Reviews

(NOTE: there aren't any spoilers, but there are rather in-depth analyses of certain scenes in particular that I felt I needed to talk about. The scene in question is about halfway through the movie, and I don't give away anything that isn't already in the trailers. But if you don't wish to read, don't)

Now, I'm actually quite surprised that I even saw this movie. Mostly because of its abundant negative reviews but after watching it, why is it so hated? While critics might not have liked it, the Beatles themselves actually liked it. Sir Ringo Starr, Sir Paul McCartney, Yoko Ono (John Lennon's widow), and Olivia Harrison (George Harrison's widow) all have expressed their praise in the movie. A story even goes that McCartney was singing along under his breath to the song "All My Loving" in the private screening. After seeing it in that screening, director Julie Taymor asked the Beatle if there was anything he disliked about the film and he responded with: "What's not to like?" So I decided to give it a chance and man, oh, man, I am glad I did!

The story is inspired by several Beatles classics and follows the story of the Liverpudlian Jude (Paul McCartney look-alike Jim Sturgess) who comes to the US in search of his father. There he forms a friendship with Max (Joe Anderson) and falls in love with Lucy (Evan Rachel Wood). There are several other characters inspired by these songs, such as the Janis Joplinesque Sadie (Dana Fuchs), the Jimi Hendrixesque Jo-Jo (Martin Luther McCoy), the shy closeted Prudence (T. V. Carpio), the eccentric Dr. Robert and more. If you don't get it, it's fine but those are characters (some even real people) from Beatles songs. As a Beatles fan I was excited to see these characters and if they were anything like their musical personas (mostly, I wanted to see Max killing people with a hammer) and most surprisingly stay relatively true to how their described, though there isn't any hammer murder. Anyway, the characters go through the sixties, which wasn't great for many people. It starts in the early/mid 60's which were a lot like the late 50's, mostly Pleasasntville-like stuff going on. Then we enter the psychedelic period and the summer of Love stuff. Then we reach the war and the revolution.

The music of the Beatles is perhaps some of the most iconic and influential music of all time and must be incorporated properly in order to make this movie work. How do they do that? Enter Miss Julie Taymor. I was ecstatic when I heard she directed this and she does phenomenally. For those of you who aren't big Broadway musical fans, Julie Taymor directed "The Lion King" which is one of the most phenomenal things I have ever seen. It uses a lot of clever puppetry and instead of CGI, she actually incorporated said puppetry into some of the most creative interpretations of the songs I've ever seen. The puppets used create this uncanny beauty that defines many of the numbers. There are very good numbers (almost all in the movie) and there are less good numbers ("Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite" though it was funny to try and explain to my dad what I was watching when he walked in on that scene).

However there is one scene in particular I'd like to talk about: the performance of "I Want You (She's So Heavy)". Now this song made NO sense to me the first three times I heard it, after that I just gave up on trying to make sense and just enjoying the song. But what she does on that scene is incredible. You see, Max ends up getting drafted for Vietnam and during his testing, he begins to hallucinate. A poster of Uncle Sam is there and he reaches out and tries to grab Max singing the "I want you, I want you so bad", a reference to the famous tagline. Men in uniform who look like GI Joe dolls strip him down, as well as several others, and begin their examination, continuing the "I want you, I want you so bad, it's driving me mad. It's driving me mad". Now here's where the scene gets downright haunting. For the "she's so heavy" part of the song (a lyric that still makes no sense to me) we see the recruits on a Vietnam battlefield carrying the statue of Liberty singing: "she's so heavy" and it sent chills down my spine. That's...just one of the most hauntingly poetic things I have seen in a long time. Hats off! Hats off! I can't get over how incredible this one scene is.

Seeing with the "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" scene, what makes this movie great is that it never uses music just to use music. It's using it to provide different interpretations and make you rethink a lot of these songs you know so well. Like "Dear Prudence" is another good example of the creative use of the Beatles. The metaphorically closeted Prudence literally locks herself in a closet and is anxious about coming out, both literally and metaphorically. So they sing to try and comfort her: "Dear Prudence, won't you come out to play?" both literally and metaphorically asking her to come out of the closet. It's a sweet scene. There are so many of these clever uses of music that if I discussed them all, you would've seen the whole movie.

