Monkey Review: Sunshine (2007)

"What bad decisions can we make? Let's throw it around the room."

After having look forward to this for months, and even throwing up a “Sunshine is Gonna Kick Ass” post here on the Monkey, I have three words I must get out: WHAT…THE…FU*K?!?!?!?!



Sunshine

Monkey Rating: 0 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

WARNING: Spoilers ahead.

Will someone please bring back Danny Boyle? The Director who brought us Trainspotting and 28 Days Later? He’s apparently gone missing, if Sunshine is any indication.

After having look forward to this for months, and even throwing up a “Sunshine is Gonna Kick Ass” post here on the Monkey, I have three words I must get out: WHAT…THE…FU*K?!?!?!?!

So much promise. This movie had SO much promise. A fresh scientific idea, a strong director, a good lead actor. What could go wrong?

Uh, how about everything? If there's a recipe for ruining a great sci-fi premise, this film followed it – and then some.

The story begins with a concise plot summary narrated by Capa (Cillian Murphy), the physicist for the ship Icarus II. The vessel’s mission: to deliver and detonate a large bomb into the sun, thereby somehow kick-starting the big lug so we can all live happily ever after. Believe it or not, as silly as that premise sounds, it’s not the movie’s major flaw. Oh no, there are plenty of those.

We're then introduced to the crew: Searle, the ship’s psych officer who’s “crazier than the crew,” Corazon, the biologist who’s running the plant/oxygen garden on board, Kaneda, the Captain, Cassie, the pilot, Trey, the navigator, Mace, the engineer, and Harvey, the communications officer.

It’s a wholly unbelievable cast of unqualified scientists – a fact that gnaws at you throughout the film. Here’s a question: if this mission is the last hope for saving mankind, why would you send only one scientist from each field of study? Did the folks who planned this mission ever consider that if the communications officer kicks the bucket, the crew won’t be able to talk to anyone? Can anyone run the oxygen garden if Corazon chokes on a space pretzel? The worst example: Capa, the physicist, is the only crewmember who can detonate the bomb. That’s ridiculous. Hell, even Noah took two of each animal on the Ark.

I have an idea…how about a crew of about 70, with entire teams to manage each scientific discipline? Not enough space onboard? Then BUILD A BIGGER FREAKING SHIP. You’re not collecting rocks on the moon…you’re SAVING MANKIND. You’re going to want to do this right, aren’t you? Spend the entire space program’s budget and lay everyone off. They’ll be dead anyway if you don’t.

Also, it might help to send a crew that has a little more experience than the one in Sunshine. The average age of the team is about 30. How about some old timers who have done this before? Think they might come in handy? It seems like they took the cast from Big Brother XXIV and threw them onto the ship.

I’m sure youth was a factor when the crew is faced with a major decision about halfway through the film. You see, Icarus II is so named because there was once an Icarus I. As they approach the sun, they discover the original Icarus spacecraft, stuck in the Sun’s orbit for seven years, obviously having failed in its mission to jump start the sun.

This is the decision the crew must make: do we veer slightly off course to rendezvous with Icarus I, to see if anyone’s alive? Also, what if its bomb is still intact? Wouldn’t that give us another shot at re-igniting the sun if our payload failed?

At this point, a newborn baby in the front row, a senior citizen struggling to chew a kernel of popcorn, and mime right next to me all said in unison: “No way, dumbasses!”

I agreed. If I could have jumped into the movie and smacked every crew member I would have done it. Remember, since this team is saving the world, they must be the world’s very best scientists, right? Would such a collection of brilliant minds even consider this? Of course not.

But guess what happens?? These idiots actually choose to rendezvous with Icarus I. Why? Because “two bombs are better than one,” a theory proffered by the ship’s Psych officer. Are you fu*king kidding me? I’m a blogger, not a scientist, but even I know that you encounter tremendous risk to the original mission if you veer even slightly off course when you’re headed toward the sun. These are the world’s best scientists?

Sure enough, Trey, the navigator, changes the ship’s course – but forgets to recalibrate the heat shields (so important when flying toward the sun). Forgetting the fact that Trey might have cheated on his Icarus entrance exams, it might have helped if he had some help during this exercise. Instead, he performs the task all by himself, in the middle of the night, while everyone is asleep. I ask again, these are the world’s best scientists??

If all of this isn’t enough to make you ask for a refund, don’t worry – the worst is yet to come.

With limited oxygen supply due to a fire in the oxygen garden (don’t ask), the crew calculates that there is enough air for four people to complete the mission. But the computer, a cheap HAL 9000 knockoff, asserts that there are five people onboard. Confused, Capa heads to the sun observation deck, where he finds…a zombie! At least that’s what I think it was.

