I was really excited to see the movie Lymelife after I read about it in EW about a year ago. I just finally got around to waching it (literally finished it ten minutes ago) and now I come bearing a movie review.
Granted, I am a fan of the realistic films that the inedpendent scene has been churning out the past ten or so years. However, Lymelife didn't quite make it, I think. The movie at times felt like it was either moving too fast or too slow, and it always changed speed at the wrong time. The most likeable character for me, Jim (Kieran Culkin) ends up leaving before you even truly get to know his character.
Thanks to my mom, I was quite aware of all the anachronisms right down to "No one wore red bras in the 70's... unless you were a hoochie!" See, you can learn so much about the past watching period pieces. I can understand that when you're setting a film in the past, it can be hard to keep everything accurate. [SPOILERS AHEAD] However, they have Jim going off to fight in the Falkhands War which (as stated in the list of anachronisms on IMDb) didn't occur until 1982 and didn't even invole American troops.
I think I could look past all that even, but the thing that got me most was the awkwardness between our two main characters Scott (Rory Culkin) and Becky (Emma Roberts). [SPOILERS AHEAD] The sex scene between the two near the end of the film goes on way too long. (See! The pace changes yet again!) It's extremely uncomfortable to watch. I mean, come on people. Everyone has had their own awkward first times. I don't think anyone really wants to watch someone else's. Even if it is fictional.
So the movie had some things going for it. As I said, Jim was a good character. And of course, Alec Baldwin turned a great performance, even if he was once again playing an alcoholic father who screws everything up. I guess he does that well. (See Running with Scissors.) Alot against it. I guess they all can't be fantastic. If you want to watch something that promises to make you laugh (and once again the blurbs lie) and instead makes you cry, then this is the movie for you.
12 May 2010
11 May 2010
They're Coming to Get You
I have already blogged about my love for all things zombie. As I had said in that entry, my first exposure to zombies was by watching George Romero's classic movie Night of the Living Dead. I am obviously a huge Romero fan, so of course, I was excited when I heard that he has a new movie coming ou this month.
First, let's take a quick look at Romero's filmography. After the success of Night, he continued the Dead series with Dawn of the Dead. (My personal favourite of the original trilogy.) There is a rumour that he wrote a sequel that he did not like, and he decided to sell that script and start over. The rumoured film: Return of the Living Dead. Then came Day of the Dead, which ended the Dead series. Or so we thought.
Now, the first three have all seen remakes now. Night has had two, one in 1990 which was alright and then another in 2006 that was in 3-D. Man, it was awful. Day's remake, starring Nick Cannon, barely stood up to the original and changed most of the plotline. The only remake I think that lived up to the orignal had to be the Dawn remake, which is a fantastic zombie movie in it's own right.
Romero wasn't finished however. In 2005, he released Land of the Dead. Technically not part of the Dead series, but widely accepted as the fourth film since it's set after the events of Day. I wasn't a big fan of Land, but it did see some success. The concept was very unique and interesting and out of all of the Dead films, probably the most scary.
I'm only on this, but I actually loved the next film, Diary of the Dead. Most fans claim that Romero was just hopping on the bandwagon with the success of Cloverfield. The whole movie is shot through Jason's (Josh Close) point of view. I don't know about you, but I love that style if it's done right and I think that Romero did a fantastic job. Even if it's ranked as his worst film.
So now on the 28th this month, we have Survival of the Dead coming out. The boards don't seem to offer any good news. Most people are saying "the trailer looks awful." "Romero will not be able to live down Diary now." I don't really care. When it comes to Romero, he is the king of zombie movies. I'm going to go see it, and even if it's like Land, I still know I will not leave the theater disappointed.
First, let's take a quick look at Romero's filmography. After the success of Night, he continued the Dead series with Dawn of the Dead. (My personal favourite of the original trilogy.) There is a rumour that he wrote a sequel that he did not like, and he decided to sell that script and start over. The rumoured film: Return of the Living Dead. Then came Day of the Dead, which ended the Dead series. Or so we thought.
Now, the first three have all seen remakes now. Night has had two, one in 1990 which was alright and then another in 2006 that was in 3-D. Man, it was awful. Day's remake, starring Nick Cannon, barely stood up to the original and changed most of the plotline. The only remake I think that lived up to the orignal had to be the Dawn remake, which is a fantastic zombie movie in it's own right.
Romero wasn't finished however. In 2005, he released Land of the Dead. Technically not part of the Dead series, but widely accepted as the fourth film since it's set after the events of Day. I wasn't a big fan of Land, but it did see some success. The concept was very unique and interesting and out of all of the Dead films, probably the most scary.