Sorry this was so long, but I had a lot to say. The movie is intense, for many reasons. The Vietnam war and revolution are not very easy topics to watch and the movie is quite graphic for PG-13, there just any blood. Pretty early in the movie we see police brutality against people of color as a young boy, hiding from the cops, sings "Let It Be" as a way of comfort. It later turns into a full choir singing a gospel rendition of the classic. And it hits, hard. Again, so many of these clever uses of music that I still can't really get over. I don't understand why this movie is so hated. It's sophisticated, romantic, intense, psychedelic, artistic, and set to some of the greatest music ever written. To quote Sir Paul McCartney (again): "What's not to like?"

Teens have been rebellious for all of time, apparently. The "swing kids" in the movie are German teens between the ages of 14-18 who grow their hair out long and go out dancing all night in swing clubs and live by their motto: "Swing Heil". Obviously teens being rebellious is dangerous enough but the swing kids are engaging in the celebration of American culture, even much of the music they listen to being recorded by African-American and Jewish artists. You understand where I'm going with this. It is very dangerous but they're teenagers and have to have what they're told they can't. So let's get into this:

Our two leads, friends Thomas (a young Christian Bale) and Peter (a young Robert Sean Leonard), are members of the swing kid group and are later forced to join the Hitler-Jungen ("Hitler's Youth" or "Hitler's Boys" in English) and being teenagers they comply but at night still continue to sneak out to go dancing. Let's just say this doesn't turn out well, for anyone. Thomas begins to enjoy the feeling of the swastika on his arm and Peter begins to question his own morals as well as his friends. There's a quite incredible scene shared by the two toward the climax of the film where they get into a heated argument over those said morals. It's really interesting to me to really see what that program did to kids. Thomas was only there because he had to be and was getting into fights and mocking the Nazis early in the film, only to become one in the end.

The friendship between is probably the strongest part of the movie. The second being the gorgeous choreography. I don't know, maybe it's the musical theatre nerd in me but I'm just a sucker for a good dance sequence. And this movie has plenty! Now here comes the part of the show where I address all the problems and in all honesty, I was surprised at the amount of hate this film received. It even made it on legendary critic Roger Ebert's most hated movies list. Let me say it right now, this movie is not bad. Maybe it's not the best, maybe you don't like it, but I'm still quite confused as to why it's hated as much as it is. The biggest problem I hear with it (besides the lackluster script) was that it was too tame. It does feature characters getting beaten up badly (you do see blood for those scenes) and characters dying, one character must even deliver the cremated ashes of those who were considered enemies of the state door to door! It is PG-13 and would've received an R rating had it been as gruesome as many critic's wanted. But it's not really about the Holocaust. It's a story about expression and trying to survive and stay true in a world where that's virtually impossible to do. And that is one of the strengths of the movie

Usually missed opportunity films leave me feeling cheated out of my money or just plain miserable or frustrated. Some even make me wonder why I ever watched movies and make me ashamed that I watch/review them in my spare time. This one is interesting. Question of the day that usually determines how I rank movies: will I watch it again? I...don't know. Knowing myself, I probably would, mostly for the swing sequences. Verdict: I don't think this movie was very bad, nor was it very good. I liked it unironically which should mean it's good, right? I actually don't really know. Ah, well, I thought it was all right. It's still a riveting and interesting story that I'm glad I've seen. It earns itself a solid seven out of ten. Think I might as well give it that.

"October Sky" is a pretty good movie with pretty good performances. Maybe even great, but I don't believe that it's one of the greatest family masterpieces it's often made out to be. The story was relatively interesting, starring a young Jake Gyllenhaal as real-life NASA engineer Homer Hickam. After the Soviet satellite Sputnik was sent into space, it instantly caught Hickam's interests and he knew that this was what he was going to do. His family doesn't believe in him, his town doesn't believe in him but one teacher does and it changes his life. I'm sorry, I know this is a true story and all but this movie is very predictable, around the half-way mark you know exactly what's going to happen almost in the order that it ends up doing. That makes the movie feel much longer than it is, probably didn't help that I was also watching it with my family very late at night. They frequently asked me "how much longer?" It's by no means a bad movie, not at all. It's average-length but just seems drawn out as the entire story could've easily been told in the span of 10 minutes. Ah, well. Still pretty good family movie, one of the better ones I think I've actually seen and I'd recommend it actually. I liked it, even though a lot of my sleepy siblings didn't. It's quite an inspiring tale of believing in yourself when no one else would but it just falls a little short for my personal tastes. It's still an excellent family movie though.

