The Producers -- 2005 -- PG-13

This film is based on the Mel Brooks' Broadway musical which also starred Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick, which was based on the 1968 film of the same name which starred Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.

Probably the easiest part of any musical is characterizing the main characters, and as with any musical, this is done very well. You get a real sense of who the main characters are as well as the supporting cast through their own character songs and moments.

The film had plenty of funny moments to it, and it even had a solid plot. It follows a down-on-his-luck Broadway producer who figures out through his nerdy accountant that with some creative bookkeeping, a producer can make more money with a flop than with a hit. So begins the roller coaster.

The way it all unfolded was just hilarious and the potential for the awful quality was there right from the get-go. The musical ended up being a romp called "Springtime For Hitler." Note this film is set close enough to the end of World War II to make this topic incredibly sensitive, so the potential for this to be a flop was right there. I found myself laughing at a lot of this and the ensuing madness when (surprise) the musical didn't flop.

There were some problems though. One of them is just in the musical to movie translation (and this may have been present in the original film). The first main scene in the office was incredibly long. After the opening scene where our producer is discussed as having another flop, we go to his office where all the principal characters and plot are introduced. This scene runs for over fifteen minutes -- an eternity for a movie. I felt it needed something to break it up a little.

In addition, I didn't quite understand the consequences of the premise. Apparently, if you bring in more money from investors than you spend on the product...you can get into trouble? Why would you get into trouble? Or my main question: if you are caught, why can't you just give the money back? This point was never explained, and I'm guessing they thought the audience would just get it? I didn't. When the musical did not flop, I didn't understand why they couldn't just say they were cooking the books and realized they did not require the funds they'd originally requested and simply return the investors' money. This was the only unexplained point, and it was big enough in my head to make the last third of the movie questionable.

If you can get past that point and just roll with it, it's a fun film though.

Barbie as The Princess and the Pauper -- 2004 - NR

Figured I've been subjected to this video about a hundred times, I might as well post something on it.

This is a musical film starring (yeah, you might have guessed already) Barbie blonde and Barbie brunette as Anneliese and Erika, the twins born to different sets of parents and who end up switching places. And that's where the similarities to the Mark Twain story end. Where the prince and the pauper switched places by choice, the princess and the pauper switched by circumstance and drama -- a better way, in my opinion.

The music was actually quite good, and I do find myself humming the tunes. The composer is obviously quite talented. The lyrics, on the other hand, are lacking a bit in the talent arena. The most glaring example or poor lyrics is the reference of "calico" to a male cat. The lyrics occasionally served to move the story, but on the whole, just were there to give the actors something to sing. One of the more popular songs (I say so, because I've been subjected to it through matching dolls -- girls are fun), "A Girl Like You," made little sense in the context of the plot, although parts of it worked to establish a little character.

As for the film, the plot, itself, was solid enough, but jam packed with contrivances. It is painfully clear that this movie was made for children since even the premise of the whole thing is contrived -- a kingdom is bankrupt because the mine ran out of gold. Let's think about this. This kingdom is positioned in the mountains and isolated. This means it should be economically self-sufficient, for the most part. Even if we consider that it trades with other kingdoms, trade is a two way street. If they are bankrupt, that means either poor management of assets or that the kingdom has nothing to offer for trade except gold. If that is all the kingdom has, though, it wouldn't be a kingdom. What we are supposed to accept from the very beginning to accept any portion of the story is that this kingdom's sole provider has been their gold mine as opposed to ANY exports, and rather than practicing good economics among their own people of this isolated kingdom in the mountains, the monarchy just bought stuff from other kingdoms and gave away all the kingdom's assets. Since the kingdom has clearly been in place long enough to build an ostentatious castle, this seem unlikely, but if the movie is to make any sense, we need to accept it.

Another contrivance was Preminger ordering that the princess be seized once he learned the truth. Let's be honest: can anyone other than the queen order that her daughter be seized. I mean, Preminger can suggest it, but if I were a guard and he said to seize the princess, I'd have some serious reservations.

The movie also implied that Preminger's gold was iron pyrite, but while this was interesting, it was never pursued. 

So, overall we have good music, shaky lyrics, good plot, but bad believability. I've been subjected to a few of these Barbie videos, and this was the start of a downhill slope for the films.

Platoon -- 1986 -- R

The film that put Oliver Stone on the map follows a young Charlie Sheen as a wet behind the ears private during his tour in Vietnam. He moves from a boy of hope to a man of blood, unafraid to do whatever it takes to survive his harsh reality.