I'm only on this, but I actually loved the next film, Diary of the Dead. Most fans claim that Romero was just hopping on the bandwagon with the success of Cloverfield. The whole movie is shot through Jason's (Josh Close) point of view. I don't know about you, but I love that style if it's done right and I think that Romero did a fantastic job. Even if it's ranked as his worst film.
So now on the 28th this month, we have Survival of the Dead coming out. The boards don't seem to offer any good news. Most people are saying "the trailer looks awful." "Romero will not be able to live down Diary now." I don't really care. When it comes to Romero, he is the king of zombie movies. I'm going to go see it, and even if it's like Land, I still know I will not leave the theater disappointed.
10 May 2010
Don't Call Me Shirley
Spoof movies usually make fun of whole genres at one go. (Naked Gun makes fun of cop movies, Scary Movie makes fun of, obviously, scary movies, etc.) Somewhere along the line, they've become their own genre. They're usually released directly on DVD with no press. I bet you've never even heard of Stan Helsing. Yet, I've watched it two times myself.
I have a soft spot for spoof movies. I remember watching Airplane, Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles as a kid. I hadn't seen many of the movies that they were even making fun of. (I still haven't watched that many Westerns to this day.) But I loved them so much. They never fail to make me laugh.
Sure, the genre had taken a turn for the worst for a bit back there. We had monstrosities such as Date Movie. (God, that made me want to gauge my eyes out.) We had our fair share of near misses such as Not Another Teen Movie. (Which I think I only like because of the slow clap guy.) Oh, and probably the most ridiculous of them all: My Big Fat Independent Movie. (The biggest waste of five dollars ever.)
I don't think that the spoof movie will be dying any time soon, though. People love to laugh. It truly is the best medicine. We love the serious movies. We love the scary movies. We also love to then proceed to make fun of these movies. Yes, I'm a fan of riffing, so obviously I would be a supporter of the spoof genre. You know you love it too.
I think if anything, spoof movies actually help the movie industry. Not only are they making money off of their DVD rentals and sales, but the movies that are made fun of may possibly see spikes in their rentals and sales too. (It does help to know what they're making fun of.) So rent a funny movie. Maybe rent a few others if you aren't sure what the jokes mean. Then prepare to laugh.
I have a soft spot for spoof movies. I remember watching Airplane, Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles as a kid. I hadn't seen many of the movies that they were even making fun of. (I still haven't watched that many Westerns to this day.) But I loved them so much. They never fail to make me laugh.
Sure, the genre had taken a turn for the worst for a bit back there. We had monstrosities such as Date Movie. (God, that made me want to gauge my eyes out.) We had our fair share of near misses such as Not Another Teen Movie. (Which I think I only like because of the slow clap guy.) Oh, and probably the most ridiculous of them all: My Big Fat Independent Movie. (The biggest waste of five dollars ever.)
I don't think that the spoof movie will be dying any time soon, though. People love to laugh. It truly is the best medicine. We love the serious movies. We love the scary movies. We also love to then proceed to make fun of these movies. Yes, I'm a fan of riffing, so obviously I would be a supporter of the spoof genre. You know you love it too.
I think if anything, spoof movies actually help the movie industry. Not only are they making money off of their DVD rentals and sales, but the movies that are made fun of may possibly see spikes in their rentals and sales too. (It does help to know what they're making fun of.) So rent a funny movie. Maybe rent a few others if you aren't sure what the jokes mean. Then prepare to laugh.
09 May 2010
It's Just a Jump to the Left
What exactly makes a film a cult classic? Probably one of the first movies that comes to mind when you hear the term is Rocky Horror Picture Show. It definitely has a cult following, but it doesn't really fit the typical definition of a cult classic.
To quote Urban Dictionary (Oh yes, a reliable source.) a cult classi is "a popular piece of work, generally a movie, which has gained a large following. This following has most likely been around for at least a few years..." RHPS would not fit this description since it's following was immediate. Cult classics usually don't do well initially. The definition continues though to say "...except for cases of an 'instant cult classic,' in which a movie gains instant fame which remains for decades to come."
I do believe that RHPS is probably the most well known cult classic, but it's success was when it was released. It did well in the theaters, and to me, that doesn't really scream "cult" classic. Cult following, yes, but a movie that's just classic, despite being a bit different than Gone with the Wind. (Which, by the way, did so well in theaters it was the biggest money maker for fifty years.)