I came into this expecting a sequel to "A Hard Day's Night" and I'm probably not alone there. Let me be the first to tell you this is NOTHING LIKE "Hard Day's Night". It couldn't be more different. While the story to that one is relatively simple, the lads are preparing to do a televised concert and hijinks ensue, this one is...interesting. It's not a mockumentary but rather an action comedy jukebox musical.

The story goes that somehow Ringo ends up in possession of a prized ring owned by a religious cult. The ring represents who is chosen as a sacrifice and so much of the movie is them trying to kidnap and murder Ringo. Once he figures out what's going on, Ringo becomes reasonably paranoid and the Beatles end up traveling all around the world trying to escape them. It's a cat-and-mouse game. The movie is delightfully absurd and for whatever reason occasionally includes title cards and subtitles (my personal favorite being: "The Exciting Adventure of Paul on the Floor". It makes sense in context). It's just pure crazy fun, in typical Beatles fashion. But now, I need to address the elephant in the room: the Beatles themselves.

Now, they're not bad actors at all (as we've seen in "Hard Day's Night") but we have to talk about the performances for a second. They're performances are all right, I had just noticed something was off. They simply weren't all the way there. It caught me off-guard. Especially John, who had this manic energy he brought, just is missing. Paul McCartney explained in an interview I saw that this was because they were *very* stoned for most of the movie, and that actually makes a lot of sense when you sit down to watch it.

Another thing I'd like to talk about is the scenes for the fan-girls because there are a few. I really would've loved to be in a movie theatre in '65, just to see what those girls' responses were to these scenes. In one scene, George has his shirt ripped off him, another one exposes Ringo in his boxers. But the highlight scene would in "The Exciting Adventure of Paul on the Floor" where Paul is completely naked. It's almost as though I can still hear those girls screaming at the top of their lungs. Strangely enough though, John doesn't get a scene like that. Probably because we saw him in the bath in "Hard Day's Night" but it's still a little disappointing. Ah, well, I'll take my John in the bath tub scene and move on.

I rewatched several scenes after my first viewing and took a great interest into George Harrison. Obviously, like the other Beatles, he's stoned out of his mind for most of the film and just doing wacky things in the background when the focus isn't on him. Such as eating a cymbal. It...actually doesn't make sense in context either but uh...it got several laughs out of me. There are several moments of them just being crazy that make no sense, such as a 7-second long "intermission" between parts 1 and 2 in which.... I don't even know how to describe it. You'll have to just see it for yourself. ALSO please watch the credits of the movie. Usually I'm one to skip them but here I was laughing my head off. There the Beatles are, stoned as usual, just laughing and messing around dubbed over the credits. And again, George Harrison steals the show. Overall, I actually enjoyed this movie more than I thought I would. Even with *slight* (you can tell from they're expressions and tones that they're mocking this way of thinking, not condoning it) racism I would probably recommend it to Beatles fans/fans of disaster comedies like "Airplane". It was just simply a lot of fun. It does include intense scenes including several Ringo murder attempts which may frighten younger or more sensitive viewers.

Okay. That's it, that's the whole review. This movie has an interesting true story that it is "inspired by", a powerhouse performance by Shailene Woodley, and as an amateur sailor myself, I just love to see movies that take to sea. I saw this movie a few nights ago, and honestly, I can barely remember it. I liked the romance, I liked the intense scenes at sea, I liked Shailene Woodley. But there just isn't much to say about this movie other than it was okay. I know I won't watch it again, that shouldn't discount that I did enjoy watching this one. Just a warning though, this is an intense one, both emotionally and physically, meant for older teens and up. I actually might have to recommend this one as looking through some of these reviews, it does indeed have its audience. If you like rom-coms that involve a couple almost killing themselves at sea, this movie is for you.