During this bit, we are introduced to a variety of different characters, each exemplifying a personality one can expect to find in the Nam world. The idiot lieutenant newbie; the battle-hardened sergeant offset by the understanding, reasonable sergeant; the captain who commands respect; and of course, the myriad of nameless, faceless "gooks" that litter the Vietnam landscape and kill everything that moves.

The characters were developed very well, however, and did force me to care about their lives and what's going on. It even demonstrated the horrors the military enacted by attacking (and killing) innocent Vietnamese and destroying everything in their path.

While pulling a lot of cliches into the mix, the film was very good and dramatic to watch. It contained a slew of solid suspenseful moments enhanced by the development of the story as well as a few well setup shocker moments. It had a satisfying ending and kept me fairly glued by the plot and pacing.

In the end, the film asserted that in this instance, they were not so much fighting against the enemy out there, but the enemy within. I'd say it was quote good.

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl -- 2003 -- PG-13

Though billed as being in the Caribbean, I have no idea where in the Caribbean this movie takes place. Port Royal is the only location mentioned without regard to what country Port Royal is in. It's a swashbuckling adventure movie (obviously) with lots of sword fights and stunts, and a plot that threatens to drag, but never quite slows down enough to do so despite its running time of nearly two and a half hours.

Jack Sparrow is put forth as quite amusing and clever in his dealings, although his status as a pirate tends to make others doublethink his plans too much, thereby derailing them. Will Turner appears to be a well-meaning character though his method of thinking seems constantly strange. He trusts Jack...and then he doesn't....and then he does...and then he doesn't.

Only the initial premise is a little thin and hard to believe: that it took ten years for Jack to show up and track down the Black Pearl. In the film, he finds it pretty easily without any effort at all, and it doesn't appear that it would have been difficult for him to have found her before this. What his hold up was is never explained, but we can infer a lot of stuff that won't make sense.

Beyond this, the story was good, and it was fun to watch.

Phone Booth -- 2002 -- R

This was one of those old fashioned cerebral thrillers where someone is dragged into an almost no win situation and must try to figure some way out of it. Stu Shepherd just happens to be standing in the last phone booth in New York City when the phone rings, and he answers it. On the other end is a guy who knows everything about his darkest secrets, and if Stu wants to get out alive, he has to come clean...or does he?

If Stu hangs up the phone, he dies. The guy has a sniper rifle trained on him from one of several hundred windows looking down on this booth, and before you know it, the sniper guns down a guy causing trouble for Stu. Now the cops and riot squads demand that Stu come out, but if he does, he dies. If he doesn't do what the guy want, someone else dies.

There is some great character transformation in Stu from a selfish to selfless during his time in the phone booth, which is the only real setting in the entire film. The tension drawn through the Stu-Killer dialogue is outstanding and makes this a real thrill to watch. High action is fun sometimes, but this is a thriller of a Hitchcockian style like Lifeboat or Rope. The diaogue is the driving force and it continues to drive.

Great flick.

Psycho -- 1960 -- R

This is probably Alfred Hitchcock's most famous movie, and considered to be the grandfather of the slasher genre, although this film is not a slasher, but a thriller. 

It follows a woman who steals some money and runs, eventually finding herself at a rundown hotel in the middle of nowhere. After chatting with the proprietor of the establishment for awhile, she learns he lives in the house behind the motel with his aged mother. When his mother doesn't take too kindly to her boy oogling the new girl, mother takes action. The thrills continue to escalate to a shocking conclusion.

As a thriller, this film takes one situation after another and milks it for all its worth from the escape with the cash to walking through the old house, it's an edge of the seat kind of ride from the thriller master. 

Though considered to be the grandfather of the slasher movie, don't get this confused with the gorefests of today. This film has two kills and almost no blood. It flows like a thriller with well-crafted characters and the constant question marks of "What is going on?" and "Will so-and-so make it?"

Hitchcock rarely fails to deliver a great film, and it's no wonder this one is so good as he had been directing for 34 years by the time this film was made. I have yet to downplay a hitchcock, so don't miss this one either.

Parts: The Clonus Horror -- 1979 -- R

Since The Island borrowed a lot from this film, I opted to watch it again. This one didn't play out as well as The Island did, but it did have that similar premise. We get a lot of information from the get-go here explaining practically everything so everything I've said is not even much of any spoiler.

