Archive for the ‘Review’ Category

Yes, I’m doing another SNL review. But before you groan, let me just say, I got some very positive responses on the season premiere, and the SNL cast and writers are doing very well on fulfilling expectations. So I’ve got four words for you: can you blame me?

Alright, on to the review part of the post. Joseph Gordon-Levitt; oh my God, I think that guy became a sex symbol for both women and gay men this evening, when he not only did an impression of Magic Mike during the opening monologue, but cross-dressed during the latter half of the show. I think someone out there might’ve fallen in love with that guy. But that wasn’t all; he was funny, he could do various accents and impressions, and he reminds me of guys I knew at Jewish summer cap, so that’s a plus in my book. Add all the serious roles he’s done lately, and I think Mr. Gordon-Levitt could have a very long career in Hollywood as a star who can do many different roles. Just don’t go weird Scientology on us or jump on couches while on a talk show and we’ll be good.

As for the skits…damn! The writers seem to be thriving under the pressure. That cold open was great! And having Mumford & Sons, the musical guest, play a song during one of the skits was just great, especially when the writers somehow manage to work in an actually decent Jerry Sandusky joke. And Kate McKinnon on Weekend Update as Ann Romney had me laughing so hard. I hope she plays that role some more before the election is over. A special mention goes to the Republican-sponsored birth control fake ad and the rapper’s fashion talk show where it showed two rappers slowly becoming effeminate. Also, I’d like to say the “Powers & Powers” skit was great, though I was sad it had to be cut short due to time constraints.

Final score on the review scale: 4.7 out of 5. Join me for another review of SNL in two weeks, when Daniel Craig tries his hand at comedy (and if they really do have Jennifer Lawrence of Hunger Games fame afterwards, like the rumors are saying, I’ll review that too. Oh don’t roll your eyes, I like this show, and it’s doing really well so far this season!).

Now, you all know I’m a huge horror fan. But I do like a little comedy every now and then, and I have been known to do a little reviewing on SNL every now and then. So, since there’s been some changes in cast and it’s an election year in the United States, I decided to do a review of the season premiere of Saturday Night Live!

First, let’s start with the host and the musical guest. Seth MacFarlane was awesome, doing numerous voice impressions throughout the show and at one point playing a stuttering Army sergeant (was not sure if I should laugh, or object over the fact that I’ve been to speech therapy before). I was not impressed by Frank Ocean as musical guest though, remarking that he reminded me of Usher trying to be Ne-Yo. But hey, I don’t really know his music, so whatever.

The  actors were pretty decent this episode: Jay Pharaoh took over the role of playing Obama with a stellar performance, which I approve of, seeing as he was underutilized last season. Taran Killam also did well as Paul Ryan, and Nasim Pedrad was able to match an impression for every one of MacFarlane’s. I did not see enough of the new cast members (Cecily Strong, Aidy Bryant, and Tim Robinson, for those of you who don’t know) to really form an opinion, but I think they’ll make the transition to SNL okay, if they jsut keep their heads about them.

The skits were also decent: during the cold open, Pharaoh and Jason Sudeikis (whom, I’m convinced, did not tell people whether or not he was rejoining the cast until the final week before the new season just to get interest for the new season) were playing off each other to get plenty of laughs from the audience. Weekend Update was phenomenal as usual, though I don’t think “Innocence of Muslims” is something you can make a joke about. And in one skit, YouTube sensation Psy (I didn’t know who he was until this episode either, but down below is the video that made him famous) made an appearance, which was hilarious.

I did think that the Amish website skit was too short for my tastes, and the commercial breaks were too long. Also, I thought the new opening credits for the show was interesting, if a little heavy on tranistion use. Other than that, very few objections, bringing my rating of the episode a 4.2 out of 5. Let’s hope they can keep up the yucks for the next episode, with musical guest Mumford and Sons and guest host Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

And if you’re curious who Psy is and why he was featured in an SNL sketch, here’s his video. Trust me, it’s great; he’s dance like me, except possibly worse!

Review: The Possession

Posted: September 3, 2012 in Review
Tags: , , ,

The movie poster for “The Possession”; if you want to scare your girl, bring her to this movie.

aka The Exorcist for both this generation and the Jews.