Where to begin with A Hard Day's Night? It's just such a genuinely delightful film through and through. Though coming out almost 60 years ago, the Beatles are still young and fresh, even in today's world. They are one of the greatest bands who ever lived, and rightfully so. Their music is timeless and wonderful, and those qualities translate to their film debut as well.

When I sat down to watch this, I had no idea what I was getting into. What it was, folks, was a charming, witty, hilarious, and just plain fun mockumentary, made before those were even a thing. Plus having the real Beatles! It's a very pure movie, and by the end I found myself screeching along with those schoolgirls.

Overall, A Hard Day's Night is an absolutely wonderful comedy, set to the music that defined a generation demanding to be heard. A must-see for fans of rock-n-roll as well as those who just want a fun afternoon flick.

The film tells the story of Thor Heyerdahl (played by Norsk actor Pål Sverre Hagen) a Norwegian explorer who we meet on the island of Polynesia. There he discovers plants native to South America and the idea sparks in his mind when he hears the story of Tiki, the sun God, who had traveled on a raft to Polynesia. He writes a theory that is almost immediately rejected, one person telling him that if he could build a raft and sail from Peru to Polynesia, they'll believe him. And that's exactly what he ends up doing.

The visual direction is just stunning! Kon-Tiki is reportedly Norway's most expensive film that they've made, and it shows! And while it is flawed, it is mostly faithful (at least compared to a lot of Hollywood biopics) with its storytelling. Most of what Rønning and Sandberg's direction style is to take the real events and crank up the intensity. And while it does result in misrepresentation of facts, it works relatively well thematically.

If you cannot tell, the movie does show and feature inspirational messages about persistence in the world of skepticism. Mr. Heyerdahl is one of those fascinating and inspirational figures in history that's never talked about in American schools, I don't quite know why. While this movie started off slow and was having hard keeping me, my attention caught on right when the characters set out on sea.

Content wise, it's pretty tame. Mostly six guys and a parrot on a boat resting, but there is some peril. There is also one scene involving the killing of a shark that would be disturbing to the faint of heart.

Oh boy, oh boy. I've been looking forward to watching and reviewing this and I'm happy to be here finally. This movie is infamously awful and sadly it brings down ET's overall quality just by its own existence but at least "Mac And Me" owns it. Similar to other "so-bad-they're-good" movies like "The Room", Mac And Me knows that it's bad and knows that it's a rip-off of family classic ET, but here's the thing folks. Mac And Me doesn't care at all what you think of it. Where ET had moments of a beautiful friendship, Mac And Me had insensitive stereotypes. Where ET pulled at heart-strings and left viewers in tears, Mac And Me has a 8 minute dance sequence in a McDonald's restaurant. (by the way, the main character is in a wheelchair and forced to just watch as all his friends and Mac in a bear costume are dancing and having a good time. How rude!)

This movie is bad, yes, there's no denying that. But you know when we get a bad sci-fi movie, we also get a great MST3K episode covering it (which is actually how I discovered Mac And Me)

I remember discovering this movie when a colleague had told me to stop being such a Cameron Fry. I didn't know what the heck that meant and eventually found out who he was and watched the movie.

This is the movie where Matthew Broderick famously breaks the fourth wall. Making comments and giving looks directly to the audience. It's a funny gag, there's even an post-credits scene where he approaches the camera asking why the audience is /still/ there and tells them to go home. While I did watch this movie in my house, the line did get a couple chuckles out of me. The premise is incredibly simple: teen gets friends together, skips school, and causes shenanigans throughout the city while a skeptical principal (Jeffrey Jones) pursues him. Oh right! The dynamic between the principal as well as Bueller's sister (played by Dirty Dancing actress Jennifer Grey) and Ferris creates some of the funniest moments. It's a cat and mouse game, like Tom And Jerry, between them and is incredibly entertaining to watch.

