My "Review" of "Watchmen"

The reason I put "review" in quotes is because this is not an official review. There is nothing professional about it. This is simply a copy of an email I sent to a friend who asked me what I thought about the movie. Rather than writing a serious review, I'm just going to be lazy and copy/paste the email. So that is the reason for the constant references to director Zach Snyder as "dude," as well as the "lol"s and possible profanity. :) So here ya go:

"I didn't really care for the movie. lol I wouldn't pay to see it again. I won't buy the DVD. And I certainly wouldn't pay to see a sequel unless I read a summary of the script first and thought it sounded good. Here are my issues:

For one, the guy who wrote the book, Alan Moore, wanted his name removed from the movie altogether. He didn't want to be associated with the movie. He said that the book wasn't really movie material and that a movie should have never been made. I REALLY agree with that for a couple reasons. First, the book is very time specific. It was very relevant in the time it was released, the events were related to real life events at the time, and the characters/costumes were very 80's-like. Other comics are not very time specific, they can take place in any time without any changes needing to be made to them (i.e. Spider-Man). "Watchmen" was extremely loyal to the original material (which is another issue I will get to in a minute), which made the movie feel very dated. It didn't feel like a 2009 movie based in 1985. It felt like a 1985 movie based in 1985. At the same time, you can't update the material without damn near completely abandoning the novel. So I would guess that's why Moore said the movie shouldn't be made. Snyder made the best movie he could I suppose, but it just felt so dated to me. This would have been the shit in 1985, though. lol

Secondly, Snyder is called a "visionary" director. I know why, and I kind of agree, but he's only a "visionary" in the sense that he's great with visuals - and that's a complete misuse of the meaning of the word. A visionary is like a pioneer, or someone whose creativity is ahead of its time. Their imagination is unrivaled. Snyder displayed absolutely none of that in making this movie. He used the book as a storyboard, completely copying everything and using no creative license whatsoever. Normally this doesn't bother me, but when we're talking about a graphic novel, and dude is matching up shots in his movie with panels in the graphic novel, that is the complete opposite of a visionary. With books, we're allowed to use our imagination to create what the scene looks like in our head. A real visionary, if he's making a book into a movie, will present those images in a new and creative way. Snyder was already limited in making a movie based on a graphic novel, but to constantly copy entire panels is just really lame.

Third, since he was SO loyal to the source material, again, this made the movie EXTREMELY boring to me. I knew exactly what was going to happen next, down to a tee. It's not like I knew IN GENERAL what was going to happen... there weren't even any surprising shots since dude copied the friggin panels. Combine this with how 80's the movie felt, and you're set for a long 3 hrs.

Fourth, too much blue penis. There was a lot of gayness in "Milk," but it was necessary for the movie...it's about gay people. But why was Dr. Manhattan walking around naked for more than half the time? Sometimes, he had some sort of underwear thing on. So if it's OK some of the time, why isn't OK for the whole movie? This kind of plays into the whole "Snyder might be gay" thing. I didn't feel this way when I saw it, and I think it's necessary to the movie, but some critics of "300" say he was very "gracious" in the way he depicted the men and that the whole movie kind of had a gay feel to it. Again, I have no problem with this when it's necessary. But having Dr. Manhattan walk around naked most of the time doesn't make sense to me when it was apparently OK for him to have underwear on some of the time. It seemed like blue penis for the sake of blue penis, and that's not a good look. lol

There were things I did like though. 1.) His visuals ARE SICK. I will give him that. When he did add something, which was very rare, it was sick. (The extended fight scene at the beginning of the movie, for instance) 2.) The violence...very good shit. 3.) Rorshach. Dude who played him did a great job, ESPECIALLY when he was NOT wearing the mask. There's some criticism about the movie in regard to the way some of the important lines were delivered, most of them I agree with (Dr. Manhattan's decision to change his mind while on Mars, for instance. That was a really well written scene in the book, but it came off kind of lame in the movie). But every single cool Rorshach line was delivered as good, if not better, in the movie as it was in the book. (Particularly the line in the prison after he hems up that black guy. It was a sweet line in the book, but 10 times better in the movie.) 4.)The story in and of itself is the shit. It's a great story. I try to tell people it's not really a "superhero" movie. It's more of a whodunit/character study. The overall statement made at the end of the movie is a great topic for discussion. 5.)The ending change was AWESOME. Fanboys of the novel are pissed because it's the one thing Snyder changed, and it's an important thing. But the novel ending is COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE for a movie. The reviews from the average filmgoer have been average as is, they would have HATED IT if he kept the original ending. lol

So yeah, my overall thoughts are thumbs in the middle. I still haven't heard anything from people who did NOT read the book first, so I'd like to see what they think since my opinion is obviously tainted by me knowing the story/events beforehand."