Believability issues abound here, though. This clone, while having average intelligence, is able to do a lot of things that he could now have learned and really can't be done unless taught. There was a sheet of paper he managed to identify as a map and that he used constantly within a multi-floor facility to find his way around. So not only does he have impeccable map-reading skills, but a multi-floor facility fit on a little sheet of paper. Wow. He also knew about the elevator maintenance hatch...not bad for someone who couldn't possibly have been told this or seen one used. He even knew how to use a VCR. Didn't fit the training programs, nor did they have TV's in their rooms. This clone knew too much for what he would have been taught according to the film.

The music used was cliche and one scene was 70's action sequence all the way. The alarm used in a facility was the "red alert" from Star Trek. The way the clone ended up being tracked reminded me heavily of Mr. Big's network in Live and Let Die (book and movie). And how'd he get out? He avoided being shot by a sharpshooter(?!).

And the ending wasn't much better. Stepford Wives, anyone?

Planet of the Apes -- 2001 -- PG-13

This remake by Tim Burton has a lot of good things going for it. The plot is decent and everything ties together better than the original version. The main character has a direct responsibility for what is going on. Some good action, and not too many contrivances make the plot side of this film very enjoyable.

However, the character side stinks. Non of the characters have any character at all. While some are likable, they never get developed to the point that we care. There are several hints made at the past of a few of them, but the topic is never persued to the point where we fully understand. The biggest pet peeve though is that I didn't know the name of a single character. The names were barely used throughout the film (perhaps once or twice for each character), and without a solid understanding of the name, character just goes into the toilet here. I take it back...I know the monkey's name was Proteus or Hercules or something Greek like that.

So it had a good plot, and the main character's journey (whatever his name was) was pretty well defined and relatable. If the names were interjected more throughout the script, that would have helped a lot.

Poseidon -- 2006 -- PG-13

Ok, so we have a disaster movie about a cruise ship that is hit by a freak tidal wave that flips it completely over on it top, leaving only the bottom of the ship exposed on the surface of the ocean. It happens on New Year's Eve so most of the passengers are reveling in either the big ballroom or another dance hall. One of the first things we are told is that once the boat was hit, GPS trackers were launched that will allow rescuers to pinpoint their location and pick them up -- few hours, tops.

From there, we launch into a journey from the bottom of the ship -- first, by a single passenger, and then by a group who want to follow him to get out, against the Captain's reassurance that the room they are in will keep them safe. I'd seen the 1972 version some time ago, so I knew exactly where that ballroom was going, but that's beside the point.

Long story short, their goal was to reach a propeller shaft so they could walk out of the bottom of the ship. Now, just to clarify (and this is not a spoiler, since I never include spoilers [the ballroom thing doesn't count; it should be obvious]), I thought the propeller he was referring to was the propellers at the rear (or stern) of the ship, so imagin my surprise when hit a certain point and announce that they are stuck because the bow in underwater. I'm laughing and saying, "you idiots, you should be heading for the stern." Well, turns out that this ship has some stabilizing propellers in the front of the ship, and THAT'S where they were going. I had no idea...

The film has a decent enough plot with some built in thrills and spills of the passengers working their way through the upside down maze of this behemoth ship to the bottom. Got a fair amount of claustrophobia and such of them working their way through, and not a lot of plot holes to fall into. Those who die are clearly telepgraphed before it happens and most are cliche deaths whose reasons for dying are incredibly obvious. There was an incredibly forced conflict with the kid running off near the end and getting himself trapped somewhere. Seriously, what kid in that situation is going to leave mom? And let's face it, folks. Despite its death in 68, we all know that parts of that 1930 production code are still in full force (in mainstream films), so the kid's fate is also incredibly obvious as is the ending.

The breakdown in this film is a very common breakdown in a lot of modern films...can you guess? Character. Introducing nearly a dozen characters and then developing them in a two hour film is a difficult thing to do, but this film wasn't two hours long. It only ran 90 minutes and then 10 minutes of credits (because they were a large font, double spaced -- I joked that if this were a Spielberg film, you couldn't read anyone's name with zoom, but here, everyone's was clearly visible -- anyway...). This means they actually had a half hour of time that could have been used to let the audience connect with these people. Give us a little of their personality, history, hopes, dreams, desires, goals, problems, issues, or something more than a bunch of nameless people trying to get out of a sinking ship. We got a little of some of them, but a lot of the actions were cliches and didn't set them apart from anyone else in the world. There was an incredible opportunity for development between Dreyfuss' character and the girl who stowed away, but it was blown off (I was even expecting it, and it never happened).

