Home

Advertisement

Customize
26 July 2008 @ 08:07 pm
It was time for a comedy, so we went to see Step Brothers. We both really liked it, but agreed that it wasn't as good as Talladega Nights. John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell play well off each other. Sure, some of the humor's a little juvenile, but it's what we were in the mood for. You know what this movie proved, though? Horatio Sanz just isn't funny. It's not that he wasn't funny on SNL, it's just that he's not funny. Period.

I think tonight we're going to watch this piece of cinematic genius. Stay tuned for that review!
 
 
20 July 2008 @ 05:36 pm
I really liked it, but I didn't love it. I thought the parts were better than the whole. Here are my quibbles with it:

1. I thought the various plots and subplots were a little muddled. I think they could have lessened or even eliminated something.
2. I thought Christian Bale's Batman voice was a little hard to understand at times.
3. I thought at times the music was too loud over the dialog.

That's really it. Admittedly, most of those are minor, which is why I still really liked it. Let's be honest, the monvie could have sucked serious donkey ass and looking at Christian Bale for 2.5 hours would have made it all better!

For my money and for the reasons I go to movies, I preferred Iron Man and probably Hellboy II a little more.


Last night, we watched The Orphanage. It was sufficiently creepy and had some good scares. I wouldn't agree with Kris and call it one of the scariest movies I've ever seen, but it's worth watching and being scared by.
 
 
19 July 2008 @ 01:45 pm
I've been lax in reviews lately. Partly because I've been forgetting, but mostly because we haven't seen much lately. However, last weekend we saw Hellboy II. I quite liked it. I liked it more than I expected to, even. I thought it was really visually appealing, and it wasn't overdone. I like how the first Hellboy got you to like the character by making him funny and quirky, then the second Hellboy was a bit more serious, with just enough humor thrown in. I guess my only complaint would be that I thought Selma Blair character was underused. Though I am glad they got rid of the wet blanket from the first movie (Agt Myers). Yish.

Also, though not a movie: I am current on my Weeds on DVD watching. I finished S3 earlier this week. It's such a good show! I can't wait to get S4 on DVD. I both like and dislike the fact that the episodes are only 30 minutes long. You should all watch it.
 
 
16 June 2008 @ 06:30 pm
Rocky Balboa: This marks the first Rocky movie I've watched all the way through. I quite liked it. Remember in my review of Rambo I mentioned that Sly had some work done and his waxy face was distracting? He must have had that work done between the filming of Rambo and Rocky Balboa, because his face was not distracting in this one. He looks like a decent 61 year old. His character of Rocky is really sort of sweet. Doofy, but sweet. I think sometime in the near future we may watch the other Rocky movies. Although we also want to start The X-Files from the beginning.
 
 
15 June 2008 @ 03:19 pm
The Happening: We both liked it. Kris had pretty low expectations going into it based on reviews he had read, and he liked it more than he expected to. Me, I just wanted to be entertained for 91 minutes and I was. The weak part is definitely Mark Wahlberg's acting. I don't think, overall, he's a bad actor, but this was definitely the weakest acting I've seen from him. The theory behind the movie is interesting, too. I haven't really hated any of M. Night Shyamalan's movies - I liked The Sixth Sense, I remember liking Unbreakable (though don't remember many specifics), I liked The Village and I thought The Lady in the Water was sweet. I'm not saying I buy into every message Mr. Shyamalan tries to sell me, but I'm entertained by his movies.

Other thoughts:
1. When did John Leguizamo become an Actor?
2. There's an initial scene with Zooey Deschanel where I thought, "Is her character supposed to be retarded?" Her acting got better, though.
 
 
07 June 2008 @ 03:43 pm
The other night we watched Teeth. It was actually quite enjoyable, though it did drag a bit toward the end. The lead actress had some weird facial things going on that were sort of distracting (I didn't find her Drew Barrymore-like in the least, as one review mentioned), but overall I thought she was a nice change from the plastic-y leads in today's horror movies. I will say this: This movie does have one of the most hilarious trips to the gynecologist you'll ever see (as yet another review put it).
 
 
04 June 2008 @ 05:14 pm
And by some things, I mean Sylvester Stallone's face. Last night we watched Rambo. All in all, it wasn't horrible, really. It was really brutal and bloody, which was really the only redeeming quality. The acting was horseshit. Sly's plastic face was very distracting. Another good thing about it, I suppose - it's only 91 minutes long.
 
 
......and we haven't seen much. Here goes:

Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: Liked it, but didn't love it. I wouldn't say I'm a HUGE Indy fan, but I do like the other three movies. It was perfectly entertaining, but nothing to rave about. I do like Shia LaBeouf, though. To me, some of the effects looked a little too CG, but I dealt with it. Enjoyable, but for my money, Iron Man was more enjoyable.

The Strangers: Cree-py. Dude, the previews for this movie creeped me the hell out, and the actual movie did not disappoint. I LOVE to be creeped out at a movie, almost more than I like to be scared, and this movie did both! The scares were more of the "abrupt appearance of something" type, but the creepiness was pretty prevalent throughout. I will say: this movie did NOTHING to allay my irrational fears of home invasion. "Why are you doing this to us?" "Because you were home." Again I say, cree-py. One of the creepiest things about this is there are really only 6 people in it. It's not overloaded with annoying teen characters (or any teen characters, for that matter), either, which is a nice change of pace for a movie like this. I loved it, but I can see where people would be confused by it.

Sadly, since the last entry, this is all we've seen.
 