It was either a zombie or the still alive Captain from the original Icarus I, who somehow survived for seven years on limited food and water. Oh, and he has no skin. I guess the sun burned it off. In any event, it was hard to tell because any time the creature was onscreen, he was blurry and the camera started to shake. I’m guessing the F/X budget ran out right about then.

From there, the movie descends into a slasher film, the zombie chasing the remaining crew around the ship. I’m not joking. Even as I type this, I can’t believe it. But hey, at least you can’t blame the bad scientists for this development. How could they have been prepared for a skinless zombie trying to kill them? They don’t have that module in the flight simulator.

No, the person you can blame is Danny Boyle, for taking this premise and blowing it to hell. Maybe he got his movies confused. Maybe he was in the middle of this sci-fi epic and had a 28 Days Later flashback, so he accidentally threw a zombie in there. If that was the case, maybe he should have thrown in some Trainspotting as well. This mission’s already got a group of bad scientists and a zombie – how can a heroin-addicted Scottish stowaway do any harm?

Read More...

Summary only...

Monkey Review: Knocked Up

Phew! Thank God She's Not Ugly!

If you're expecting an uproarious laugh fest, this really isn't your movie. But if you want to see a warm, genuine and pretty funny look at how two young people would react to a very difficult situation, then Knocked Up fits the bill.


Knocked Up

Monkey Rating: 3 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

I always think it's great when a comedy relates to real issues and anxieties that moviegoers actually deal with in their lives. Real problems form a much stronger comedic foundation than fabricated issues; actions and reactions mean more because of the context.

That's what I like about Knocked Up, the most recent effort from Director Judd Apatow. If that name sounds familiar, it's because he was also behind the camera for 40 Year Old Virgin, another film that, although the notion of such an old virgin is a stretch, his fears rang quite true. Contrast that with movies like "Click" or "Christmas with the Kranks," which, because they're rooted in completely unbelievable premises, seem to ring hollow (of course, the overacting and terrible dialogue don't help).

Knocked Up tells the story of Ben Stone (Seth Rogen) and Alison Scott (Katherine Heigl), a couple of happy go lucky people who get drunk and have a one night stand which results in, you guessed it, Alison getting pregnant.

What ensues is not what you'd think. It would have been easy to turn this into a farce where Ben tries to get Alison to abort, or where Alison tries to manipulate Ben. But Apatow has drawn up real characters here who decide to take on the responsibility of having the baby.

The problem? Ben and Allison don't even know each other. So now their struggle is two-fold: deal with the impending birth of their child and try to establish a relationship at the same time. Though it's never happened to me personally, this strikes me as something to which a lot of people can relate.

The way Ben and Allison react to their situation seems entirely plausible. They're scared, confused and totally on their own, so you'd expect their emotions to get the best of them, which they do in a naturally funny way.

The supporting cast is also solid, anchored by the underrated Paul Rudd and a great Leslie Mann as Alison's sister and brother-in-law, respectively.

Still, the movie is not without its flaws, beginning with the fact that, while it's very believable and generally funny, there aren't ENOUGH laughs to really call this a great comedy. The gaps between laughter-inducing scenes are simply too long. I think it would have been possible to insert some more funny without compromising the organic integrity of the plot.

I've been known to nitpick some movies, but I can't let this one go: it helps that Alison is Katherine Heigl. Ben's decision to keep the baby is certainly made easier by the fact that Alison is a 5'10", blonde, busty bombshell. Ladies, you can deride men all you want for placing too much emphasis on a woman's appearance, but hey, it's important to us; we're hardwired that way. As long as the woman is not a complete psycho, it's hard to turn away someone who looks like Alison.

It's no different than a woman who wants a financially successful man. Do you think Julia Roberts would have run off with Richard Gere in Pretty Woman if he was a garbage man? No, we have to be realistic on this one. Think of it another way: if Ben had impregnated Ugly Betty, would he be jumping into parenthood with both feet? Unlikely.

So if you're expecting an uproarious laugh fest, this really isn't your movie. But if you want to see a warm, genuine and pretty funny look at how two young people would react to a very difficult situation, it's hard to think of a recent movie that fits the description more than Knocked Up.

Read More...

Summary only...

Monkey Review: The Transformers

There's More Where This Came From...

On the surface, it’s easy to see Michael Bay’s name attached to the Transformers and immediately dismiss it. Still, I think that most viewers should enjoy this one.



The Transformers

Monkey Rating: 4 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

On the surface, it’s easy to see Michael Bay’s name attached to the Transformers and immediately dismiss it. Why? Just have a look at his resume: Pearl Harbor, Bad Boys, Armageddon…need I continue? So there’s no excuse for going in with high expectations. That would be like expecting Mel Gibson to enjoy himself at a bar mitzvah.

To be fair, Jerry Bruckheimer was involved in most of those projects, so while the awful dialogue and silly plots lay mostly at the feet of Bay, at least the unnecessary explosions could be partially blamed on the pyromaniac Bruckheimer.

