Hugo Review

First, I’d like to say I’m sorry for being gone forever, but hopefully (keep your fingers crossed) I’ll be back with more than just this review, and there will be more to come. We’ll see though!

Anywho, Hugo is a movie that could get a lot of different reactions from people. For instance, Dad really enjoyed it a lot. He enjoyed the story and the way it progressed was pretty nice. I, on the other hand, thought it was just ok. Not to say it was bad by any stretch, it just wasn’t great in my mind. The story was about a child, who was orphaned by his parents’ deaths, and then later by his uncle. He stays in the train station walls and cranks all the clocks (remember, this is 1930s we’re talking about here). His main goal through the majority of the film is fixing a machine that he and his father had worked on while he was alive. The rest of the movie, the more enjoyable part I believe, is spent trying to build up the confidence of a man who feels betrayed by the boy. Adventures unfold, and they discover things about the man that puts him in a new light, and it ends happily ever after or whatever.

Now, the scenery was really neat. You could tell some of it wasn’t real, but that’s always going to happen. However, the gear animations and clock scenes were all stunning. I guess since those scenes were the primary focus of the film that’s a good thing, but still, the visuals of those are simply amazing.

The acting was pretty great with exception to one, and coincidentally the most important, character. Asa Butterfield, who played Hugo, the main character, while being able to play the orphan well enough, really just didn’t connect with me in anyway to keep me really enthralled with it. Ben Kingsley, on the other hand, I felt did splendidly as the shop owner with a past he’d like to forget, and my favorite part of the entire movie is actually the part where he takes over and talks about his past. That was the one part of the movie that I was completely involved with. Sacha Baron Cohen played the station inspector, and he did well with the role. He managed to squeeze in enough awkwardness in the part to act as the comic relief.  Chloe Grace Moretz did a great job as Isabelle, who is the one who motivates Hugo to actually take some adventures out of the station. So, as I said, there was only one performance which I thought was lack-luster, and unfortunately it was the one that mattered most.

In the end, I would still recommend this movie. The more I think of it the more I realize that I actually did enjoy it more than I thought I had. However, the acting of the main character still keeps it from being anything more than alright in my opinion. Unfortunate really, because this movie had all the elements of being really good. By all means see it; the story and visuals alone are by far worth it, but if you come out of the theater and feel as if something wasn’t up to expectations or you feel like it was missing a little something, in my opinion, it was the lead.

As always, donations are appreciated so I can keep this up, and please share this with all your friends via the toolbar down under the donate button! SO MANY SOCIAL NETWORKING OPTIONS IN ONE SPACE!!! Click as many as you like.

True Grit (2010) Review

I would like to issue a formal apology to Jeff Bridges. I am truly sorry for being mad at you for using Jeffy as a stand in during Tron: Legacy, because this movie was clearly worth it. Any movie with both Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon at the top of their games is almost an automatic must-see, but if you were skeptical fear no more. This is a movie that you have to see right now. It’s 4:40 am you say? I don’t care. Go. Now. It’s that good.

In case you didn’t know, this version of True Grit is a remake of the movie True Grit filmed in 1969 starring John Wayne. And THAT version was an adaptation of a book. So really, I’m not sure whether this can be considered a remake considering how different it is than the original movie, and how much closer it is to the book. It’s like calling Charlie and the Chocolate Factory a remake of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. They’re both adaptations of a book, but either way you cut it, a fat kid gets sucked up a tube and and a girl becomes a giant blueberry, so who am I to decide. Enough of candy talk though. If I had to compare the two different versions of this film, I would have to say that the 2010 version outshines the 1969 version. Although John Wayne is the king of westerns, Jeff Bridges plays a better “badass loose-cannon cowboy” than John Wayne does for this film. Bridges is just grittier, and I apologize for the horrible pun.

Basically, what this movie is about is a girl(Hailee Steinfield) who is seeking to avenge her father’s murder. She hires US Marshal Rooster Cogburn (Bridges) to find the murderer, Tom Chaney (Brolin), and bring him back to be hanged. However, before they can be on their way, they meet a Texas Ranger (Damon) who is attempting to find Chaney and bring him in for murdering a Texas Senator. They join forces and disband several times in this film, go through many misadventures, and partake in various witty banter. I can’t go on much or I will give away things that I shan’t be giving away. It is a great plot though, which is more of a compliment to the book rather than the movie.