To me, a cult classic would be something more like Donnie Darko. It was barely a blip on the rader when it was released in theaters. About a year later, however, teenagers across the country found themselves drawn to the movie. Many identified with young Donnie (Jake Gyllenhaal) and the movie became a huge hit. It has since made more money on DVD sales then it did in theaters, and it spawned a sequel ten years later entitled S. Darko.
I think that "cult classic" is a term that is going to die off soon. Most movies, even independently made ones, are shown at so many theaters, it's not hard to have minor success at the box office. Years ago, it was easy for a film to barely get any press while it was showing, but then become well known after it was released to video. Cult followings of movies will continue to thrive, but they will be bigger and you'll probably have actually heard of the movie.
To quote Urban Dictionary (Oh yes, a reliable source.) a cult classi is "a popular piece of work, generally a movie, which has gained a large following. This following has most likely been around for at least a few years..." RHPS would not fit this description since it's following was immediate. Cult classics usually don't do well initially. The definition continues though to say "...except for cases of an 'instant cult classic,' in which a movie gains instant fame which remains for decades to come."
I do believe that RHPS is probably the most well known cult classic, but it's success was when it was released. It did well in the theaters, and to me, that doesn't really scream "cult" classic. Cult following, yes, but a movie that's just classic, despite being a bit different than Gone with the Wind. (Which, by the way, did so well in theaters it was the biggest money maker for fifty years.)
To me, a cult classic would be something more like Donnie Darko. It was barely a blip on the rader when it was released in theaters. About a year later, however, teenagers across the country found themselves drawn to the movie. Many identified with young Donnie (Jake Gyllenhaal) and the movie became a huge hit. It has since made more money on DVD sales then it did in theaters, and it spawned a sequel ten years later entitled S. Darko.
I think that "cult classic" is a term that is going to die off soon. Most movies, even independently made ones, are shown at so many theaters, it's not hard to have minor success at the box office. Years ago, it was easy for a film to barely get any press while it was showing, but then become well known after it was released to video. Cult followings of movies will continue to thrive, but they will be bigger and you'll probably have actually heard of the movie.
08 May 2010
Melon Farmer
Don't worry. I'll get around to explaining the title of this entry. First, I should mention that I'm a big fan of television as well as movies, if you hadn't guess that already. The average American watches at least three hours of television per day. I'm sure that I exceed the amount. Ten times over. No wait, there isn't thirty hours in a day.
It should go without saying, then, that I have watched my fair share of movies on television. Mostly the B grade horror and science fiction types on Sci Fi. I mean, how could you pass up Frankenfish? It's a classic.
The funny thing is, the censorship if my favourite part of watching movies on television. Granted, I think that censorship needs a bit of a make over. In this day and age, there are things that are cut out that shouldn't be and then things that are left in that really should be cut out. God forbid we see a little blood, but it's okay to basically show softcore porn.
I'm not concerning myself with that right now, however. It would take more than one blog post to rant about that. I'd much rather talk about the censorship of inappropriate language that can be so hilarious. The first time I ever saw Jeepers Creepers was on Sci Fi on summer's day. They say "bull shit" at least twenty times in that movie. Instead of the classic "bleeping" it out or the more modern technique of "silencing" it, they replaced it with "bull spit".
Bull spit is fine and dandy. It actually works. What happens when they can't come up with something that still makes sense but is appropriate for television. One day, I just left on Idle Hands playing on MTV while I was eating lunch. (Little side note: Never watch a horror movie on MTV. They literally cut out even paper cuts.) The original line in question was "I can't believe you cock blocked me like that." Oh, you definitely cannot say "cock". So what did they replace it with? "I can't believe you goat blocked me like that." I don't know if it's just me, but that sounds dirtier. I guess I must have a filthy mind.
Though, the creme of the crop has to be from Die Hard. One day, me and my dad were watching Die Hard on TNT, I believe it was. You know how much they cuss in that one. Every single "mother fucker" was replaced with (you guessed it) "melon farmer". Fantastic. I love it.
Even though censorship is a bit out dated, I still love watching movies to see how they'll edit them. It can be extremely entertaining. Oh, and to this day, I still call people melon farmer. They think I'm crazy. To that, I say bull spit. I'm totally sane. Now excuse me. I have a goat to meet for lunch.
It should go without saying, then, that I have watched my fair share of movies on television. Mostly the B grade horror and science fiction types on Sci Fi. I mean, how could you pass up Frankenfish? It's a classic.
The funny thing is, the censorship if my favourite part of watching movies on television. Granted, I think that censorship needs a bit of a make over. In this day and age, there are things that are cut out that shouldn't be and then things that are left in that really should be cut out. God forbid we see a little blood, but it's okay to basically show softcore porn.