Now I know this will sound iffy, but Ferris Bueller is and can be a positive role model, just depends on how you look at it. Yes he cuts school and makes risky decisions throughout, but it's all in good fun. And for those of us like Cameron Fry, sometimes we need to just let loose and have fun every now and again. Like Bueller famously says to the camera: "Life moves pretty fast, if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it."

Ferris Bueller's Day Off is a comedic classic written and directed by the late 80's icon John Hughes. It's one of those movies that provides something for everyone and this is indeed a feel-good movie. While there's a little bit of language, it's not too bad.

I consider myself to be relatively tolerant of many things in movies. I can handle quite a bit, but there was something about this one that really did make me quite uncomfortable. I think it was my inner voice crying out that no matter what would happen in the future, it was unethical to punish someone for a crime they hadn't committed. And I stand by that still. While some believe that fate exist, there is nothing set in stone and you can change your fate. In fact, we do that with every choice we make in life. There is a lot that can trigger people here, a lot that triggered me even. The movie has a subplot where Anderton (Cruise) is desperately searching for whoever kidnapped his son and we are to believe that the son was murdered. I'm a bit embarrassed to say that now the scene that made me the most uncomfortable had to do with a simple surgery. I've watched House but there's one thing I can't handle when it comes to surgery and that's eyes. Weird but I was not quite prepared for a graphic eye removal surgery of the main character.

With all that said, let me make it clear that this is an incredible thriller. It was made by the legendary Stephen Spielberg and is based on a story by Philip K. Dick who also brought us sci-fi classics like Blade Runner. The characters are each developed and interesting. The visuals are absolutely stunning, everything seems to just be perfect and I can't in my right mind not recommend this movie. There is a lot of content that might make viewers uncomfortable but if you go in knowing that I don't think it would affect as much. The movie reminded me a little bit of (one of my favorite movies of all time) 1998's "Pleasantville". This perfect world where no one gets hurt. But in creating that perfect world, you take away people's ability to live. Of course, this is much darker than Pleasantville but it ties a lot in with the same philosophies of it. "Minority Report" is a fantastic movie, absolutely!

This movie isn't The Dark Knight, but I think that some people hold the other Christian Bale Batman movies to the ridiculously high standard of the second in the trilogy. Trying to forget about Dark Knight, I decided to revisit the two other Batman movies and to my surprise they weren't actually that bad. In fact, both were pretty good, not perfect but still pretty darn good. Perfect example: the one that started it all, 2005's Batman Begins.

The movie features Bruce Wayne's life in sometimes excruciatingly long detail. Remember when he became a ninja and almost joined the League Of Shadows under an obviously evil guy Ducard? No? It happened. Or where little Bruce Wayne falls in a well and is attacked by bats, making them his greatest fear even well into his adulthood? Still no? Well ok. I've never read a Batman comic before so I don't know how accurate this "gritty and realistic" take really is but this movie had to walk so Dark Knight could run.

And yes, Katie Holmes gives the infamous wooden performance as Rachel Dawes but I believe part of that is because of the writing. They give her some of the most pretentious and melodramatic writing it makes me nauseous. They got better when it came to Dark Knight, also replacing Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhaal helped too. With that aside, a lot of the movie is really good. It has an incredible supporting cast including Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine. And I need to take a minute to praise the one performance that nobody seems to mention: Cillian Murphy as Jonathan Crane/The Scarecrow. Dang! His decent into madness is horrific to watch, even if it is reduced to only being a subplot. I genuinely wish I could've seen more of him.

Overall, the movie isn't as bad as many people say it is. In fact, it's pretty darn good! Is it Dark Knight good? No. But this is a Batman movie definitely worth a watch (especially when compared to the previous and horrendous "Batman and Robin")

I love this movie. While it's rarely talked about now it is one of the most emotional movies I've ever watched. The story follows a couple (Judd Hirsch and Christine Lahti) who had protested the Vietnam War in the 60's and have since been running from the FBI. Their oldest son, Danny (the late River Phoenix), is at the age he'd naturally be going out on his own. He's also a talented pianist and dazzles his music teacher and also begins to form a romance with the teachers daughter (Martha Plimpton). The movie is filled with incredible performances, brilliant dialogue and scenes that break and warm your heart simultaneously. The film also serves as a tribute to the late great River Phoenix as he gives the performance that would nominate him for an Academy. It's a movie about your past. This movie asks the question should you continue to run and hurt from it or should you be forgiven. However, Danny's running from a past he had nothing to do with.

