Bolt - 2008 at 3:33 PM

The canine star of a fictional sci-fi/action show that believes his powers are real embarks on a cross country trek to save his co-star from a threat he believes is just as real.


The Good: The animation is good.

The Bad: The visual quality doesn’t compare to Pixar quality movies and the plot seems like we’ve done before.  Toy Story, The Incredibles, Inspector Gadget, Kim Possible or even 101 Dalmations.

The Ugly: Nothing really.  The bad guys don’t really seem that bad, ugly or vicious at any point.

The Summary: The movie is enjoyable, pleasantly safe for children and just a bit interesting for adults.  You won’t walk away disappointed but you also won’t want to get a T-Shirt with a Bolt iron on.

Not Disney’s best but it is one of their better movies lately.

If you have kids, they will probably love it until they are 7 years old.

Fahrenheit 451 - 1966 at 3:33 PM

In an oppressive future, a fireman whose duty is to destroy all books begins to question his task.

The Good: The attempt.  I'm glad they tried to make this movie. 

The Bad: The method.  Artistic but essentially boring.

The Ugly: The truth.  We live in that world today.  E-Books make burning unnecessary but instead much more easily editable.

The Summary:  I know, my details are a bit abstract but they really summarized how I felt about this movie.  I read the book in High School and again recently.  As a fan of old films I knew not to expect any current interpretation of the book but this one really was a leap.  VERY symbolic yet they chose to omit so much of the novel that I felt was pertinent to the story.  It looks like most of the money was spent on that railway if it wasn’t there previously for any other reason.  It really seemed silly as hard as I tried to take myself out of my “modern” view of the world.  The film was just not enjoyable and I don’t think I’ll ever want to watch it again.  The “wall tv” was interesting considering that we have pretty much that same thing now with our LCD’s and YouTube etc…

This movie should burn.  If they remade it though, I would give it a chance.

Food, Inc. (2009) at 10:16 PM

See this film. It will change the way you look at food in the supermarket.

I am biased when it comes to this subject, since I’ve read a lot about it and I am now studying Sustainable Food Systems at Montana State University. I wasn’t surprised by what I saw in the film but it still affected me. For instance, I wasn’t shocked to see the cattle feedlots or to hear that Monsanto bullies farmers all over the Midwest. However, seeing the images or hearing the stories puts a lot of what I’ve read and/or studied into focus.

Basically, the documentary exposes the food industry’s flaws. Our food system is sick and the FDA and the USDA aren’t doing anything about it (or they are doing very little). It’s up to us, the consumer, to demand better food. We subsidize cheap, unhealthy food. The poor and minorities have increasing rates of obesity and Type 2 diabetes simply because a bag of chips and a 2 liter of soda are cheaper to buy than a bag of apples or a head of broccoli. When you have limited money to spend on food, you will buy what will last you the longest, even if it’s the unhealthiest.

This is not a Michael Moore-style documentary with crazy antics to get points across. This is a standard documentary and a well-made one at that. The filmmakers talk to authors like Michael Pollen and Eric Schlosser who have been writing on this subject for years. The film covers a wide selection of subjects -- from talking about corn to showing animals being slaughtered. The movie flows at a good pace and they managed to pack a lot of information into 1 1/2 hours. The producers even published a guide book for the film. I've flipped through the book but haven't purchased it.

I guarantee that you will sit back and start thinking about the food in your cupboards. You will begin to wonder – How much corn am I really eating? Where was that chicken raised? How far did my food have to travel to get to my town?

It’s an important film, one that everyone should see. If you a human (in particular, an American) that eats, then you need to see this movie.

Rating: 5/5

For more information about the film go to Food, Inc.

Australia (2008) at 7:55 AM

Synopsis: In northern Australia at the beginning of World War II, an English aristocrat inherits a cattle station the size of Maryland. When English cattle barons plot to take her land, she reluctantly joins forces with a rough-hewn stock-man to drive 2,000 head of cattle across hundreds of miles of the country's most unforgiving land, only to still face the bombing of Darwin, Australia, by the Japanese forces that had attacked Pearl Harbor only months earlier.

