Priceless

Priceless

T

The Bucket List

Oscar Winners

AUDREY!

New Review:

Priceless

- Fucking Good Movie. I love Audrey Tatou. They call her the Hepburn of France.. Well deserved accolade as she is fantastic actress. Has a million looks, all great. Funny sad threatening. -Very funny plot wonderfully executed by the cast and director. Not as funny as Bruges, but just as good in its own ways . Involves mistaken identity, discovery, and an easy developing relationship that is quite believable. This movie is not in English. That bothers some pinheads, I don't know why. Doesn't seem like a major skill set to integrate subtitles with the dialog. A nice job by all!

I give it 9 stars out of 10.

--kim

Iron Man

by Doc Klein

Superhero movies are a funny breed. All of them first require a basic suspension of disbelief, in order to accept the idea of people with a variety of superpowers that are ludicrous given even an elementary knowledge of science. But the best superhero movies, as opposed to the often-times cartoonish characterizations that occur in most comic books, also are successful in making their characters as human and real as possible on the screen, with motives close to something the audience can relate to. Perhaps the best idea of this was Magneto, the villain in the three X-Men movies - whose malevolence began secondary to his family being tortured by the Nazis in World War II.

Iron Man is Marvel's newest foray into the superhero genre and while it's not the best of the breed, it's certainly not the worst either. Robert Downey Jr. superbly plays Tony Stark, who has inherited his father's company that makes most of the world's weapons, but as a rich playboy has never considered the moral ramifications of his work.

That changes when he is almost killed in Afghanistan and he sees that the terrorists have stockpiles of weapons made by his company. Jeff Bridges, in an unusual role for him, is the seeming good guy who's really a villain, and Gwyneth Paltrow and Terence Howard also have important roles. The movie lacks the excitement of the best superhero movies, perhaps due to the need for expository material to explain the background, and it lacks the dramatic and emotional connections to the characters that make us truly want the hero to win. That said, it's well worth the 126 minute time spent, and if you go, do yourself a favor and stay through the credits. As they've done for several movies now, there's an epilogue at the end that hints at the future, and left an old comic book fan like myself with goosebumps. Rating: 8.5 (out of 10).

	Home Page \| Author Page \| Journalist Page \| Horseplay \| Presidential Election \| Sara Page \| People Pages

	<a href="http://www.technorati.com/claim/tkz6545r4" rel="me">Technorati Profile</a>

Dr. Klein on Film

"Direct from Los Angeles"

-------------

Leatherheads

Back in the 1930's and 40's, two of the most popular genres for films were screwball comedies (Preston Sturgess & Noel Coward were among the most well known) and morality plays (Frank Capra may well be the master). Leatherheads, directed by and starring George Clooney, takes place in the 1920's, but has the feel of those 30's and 40's movies. Clooney and Renee Zellweger play the Cary Grant/Gary Cooper and Barbara Stanwyck/Katherine Hepburn roles and while they don't totally click like the stars of yore, the fault may lie in the screenplay rather than their acting. The problem is that the movie doesn't know which of the two genres it's imitating. It's not amusing enough to be acceptable screwball comedy, yet if it's meant to be a morality play, it's one that is strangely devoid of any emotion - the staple of that latter genre. Ostensibly, the movie is the story of the rise of professional football. Clooney is part of the "old" game of pro football, which includes violence and a proudly claimed lack of rules. John Krasinski plays a war hero turned college football player, who appeals to the masses because of his supposed heroism. He joins Clooney's team and suddenly pro football is popular. The morality play part of the movie is that the "war hero" isn't a true hero after all; his exploits have taken place due to drunkenness and misunderstandings. Zellweger plays the newspaper reporter who is intent on debunking the hero's story. The photography and music work well to create the feel of earlier movies, but at the end, it just doesn't totally work - there's no emotion, little humor, and the denouement is strangely muted. Points (out of 10): 7.5.

BANK JOB

T
his intriguing story of the largest bank robbery in British history is a master of the true crime genre (I guess truth is indeed stranger and more interesting than fiction), and though it doesn't have the light comedic tone of the best Oceans movies, Bank Job packs more thrills into its denouement. In fact, the robbery is the easy part. Unfortunately, this team of non-professionals has chosen to steal the contents of safe deposit boxes in one of England's largest banks. These boxes contain large amounts of money, but no one seems to care about the money. Instead, there are at least 5 different groups after our thieves, including a porno king that has been paying off police in Scotland Yard, the cops that have been on the take, British Intelligence which is trying to recover salacious photos of Princess Margaret that were in the boxes, a local Black Power rabbler-ouser who has ties to the pornographer and the local coppers that are trying to get to the bottom of the theft. Whether and how the thieves escape their seemingly hopeless fate is the fun part of this movie and the resolution along with written notations at the end that tie up the loose ends is greatly satisfying. The movie starts slowly as the prologue is somewhat difficult to follow until one gets used to the British dialects used, but once past the set-up, the movie is non-stop enjoyment. Total Points: 9.5 (out of 10).