The most important aspect of a movie like this is execution, and I believe this movie passed with flying colors in that department. Jeff Bridges was an excellent choice for this character, and Matt Damon was a good fit for his, although its an odd experience seeing Matt Damon out of his two niche characters, super action government guy, or super paper pushing government guy. Stretching out has proven beneficial for Mr. Damon it would seem. Hailee Steinfield also did a great job. She fit the character, I feel, better than the original actress. Of course, she had to do well in this movie because her’s was a major role, and I don’t think there was much screen time without her presence. There was plenty of witty dialogue in this movie, mainly either from Bridges’ character, or between Bridges’ and Damon’s characters. While many of these moments were in the ’69 movie, they weren’t nearly as smooth as they were in this movie. Bridges and Damon really had chemistry in this film and they definitely brought their characters to a new light. I’ve never been a huge western fan, but this is one of those movies that you have to see regardless. Even if you don’t think you’ll like it, you have to see it for the cast. It’s kind of like a small scale The Expendables with a better plot, less explosions and better production. But yes, I definitely recommend this movie to anyone, including people who don’t like westerns. It’s too good to miss.

As always, donations are appreciated so I can keep this up, and please share this with all your friends via the toolbar down under the donate button! SO MANY SOCIAL NETWORKING OPTIONS IN ONE SPACE!!! Click as many as you like.

TRON: Legacy Review

CRAP!!!! I had this WHOLE review written and then when I hit save draft it DISAPPEARED!!! RAAAAAAAAAAAAGE!!!!!!!! /rage So, New Year’s resolution is more movie reviews, so look forward to that! And now it’s movie time!

TRON: Legacy is a pretty good movie, wonderful casting, good plot, but NOT worth forking up the extra cash for IMAX 3D, or any 3D for that matter. The first thing it says when it begins is something along the lines of “Several of the scenes in this movie were shot in 2D and are intended to be viewed as such.” Of course the first thing I thought was what a mistake 3D was.

Now, I’m not against 3D. I mean, I loved Avatar, and that was an example of great IMAX 3D usage, but I hate gimmicky 3D, and that’s pretty much what this movie consisted of. There was no 3D besides when people got assimilated during the light disk battles, and hardly any in the Light Cycle battles, which was disappointing. I expected more from Disney, considering they’ve been great with 3D lately. So my advice is if you’re going to see this, don’t waste the money on 3D when you can get an equally good experience in 2D.

Anyway, this movie is a sequel to the 1982 movie Tron, but if you haven’t seen that, don’t fret! There is a 5 – 10 minute cut at the beginning of the film that recaps parts of the original movie. Sort of a “Previously on…” type thing. Even if you miss that, you aren’t going to lose too much of the story. Sam Flynn, son of Kevin Flynn, is abandoned by his dad at a young age and then his mom dies and then he runs away from his grandparents and then he grows up. There ya go, first 10 minutes of the movie all there for you in one easy-to-read run on sentence! Anyway, when a chairman from the company his dad started, Encom, receives a page from Kevin Flynn, he tells Sam about it, and it turns out his dad has been trapped in the Grid since he left. Adventures ensue, and Sam gets back home with an extra person. I’ll leave it up to you to speculate who it could be.

They had a nice little line-up going for them, with people like Jeff Bridges, Olivia Wilde, CGI Jeff Bridges, and Garrett Hedlund on board. The acting could have used a little boost here and there, but overall, the acting didn’t really disappoint. I am impressed with Mr. Bridges though, seeing as he stars in 2 of this holiday season’s movies (True Grit and this). Olivia Wilde did a great job in her role, even though I’m still mad at her for leaving House, and Garrett Hedlund did swell as Sam Flynn, although I have never heard of him before.

Graphics were great, bright neon lights, flashy animation, good CGI, the works. EXCEPT CGI Jeff Bridges! He looked horribly unrealistic. You know those plastic dolls? He looked like one of those. Like freakin’ Nancy Pelosi after her botox injection. He didn’t even begin to look real. I guess it’s understandable given he wasn’t real, he played C.L.U., but you’d figure you’d want him to look real. And if Bridges wasn’t in True Grit he probably could’ve shaved the beard and played C.L.U. instead of forcing the CGI himself to play him. Fortunately, the light cycle and light disc battles made up for the poor work on CGI Bridges (now known as “Jeffy”).