I really enjoy this movie. It's movie is very complex and I recommend seeing it again. It has a lot of great ideas and has interesting characters I'm invested in. The story is set in the far future. It has been evacuated and abandoned due to an alien invasion by creators named "scavs". A drone-repair man named Jack and partner Vika are the last sent there to clean up. Both of them have memories, though only Jack's are seen and in his dream there is a woman who is always there. He has no idea who she is and it's driving him mad. Then bang! A ship crashes on Earth and guess who's on it? The woman of his dreams, literally! For content: one F word at the end, Vika and Jack go skinny-dipping, the noises the drones make are pretty frightening, some gun violence. PG-13 stuff, pretty mild. To all those who say it was too confusing, it wasn't too hard to follow (at least for me). It's one of those movies that requires a lot of deep attention and similar to a movie like Inception, it asks questions but leaves audiences to fill in the blanks. That's one of the things I love about this movie, almost makes me feel like I'm in part creating the story. Don't expect clear answers, it's meant to be a movie that makes you think and theorize and it has a basic enough story that you can connect the pieces a little more clearly than something like Inception.

Well...I can't attack this film as much as some might. You have to understand where everything was coming from. Behind the scenes, there are plenty of stories about the production company trying to sabotage this movie. Why? No one will ever know. It starts off cute and simple (and it's really fun to see a very young Ethan Hawke and a very young River Phoenix together) but toward the end there wasn't really a script and the production company kept pushing and trying to get the film out on schedule. The result? A significant drop in quality for the film's third act. I'm probably exaggerating, it wasn't too bad...it just didn't work. It got really weird and I was beginning to get uncomfortable as I watched it. The saddest part is this film had potential and even the people involved, most notably iconic director Joe Dante, aren't proud of how it turned out saying if they had more time and money they could've created what they wanted to originally. It was an interesting watch but I can't hate this film for a second because I can recognize the heart that was put into it even if it was rushed to appease the producers.

For those who might not be able to see past the brilliant subtlety, the plot is a Cold War allegory. The majority of the movie is the two groups with guns to one another, waiting for the other to strike. Sounds pretty Cold War to me. Anyway the story stars a group of teenagers who choose to attack when their home is invaded. Except it's not Red Dawn. It's Red Dawn with a little bit more logic and subtle beauty. In Red Dawn, it's average teenagers who almost spontaneously turn into action heroes, here it's teenagers who live at a military school. Teenagers who have been preparing for something like this for who knows how long. Also I don't want to say too much but the ending, oh my goodness the ending! Perhaps one of the simplest, most raw and emotional endings to a movie I've ever seen. This movie is also a must-see for Tom Cruise fans who might appreciate to see him in his first feature-length film.

Was this movie good? No. It tried so very hard to be a serious epic about immigration but I kept getting distracted by Cruise. While his acting is fine for a script this bad...it's his accent that just makes me giggle. He can't be serious with that bad of an accent (thank goodness he didn't even attempt in Valkyrie). However, right when I thought it was getting good, it disappointed. The saddest part of it all is how much potential was there. How good it could've been based on the interesting premise. But no. There's a few genuinely good scenes throughout but is it worth full watch? Probably not.

Legendary Norwegian band arrive at the big screen in this phenomenal documentary. It follows them and their whole career from kids in Oslo dreaming of music to now. I like to consider myself an a-ha fan, but I was surprised at how little I actually knew about the trio.

To fans, this is a must-watch. To people who aren't fans, I still would recommend this as a wonderful drama set to wonderful music. The story is told through interviews, vintage photos, concert clips, and more. It's a phenomenal movie and just go watch it for yourself. Chances are, even a-ha's biggest critics can still find something to enjoy here.

Not the best, certainly not the best of the actors's careers. But strong and intense performances save this otherwise quite dull drama.