 
13 May 2008 @ 07:18 pm
Sadly, there hasn't been much to report movie-wise. But here goes......

Iron Man: I really, really liked it. For me, it had a nice mix of humor, action, drama and romance/romantic "tension." For those who particularly like Robert Downey Jr, I would recommend Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

27 Dresses: Nothing earth-shattering, but I enjoyed it. It's worth watching just for the end scene/sequence.

That's it. I told you it was sad.
 
 
19 April 2008 @ 09:59 pm
1. Last night, before dinner, we watched Lars and the Real Girl. While it was enjoyable, in an "I feel uncomfortable for all involved in this story" sort of way, I'm not sure I liked it as much as I was expecting. Of course, Ryan Gosling is good (when isn't he?) and Bianca is great in it, too. All in all, I think it's worth watching, but I didn't LOVE it.

2. Today we went to see Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Two words: Loved it. It was well-written, well-acted, funny, (NOT all the funny parts are in the previews), and sweet, without being heavy-handed. I think it was easily the funniest comedy we've seen in a long time. It may (may!) even be slightly funnier than my all-time favorite funniest movie, The 40 Year Old Virgin, but I need to see it a few more times to determine that. One side note: Mila Kunis is absolutely gorgeous.
 
 
15 April 2008 @ 10:31 pm
I gotta be honest. I was prepared to hate (or at least dislike) Juno just because of the unending hype. But I didn't. There were a few spots at the beginning where I found the dialog to be a little "hipster doofus" for me, but I got over it quickly. I'm not totally sold on Ellen Page, but I don't hate her. Michael Cera is adorable and now I want to watch Superbad again. The rest of the cast was wonderful (though I don't particularly like Jennifer Garner). Has JK Simmons ever been bad in anything? All in all, a perfectly enjoyable movie.

4.5 cookies!
 
 
12 April 2008 @ 11:50 am
Last night we had intended to watch Margot at the Wedding, but Kris wanted something a little lighter. So we ended up watching Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. It was actually quite funny. It was a good steady entertaining all the way through, with a few parts that made me giggle uncontrollably. I think John C reilly is a better "stupid humor" choice than Will Ferrell. I know, a bold statement, but I made it.

That's all I've got. I think I'm getting sick, so I have no energy for more.
 
 
09 April 2008 @ 03:16 pm
The birthday movie was Enchanted. I thought it was really cute, though Amy Adams totally made the movie. I still don't see Patrick Dempsey as dreamy. Y'see, a while ago, I saw an interview with him and just seemed so.................dull. Bleh. But the songs were cute, the acting was decent, and the story was cute. I don't consider myself a fan of check movies, but this appealed to my sense of chickiness. A side note: I think Giselle is secretly a Melcher!

4 cookies
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Last night's movie was P2. As someone on imdb says, it's easy to call bullshit during several parts of this. There's really not anything terribly original about it. Wes Bentley is sufficiently creepy, but not really scary. Rachel Nichols isn't all that great an actress, either. This didn't seem to bother Kris, though. All in all, fairly decent, but not life-changing.

2 cookies
 
 
07 April 2008 @ 05:30 pm
Last night's movie was The Mist. At first I thought the effects of the "monsters" was a little hoky, but it started to grow on me. I thought it was pretty well-acted, too. No one seems to do crazy like Marcia Gay Harden! I think I had heard something about a twist ending, so I sort of had that niggling feeling at the back of my mind through the whole movie, so I don't think it was impactful as it could have been.

Cookie rating: 4 cookies out of 5.
 
 
29 March 2008 @ 08:07 pm
Tonight's movie was Dan in Real Life. Overall, I would say it was okay. The high point was definitely Steve Carell and the low point was definitely Dane Cook. I love Steve Carell in everything he's been in. He's always slightly different. Andy Stitzer is different from Michael Scott is different fron Dan Burns. He's so likeable. Dane Cook, on the other hand, was annoying. He can't act and he basically just tones down in no-longer-funny standup for this role. Anoyone who thinks my family is a little nutty (Robin, I'm looking at you!) should see this. This family makes mine look like.......well, like a boring family.

All in all: a good, solid 3 out of 5 cookies.
 
 
09 March 2008 @ 11:00 am
Funny Games: We watched this because we had been seeing previews for this all day, while watching Ninja Warrior on G4. On the whole, I enjoyed it. Well, as much as you can enjoy the idea of two men toying with a family for a day. There are a few scenes that are effective at first, but then go on a tad too long. I thought the main baddie was entertaining. There were even a few looks and lines directly to the viewer. It will be interesting to see how this movie plays in the US. The original made one bold choice that I'm guessing won't be done in the remake.
 
 
01 March 2008 @ 10:35 pm
The Brave One: I did not like it at all. I thought it was poorly-written, cliched mediocrity. Terrence Howard's partner cop was an atrocious character. The two cops were like States the Obvious Cop and Witty Cop. I didn't buy Jodie Foster or Naveen Andrews as romantic characters, either. And no, it doesn't have anything to do with Jodie Foster's rumored lesbianism. I think it's just because I've never seen either of them in that sort of role. At Blockbuster I paid $1.24 for this movie and I, sadly, did not get my money's worth.

And these, from a previous [info]half_iowan entry.

Gone Baby Gone: I liked it. I had really liked the book Mystic River, but hated the movie, so I was hoping that the adaptation of the movie was the problem there. To me, it was. Gone Baby Gone moved better than Mystic River and I don't think it was quite as heavy-handed.

Michael Clayton: I think I liked it. I mean, the performances were good, but I'm not sure I really enjoyed it on the whole. I am able to admit that I'm one of those people who doesn't always "get" what a movie is about. I think this may be the case with Michael Clayton.
 
 
 
 

Advertisement

Customize