What it seems is that there was too much pressure to keep the plot going and character was left by the wayside. This is unfortunate in films like this since a quick study of the best of the best reveals that what makes them great is not the plot (because some of the best films in the world have a simple plot), but it's the character inside them. This film could have been much better, but it abandoned the most important part of the film in favor of getting through it. It has no real rewatchability to learn more about the people inside.

And finally...there was a raft waiting for those who made it out...with oars. I just shook my head and rolled my eyes. That has got to be the sickest coincidence I've ever seen. That's not a spoiler...that's just awful.

Prelude to a Kiss -- 1992 -- PG-13

I watched this one as I watch a lot of films: knowing absolutely nothing but the title and maybe some cover art. I knew about Meg Ryan and Alec Baldwin, so I made the RomCom assumption. It moved rather fast through the first 45 minutes. I was beginning to wonder what I was in for since it was breaking a lot of coventions. My shocker came at the halfway point. The movie makes no secret of what went on if you're paying attention.

This bizarre twist is what makes this film unique in the romcom world. After this halfway point, we have a totally differnet movie to work through, and to be honest, this is where it started slowing down. Through several scenes, the point was reached very quickly, but the scene continued. I wanted to move on. The old man tended to chatter on a long time when he was on screen despite his identity. It was strange and just a reversal from the characters we met in the first half.

The separation part of this one was uncommonly long, but uncommon anyway since it was only kind of a separation. Once we started moving into the final 15 minutes, the pace picked back up and the climax was very satisfying.

It's not a bad film, and it's unique enough to work well with me. I definitely did not see what happened at the halfway point coming at all, and the rest remained fairly unpredictable as well. Despite a few slow spots, it was good.

Pulse (Kairo) -- 2001 -- R

This is the Japanese version of the film that has been remade into an American version and I'm not sure if its out yet or not.

I was rather concerned early on when we were going through mundane tasks such as installing an internet browser complete with entering the serial number in that this movie might run a bit slow. Well, it was definitely a slow burning fuse and a very cerebral flick, as a lot of Japanese horror tends to be.

We get introduced to two people and their immediate cirlce of friends. One is a girl working in a plant shop who has a friend with a side job of programming or something. She goes to his place to get a disk, and he hangs himself just before disappearing into a moldy spot on the wall.

The other is a economics student who installs the internet for the first time (hooray, dial-up!) and is immediately logged onto a video site promising to interact with the dead. This site figures somewhat prominently into the backdrop of this weird plot and multiple videos of the dead are displayed depending on how many monitors they happen to have. Of course, this flips out the student guy, and he usually turns off his computer after a few minutes.

The plant girl slowly loses her friends to their own moldy spots on the walls after they enter a forbidden room, which is a room that has been sealed off by red tape. Anyone who goes into this room and interacts with a ghost will become a moldy spot. The student guy has the same experience, but he befriendsa computer girl who tries to help, but ends up being sucked into the ghostly world via the dead video sites, which apparently have much the same effect as the forbidden room.

Getting lost? Well, it does its best to keep the film moving along despite the relative confusion. We do eventually get a decent explanation of what's going on and it slowly affects everyone in the world until student guy and plant girl are the only ones left and they meet up. Student guy looks for computer girl and in a fit of total randomness,they decide she must be in an abandoned factory. ?!

But here's the part that really gets me. Once the two main characters hook up and go off gallavanting together to find all the answers, they split up on several occasions. "Wait here. I'll be right back." No no no no no no no! You're in situations where sticking together keeps each one of you safe from the freaky stuff going on. If I never hear the phrase, "Let's split up," in a horror movie again, I'll die a happy man.

Of course they find her there, and she reenacts one of the things we saw earlier on the video site. It's Japanese horror, so it's no secret that everyone is totally screwed so it's not much of a spoiler to say it doesn't work out too well for anyone here.

The main pair of characters are pretty well developed through their interactions with their friends, and their friends get developed both before and after they die...or rather, become moldy spots.

In all honesty, the film does build a really creepy atmosphere, and while it's not a scary film, like a lot of Japanese horror, you're bound to be at least a little creeped out by the goings on in this one.

The Polar Express -- 2004 -- G

I watched this one again the other day, and just like when I saw it in the theatre the first time, it was amazing film. The story is very, very simple and a bit fantastical.

A boy who doesn't believe in Santa Claus is whicked away one night on a magical train that will take him and a group of other kids to the North Pole. Along the way, they run into a variety of misadventures involving a ticket, the train, and a weird hobo, but visually, it's all a pleasure to watch unfold.