Movie Review: The Wrestler

Darren Aronofsky's 'The Wrestler' is short on flash and flair. There are no fancy camera tricks and no mind blowing plot twists. The story plays out chronologically, and there are very few action sequences and no special effects. 'The Wrestler' is nothing more than simple and direct story telling at its very finest.

'The Wrestler' stars Mickey Rourke as Randy 'The Ram' Robinson, a professional wrestler who probably should have retired about a decade ago. He's well past his prime and, despite being in great shape, is riddled with injuries. Randy lives in a trailer, and can barely afford his rent. Aside from a daughter he barely knows, he has no family. He's so lonely that his best friend is a stripper named Cassidy, played by Marisa Tomei. When your best friend is a stripper, how are you supposed to be sure that you even have a friend in the first place? The pay for over-the-hill wrestlers must not be too good either, because Randy has a second job (or is wrestling his second job?) at a deli.

The only place Randy gets any respect is in the ring. His fellow wrestlers are honored to work with him. They relish the opportunity to lose to him in the ring. His fans adore him, and boo his opponents mercilessly. They roar with anticipation as he climbs the ropes to perform his signature move.

Outside of the ring, Randy's life is not so glamorous. He gets no respect at his job at the deli, being forced to wear a name tag sporting his real name, Robin. His daughter, who he knows nothing about, loathes him. He attempts to reconciliate, only to fail yet again. Unfortunately, he does not have the success rate in real life that he has in the ring. Randy's also confused about his relationship with Cassidy. He thinks there's something between him, but Cassidy is quick to draw the line between herself and her 'customers.' Despite severe health problems and with no one to turn to, Randy returns to the ring, the only place where he is respected and wanted.

The power of 'The Wrestler' is in its simplicity and realism. Aronofsky puts us right into the middle of Randy's life, both figuratively and literally. The camera regularly follows around the film's protagonist, making us feel as if we're chasing Randy throughout the film. Most of the scenes are shot in medium to close range, and the wrestling matches are very intense. The camera gets right in there for every bit of the action, and we can almost feel every blow. When most people talk about wrestling, they refer to it as 'fake.' It's no secret that wrestling is staged, but Aronofsky makes it a point to show that nothing is fake about bodies hitting the concrete...or in some cases, barbed wire and thumb tacks. He then takes us backstage, and shows us how real wrestling actually is. There's nothing fake about sewing up open wounds and removing thumb tacks and staples. There's nothing fake about taking drugs, constantly working out, altering your appearance, and putting your body on the line, only to barely be able to afford rent. It's all very real to Randy, much more so than his life outside of the ring.

Mickey Rourke is astounding as Randy, and will probably earn himself an Oscar nomination. Rourke shows Randy as a man with a lot of pride on the outside, but a lot of pain and loneliness on the inside. Randy suffers from something a lot of us can relate to: feeling of inadequacy. He feels inadequate as a father, worker, and in his love life. We can see the pain in Randy's tear-filled eyes as he begs his daughter not to hate him. Randy's a simple man; all he wants is to be significant outside of wrestling. We feel for him when we realize, and he realizes, that he can never be a good father. Then, we understand, as he does it, that he must accept his fate. Acceptance of your place in life is another theme that we can all relate to, and Randy accepts his place and bows out gracefully. Most importantly though, he finishes on top, and we're happy for him.

