. What could possibly go wrong?

The setup is uninspired, but still a decent method for creating hilarious situations with disastrous consequences. Fortunately, it never gets so serious that it can’t return to its comedic roots, although the switched identities shtick is carried a bit beyond the logical turning point, making the resolution unrealistic (and tidy) even within the boundaries of pure fantasy. Role reversals aren’t new, but Jason Bateman pretending to be sexually uninhibited, preposterously wild and unspeakably crude is a delight to watch, similar to his costar Jennifer Aniston’s part in Horrible Bosses. He’s cast in his usual role, but then assigned to take it in the opposite direction. This ungentle contrast works well for Bateman, whereas Reynolds simply returns to his Van Wilder days. Coming from Green Lantern, it’s obvious he’s more cut out for coarse comedy than superhero tights.

Responsibility, family and a career must battle freedom and recklessness in a classic switcheroo scenario with a twist of nudity and crudity. Mitch learns to be a go-getter and to stop quitting (accomplishment issues are at a high), while Dave gets to take a break and date smoking hot associate Sabrina McArdle (Olivia Wilde), which is somehow classified as innocent flirtation. He essentially gets a vacation. Disquieting secrets are revealed and kinky sexuality explored – it’s divertingly vulgar but doesn’t have enough substance to entertain beyond a single viewing.

- The Massie Twins

The Massie Twins are identical twin film critics who have been professionally reviewing movies full time for over 5 years, appearing on TV, radio, online and in print. They are members of the Phoenix Film Critics Society and the Internet Film Critic Society and their work can be seen at GoneWithTheTwins.com

Article Source: Joel Massie
Movie Review: The Change-Up (2011)