Animation was a perfect choice of venue for this one since trying to do a live action movie with what's in here would have been beyond expensive, and the special effects might have been cool, but not as cool as this one looked. The characters looked really good for computer animation as well. It used a performance capture technique that was supposed to be very new and unused before. Well, it worked remarkably well.

Given that this is essentially an animated Christmas movie, we have our set of songs to make it a musical, but the songs were well-written as well. The main song of the film is entitled "Believe" and it is still being played on the radio around Christmas time. Heard it very recently as a matter of fact.

There was one little plot device that I found a little off, and that was the know-it-all kid...yeah, these characters don't actually have names. IMDB identifies the lead as "hero boy." But this know-it-all kid served as a bit of comic relief on the train, and then seemed to follow our main three at the North Pole as they got into a fix. The problem here is that these three went all over the place, and there's no way he could have followed them exactly. He ends up in the gift bag, and how he got in there is anyone's guess, but he apparently failed to actually follow them as the plot implied. To make it weirder, he serves no purpose for being there, so it's a device that really didn't matter. He could have been left out, and this hiccup totally avoided.

Finally, if one thinks back over their original journey, I can't help but wonder if they had any problems going back. After all, a good portion of the track was at the bottom of a lake at one point and this lake, which was iced over, busted clean through meaning that this train essentially drove under water for a bit. Sure, movie's over, but still...

It was a great flick to watch, and though rated G, it was thoroughly enjoyable as well. I'm sure it'll be a Christmas classic as the years roll on and rightly so, because they really did a good job on it.

Princess Mononoke -- 1997 -- PG-13

Don't let the name or animation fool you. This is a solid PG-13 film that the kids should no be watching. Way too much violence and graphic stuff, and I'm actually surprised how it missed R...probably because it is animated blood.

Anyway, this film follows a guy who is cursed by a demonic creature and he is forced to leave his village to discover where this thing came from and if the curse can be reversed. He ends up discovering two sides to a war of man vs. the spirits and creatures of the forest. This one has a slew of interesting and unique characters that get fair amounts of screen time each to give you an idea of who they are (or at least enough to wonder whose side they're on). Tons of battles that aren't just run of the mill. Some wild animation and larger than life situations that are tackled in remarkable ways by the animation medium.

Things turn from bad to worse, and our hero tries to keep both sides under control as he tries helping them equally without betraying either one. While some sides are introduced as evil, you start to wonder which side you should actually be cheering for.

It's a fascinating movie with a lot of depth and interest to it. It definitely deserves its place on IMDB's top 250.

Pulp Fiction -- 1994 -- R

I first saw this film in 1994 when I got to Fort Carson in the military. I didn't understand it at all at the time. Now, 12 years later, I've watched it again, and I get it.

The genius of this film rests in the dialogue. There is endless banter running through this film among all the characters which serves to firmly root them as people with lives outside of the narrative of the plot. This is a fundamental necessity of any story and it is done with ease throughout the movie.

The stories are told out of order like you have a stack of pulp fiction books and are going through them in the order of the stack, but not necessarily the order of release. When I first saw this, I thought the story being out of order was someone's warped mind, or just projectionist screwing up on the film. Well, it is a warped mind, but as I said, seeing years later, I understood it and it works beautifully.

The only problem this film has is the tendency to drag a little bit when the conversations go on too long. Some of what is being discussed is interesting, but sometimes, the banter just drags and although well delivered, you just want some scenes to get moving on to the next one. We're dealing with a 2 1/2 hour movie here, so brevity should be the rule, but it wasn't always.

All in all, this was a very good film to watch. It really didn't have a point to it beyond a collection of clever little stories that intertwine somewhat, but it was a lot of fun.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest -- 2006 -- PG-13

I'm finally trying to catch up on some backlogged reviews here. I watched this one last month, and instead of putting it first, I've been writing up stuff on whatever I'd just seen. A review for this one has been deleted probably 2 or 3 times now, which makes for a discouraging attempt to review anything.

Anyway, this sequel to the Curse of the Black Pearl makes a nice little follow up to the previous film that uses the final events against the characters as the wedding of Will and Elizabeth is interrupted by charges of conspiracy against the crown for letting the notorious Jack Sparrow escape. Will's only hope of getting out of this is retrieving an item from Jack: his compass that pointed to the Isla de Muerta. Naturally, Will points out that getting this item is silly since the treasure on the island is cursed, but it turns out the compass has a greater purpose.