Movie Review: Seven Pounds

Do truly good people really exist? What causes a person to do a selfless act? Is any act truly selfless? Don't we all get something from every good thing that we do? Even if it's only the satisfaction of helping another human being, if we enjoy that feeling, are we truly being selfless? There are two reasons people do nice things, one reason is good, and the other is bad. The first reason is because they enjoy helping others. They like to make other people smile, and it makes them feel good when they make someone else feel good. They do it simply because they want to. The other reason is because they hope they will get something in return; or, they are afraid of what will happen to them if they aren't nice. They don't do the nice act for someone else, they do it for themselves. The truly good people do kind acts for the first reason; the pseudo good people do it for the second. So again, do truly good people really exist?

Will Smith's latest movie, "Seven Pounds," shows us that it is indeed possible for good people to exist. "Seven Pounds" isn't so much about Smith's character, Ben Thomas, being a good person; it's about his quest to find good people. Ben, an IRS agent who has probably spent most of his life doing bad things, is trying to do something good. He has something at his disposal that, as we hear in the trailer, can "drastically change someone's circumstances." So, Ben is on a quest to find seven people deserving of this gift.

Director Gabriele Muccino, who also directed Smith in "Pursuit of Happyness," masterfully takes what sounds like a simple and, frankly, uninteresting premise, and does a fabulous job of generating and maintaining interest from the opening credits. Muccino does this by constantly raising questions, and then revealing the answers at precise moments throughout the film. Not one answer need, or should, be given any earlier or later than it is. Why does Ben behave the way he does? Ben seems like a great guy one minute, but then is inexplicably cruel to a blind man over the telephone the next. Who are these people Ben has chosen to help? Why has he chosen them? Why is he helping them? Why seven people? We know Ben is going to help these people, but how? What is his gift? Muccino expertly answers these questions sporadically throughout the film, just in time to maintain your interest and then create more.

As has come to be the norm for Will Smith, his performance is marvelous. We can tell that Ben has something inside him, compelling him to do good things. We don't know what it is, but we can see that he struggles with it. Throughout the entire film, Ben tries to retain his composure. We don't know why he's so sad, or so determined, but we can feel his pain and his struggle. Ben's quest only becomes more complicated when he falls in love with one of the women he's attempting to help. He wants to tell her the truth, and we can see that as bad as he wants to, he knows that he can't.

Smith's career has been filled with great performances that did not get the credit they deserve, and this year will probably be no different. It seems as if every time Smith gives a great performance, someone else gives the performance of their career. Is Smith going to get an Oscar nomination? The answer to that question is not clear. There have been many great performances this year. However, there is one question that needs to be answered sooner than later. When will Will Smith get the Oscar nomination, and win, that he deserves?

"Seven Pounds" is a film that makes no secret of its intention to tug at your heart strings. It will undoubtedly touch many people, and it should. It is rare in today's world to see people being good, just because they want to. One man asks Ben why he was chosen. What did he do that made him so deserving of Ben's help? Ben tells him, "You're a good man…even when you don't know people are watching you." If only we all were…

Movie Review: Towelhead

Speaking from personal experience, becoming a parent is a difficult time. There is much to learn, and no time to learn it. We learn on the fly. Once we grow up, there is little thought given to the difficulties of being a child. To say that "Towelhead" gives adults an idea of what it's like to be a child would be a drastic understatement. "Towelhead" gives us an in depth look into the life of Jasira, a 13-year old Lebanese girl, born in America. Jasira, like any other 13-year old, is just beginning to understand herself, her body, and her sexuality. At the same time, she has to deal with other external factors that make her life exceedingly difficult.

Jasira's mother has just shipped her off to live with her dad. She found out that Jasira had allowed her step dad to shave her, and blamed Jasira. She felt Jasira needed to live with a man in order to know how to act around one. Jasira's father is an extremely strict Lebanese man who is very traditional. He slaps Jasira for coming to breakfast in a t-shirt with no bra and boy shorts. He talks to her rudely, seems to have little to no care for her well being, and generally just treats her horrendously. At school, Jasira is constantly being made fun of for being foreign - she's called every dirty racial slur in the book - despite the fact she is American. When she finally finds a boy who likes her, her dad forbids her to see him because he's black. As most racist parents say, he's only doing this for her. He didn't create the world's rules. At the same time, her father hates their next door neighbor Travis, played by Aaron Eckhart, because Travis thinks he likes Saddam Hussein. He'd really hate Travis if he knew that Travis had an eye for his daughter.