Man alive, this movie is long. I mean, looooooooooong. Coming in at almost 3 hours, I thought that at a certain point, they could have ended it. That’s bad news for a movie if the viewer is going, “Ok, it’s done. Oh wait – it still has an hour left? Geez.”

I like Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman. They are easy to look at, especially Hugh. I’d like to thank Baz Luhrmann, the director, for showing a shirtless Hugh in a few different scenes. That made the movie experience better. There’s plenty of chemistry between the two actors, but it wasn’t enough to carry the film.

Even though it was nearly 3 hours long, parts of it seem choppy and out of sync. The story is a noble one, partly paying homage to the Stolen Generation in Australia. It’s respectable and I wish they figured out a way to shorten the story. There’s a good movie in the 3 hours if you cut out about a third of the film.

My other problem is, I could predict the ending of the film. Normally this doesn’t bother me, but when it comes to historical romance plots, I wish it wasn’t so formulaic.

The cinematography is impressive, showing off the magnificent views of northern Australia. So, I guess if you want to spend 3 hours watching a hunky Hugh Jackman and a beautiful Nicole Kidman look longingly into each other’s eyes, then this film is for you.

Rating: 2.5/5

No Reservations (2007) at 12:26 PM

Directed By: Scott Hicks
Starring: Catherine Zeta Jones and Aaron Eckhart

I have mixed feelings about this one.

In this corner: 1.)Catherine Zeta Jones is luminously beautiful and also happens to be a great actress. 2.) I love movies about food and 3.) Bob Balaban is a therapist (I love Bob).

In that corner: 1.) The movie enters sappy formulaic territory once too often. 2.) It's woefully predictable and 3.) the direction sacrifices artistry for heartstring-tugging when it's entirely unnecessary.

While I admit that from the beginning, this film prevented itself from sliding into the ranks of 'Baby Boom'/'Raising Helen' mediocrity by simply bringing charming actors to the table...it also abandoned that initial charm by following well-worn territory on several occasions. Yes, Abigail Breslin is a precocious little actress but she's played this part before and very little demand is made upon her talents. And I'm tired of movies attempting to convince me that a pillow fight and a game of Monopoly is enough to draw a grieving child out of her melancholy and into the arms of a comparatively selfish woman. I did like seeing the lead character come out of her introverted ways and begin to give of herself to this child, but I wish it had been brought about by less familiar means. As it stands, the movie had high points (mostly having to do w/ food) but not enough of them for me to give it more than a
7/10.

Fool's Gold - 2008 at 4:45 PM

A new clue to the whereabouts of a lost treasure rekindles a married couple's sense of adventure -- and their estranged romance.


The Good: The scenery is beautiful and some of the airplane stunts are believable.

The Bad: The acting.  When they are funny, they work.  When they are scared or angry, they don't.  The plot.

The Ugly: The gross flirtation and innuendo with the little girl.  A bit disturbing.

The Summary:  I totally don't mind a stupid action movie.  In fact I was excited about this one because I honestly confused it for another!  Matthew McConaughey makes a great comedic actor and this movie doesn't emphasize that enough.  I liked Kate Hudson in the Skeleton Key so I KNOW she's capable of suspense and action.  This movie though, it didn't quite find its footing.  Was it action?  Was it comedy?  Was it drama (father & daughter)?  It was a mix of them all and it didn't quite make good of any one genre.

Interesting backdrop and terrible implementation.