In tracking down Jack, Will finds him trapped on an island of natives as their ruler with his crew all locked up in cages. Jack is hiding because he doesn't want to fall victim to the Kraken of Davy Jones, a guy to whom Jack owes a debt of his life. Once off that little island, Jack tells Will that he is on a quest of his own: he wants to find a key to a chest, but the key is in the possession of this Davy Jones guy. He now wants Will to help him get this key.

Fast forward to Will being sent over to Davy Jones' ship after this key thing. Davy Jones' ship turns out to be this weird vessel of fish-men. They claim to be men who have sold themselves into 100 years of servitude to Davy Jones for something he gave them in life. Jack apparently cut a deal with Davy Jones to get 100 souls to replace his own, and Will fell into that bargain. As for the fish-men, I can understand they way some of them look, but does being on an underwater boat really turn you into a fish?

It goes on from there to get ahold of the title Dead Man's Chest and all that comes out of locating, taking, and losing the chest and/or contents as it relates to the big picture. The film ends on a cliffhanger, but in a big budget film way so we're satisfied that we contributed our part to making this half a story.

This whole film is the first part to a two part set to round out a trilogy of Pirate films, so a lot of plot threads go unresolved and the film turns out to be 60% setup to what will follow in this year's conclusion.

There were only a few new characters heere, so everyone that carried over from the last film benefited from familiarity to us allowing the film to take right off from the beginning without letting up. There were tons of madcap adventures lending laughs and some thrills as it carried on. It gets very, very plot heavy the further you get into it, and given that it's 2 1/2 hours long, it manages to maintain interest by throwing yet more plot at us...and even more plot. Add in the swashbuckling stuff, lots of humor, and a few sword fights with accessories and ta-da, there you have it.

I will say it's very refreshing to find a film that uses the world and characters and places them all in an entirely new story instead of rehashing the original plot. That makes for a very good sequel to begin with. On another note, it's also nice that they didn't use a number in the title. Sometimes, you need a number, but I find that sequels are somehow better if there is no number there. Don't know why.

So the film's a lot of fun to watch and get lost in. Though it is very thick on the plot and doesn't fully resolve, there are enough reversals, laughs, and surprises to keep you glued as it runs through. It won't stand well without it's introductory part or it's following conclusion, but for what it is, it's definitely an above average film.

The Protector (Tom yum goong) -- 2005 -- R

Thailand has a movie market, and that's where this film came out of. It's one of those ultra-action, martial arts extravaganzas where the whole purpose of the film is to get a bunch of scenes strung together to set up long, elaborate action sequences. Story? Well, "Who cares?" is an appropriate come back to that one.

 

The basic plot of The Protector ("Tom yum goong" being its original Thai title) involves a family who are pledged to raise and protect elephants, who are used in battle by kings. It is believed that a good elephant contributes to the life force of a king and makes him powerful. The plot starts when there is an "open call" or something for elephants and when old man decides not to give away his elephant (can't figure this one out), he is killed and the elephant is taken anyway. This prompts the old man's grandson, Kham, to chase after him, which causes his to lose not only the elder elephant his grandfather was caring for, but also the baby. Kham tracks them to Australia with only a photo of two men in front of a restaurant to go by in order to get back his elephants.

 

Once in Australia, the film gets really confusing in terms of the storyline. To this stolen elephant plot, we add a plot of police corruption, drug trade, and assassination, all of which only marginally intersect our main elephant tracking plot. This whole part could have been completely left out and the movie lost very little since we apparently only came to watch Kham jump about and beat people up using a variety of theatrical martial arts.

 

Now, in the action department, this movie is absolutely incredible. Tony Jaa (who plays Kham) is very limber, very acrobatic, and just plain fast in all of his moves. The fight sequences are incredibly choreographed, and move non-stop from one end to the other. The opponents are fairly realistic in their attacking in that, on one occasion, Kham gets surrounded, and they all attack at once. Our hero does the best thing and makes a run for it to try and have at his attackers one or two at a time. He frequently takes on two at a time throughout the film, and sometimes as many as three. He didn't just fight scrawny martial arts guy either. He got to the point of fighting these huge strong-men; you know, the kind that you can beat on and they just laugh to you? But everything has its limits.