Jasira's life is so complex, much too complex for a 13-year old. One can only hope that the average teenager doesn't have it this difficult, although if they do, it would go a long way into explaining all the teenager suicides and murders. Jasira is taught to respect adult men, but where she should she draw the line? Is it OK to allow Travis to touch her? Or does she know it's wrong, but her teenage hormones want to allow it?

Jasira needs help, but doesn't seem to realize how harsh and unfair her life is. Even if she did, she can't turn to her self-absorbed father. His trivial problems are much more important to him than her well-being; "just do this and you will be fine" pretty much sums up the extent of his fatherly advice. Jasira has one neighbor, Melina, played wonderfully by Toni Collette, who appears to be the only person concerned for Jasira. Unfortunately, Jasira grows to resent her because of her suspicions about the inappropriateness of Jasira's relationship with Travis. All of this may seem to be a lot to take it, but that is the life of the confused American teenager.

The performances in this film are all very well done. You hate Jasira's father, played by Peter Macdissi. Macdissi plays the father as a traditional Lebanese man, but only when being traditional benefits him. He has no semblance of an accent, sounding almost completely white, and carries all kinds of American beliefs. He's so disrespectful to Jasira, and we feel for her because we know what she's going through. Then we feel worse because we know that not only does her father not know, but he seems to have no interest in knowing.

Toni Collette is splendid as Melina, the only person looking out for Jasira. She's sees Jasira fraternizing with Travis, and wants to nip the relationship in the bud before it becomes inappropriate. You can see all the worry and concern in Melina's face as she chases Jasira from Travis' house.

Aaron Eckhart is yet again first-rate in his "other" role this year. Travis is someone who seems completely normal, like a pretty cool guy, until he's sneaking Jasira off to restaurants far away from their town in order to cut down the chances of anyone they know seeing them. Jasira, the naïve child that she is, calls herself Travis' girlfriend, "You touched me down there. I'm your girlfriend." Travis gives a shy smile and chuckles, and it sends a shiver down our spine. Eugene Jones III is also pretty good as Thomas, the black boy Jasira isn't allowed to see. He really seems to care for her, but of course has his own teenage boy agenda.

"Towelhead" is a very good film, and it gives its audience an idea of what it's like to be a teenage girl. However, it gives us very little new information nor does it explore any new territory. It's not like it's a surprise to find out that pretty 13-year old girls have boys their age, as well as grown men, trying to have sex with them. The fact that Jasira is Lebanese adds a different angle to the film, but again, racism is not exactly a new concept in film either. It's difficult to find any reason to recommend this film over any other film like it, for instance, "Thirteen." Director Alan Bell takes his material and does a great deal with it, making a very respectable film. Films about teenage angst are not in short order, so if you decide to make one, it should really find a way to stand out from the others. "Towelhead" seems to come off as a film that wants to be new and different, but doesn't want to put in the effort. The film may have benefitted from focusing on one or two teenage issues, and really building on those, rather than lumping them all into one 2 hour film.

Movie Review: Appaloosa

Last year's "3:10 to Yuma" did more than its part in helping to rejuvenate the western genre in Hollywood. Ed Harris hopes to continue the resurgence of the western with his latest film, "Appaloosa." Harris directs and stars in "Appaloosa," a film about two vigilantes who travel from town to town, restoring order by any means necessary. They are hired by the sheriff of Appaloosa after Randall Bragg, played by Jeremy Irons, kills their current City Marshal and his two deputies. Bragg and his cohorts take over the town, doing as they please with no respect for the law. After all, why obey the law when the lawmakers are terrified of you?

So the town calls on Virgil Cole and Everett Hitch, played by Harris and Viggo Mortenson. Cole and Hitch agree to help them take back over the town, as well as subdue Bragg and his men. They two men come at a hefty, though. The sheriff must sign the town over to Cole; basically making whatever Cole says is the law, the law. Cole and Hitch then go about cleaning up the town, starting with two of Bragg's men, who seem to find it necessary to urinate on the floor of the bar. Once Bragg sees that he and his men can no longer do as they please, he has a meeting with Cole and Everett.