Overall, good idea, but just ok execution on the part of Disney. If the 3D had been as expected this could’ve been a recommendation for 3D from me, but since only about a quarter of the movie was actual in 3D, it’s just not worth it. Go see it, by all means, it’s a good movie. Just don’t spend the extra for a 3D viewing. Save that for The Green Hornet, which comes out Jan. 13! That’s gonna be great in 3D. And you will get a review on that movie when it comes out, so look forward to that.

As always, if you wanna donate, click the button. New this week, the tweet button will also be here, so please click it so you can share the review with all your little stalkers. I’d love some more support.

Sorry!

Hey guys, I am really sorry for not posting a review lately. With school starting recently I haven’t had much time. However, I’ve seen The Other Guys, Vampires Suck, and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, so be looking forward to those reviews, hopefully starting tonight with Scott Pilgrim. Check back tomorrow to see if it’s up, which it should be. Until then, this is a place holder. Sorry once again. -Brad

Dinner for Schmucks Review

Dinner for Schmucks… What is there to say about this movie? Well, first off, you need to NOT read any of the critics reviews of this movie, because they’re all wrong. If you haven’t read the description of this blog it’s a movie review site for people who don’t care what the professional critics say, so not listening to them shouldn’t be a problem. This movie isn’t the fast paced punchline after punchline comedy that they’re looking for. It moves a little slow for the first part of the movie, the part leading up to the dinner, but the dinner makes up for it. The first 2/3rds of this movie is the giant set-up for the dinner, but there are still plenty of funny parts in this section. The critics make it sound like it’s boring until the dinner, but it’s really not. Dinner for Schmucks is about Tim (Paul Rudd), an analyst for a big financial company, Fender Financial. An employee gets fired, and Tim wants his position. He then discovers that the only way to get the promotion is for him to find and bring an idiot to an annual dinner Fender holds that he calls “Dinner for Winners.” They bring idiots to a dinner to make fun of them and the employee who brings the biggest idiot snags the promotion. He plans on not doing it because his girlfriend (Stephanie Szostak) thinks its a ridiculous idea. Even though he plans on not doing, he runs into an idiot of his own, Barry (Steve Carell). His girlfriend leaves when she finds out he plans on it, and other events roll out that run the course of the movie. I’m really trying not to give the movie away, so sorry for the half-baked plot summary.

There are plenty of humorous parts throughout the movie, and you should expect to get quite a few good laughs out of it, especially considering the cast. Be warned though. While it’s not as crude as The Hangover (see my last review for a description of that) it has parts that probably aren’t the greatest for the kids, like the part during the dinner when Barry (Steve Carell) talks about why his ex-wife left him for his boss, Therman (Zach Galifianakis.) Regardless, this movie is still full of laughs for everyone. Carell does a marvelous job playing the “idiot” role, and Galifianakis does great as well. Even though Barry is the idiot in the story, he’s the one we’re probably supposed to root for the most, and I think this movie plays it off rather well. Tim is the other one we’re supposed to root for, and even though he comes off as the bad guy through part of it, he becomes easier to cheer for later on.

Ultimately, if you want a comedy that you can pretty much shut off your brain and watch and laugh, then this is the movie for you, but this isn’t a thinking man’s movie. Most comedies aren’t though, now that I think about it. I suggest you go see this, don’t expect it to be The Hangover, but it is funny. Don’t listen to the critics, because they’re ridiculous. (Also, if anyone else thinks that Steve Carell looks like a gofer in the movie poster, feel free to comment.) By the way, this is a double movie week, so I’ll be doing a review of Will Ferrell’s new movie The Other Guys on Wednesday or Thursday.

Also, if anyone is feeling generous, you could donate some money to my PayPal to support this little review service of mine so I can keep seeing movies and giving you top notch reviews. Thanks guys!

The Hangover Review

First of all, I want to apologize for it being Sunday and just now getting a review up. I’ve got relatives in so I haven’t gotten a chance to go see a new movie for a review, so I’ll review an old one from last year: The Hangover. If you’re like me, you’ve heard the endless praises of this movie since the day it came out. You heard people quoting lines from it, talking about how the laughed through the whole thing, and how it was the funniest movie they’ve ever seen period. Well, I’m here to separate fact from fiction about the hype that this movie got.