 

The more sequences we got, the longer they started to feel, and the more I just wanted the story to move forward. We got into a building on fire, and it started to feel very video gameish with random characters to fight coming out of no where and his previously defeated opponents disappearing from where they'd fallen (again, kind of video game style). The strongmen got really tedious when he's beaten on one of them for a while and then three more showed up. By the time, the main villain started interfering with the battles with the strongmen, you just want to tell her to let it end already. When it was finally over, I felt about as tired as our hero from watching the non-stop sequences.

 

As for character…who are we kidding? It was a fight movie. Kham was ok, but that's because we got some insight into his head when he passed out. We also got some minimal backstory for him. But everyone else was cardboard and fodder for Kham to beat up.

 

This is one of those guilty pleasure films that lets you feel like a little kid when you watch all the punches fly. It doesn't really lend itself to anything deep, but sometimes a mindless punch-out film is a lot of fun. This one certainly moves and is just impressive to watch.

A Prairie Home Companion -- 2006 -- PG-13

This is an interesting offering for someone of the post-radio generation who can't fully relate to the very concept this movie represents. Sure, we all have radios in our cars, but to have an entire hour and a half radio show where the songs aren't prerecorded and the commercials aren't either? That's different for us, but was once as normal as live news broadcasts (via satellite from Iraq) are today.

The Prairie Home Companion follows the cast of this radio show during their final broadcast performance. The station that broadcasts it sold out to a modern company who wants to axe the show after this final night where a live audience watches the show as it broadcasts its acts, commercials, and songs live from the decorated stage. We are introduced to each of the characters who perform onstage and backstage, and how they really feel about this final show. Some are distraught and don't know what to know, while the leader seems oddly detached from the proceedings. There is no plot threading through this beyond getting to know these people as their life as they know it comes to an end when the curtain comes down. It's sad in many ways because we are told of the inevitable before it begins, but its enjoyable to watch them put it all behind them for one final evening of performances only to rejoin the real world offstage.

But we're not without a really weird and pointless flaw (in my opinion, anyway). We're introduced at the beginning to a woman dressed in a white trenchcoat, and we wonder who she is and what she wants. Well, her true purpose blows the whole realism of the story. Her presence isn't even touching. Her backstory is all right, but the whole story could have gone without her and  have been far better for the deletion.

This is material based apparently on a play and it really feels like it due to its single set feel throughout. It's nice to see the sheer numbers running around trying to make it all work, the characters are nice, and some of the jokes are quite funny (particularly the final set told by Dusty and Lefty), but it teeters on the edge of being slow. Could be our viewpoint of modern movies and their high action as opposed to the old school films of lots of chatter and character building, but I've seen better paced movies with less action.

So overall, it's not a bad film. The character are nice, and the story makes sense. The ending was a bit cheesy and ambiguous, but barring the "dangerous woman" it was pretty good.

Leon (The Professional) -- 1994 -- R

Here's something rather special...Jean Reno, always the French cop, never the lead, takes the lead in this film about a "cleaner" who is highly skilled at his craft. Natalie Portman in her first big screen appearance 5 years before Star Wars: Episode 1 showing how good she is. It all amounts to a movie that is equal parts disturbing, touching, and tragic but well crafted.

Leon is a professional hitman who handles jobs given to him by a man named Tony. 12-year-old Mathilda lives next door to Leon with her family (mother, father, sister, brother), and they've passed each other in the hall before, so they're familiar with each other. Worst comes to worst one day when Mathilda's father is set upon by a set of goons lead by Stansfield (played by Gary Oldman, who is rather wirey and psychotic in his performance), and they wipe out her entire family while she is out for groceries. Upon seeing the carnage, she wisely walks past the door and acts as if she lives with Leon instead. So begins a relationship between the two where she wants to be trained as a cleaner so she can exact revenge for the death of her little brother, but Leon wants no part of that, though some part of his cold self wants to take care of her.

The film is centered around the relationships between these characters and the situations they find themselves in. Leon does take Mathilda in as an apprentice of sorts, allowing her to accompany him on his hits and even assist him in drawing out the bad guy. Mathilda falls for Leon in a way only a little girl can, and he wisely maintains a fatherly distance from her. Stansfield maintains his psychosis throughout his bizarre part of the overall plot which I would not spoil here. These are three very well drawn characters that lead us through this interesting little story.

The whole thing flows very naturally and smoothly, and I didn't find it dragging at any point really. Leon is exceptionally clever in escaping difficult and dangerous situations and watching the intelligence given to him is nothing short of impressive.