There is another factor to which I must confess here: I happen to be a fan of the Transformers. I enjoyed the cartoon as a kid. So let’s just call these two major factors a wash and get on with the review, OK?

The first thing you notice as you watch this film is how (surprisingly) funny it is. The writers, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, do a fine job of squeezing laughter out of some believably awkward situations. So if you’re coming for an action movie with terrible dialogue you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

We know, however, why anyone would be coming to watch this film: robots – and there are plenty of them. The machines pop off the screen through seamless special effects, and for the most part seem to retain their scale (their size in relation to other objects). The special effects team truly deserves accolades for their incredible attention to detail, which is quite obvious as you look the robots up and down.

Shia Labeouf plays Sam Witwicky, whose grandfather discovered a “large snowman” in the mid-19th century. Sam, in possession of his grandpa’s artifacts that contain information critical to the location of a cube of energy coveted by the robots, is sought by both the Decepticons (the evil robots) and the Autobots (good robots).

The Autobots reach him first, when Sam’s new car begins to act a little strangely. There are some nice moments between Sam and his new ride, especially as they related to his interaction with Megan Fox (the red hot Mikaela Banes).

Meanwhile, U.S. military computers are being hacked by the Decepticons, looking for secrets which will lead to the energy cube.

I suppose it should come as no surprise that women are treated purely as sex objects in the Transformers. Sure, Megan has a major role as Sam’s love interest, but how can a viewer take her contributions seriously when she spends the entire movie with her breasts popping out of her shirt? Ditto Maggie Madsen (Rachael Taylor), who, though she is a gifted computer hacker working on behalf of the government, is prancing around the Pentagon in high heels and short skirts. By the way, both of these young women are supposedly of high school age.

Sure, a woman can be gifted and sexy, but Hollywood always finds a way to make the sex overshadow the gifts, don’t they?

Oh, and I want to make you aware of the barrage of in-movie advertising to which you’ll be subjected in the Transformers. Since the robots transform into earthly vehicles, it should come as no shock that car makers – in particular, GM – pounced on the opportunity to feature their cars. One scene, in which we’re introduced to all of the Autobots, is basically a GM showroom. I thought a guy in a plaid suit was going to pop out and sell me some “rust-proofing.” Also beware Mountain Dew and Nokia placements.

Let me nitpick a little more: why is it that movies never take the issue of security clearance seriously? We learn of a super secret government agency known as Sector 7 – an agency not even known to the Secretary of Defense, only to the President himself – and yet by the end of the movie a bunch of low level, high school graduate hackers are roaming the secret agency’s office halls freely. Whatever.

Still, I think that most viewers should enjoy this one. Excuse me, most MALE viewers. Women, to their credit, are generally not interested in fighting robots and objectified girls as movie content. If you’re dating a girl who is into those things, then…congrats! Barring that, fans of the franchise (read: geeks) will enjoy seeing the robots as never seen before. Fans of the movies in general should have a good time. This is a summer blockbuster, an action movie with hot women. In that context, this receives a 4 opposable thumbs out of 5 rating.
Enjoy, fellas.

Read More...

Summary only...

We, Robots (I, Robot 2): Future Review

Total pansy sissy Mary baby cry-cry

We, Robots (I, Robot 2): Future Review

Zero Opposable Thumbs up (Out of Five) and a Poo Fling

(From the Monkey Time Machine - 2010)

Good God, what happened here? I enjoyed "I, Robot" even though, as an Asimov fan, I felt mildly outraged. But now? Shit, I want to kill something. With my bare hands. Then drink its blood. And eat its skin.

Sorry. Sometimes bad movies make me angry, and "We, Robots" is a very bad movie.

Joel Schumacher, who directed "We, Robots," has made some great films: "Phone Booth", "Falling Down" and, uh, "D.C. Cab". He's also the guy who put nipples on Batman's suit, for which he will never be forgiven.

There is a decent conflict in this movie, I have to admit: it's humanoid robots like Sonny (from the first movie) vs. billions of dumb miniature robots. The minibots are run by something called "swarm intelligence" which is the same process that lets ants, bees, and termites build incredibly complicated societies and structures even though the individuals have IQs of about 0.000001. The more minibots there are, the smarter they become. Nine minibots are easy to deal with. Nine billion minibots will develop warp drive before you're finished with breakfast. It's a good concept for a nasty, faceless enemy.

But even a cool concept doesn't save this movie from the dreaded Monkey Poo Fling. Why? It hurts to even type this:

The robots cry. And then they sing a sad little robot song. I swear to god. They fucking CRY and SING.

*sigh*

You don't really need to know anything else. You don't need to know about Will Smith, whose character has had so many accidents and rebuilding he's more of a wise-cracking Robocop than anything else. You don't need to know about the battles in low earth orbit, because at that point, the robots have wept tender tears in a minor key, the movie is irrepairably ruined, and you just want everyone to die.