Cole: There's a set of bi-laws posted right outside the door here of this very saloon. Your boys do like they say, and everything will be muy bueno.

Bragg: And if they don't?

Cole: I arrest them.

Bragg: And if they don't go along?

Cole: Then I shoot them…or Mr. Hitch shoots them. That's the law.

Bragg: Your law.

Cole: Same thing.



A rather simple arrangement is complicated by the arrival of Allison French, played by Renee Zellweger. Allison immediately falls for Cole, and their relationship appears to cloud Cole's judgment. Cole must now juggle his questionable relationship with Allison, while trying to stay focused on arresting, or killing, Bragg and his men.

The main thing that keeps this film afloat is the fantastic performances by Harris and Mortenson. Their chemistry is great, and both men fully get into the roles, appearing as if they've been working together (in the movie, and in movies) for many years. Cole has many moments in which he can't seem to find the right word; and Hitch is right there to help him out in that "we finish each other's sentences" sort of way.

This film has all the makings of a spectacular western, but suffers from a few fatal flaws that make it difficult to fully recommend. For starters, the plot is extremely thin and the story suffers from a lack of depth. It's a very basic film, and you keep feeling as if it's about to incorporate some new and creative aspect or twist, but it just never seems to get there. After it's over, it leaves you with a "That's it?" sort of feeling.

The film also suffers from a lack of background information. It opens with Bragg killing Appaloosa's City Marshal, and then all of a sudden, the entire town is terrified of him. Was the City Marshall the only tough guy in town? Why was Bragg so intimidating that the sheriff was willing to sign the town over to Cole at the drop of a hat? Bragg may have come off as a more frightening character had we seen more than one instance of him displaying his wrath. Also, Allison appears out of nowhere. Her presence appears to be nothing more than a tool to help move along the plot. Allison and Cole immediately being seeing each other, without even as much as a brief wooing phase. Zellweger's performance and presence lend very little to the film. Finally, Jeremy Irons performance, while good, seemed to come directly out of the Daniel Day-Lewis playbook. Bragg seemed to be nothing more than a carbon copy of Day-Lewis' character Daniel Plainview in "There Will Be Blood," minus the genuine creepiness.

"Appaloosa" is a good film, definitely worth renting. However, if this is the direction Hollywood plans on taking the western, it may be a long time before we get another "Unforgiven."

Movie Review: The Day the Earth Stood Still

Every year, Hollywood releases a generic group of films that are aimed at a certain audience. Usually in January in February, you get your generic dance film. The next month or two, you get your "athlete overcomes tremendous adversity" film. The athlete's obstacle can either be one of personal tragedy, racism, or overcoming incredible odds. Then, usually in the late spring or early summer, you got your alien invasion or apocalyptic film. "The Day the Earth Stood Still" is this year's combination of your incredibly generic alien invasion film AND apocalyptic film.

"The Day the Earth Stood Still" stars Keanu Reeves as Neo - I mean, Klaatu - an alien sent here to save Earth. The same empty and expressionless "style of acting" that Reeves has used so many times before is yet again his "go to move" in this film. He arrives in some sort of giant alien snow globe, accompanied by something that can only be describes as equal parts Iron Giant, Iron Man, and Cyclops from "X-Men." As usual, Reeves gives very little, if any, information on why he has arrived on Earth. After all, his face says more than enough, right? Jennifer Connelly co-stars as Dr. Helen Benson, someone the government inexplicably finds qualified to figure out why Klaatu is here.

Klaatu, against all common sense and logic, is taken to a secret government facility for interrogation. Here, he meets with the Secretary of Defense, Regina Jackson, played by Kathy Bates. Once Jackson realizes her primary method of bullying and intimidation doesn't seem to work on aliens, she moves on to the next logical step: drugging him and hooking him up to a lie detector machine. Brilliant. After Klaatu escapes, he somehow gets detained at a train or bus station, picked up by Dr. Benson, and meets with another alien to discuss the future of the Earth at McDonald's. You can't make this stuff up.