This is a very cool film with lots of action and character built in which not only gives you a satisfying movie experience, but one that allows you to sink into the story presented and feel like you just viewed something that might have actually happened instead of some kind of sick fantasy. Definitely worthy of its place in the greatest films of all time.

The Philadelphia Story -- 1940

Not to be confused with the movie Philadelphia from the 90's about AIDS, this one is about a love triangle (square?) and ranks as one of film history's best. In top billing, we have Cary Grant, Jimmy Stewart (in his one and only Oscar winning role), and Katherine Hepburn. Completing the list of three lovers for Miss Hepburn is a guy named John Howard. Let me tell you something suspicious about Mr. Howard: he looks just like Clark Gable in this movie! If you don't know better, you'd swear they got themselves a heck of a star lineup, but not so. I can only guess that they couldn't afford Clark after his Gone With The Wind stint, so they got a look alike to fill in. Click here for pictures from the movie see if he doesn't look like Gable. 

Anyway, the story involves a reporter and photographer invited to the wedding of a socialite by her ex-husband who wants her plastered all over the papers (the rag in question is similar to our Star or People magazines). The Ex claims they're friends of a friend of the family who couldn't come, but the family doesn't buy it for a minute. Through the course of the story and a lot of misadventures and misunderstandings, the girl is left to choose the ex, the reporter (who is really in love with the photographer), or the fiancee. Who will win? We shall see.

Now, the movie is based on a stage play, and as such, the characters are amazing. The plot is delivered via the dialogue, and I read it was even edited some to fit the code of the time. Each of the three primary leads (sorry, Gable look alike, you don't count) are perfect. Prior to this film, Katherine Hepburn was box office poison; no more after this. The film delivers laughs and emotion and finally, a satisfying ending.

Now, I will admit, it runs a bit slow here and there when you want it move along, but it's not that bad. The pacing keeps up for the most part from one scene to another, and it all makes sense.

So, we have a good movie in this one. Just confirming what I'd read and others have said. This film is worth watching, so turn off Scary Movie 2, for crying out loud, and watch it!

Pulse -- 2006 -- PG-13

So I'm about to tick off all the J-Horror enthusiasts who saw the original Kairo from 2001 and say this American remake made a lot more sense than the Japanese original. Yup, I've seen them both. The premise is basically the same, but the American version set it up better and explained it better and ended it better. If you want the Japanese plot, you can search for my Kairo review.

We open up with a guy meeting someone in a library, but instead, he's met with a freaky looking ghost. He goes AWOL for several days before his girlfriend decides to check on him. When she does, she finds one messed up guy who kills himself while she's there. Suddenly, people start dropping like flies all over the place; it's one suicide after another and the population is dropping like a stone.

Meanwhile, the boyfriend who killed himself is begging for help on a chat board leading someone to go over to his old apartment to make sure his machine is logged off. Once there, this someone find no machine hooked up at all, but a room covered in red tape. He checks out the room and the bad ghosty gets him too. The computer is sold off to a guru with whom the girlfriend gets in touch. Together, they work to find dead boyfriend's buddy to find out what he did and how to possibly stop it.

This movie was all two things: the plot which wasn't bad and a message which was very obvious. Nearly every piece of what happened was explained here, unlike the Japanese version which preferred ambiguity to explanation. We understand the point of the red tape and what those rooms are supposed to be. I suspect their purpose is different than Kairo, or maybe this was just how the American writers interpreted it so it made sense. We were a bit ripe with coincidence, but those aside, I understood the reasoning behind what was going on. 

I did find going into the computer room a bit weird followed by going into this basement area. If their goal was going to be the basement why stop at the computer room? Also, was every ghost dangerous or just the main one? If the bad guys could come through cell phones, why didn't our heroine just turn hers off? And my biggest beef: if boyfriend had the solution, why did he leave it for others to find? Why not use it? An upload can come from anywhere to anywhere.

The message here is that the technology intended to bring us closer will take away our will to live and destroy us. Sound familiar? It's a doomsday film, plain and simple. It was presented as a horror flick, but all that did was drive off the doomsday flickers and tick off the horror flickers. If anything contributed to this film's failure, that did. It was presented incorrectly.

To touch on characters, they really were vehicles to drive the plot on. They had no past, no dreams, no nothing. Just people you watch go through this plot.

So in the end, it's not a bad film. It was very easy to watch, there were some genuinely creepy moments (not scary, but creepy), and a plot that made a lot more sense than its predecessor. If you're looking for the next Ring, look elsewhere. If you want something fairly decent to pass the time, it's not a bad choice.