Did I mention the movie is three hours long? It's three hours long.

Read More...

Summary only...

Men in Black 3: Future Review

Surprisingly not full of suck

Men in Black 3: Future Review

Monkey Score: Four Opposable Thumbs Up (out of Five)

(From the Monkey Time Machine - 2011)

"Men in Black 3" is far better than "Men in Black 2" for one reason - it takes the characters into new territory, instead of the shoot-the-alien-before-it-destroys-earth plot we saw the first two times out.

Since you may not remember way back to 2002, the Men in Black are an alien-tracking organization so secret the government doesn't even know about it. But, inevitably, a 100-foot slug decides to ingest an office building and dozens of humans see this. The MIB use a special pen-sized device called a neuralizer to erase people's memories of the event. The neuralizers are the only things that keep people feeling safe about their lives, the MIB doctrine goes.

So, of course, in MIB3, the neuralizers stop working. It's in all the trailers, so I don't think I'm giving anything away.

Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith reprise their roles as Agents J and K, as they try to figure out what the problem is, and quarantine the growing number of witnesses. Agent J wisely decides to tell the witnesses everything and even give them a tour of the MIB facility, mostly because it calms them down. And since they plan to restart the neuralizers, why not?

Smith and Jones find themselves up against a devious alien shape-shifting trickster, Koli (anagram of "Loki", which I don't think is an accident). Koli is played with shocking ferocity by hot-with-a-side-of-crazy-eyes Amy Poehler, taking a leave of absence from Saturday Night Live. Apparently, she has a device that's causing the neuralizers to stop working. Even when she's eating an entire police squadron, she's so damn likable that it's hard not to root for the villain. But then she switches to crazy-batshit-mean in about half a second and it's clear she must die.

Meanwhile, the number of alien sightings go through the roof. President Gore appears to make a cameo, but the filmmakers are tight-lipped as to whether the appearance is real or computer-generated. However, Gore has previously shown himself comfortable in the presence of movie cameras ("An Inconvenient Truth", "Global Warming is Hot!" with co-star Paris Hilton).

An audience favorite is the gang of gross but cocky worm-bugs set loose on the streets of New York. Successfully seducing drug-addled club girls (especially those on the new "Foxy" drug) is so convincing that it might persuade a few hot young things to stay away from the harder stuff.

Like the other MIB films, the emphasis is on goofy fun. Coming off the unfortunate stinker "We, Robots" (I, Robot 2), Will Smith makes good in another futuristic action movie, but one that plays well to his humor. Word is he took a break from directing the 24th Bond movie to shoot this sequel.

Again,Tommy Lee Jones' businesslike sternness and logic plays well against Smith's more spontaneous, freewheeling style. And the surprisingly clever game of cat-and-mouse between Smith & Jones and Koli keeps the movie racing along, even as the general population begins to panic over the large number of aliens.

As soon as the MIB figure out how to get the neuralizers working, they stop again. How is Koli doing it? Are we sure it's still her? All signs point to her, and she doesn't discourage the attention.

I won't reveal the ending, except to say it's not the one you expect.

Read More...

Summary only...

Ocean’s Thirteen- Analog players in a Digital world.

The crew is back for more shenanigans

Clooney, Pitt, and the rest of the crew were apparently unsatisfied with themselves for the disappointment of Ocean’s 12, so they decided to come back and make a suitable sequel. Do they deliver? Hell yes. Two heists. New cons. and a Mexican factory revolt. What's not to love?


By now you may have heard that this one is about friendship at heart—leave the women at home, this one is about loyalty between friends. These movies have always been self-referential, and this probably parallel’s the actors themselves again- you’ve got a crew of buddies that have a lot of fun together, but other than these movies they probably don’t get to work together very often. You can see the fun they are having making the movie, and as usual it’s contagious.

There was another theme that resonated with me in Thirteen- to put it simply, its a nostalgic comparison of ‘old school’ vs ‘new school’—the new Vegas compared the the golden age when Sinatra was running around. There’s a scene in the movie where Roman (Eddie Izzard) tells Danny and Rusty “You guys are analog players in a digital world”. He’s talking about the high-tech security systems being too sophisticated for them to beat, but it’s also a bigger metaphor of the movie. The movie is literally peppered with references to this old school/new school dichotomy. Rusty and Danny are reminiscing on the strip about the old casinos that have long been replaced, and about their early days in Vegas, and how it was back then. In other scenes, characters reference the guys that “shook Sinatra’s hand”—a reference not only to those who have been around that long, but also to a code of honor where a handshake was good enough to seal a deal. It gives you something to think about in a world where everything is about the newest technology and MTV soundbites. What happened to style, craftsmanship, design? What happened to old ideals? Friendship. Loyalty. The human bonds that enrich life.