I'm not concerning myself with that right now, however. It would take more than one blog post to rant about that. I'd much rather talk about the censorship of inappropriate language that can be so hilarious. The first time I ever saw Jeepers Creepers was on Sci Fi on summer's day. They say "bull shit" at least twenty times in that movie. Instead of the classic "bleeping" it out or the more modern technique of "silencing" it, they replaced it with "bull spit".
Bull spit is fine and dandy. It actually works. What happens when they can't come up with something that still makes sense but is appropriate for television. One day, I just left on Idle Hands playing on MTV while I was eating lunch. (Little side note: Never watch a horror movie on MTV. They literally cut out even paper cuts.) The original line in question was "I can't believe you cock blocked me like that." Oh, you definitely cannot say "cock". So what did they replace it with? "I can't believe you goat blocked me like that." I don't know if it's just me, but that sounds dirtier. I guess I must have a filthy mind.
Though, the creme of the crop has to be from Die Hard. One day, me and my dad were watching Die Hard on TNT, I believe it was. You know how much they cuss in that one. Every single "mother fucker" was replaced with (you guessed it) "melon farmer". Fantastic. I love it.
Even though censorship is a bit out dated, I still love watching movies to see how they'll edit them. It can be extremely entertaining. Oh, and to this day, I still call people melon farmer. They think I'm crazy. To that, I say bull spit. I'm totally sane. Now excuse me. I have a goat to meet for lunch.
07 May 2010
Lock Up All Sharp Objects
Yeah, that's one of the catch phrases of FearNET, the onDemand station for horror movies. I watch it quite a bit. Free horror movies that arent' edited with no commercials? I was like "Sign me up."
I've managed to watch alot of bad and good movies thanks to FearNET. I sat through at least five Paris Hilton films that didn't involve her naked and usually resulted in death. I've seen interviews with cool bands such as Reel Big Fish talking about their favourite movie monsters.
One of the best movies I ever saw on FearNET was a little movie called Disturbing Behavior. Granted, when I say good, it doesn't mean it's fantastic. It has quirks going for it, but unfortunately not the best ending. Later, I found out, it could have been a better movie.
DB is your typical "high school kids are being brain washed" type of movie. Though, literally, they are being brain washed. And killing off those students who have some actual individuality and refuse to be preppy zombies. Perfect cheesy movie set up.
Unfortunately, the ending falls flat. I later found out, though, there was an alternative ending that actually had some spunk that fit in with the rest of the movie. [SPOILERS AHEAD] When U.V. (Chad Donella) shoots Gavin (Nick Stahl), Gavin says "I guess this diminishes my chances of ever meeting Trent Reznor..." as he dies. Yeah, I guess only us other unique kids who refuse to be mindless zombies would get a Nine Inch Nails joke.
All in all, it's a pretty decent movie. I eventually bought it on DVD so I can watch it with the better ending. Makes it a bit better, though the beginning is really the best part. I guess the writers got a little mindless at the end there themselves, but it's still worth a watch one day when you're bored. Home alone. All the lights are off. Oh, and look. A thunderstorm is on it's way.
I've managed to watch alot of bad and good movies thanks to FearNET. I sat through at least five Paris Hilton films that didn't involve her naked and usually resulted in death. I've seen interviews with cool bands such as Reel Big Fish talking about their favourite movie monsters.
One of the best movies I ever saw on FearNET was a little movie called Disturbing Behavior. Granted, when I say good, it doesn't mean it's fantastic. It has quirks going for it, but unfortunately not the best ending. Later, I found out, it could have been a better movie.
DB is your typical "high school kids are being brain washed" type of movie. Though, literally, they are being brain washed. And killing off those students who have some actual individuality and refuse to be preppy zombies. Perfect cheesy movie set up.
Unfortunately, the ending falls flat. I later found out, though, there was an alternative ending that actually had some spunk that fit in with the rest of the movie. [SPOILERS AHEAD] When U.V. (Chad Donella) shoots Gavin (Nick Stahl), Gavin says "I guess this diminishes my chances of ever meeting Trent Reznor..." as he dies. Yeah, I guess only us other unique kids who refuse to be mindless zombies would get a Nine Inch Nails joke.
All in all, it's a pretty decent movie. I eventually bought it on DVD so I can watch it with the better ending. Makes it a bit better, though the beginning is really the best part. I guess the writers got a little mindless at the end there themselves, but it's still worth a watch one day when you're bored. Home alone. All the lights are off. Oh, and look. A thunderstorm is on it's way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)