The Fourth Kind at 3:28 AM

"In 1972, a scale of measurement was established for alien encounters. When a UFO is sighted, it is called an encounter of the first kind. When evidence is collected, it is known as an encounter of the second kind. When contact is made with extraterrestrials, it is the third kind. The next level, abduction, is the fourth kind. Modern-day, Alaska, where-mysteriously since the 1960s-a disproportionate number of the population has been reported missing every year. Despite multiple FBI investigations of the region, the truth has never been discovered. Here in this remote region, psychologist Dr. Abigail Tyler began videotaping sessions with traumatized patients and unwittingly discovered some of the most disturbing evidence of alien abduction ever documented. The Fourth Kind exposes the terrified revelations of multiple witnesses. Their accounts of being visited by alien figures all share disturbingly identical details, the validity of which is investigated throughout the film. "

Went to the cinema yesterday with Fernando to see this.

It's supposedly based on true stories and the film uses real footage mixed with the actors to verify the events. I thought the layout of it was pretty good and the real footage truly made an impact.

I love horror movies although this one isn't meant to be one (I think) it has some very good 'jumpers' (as I call them) so that was quite good.

Plus it left me intrigued today and I have to google some facts about it!

4 out of 5 for me, worth watching if you haven't seen it already and you're interested in alien abduction. :)

Coraline at 3:45 AM

"A young girl walks through a secret door in her new home and discovers an alternate version of her life. On the surface, this parallel reality is eerily similar to her real life - only much better. But when her adventure turns dangerous, and her counterfeit parents (including Other Mother) try to keep her forever, Coraline must count on her resourcefulness, determination, and bravery to get back home - and save her family. "

Just recently watched this movie and absolutely loved it. It's obviously a childrens film but I'm a sucker for these things (hence my blog name Vivienne in Wonderland) and have to say I thought it was really really good.

Entertainment for grown ups as well.

And if you click the extras you see how much meticulous work actually goes into one of these movies. The settings, decorations etc are just sensational.

5 out of 5 for me!

Wanted (2008) at 8:05 PM

Short synopsis: A frustrated office worker learns that he is the son of a professional assassin, and that he shares his father's superhuman killing abilities.

The body count is quite high in this film. Lots of innocent people get killed during the action scenes and it can be quite bothersome if it wasn’t for Angelina Jolie and James McAvoy lighting up the screen.

For some reason, I like this film and I don’t know why. Is it because I like watching silly action movies? Perhaps. Could it be I like watching Angelina Jolie shoot ‘em up? Maybe. She’s badass, that’s for sure. And what about James McAvoy who is quite the actor these days with some excellent work done in Atonement and The Last King of Scotland? Probably.

I think I need to start a support group, “I’m a girl and I like action films.” The plot is non-sensical and far-fetched, but by golly, it’s fun to watch. For me, after living in Chicago, it’s nice to see the El train used to its advantage – as a transport for 2 assassins. Do they pay for tickets to ride and squeeze through the turnstile? I wonder.

If you like fantasy type action films (and let’s be honest, how many action films are based in reality?), then watch this. It’s bang-bang, bullet-curving, shoot ‘em up film at it’s best.

Rating: 4/5

Prom Night (2008) at 12:00 PM

Starring: some actors from television...oh, and Jonathan Shaech who is aging well.
Directed by: some guy

I seriously hated this movie. Not only because it was entirely throwaway and devoid of entertainment value but because there is something slightly off-kilter abut a 'slasher flick' in which all the murder victims are good people. I did appreciate the gentle homage to Halloween and other classic horror films, in that the film contained lots of 'slashing' but very little actual gore. However, isnt it just the lay of the land for these movies to kill off the annoying and slutty kids? Usually, the appeal of these movies is to guess right away which of the bullying, over-indulging, sexually active teens will get the knife first. In this one, there are no such kids...unless you count the pouty wanna be prom queen, who incidentally lives out the night just fine. Even the drunken loudmouthed boyfriend makes quick amends with the viewing audience by apologizing for his jerkiness before he gets the ax (pun intended). I dunno, I just found that very offputting. And yeah, in addition to that, the movie just sucked.

My rating:
a dismal 2/10