Clearly, this film's story is not worth discussing. It's a bad film, plain and simple. Any cliché character or story point is utilized, poorly, in this film. Kathy Bates plays your customary generic authority figure on a power trip who refuses to listen to logic and stubbornly sticks to own agenda, despite all evidence she should do otherwise. Will Smith's son, Jaden, plays the typical rebellious and disobedient kid who resents everything and everyone because his father has passed. He thinks he knows everything, and risks everyone's lives because he's stubborn.

The film is predictable, and the people make stupid and illogical decisions. Seriously, what purpose was there behind shooting Klaatu as soon as he emerged from his snow globe? Who would do that? He hasn't even posed a threat, unless "walking" can be perceived as threatening. Just like every generic disaster movie, all the characters are complete idiots who are incapable of seeing or doing the obvious, and continually put themselves at risk for no discernable reason. Finally, this film reeks of blatant product placement. Microsoft, LG, McDonald's, some watch company ... they're all present in this film, and you will NOT miss them. So in addition to watching a bad film, when it takes breaks from sucking, you have to watch commercials too?!?!?

Don't go see this movie. You'd be better served watching your paint dry or, God forbid, watching a Jack Black movie. This film has absolutely no redeeming qualities. The makers of this film thought so little of us, the audience, they didn't even compensate for the film's countless flaws by throwing in a nude scene or two. Don't support these selfish filmmakers by giving them your $10. Your world will stand still for an hour and a half if you see this film.

Movie Review: Gran Torino

"Gran Torino" is the second film to be released this year, in only a few months, that is directed by Clint Eastwood. Now in his 70's, Eastwood has almost made more of a name for himself as a director than he has as an actor. He will only add to his legacy with his latest film, "Gran Torino."

Eastwood stars in "Gran Torino" as Walt Kowalski, a Korean War vet who still harbors ill feelings toward, well, everybody. Kowalski snarls and growls at everything and everyone who is young, different, or not white. He's a racist old man who, having done despicable things in the war, loathes all people, particularly Asians. They're all Korean to him. After the passing of his wife, Kowalski returns to his home in Detroit, only to find a Hmong family moving in next door. The grandmother of the family doesn't like him either. She can't help but wonder why the only remaining American in the neighborhood refuses to move. Kowalski mutters a seemingly endless variety of racial slurs under his breath as the two scowl at one another from their porches.

The teenage children in the family, Sue and Thao, are complete opposites. The family wants Sue to find a man because they feel that Thao will never be masculine enough to be "man of the house." Thao is quiet and keeps to himself while he washes dishes, does the gardening, and obeys his sister's every order. When a local gang decides they want to recruit Thao, he decides that this would be the best way for him to prove his manhood. In one of the best scenes of the year, and one that will undoubtedly go down in history as the "get off my lawn" scene, the gang attempts to kidnap Thao from his house, and the ensuing fight spills onto Walt's lawn. Walt's response is interpreted as heroic and Thao's family feels they are indebted to him. Thao is ordered to work for Walt in order to repay him, and the two eventually develop an interesting relationship where they both learn a lot about each other's lives and culture.

Eastwood, as usual, is great. Walt's character is a composite of all the bad asses he's played through his entire career. Walt is The Man With No Name. He's Harry Callahan, Josey Wales, and Bill Munny, all wrapped in one. Walt is a man who doesn't like, know, or care to get to know, his own family. They have nothing in common with him, and his own children don't understand him. Walt seems to have more in common with his dog than he does with his family. He has no respect for his local priest, a man he calls (to his face) "an over-educated 27 year old virgin who likes to hold the hands of old ladies who are superstitious and promise them an eternity." Young people infuriate him. He snarls and growls at every tattoo, piercing, and youthful act of ignorance or rudeness. Yet, for some reason, he realizes he has more in common with the people he hates the most than he does with his own family. Walt develops a relationship with Thao; a caring relationship in which Thao calls Walt "Mr. Kowalski," and Walt regularly refers to him as female genitalia when he can't think of a new racial slur.

Though on paper the film really appears to bring nothing new to the big screen, the script is elevated by Eastwood's performance and direction. The film is very entertaining and interesting, and it's refreshing to see a major Hollywood film starring unfamiliar faces. One also can't help but smile at the fact that Eastwood appears to be leaving the acting game just as he entered: a bad ass who always wins, even when he loses.