I may be extrapolating a little far- this is, after all, a heist film.
Anyway, on to the heist:

I actually enjoyed 12, right up to the point where they pull the Julia Roberts-pretends-to-be-Tess-pretending-to-be-Julia Roberts fiasco. To be fair, it was a risky move. They had to know that premise would either be considered hilariously inventive or bomb completely. But my biggest complaint with 12 was that most of the crew spent most of the movie sitting in jail. That is definitely not the problem in Thirteen—each member of the crew is given their own tasks and sub-missions to pull off the heist, so all the characters get plenty of fun screen time. On top of that, several fun characters from the previous movies get screen time as well.

Thirteen twists the standard heist convention slightly. We already know the crew, so there is no need for that usual setup. The movie jumps right into the planning of the heist, which is a critical piece of any heist movie. And plenty of time is devoted to the planning. But what I really enjoyed was that as they went through the preparation of the heist, the crew runs into several dead ends and has to come up with alternate ideas. That was a very fresh take on the heist convention. How many times have you seen a Mission Impossible type movie featuring an incredibly complicated plan, only to watch it go off without the slightest inconvenience or hitch, EXACTLY as planned? Where's the fun in that?

The theme of analog players in a digital world also shows up here in the heist- the Bank Casino is billed as the most technologically sophisticated Casino in the world, with state of the art security, all monitored by an artificially intelligent computer. Yet Danny and the crew plan to beat it with a plan as old school as it gets- loaded craps dice, a trick roulette ball, and modified blackjack machines. There is a secondary heist thrown in as well- stealing Willie Bank’s personal collection of diamonds from hotel awards he has won. This heist has its own set of challenges to be dealt with.

Ultimately the heists play out with great fun and complication.

As a heist purist, there were two things that disappointed me, both involving the secondary jewel heist. I don’t want to give anything away, but suffice to say the crux of that heist, as well as some of the events, were completely out of character for the personalities established in previous movies. The Ocean’s franchise isn’t just about stealing things, but doing it with style, panache, and a clever plan. The second heist ultimately lacked that sense of style and sophistication. But this is a very minor complaint that most viewers probably won’t even notice. Overall, I thought the primary heist was an inventive take on the genre, which is a helluva lot more than I can say about most heist movies.

A couple minor complaints:

The movie felt rushed in the beginning, partly because it wasted no time getting into the heist planning. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but much of the first half of the movie feel slow, largely because there is a lot of exposition, but not much humor. In fact, the entire movie felt much longer than its actual running time (which is under 2 hours). I have to say, as much as I enjoyed Thirteen, I can’t say I feel this was a great editing job. The movie felt longer and slower than it was, and ironically I think adding a couple more humorous scenes would have actually made the movie move along faster.

My last complaint is that there was never really an element of tension or suspense to the heist. What was great about 11 was that you didn’t see the critical aspect of the heist (getting out) until after the fact. The movie had you wondering how they were going to pull it off, like a magic trick, only revealed after it was performed. In Thirteen it is all spelled out so cleanly, that when the heist actually happens there is no element of surprise or tension. To continue with the metaphor, it’s like explaining a magic trick before it is performed, so there is no sense of wonder or build up of drama in watching it. But hey, it's not like you were seriously thinking they weren't going to pull it off anyway. The whole point is to just roll with the fun.

There is a minor attempt at a ‘twist’ near the crux of the heist, but the audience never really falls for it. Perhaps this is partially the burden of being a third sequel- audience is familiar enough with the Ocean’s gameplan to expect that everything has been thought of ahead of time. And to be fair, we’ve all seen what happens when a director keeps trying to pull the same trick over and over. Just ask M. Night Shyamalan.

But really, these complaints are minor. For the normal moviegoer, this film is entertaining, funny, and enjoyable romp with some very likeable characters.

It’s like going on a road trip with a bunch of old college buddies- you’ve heard many of the jokes before and you’ll probably end up at some of the same ol’ places, but you have a great time anyway just because its good to hang with the old crew again.

Read More...

Summary only...

28 Weeks Later – Monkey Review

If only the zombies were this visible!

If you’d like to watch a movie about futuristic urban quarantine with some blurry zombies thrown in, then this movie is for you.


28 Weeks Later

3 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

We’ve all seen enough zombie films to know what qualifies as a good one, and the two overarching characteristics of a good zombie flick are good zombies and good cinematography. Let’s not even pretend that the script and acting have a big role in this genre.

So it was on these terms that I watched 28 Weeks Later, the latest zombie flick and sequel to the very good 28 Days Later.

As you’d imagine, it’s 28 weeks after the first outbreak of the ”Rage” virus, where the infected turn into frenzied, bloodthirsty killers. Of course, each time a person is bitten, he or she becomes one of the infected – which equals more zombies.