Did that opening statement interest you? Well if it did, then good, because this movie was awesome! I was freaking out! Based on a true story (there’s a book out there that explains that true story, and I’m trying to get my hands on it), The Possession chronicles a family’s troubles as the youngest in the family buys a box from a yard sale, unaware that the box contains a dybbuk, a type of demon or spirit from Jewish folklore. The movie featured among its cast Jeffrey Dean Morgan trying to be a good dad after divorcing his wife, played by Kyra Sedgewick, Natasha Callis as the possessed little girl (and who might have a good career going for her, if you ask me), and Hasidic rapper Matisyahu as an exorcist named Tzadok (and yes, there are Jewish rappers; including this guy, there are three professionals I know of).

The film was very well done in my opinion, with the little girl Em showing both some Exorcist, some The Ring, and even some Grudge in her performance. The effects were simple but very effective, with wind, flashing lights, and a roomful of moths among what was used. And in the end when you actually see the dybbuk, you can’t help but be grossed out by it; it’s disgusting to behold.

The script was also well-written, though reminiscent of The Exorcist in that at first the possession is considered a reaction to the divorce, followed by a medical/psychological problem, and only afterwards, with a little too much grace, is the supernatural acknowledged. However, even though the plot was done, it found new life here. Not to mention that the end left room for a possible sequel.

Oh, and Matisyahu’s character made a joke at some point that has a distinctly Jewish flavor to it.

For the possession, I give The Possession a 4.8 out of 5 for being utterly freaky, the actors convincing me with their emotion, and some very nice special effects. Points were taken off, because like I said, the acceptance of the supernatural was just too rapid for me, or at least there was less reluctance to accept it than I thought there would be.

The cover of the original Carrie novel. Oh, does this bring back some fond memories.

In case you haven’t heard, MGM and Screen Gems are doing a remake of that wonderful debut novel of His Highness Stephen King, Carrie. I feel a strange connection with that novel, not just because I’m a huge fan of King, but because I was bullied when I was a kid, so I know what it’s like to want to lash out (and sometimes actually lash out) at the bullies who hurt you. So you can tell I’m super-excited that Carrie‘s getting a third chance at the screen, big or small.

I’d like to devote two posts to Carrie. One will be on what I hope the filmmakers will do with the novel, in comparison to what others have done with the novel. The second post, which I will write in the morning or afternoon, will deal with what I hope people will get from a new film adaptation of Carrie. And trust me, what I’m thinking of, is probably different than what you’re thinking of; they are two very different subjects.

Theatrical poster for the wonderful 1976 film.

Alright, the first film, the one that’s famous, starred Sissy Spaceck as Carrie, and Piper Laurie as Margaret White. Spaceck was very believable as Carrie, though a tad prettier than I expected, while Laurie was freaky as hell as Mrs. White (honestly, I’m soooo glad my mother, who’s a rabbi, is not like her!). The prom scene seemed not as scary as I’d hoped, though that may be because I’m a Generation Y-er, which means I’m used to special effects and whatnot. And of course, Chris Hargensen was a total bitch. 4.2 out of 5, if I had to review it.

The second film, a made-for-TV movie, could’ve done a lot better. Angela Bettis not only looked like a real Carrie, she embodied the role to the point I believed that girl was Carrie. Patricia Clarkson, on the other hand, did not intimidate, but then again what do you expect: the woman was passive, and wore colors other than black. Not scary in the least. The music for that film also was better suited for a Hallmark Channel white-women romantic drama centered around family life, not a Stephen King-based horror movie. There were high points though: not all the characters were Caucasion, and Sue Snell was even African-American, so kudos for diversity, which I think should be looked for in every movie, especially horror with its nearly-always white victims. And the special effects, while not exactly state-of-the-art enough to look very real, were done in such a way that during the prom scene, I had a huge grin on my face from glee. Once again, freaky as hell.

Poster for the flop of a TV remake.

Like I said however, the TV remake could’ve been better, barely getting a 2.9 on my review scale.

Now what I hope from the new movie: we’ve learned by now that Chloe Grace Moretz, the little girl with a punch from Kick-Ass, is playing Carrie, while Julianne Moore, who I’ve seen in a couple of films but never really taken note of till now, is playing Margaret White. Now, as I’m not that familiar with Moore’s work, I’m going to decline to specualte on her in the role and hope she plays a good crazy woman. As for Moretz though…well, she’s a very pretty fifteen-year-old. The make-up artists are going to have to work hard to make her look plain. I’m also a little surprised that they didn’t include an actress who’s maybe a little chubbier so as to be more in-line with the book, but hey, if Moretz can seel it, I won’t complain.