The Hangover is about a group of friends, Doug, Stu, and Phil, (Bartha, Helms, and Cooper respectively) who go off on a bachelor party for Doug. They end up taking along Doug’s brother-in-law, Alan (Galikianakis), who is a very eccentric guy to put it lightly. They end up losing Doug after their first night in Vegas, none of them remembering what happened the previous night. The whole movie is a story of the morning after really, and it has made for a nice story. First off, let me warn you, this probably isn’t a movie to let your kids see. It’s got lots of crude elements in it, but that doesn’t detract at all from the movie. If anything, it makes the movie as good as it is. It wouldn’t be the same without the crude humor that was in it. Even if you don’t want to listen to the hype, I’ll tell you this, it’s most likely the funniest movie of ’09. But, don’t listen to all the hype. It’s not the funniest movie of the decade or anything like that. They’re weren’t many great comedies in ’09, so don’t be super impressed by that statement. There were plenty of funny parts in this film, like the Tiger song that Stu (Ed Helms) sings in the hotel room, and practically every single thing Alan (Zach Galifianakis) says through the movie. But overall, this movie is way way over-rated. It’s not hilarious all the way through. There are a lot of funny parts, but the majority of the movie won’t make you roll on the floor.There are memorable quotes throughout, though mostly Alan’s, that you will be quoting to your friends for a while after you see it, but it’s not all that it’s hyped up to be.

So, basically, what I’m trying to say is that this is a very funny movie, probably the funniest of ’09, but it doesn’t live up to the hype it received. Don’t think that’s the movie’s fault though, people just hyped it up too much for you to trust how funny they say it is. So, if you’re in the mood for a comedy, watch The Hangover by all means, but don’t expect it to get as many laughs as everyone says it will get. Plenty, yes, but not as many as people have told you.

Also, if anyone is feeling generous, you could donate some money to my PayPal to support this little review service of mine so I can keep seeing movies and giving you top notch reviews. Thanks guys!

SALT Review

Hello and welcome to the first review of this fascinating blog called The Reel Reviewer! I went and saw Salt (starring Angelina Jolie, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Liev Schreiber) today and overall it exceeded my expectations of the film. From the sneak preview given by USA as well as the interview I saw with Jolie, it looked as though this film was going to be a completely mindless action flick with absolutely no plot and was pleasantly surprised. If you haven’t figured out what it’s about yet, here’s a quick snippet of the summary from IMDb. “As a CIA officer, Evelyn Salt swore an oath to duty, honor and country. Her loyalty will be tested when a defector accuses her of being a Russian spy. Salt goes on the run, using all her skills and years of experience as a covert operative to elude capture. Salt’s efforts to prove her innocence only serve to cast doubt on her motives, as the hunt to uncover the truth behind her identity continues and the question remains: ‘Who is Salt?’” So to start off, the acting was great! Jolie did an outstanding job as Salt, but that comes as no surprise seeing as this is her sort of movie. She’s an action movie actress. Regardless, I thought she did an outstanding job, as did the rest of the cast. Schreiber and the dude who plays Peabody (there’s no chance that I’ll ever spell his name correctly. It’s like his parents spilled the game of scrabble they were playing and named him using the face up letters) do great jobs as well. I’ll try not to give too much away, but there are definitely some twists in this movie. I thing I didn’t like about this movie is unbelievable turn the plot took, and I don’t mean unbelievable in the good way. The threat level after Salt is accused of being a Russian Spy goes from the assassination of the Russian President to the destruction of the freakin’ world. That’s all I’ll say to keep from giving up the end, but that’s the turn it takes, and it goes from being a threat that’s plausible to a threat that’s plausibility is atrociously minuscule. That’s just how it goes. This is definitely not a thinking movie. This is one of those movies you watch to escape reality and not think about the outside world. It absorbs you into the film and then you don’t have to think through much of it. There are plenty of flashbacks which help with Salt’s character development quite nicely, but otherwise, this movie is basically a fast-paced action movie with a somewhat interesting plot and enough energy to keep your mind occupied for the duration of the film.