The American military has entered London to manage the quarantine. They insist that they have successfully eradicated the virus from London, and to prove it they have set up a safe living area that has “hot and cold running water and 24 hour electricity.” It is into this safe area that two children are moved, reuniting them with their father, who had earlier escaped a herd of the zombies.

It won’t be a spoiler for me to tell you that the virus rears its ugly head again. But I’ll leave secret the manner in which it resurfaces. All you need to know is: there are more zombies.

Let’s start with the good: this movie is generally well shot (except for one major issue, which I’ll get to in a moment). You get a distinct feel for a dystopian London, and you fully believe that the city has been wiped out by the virus. As in the first film, this movie once again makes use of great CG work to deliver us an empty London. There are no people on the streets, which adds to the eerie tone.

The acting is good enough to make us believe that this truly is a desperate situation. We don’t really have time to get too attached to any of the characters, but this is a zombie film, so who cares? And that’s also a positive commentary on the pacing which is fast and fun. Still, who ends up living and dying is a bit of a surprise, so that was nice.

The militaristic quarantine backdrop is excellent. I’ve never been in a military quarantine, but I’d imagine this is how it would be. And the quarantine conditions provide some terrifically tense parameters to the prospect of trying to escape the zombies.

But there is one major issue with this movie which causes me to knock down its rating: YOU CAN’T SEE THE ZOMBIES. How’s that for a zombie movie? Every time they show a zombie, the camera is shaking uncontrollably. Whether this is done to give us an idea for how frenetic the zombies are or because the makeup and special effects teams were working on a tight budget, it cripples the film. When the zombies are actually attacking, it’s simply impossible to tell what’s going on.

So if you’d like to watch a movie about futuristic urban quarantine with some blurry zombies thrown in, then this movie is for you. And believe me when I tell you that the above-mentioned strong points of this film almost make it worthwhile still. But ultimately it’s quite disappointing to know that 28 Weeks Later was a few clear zombie shots away from being a great movie.

Read More...

Summary only...

Shrek the Third - Review

One of the kick-ass ideas in a disappointing flick.

Shrek the Third
Monkey Score: 2 Opposable Thumbs Up (Out of 5)

God bless the filmmakers of "Shrek the Third" - they're really trying. You can tell.

Oh well.

The first Shrek was funny as hell. The second was iffy, but Puss-n-Boots (Antonio Banderas) saved the flick. Sadly, there's no saving grace for Shrek 3. There are some clever bits, but not enough is done with them.

The plot: Shrek doesn't want to be king, so he must find the kingdom's next heir (why didn't anyone ask Fiona if she wanted to be queen?). As his ship departs, Fiona reveals she's pregnant. He isn't thrilled.

Meanwhile, the evil Prince Charming wants to rule, so he gathers together all the storybook villains: Capt. Hook, various witches, evil queens, and a cyclops. This could have been awesome, but they didn't take it far enough.

Shrek finds the lost heir, a whiny teen, and kidnaps him. The teen is Arthur (to be King Arthur, of course). Cool idea, but they don't do anything with it. Arthur just complains that he isn't ready to be a king. What, he wants to go back? Even the nerds were kicking his ass in high school. Count yourself stupidly lucky, you simpering wretch. Shrek should've stuffed him down the nearest gopher hole.

Meanwhile, Charming kidnaps the princesses (Fiona, Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel, and the Queen), who escape and promptly become a very cool all-girl A-Team. Again, more could be done with this - it's a brilliant idea.

Notice all the good ideas have nothing to do with Shrek, Donkey, and Puss-n-Boots. We've seen their journey before, and Shrek's trepidation about becoming a father isn't too interesting (though the Baby Nightmare is pretty sweet). Unfortunately, Puss-n-Boots has a much smaller role, and I missed him - his suave elegance is a great foil to the ham-fisted Shrek. But he's barely in the movie. And Donkey's fine - he's just not given much to do.

SPOILER ALERT
Stop reading now if you don't want details revealed.

All this boils down to a disappointing ending. A showdown between the powerful, evil storybook villains, and the overwhelmed but plucky good characters? Well... no. The whiny Arthur grows enough of a pair to convince all the villains to stop being mean and go away to grow flowers. Seriously. That's it. That's the big showdown. They walk away. And it all happens on a battlefield in an -- wait. It happens during a play. A PLAY?! *sigh*

I've heard rumors of Shrek 4 and 5 being developed, with Shrek 4 being a prequel, kind of a "Shrek Begins."

Feh.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End - Review

Low expectations = fun movie

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Monkey Rating: 4 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

Watching "Pirates of the Carribean: At World's End" is like having a crush on someone - you're having so much fun that you don't mind the annoying bits at all. Yes, it's too long, has superfluous characters, plot twists I lost track of, and subplots I ignored. But I didn't care, being too busy booing the villains, cheering the good guys, and going "Cool!" at the special effects.