As for special effects…let no expense be spared. This is a movie about a psychic girl with a ton of issues, and the one thing the TV remake did right was make that prom scene scary to behold. So this time around, I hope they can top that: students screaming, flames burning students while scoreboards fall into water to electrocute other students, and Carrie standing in the middle of it all, a melding of the Queen of Hearts and the Red Queen, silently chopping off heads.

Promotional image for the new movie. So far, I like what I’m seeing.

 

Was that a great metaphor or what?

Two other things I’d like to see: one would be more of a stand-off near the end between Chris Hargensen and Carrie. It just seems a little anti-climactic that Chris and Billy always see Carrie on the road and then get killed while accelerating at her. Can’t Carrie have a few seconds to say, “Very funny, bitch” or something before crushing them? Or maybe just a stare to say, “Our eyes are locked. Here’s my revenge”?

I’d also like to see the inclusion of the subplot featuring Sue’s pregnancy. So far, that hasn’t made it to the films, but I would love to see it happen in this one. After all, it plays a big part near the end of the novel, especially since this is a story centered around blood. Blood starts it, blood is at the climax, and blood should symbolically end it.

By now I’m thinking my words won’t affect the script, but hey, I can hope, right? Let’s see what happens.

Tune in at some point tomorrow; I’m planning on doing some thoughts on the subjects of Carrie and bullying, all before I go to see a movie at the theater near campus.

Bye.

Review: ParaNorman

Posted: August 19, 2012 in Review
Tags: , ,

The theatrical poster for ParaNorman. Read my review below.

I hope I got that title right; when the trailers have all the words in capital letters, it’s hard to tell. Also, be aware there are spoiler alerts in this article.

Anyway, today a friend of mine and I went to see ParaNorman at the theater near campus, and we got to wear those 3D goggles that sometimes seem useless when there aren’t enough shots that emphasize the 3D part of it all. But I’m getting sidetracked; here’s the review part you all came for.

ParaNorman is interesting to talk about. I say that because it’s one of those children films where the filmmakers have added parts that adults will also find funny. Now sometimes that works: there’s a scene where one of the characters, a teacher who thinks she should be in the opera, emphasizes that the town legend of the witch is not meant to be accurate but to sell postcards and that sort of stuff. Other times, it doesn’t: Norman’s mom asks him early in the film what he’s watching on TV, to which he says, “sex and violence”. I think some parents may not like that aspect of the movie.

There is also a few cliche and stereotypical characters in this movie: there’s the dad in the film a typical Daddy-knows-best type who doesn’t really know best, which makes you wonder if he’s really qualified to work with a kid who under other circumstances might’ve been taken to see a therapist; and there’s a black female cop who seems to be the stereotype of black females cops by being loud and yelling “Sweet Jesus!” Yes, she does say that.

However there are attempts to break stereotypes that are pretty positive. Remember that dumb jock type from the trailers? He ends up helping to save the day at the end of the movie, and when we think Norman’s sister finally has a great boyfriend, we find out he’s gay. Got to say, my friend and I enjoyed that.

But the other thing that’s just as interesting about ParaNorman is that while although this is a zombie film, it’s one that breaks a few of the rules. For one, there are only seven zombies–yes seven, you read that right–and they don’t turn anyone else into zombies or kill anyone. Also, these zombies are less stupid antagonists but more intelligent, speaking to Norman and actually playing a different purpose than being evil.

In the end the message of this movie is one that gets us in the heart: sometimes we act mean to things (or people) that scare us, and that causes us to do horrible things. It’s only that by thinking of the good people in our lives that we don’t become like them and that the cycle of hate and fear can end.

One qualm I had with the film that reminded me that this wasn’t magic before my eys but actual filmmakers manipulating little puppets was that one of the characters, a big guy with a beard, had a beard that changed a bit too much when he talked. It just took away from the movie magic.

To ParaNorman, I give the film a 3.8 out of 5 for wonderful memories, but I take away points for trying to please the adult audience too much at the expense of the kids who will go to see this film. Hope you enjoy it anyway.

The poster for Nolan’s final Dark Knight film, which is not to be missed.

Holy awesome blockbuster, Batman!