21--Screenwriters have a difficult job. If they write a screenplay that is exactly like the book or source material, they will be accused of having no creativity. If they change it greatly, the new screenplay may work on its own merits, but those who have read the book will be disappointed because of the great differences. And so we have "21" - based on the Ben Mizrach book Bringing Down the House, which is a true account of a brilliant MIT student, his physics professor who gets him into counting cards at blackjack, his winning of hundreds of thousands of dollars with his counting "team" and his losing it all at the end, due to betrayal, jealousy and the casino's increased ability to identify card counters. This movie is not great, and it's nowhere near as engaging and thrilling as it could be. Part of the fault is the screenplay, which has added several elements not in the book meant to give more "believability", perhaps, to the story of Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess), who was called Kevin Lewis in the book and whose real name is Jeff Ma. But in the interests of "believability", they've changed the ethnicity of the protagonist, made him originally a nerd with nerdlike friends that he "leaves behind" as he discovers his new life, made the ultimate goal for him the admission to medical school, and made the professor (wonderfully played by Kevin Spacey) that started the counting scheme as evil as Hannibal Lecter. So it becomes a little like "Superbad" meats "Rounders". Frankly, the original story was gripping enough and sticking to the original plot would have worked better, but it's always nice to get caught up in Vegas, and for those with gambling interests, you probably won't want to miss this acceptable but not great addition to the body of gambling movies. Rating (out of 10): 8.0.

Vantage Point:Superb thriller shot in Mexico told in an unusual style. Story is about the attempted assassination of an American President (played by William Hurt) on the eve of a summit to unite against terrorism, a particularly dogged and adept secret service agent (Dennis Quaid), a lonely sightseer (Forest Whitaker) who plays a large role in the resolution, and several terrorists. The twist is that the 30 or so minutes of the story is laid out at least 4 times in parallel fashion, but each recitation takes the story a little farther.

As per the title, the action is told through several different vantage points. However, that's not really the case; instead, in each retelling of the story, a different character's role in the plot is detailed. As we learn the roles of the different characters, additional facts are "released", allowing the audience to begin to understand the details of a very complex plot.

The movie is sufficiently interesting and fast-paced that the viewer doesn't at any time get tired of the plot. The car chase scene set a new standard for those that will follow.The resolution is "edge-of-your-seat" exciting and satisfying. If you like the TV show 24, you'll love this movie. Total Rating: 10 (out of 10).

The Bucket List
- Rob Reiner has directed another superb movie, this time about two men from disparate walks of life who share a hospital room after both learning that they have less than a year to live. They create a "bucket list" of things that they've always wanted to do before "kicking the bucket". Morgan Freeman is his usual solid self, playing a mostly self-educated auto mechanic with a large loving family, who begins to wonder about his life after hearing the bad news. Jack Nicholson, on the other hand, is a nasty, mean billionaire businessman who has never had an introspective moment in his life. The story revolves around the two men discovering from their experiences with each other what is important in their own lives. Nicholson gives a tremendous performance - as noteworthy in its own way as his performance in another of Reiner's great films - A Few Good Men. It's a somewhat unusual male bonding movie, because all the bonding occurs in the three or so months before their appointments with death. Lots of humor, tears and enjoyment. Rating: 10 (out of 10).

P.S. I Love You - An almost perfect love story though very different than what you might imagine. Holly Kennedy (Hilary Swank) and her Irish husband Jerry have been married for 9 years, and in the introduction, we see them having an argument not very atypical for two people who basically love each other, but neither has quite made of their lives what they might have wished. Then come the opening credits, after which we move to the bar owned by Holly's mother (a great, subdued Kathy Bates) where we see that Jerry has died of a brain tumor. The remainder of the movie is a starkly real portrait of a woman that truly loved her husband, and what she ends up doing to move on. There are lots of small surprises, a number of very touching scenes and flashbacks, and I don't think the writers took the cheap way out even once, something that is rare in this type of film. The existential question that is at least partly answered by the end: How do you compare the pain of a woman whose loved one has died of a brain tumor to a woman who has been abandoned by her husband because "love is gone"? Great movie, though you'll need many hankies. Total Points: 10 (out of 10).

Oscar Winners