"Pirates" is bold, loud, frantic, surreal (things get weird when you see the giant nose), and has a surprisingly good vocabulary. Its seas are deep, menacing, and active. And the movie is nothing without the teetering, swishy, bemused Capt. Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp), of course. He's the only character I really cared about, followed closely by Capt. Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), the only one in the movie who really gets into the "ARRR!" of being a pirate.

My chief complaint about the second "Pirates" movie was that they didn't spend enough time on the ocean doing piratey stuff. And Davy Jones looked scary, but was actually just a tentacled pansy we were supposed to feel sorry for. No good.

Not this time! Finally, Davy Jones is an evil bastard! A real villain! And there's even a larger villain, some wretch from the East India Co. who's managed to capture Jones' heart, and thus command him.

(Note: in case you missed it, corporate CEOs have replaced Nazis as Most Reliable Bad Guys in movies. Even more so than terrorists. For some reason, they're scarier. )

How to enjoy this movie:

• Go on the ride in Disneyland. Even in the third movie, there are plenty of references to it.
• Hit the bathroom before it starts
• Lower your expectations
• When Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly have a heart-to-heart, feel free to go back to the bathroom, buy a $4 hot dog, or imagine your date naked. Remember the Aragorn/Arwen yawn-fest of LOTR? It's like that.
• Pay attention to the details: lots of little things are pretty funny, and the wordplay is better than I've seen in years on the big screen.

Otherwise, Keira Knightley has a great character - she could have been relegated to a marginally-useful-but-really-just-eye-candy role. However, she actually does some pretty cool shit.

(Note: in case you missed it, women are the new action heroes. Guys are mostly charming rogues.)

Orlando Bloom does some stuff, I think. Something to do with his dad.

Other reviewers have complained about the exhausting non-stop action, convoluted plot, and the nearly-three-hours running time. And they're right - these things detract, and they keep this movie good instead of great. But look - I work hard, I'm tired, and I just wanted to see wacky pirates beat the shit out of each other for a while. I got exactly what I wanted, and I had a great time.

And the ending is not what you think it is. 'Nuff said.

This was a hard review to write, because I don't want to analyze this film too much: it's not a relationship - it's just a crush.

Steve totally disagees with me.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End - Review

Aaargh! Are You Confused Yet??

Pirates of the Caribbean – At World’s End
Monkey Rating: 1 Opposable Thumb Up (out of 5)

.

You want pirates? No, do you REALLY want pirates? If you answered yes to the second question, then you’re probably going to love At World’s End, the third and latest (I’m definitely not going to say “last”) installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. And if it is indeed pirates that you want, be careful what you ask for, because Disney has them, and they’ll shove them down your throat for 3+ hours.

At World’s End is the first movie in history without any editing. At least that’s the conclusion one must reach with all of the fat in this steak. The cutting room floor must be spotless at Disney because it doesn’t seem like they left anything out of this film.

The movie could have had an hour of footage removed without harming the story, which is still difficult to describe even after 3 hours plot “movement”. Elizabeth (Keira Knightley, who has great dental work and mascara for a pirate), along with Captain Barbosa (Geoffrey Rush) and Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) are out to find Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) so they can get him to the pirate council, which has convened to defend themselves against the East India Trading Company, which is trying to execute all pirates, and to that end enlists the Flying Dutchman (a ship full of dead pirates) to help. In order to get Sparrow, they need to get the maps to World’s End, which are possessed by Sao Feng, another pirate. Will strikes a bargain with Feng for the Black Pearl (Sparrow’s ship) in exchange for Sparrow, who Feng wants to barter to Beckett. Meanwhile, Will is trying to kill the heart of the captain of the Flying Dutchman so he can revive his dead father (Stellan Skaarsgard), whose body and soul is captured on the Dutchman. Captain Barbosa wants the Black Pearl for himself. There are also 8 other pirate crews and ships, Keith Richards, and a psycho sea goddess named Calypso.

Did you get all that? Neither did I. The plot is ridiculously convoluted, with 80% of it being completely unnecessary. I still don’t know exactly what happened, but my $10 is in the cash register, so I’m left to try to make sense of it. I think I’ll cut my losses and solve a Rubik’s Cube instead.

The action sequences are well shot and choreographed, if too long. It’s generally clear what’s happening during these shots, if for no other reason than you have more then enough time to figure it out.

The acting is decent, but these performers are bogged down by the confusing script. Depp once again leads the way, but Rush is also strong as Captain Barbosa.

Once the climax occurs, there is another 20 minutes of unnecessary footage, along with a rather pointless “bonus” scene after the credits have rolled – which, by the way, takes a good 20 minutes. Is there anyone who didn’t work on this film? I think I even saw my own name on there.