Okay, all Robin jokes aside, this movie kicked butt! At times it seemed a little slow, but it was definitely killer! There were plot twists that I had no idea coming (seriously, you will freak at certain points), the emotion was believable, and the storyline was superb (there were things I wouldn’t have done, but I’m still an amateur by comparison. And besides, how many movies make you rethink how you’ll write your novel, which I’m considering doing?).

The one thing I did not care for was the girl two rows below me and one to the right who kept turning her phone on and lighting up the theater near the end of the film. Girl, it’s a movie theater. Your boyfriend can wait, and if you want to check the time, buy a watch.

I rate this movie a 4.5 out of 5 for a job well done.

Oh, fun fact: you know that chant they do in the film that the guy from the trailer translates as “Rise”? Well, I did a little digging, it’s actually Moroccan Arabic and it means “he rises”. Close enough translation, but still makes more sense in context.

Poster for the new Spider-Man movie.

Epic.

That’s what went through my mind when I was watching the climactic fight scene. Epic.

Every person on the planet familiar with the previous three films of Spider-Man were skeptical when they heard the series was getting a reboot. Then a few trailers were shown, and people started liking the idea. And then more was shown, and people really started liking the idea. And then it came out, and the reviewers were raving.

And I can see why.

This new Spider-Man, played by a superb Andrew Garfield (nice American accent; almost worth it that we outsourced the role), is much more three-dimensional than Tobey Macguire’s portrayal, to the point where you can really relate to him. The same goes for Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy, who has more depth than Mary Jane as played by Kirsten Dunst, and actually does more than scream, get kidnapped, and flirt. Dr. Curtis Connors/the Lizard (whose actor I forget) is amazing, not only in the CGI used to create him, but also in the chronicle of a man who as the movie progresses, becomes more and more delusional, not realizing what he’s doing until near the end of the film.

You know, just about every actor in this movie did extremely well. Not too mention the story was well-written, and there was more to Peter Parker/Spider-Man than just swinging around like a monkey in a spandex suit: he’s crafty, he knows strategy, and he’s funny while he fights crime. And hey, the romance didn’t end on an annoying tone like it did in the original film. Thank you!

I’ve just got three complaints (it would be four, but for once I’m going to shut up about sequels). First is the music for the movie: at times it seems wholly insipid, more suited to a children’s adventure film than a serious superhero film. At other times, the music can seem appropriate but out of place, by which I mean why is there piano keys being clunked all together when the Lizard enters Oscorp? That might work in an old horror film, and it might work here, but the composer could’ve done something better.

The other complaint is after the big battle, Gwen goes to see Peter and all his battle scars are gone. What the hey? You can’t heel a guy that brutally injured in such a short time! It makes no sense! It makes even less sense that at the end, the web comes out in slow-mo. That’s anti-climatic, really.

Well that’s it. I give the film a 5 out of 5, for defying expectations and giving us a really enjoyable superhero film that has some real depth to it.

Oh, before I forget: when you see the film, watch out for octagons. They’re everywhere: in Spider-Man’s mask’s lenses, on the suit’s spandex, on Oscorp’s exterior. I know, it’s a minor detail, but why did they do it?

The poster for the Avengers movie.

As I said in the last post, I saw this last night and I thought I’d write a review of it as the third entry in my summer movie review series. However I’m pressed for time so I’ll keep it brief (hope that’s okay with everyone).

In this latest edition to the Marvel Cinematics Universe, we have the heroes of Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Captain America and Thor, plus a few new guys, getting together to fight Thor’s evil brother Loki, who’s allied himself with some monsters with a really hard name to pronounce and a minor resemblance to the Xenomorphs and Predators. The plot of this film, like the other ones, seems rather formulaic–meet guy with personal problems/flaws, guy has life-changing experience, guy realizes who he can become, guy confronts enemies, guy takes a break for various reasons from fighting evil–and yet I still find myself impressed and thrilled by the action of it all. Not too mention that they really did some great CGI effects on Hulk and Iron Man.

My one major complaint is that while I was promised there’d be some conflict between the characters involving Captain America and Tony Stark, plus Bruce Banner’s problems with the Hulk. I just didn’t see enough of that. I really thought the former two would have a shouting match that would devolve into a fist fight. There was none of that. Just a little trade of sentences. Where was the conflict exactly with the coming from two different worlds? And I thought Banner seemed to have too much control over Hulk. I mean seriously, you need to startle Banner with the Hulk to bring out the Hulk? Really? And what’s with the “I’m always angry” bit? If you were always angry, you’d always be big and green! Imagine having to find a car that matched your wacky melanin and fit your size!