It’s not all bad. There are a couple of great parts, namely the “ship flipping” sequence and an inspired psychedelic scene at World’s End featuring Depp and some helpful crabs.

But those scenes alone simply aren’t worth your time or money. The biggest pirate of all, Disney, has successfully plundered the pockets of the American Public here. I strongly suggest you sail wide of this mess.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pirates 3 just might suck

What's that smell?

The reviews are coming in for Pirates of the Caribbean 3, and so far it doesn't smell too good. Wasn't it bad enough that it has the longest title since Homework, or How Pornography Saved the Split Family from Boredom and Improved their Financial Situation

(that's a good film, by the way)

Here's a sampling of quotes from various reviewers:

...What started out as a fleet one-off swashbuckler with novel
supernatural elements has become loaded and graceless, with each new entry
barreling across the goal line like William "The Refrigerator" Perry...

...It's an even more tedious storytelling mess, with a plot so muddled
it's impossible to accurately describe, generating zero interest in its
characters and grinding on for nearly three endless hours...

...It's not a total shipwreck, but abandon hope all ye seeking a coherent, much less satisfying, narrative...

Yeah, it's not good when you are being compared to Refrigerator Perry. And those are the GOOD quotes. Don't get me wrong- I'm still going to see this for myself, (and you probably will too). But consider this a fair warning: Metacritic has given Pirates a score of 55. by comparison, Shrek 3 scored a 58 and Vacancy scored a 54.

Eeeesh.

Read More...

Summary only...

Shrek 3 Review - Opening Weekend

Hey Shrek, how about more of Puss N' Boots?

Shrek 3
Monkey Score: 2 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

The first two installments of the Shrek series were quite good films. The original, Shrek, introduced us to the cranky ogre with a good heart and his obnoxious, loveable sidekick, Donkey, in a classic fairy tale. The second, Shrek 2, improved upon the first, with even more of the smart pop culture references and sharp writing we saw in the first movie. Whether you liked the first or second film better, however, the two movies unquestionably wove in adult references into a kid package (the animation). That was the appeal.
This is where Shrek 3 falls short. Like George Lucas sold out with the Ewoks in Return of the Jedi, Shrek 3 seems a cheap attempt at a clearance sale of Shrek action figures. All that was missing was a McDonald’s cash register at the theater door.
In the latest installment, the big green dude is unwittingly thrust into the role of King of Far, Far Away because his father-in-law is gravely ill. Sure enough, the old man croaks (no pun intended), and Shrek is next in line to rule the kingdom. There’s only one problem: Shrek doesn’t want to be king. There is, however, another possible heir: Arthur. Shrek and his gang go off in search of Arthur, in a desperate attempt to avoid the throne. Complicating the journey is the fact that Fiona has become pregnant, causing Shrek to worry about the prospect of fatherhood.
What follows is an only occasionally funny romp, what seems more like a formulaic musical than the sharp satire we’ve come to expect from Mike Meyers and Co. In a telling sign, there were more kids than adults laughing in the theater.
Another disappointment is the reduced role of Puss N’ Boots, the cheesy, suave feline who stole the show in Shrek 2. We don’t get many good one liners from the tabby this time around. Donkey is, well, Donkey. He does a good job, but also seems like more of a background player this time. One funny twist: an old magician casts a spell with a “side effect” of switching Donkey and Puss N’ Boots. It’s one of the film’s comic successes.
Attention span disclaimer: I do need to be fair here. I saw this movie with a really hot chick. Though I felt like I had my wits about me, it’s somewhat possible that I was distracted by thinking about the moves I was going to put on her. Don’t hold it against me: you would have done the same thing. What was I going to say? “Get your hand out of my lap, I need to write a review.”
Bottom line: unless you have kids, or Happy Meals are a staple of your diet, I’d skip Shrek 3.

Read More...

Summary only...

28 Weeks Later: Regular Guy Movie Review

Zombie movies are getting better and better. This pleases me.

28 Weeks Later
Monkey Score: 4 Opposable Thumbs Up (out of 5)

“28 Weeks Later” - the sequel to the best-reviewed zombie movie of all time “28 Days Later” - is a kick-ass good time. Finally, a horror movie with scenes that are actually horrific, not just gory.

“28 Days Later” (the first movie) was about people’s individual reactions to a zombie infestation. “28 Weeks Later” (this movie) is more about the military reaction to a zombie infestation, after they start letting dipshit civilians back into the country. Thus, the flick doesn’t have the strong heart and characters of the first movie. But who cares? It’s a zombie movie! It’s fast-paced, scary, interesting, and it kept surprising me with actual plot twists, not WHAT’S-THAT-Oh-it’s-just-a-fucking-cat.

One breast. One flamethrower. Sniper fire goodness. Sprinting zombie goodness. Fire-bombing of a major city. Blood, blood, blood. See it in the theater.

Read More...

Summary only...