I’d rate this film with a 3.6 out of 5, for–although impressive–being formulaic, having monsters look like Xenomorphs and Predators, and not showing the conflict I was promised.

Oh, and for those of you wondering what films are in this summer film review series of mine, let me tell you: Men In Black III (seen it), Prometheus (seen it), The Avengers (just reviewed it), Rock of Ages (gotta see it), The Amazing Spider-Man (just came out), Ted (still in theatres, last I checked), and The Dark Knight Rises (sitting on my hands till it comes out).

The cover of Anne Rice’s “The Wolf Gift”.

You know, it just doesn’t seem right to do a review of an Anne Rice novel without mentioning in the title that it was written by her, and there’s good reason for that: Anne Rice is a wonderful writer, a woman whose evolution from her early works to her latest writing can be seen by even people who are not well-versed in the study of literature. If I were to try to classify Anne Rice’s writing, I’d call it sophisticated horror, and that depending on what work you are reading, you can compare her work to some sort of food or drink: The Vampire Chronicles are, most appropriately, red wine; Lives of the Mayfair Witches could be an aged, sweet port; The Mummy as a leafy salad; Servant of the Bones as a French bread; and Songs of the Seraphim as a dairy dessert. I’m sorry, I just had lunch, can you tell?

So what does The Wolf Gift taste like? Probably a white wine meant for right before bed. It is an amazing work of fiction, and shows just how Anne Rice’s style has acclimatized to the Information and Technology age. From the point of view of reporter Reuben Golding, we see how he becomes a werewolf–or Man Wolf, as he prefers, and Morphenkind, as his species in the novel is referred to as a whole–and how his new abilities include an instinct to hunt down those whom we consider evil (rapists, murderers, etc.) just by scent. Along the way, Reuben must figure out how to interact with his family after his change, the question of whether he is good or evil, abomination or divinely blessed, and unravel the mysteries surrounding the house he lives in, where he is bitten, and what it all has to do with Morphenkind in general.

Although the book doesn’t have a central primary antagonist (two antagonists do appear throughout the story though; a werewolf who has “lost his way”, which is not what you’re thinking, and two Russian scientists with sinister goals), the obstacle that all the main characters must face is whether they are good or evil, and what it means to be given the Wolf Gift, and how it places them in the grand scheme of things.

One of the unique aspects of Anne Rice’s latest novel is that instead of looking at things from a supernatural/magical point of view as she usually does, she instead looks at the werewolves and their abilities from a scientific perspective, using that to explain the forensic conundrums of werewolf DNA and the passing-on of the wolf gift and how exactly it works on the body’s structure, endocrine system, and DNA.

If I had to discuss the main theme of “The Wolf Gift”, I would say it is purpose, whether it be individual, moral, or cosmic purpose.

I give this latest masterpiece by the woman who basically created the sexy vampire, a 4.4 out of 5, for outstanding plot, character development, and philosophical questions explored. If there’s ever a movie adaptation, I would love to write the script for it.

All for now, I think I’ll write Ms. Rice a fan letter (I do that for every new book of hers I read; she’s the only author I know that has an email address for her fan mail).

What I imagine the werewolves in “The Wolf Gift” to look like. Very scary, but actually very nice if you get to talk to them, and I mean that in either form.

Review: Prometheus

Posted: June 22, 2012 in Review
Tags: , ,

The film poster for Prometheus. It’s huge in this post for a reason.

OH MY GOD! I FINALLY SAW IT! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Ok, spazz-out done. Let’s get down to it without giving away any plot points or whatever. Wow. What a movie. I was put into suspense, I got scared a few times, and I couldn’t stop putting my hands on my face at every scary or gruesome part. Yeah, I liked it. It was so much fun learning about the origins of the Xenomorphs and seeing their evolution from simple to close to what Sigourney Weaver fought in 1970. The characters have been criticized by other critics as being “too two dimensional” but I felt they were real enough, especially considering that it’s a slasher film with sci-fi bio-warfare as the killer. And I was left with more questions than when I came in, so I guess that means there’s going to be a sequel! In fact, I’ll be disappointed if there isn’t.

My one qualm is that the beginning might move a little too fast and be a little more confusing if you can’t adjust too quickly, but it becomes easy to follow after that.

I give this movie a 4.3 out of 5, for showing me the evolution of the Xenomorphs and for scaring the crap out of me at some points.