Prometheus

Is it an Alien prequel or isn’t it? Everyone involved was so afraid of spilling the beans about Prometheus that the audience was left with little information about what the movie actually is about. But Ridley Scott’s return to sci-fi plays out in the style of Alien, which he also directed. Noomi Rapace leads an all-star cast as an archeologist, whose discoveries lead to a deep space expedition to attempt and find the aliens who created human life on Earth. But upon arriving to the foreign planet, they slowly realize that things aren’t as cut and dry as they thought. Let’s just say that not everyone gets home safe in the end.

The crew of the Prometheus, the spaceship in the film, is a who’s who of sought after talent. In addition to Rapace, Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, Guy Pearce and Michael Fassbender all star in the film with layered interesting performances. Fassbender especially shines as the android, David, who is written incredibly well and is even improved upon by the actor’s performance. When a movie is filled with such talent that well-known actors play the parts of characters in flashbacks and minor roles, (Patrick Wilson, Rafe Spall) you realize that there must be something drawing them to the film. In this case, Prometheus has Ridley Scott’s attention to conceptual and visual detail and a place in the Alien cannon in play. Yes it does tie in to Alien.

While die-hard fans of the previous Alien films may be disappointed with some of the revelations, or lack thereof, there is a strong sense that this film is meant to stand on its own. The small pieces of connectivity are to excite fans and reward them for their loyalty. Prometheus is a spectacle with an incredible look and feel in part due to the impressive sets and visual effects. There are a handful of scenes that fall back to tired sci-fi clichés. That’s partly because Ridley Scott first introduced those clichés earlier in his career. Even the most skeptical viewer should consider the film for its impressive acting standard and its standing as pure sci-fi event.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Battleship

So it turns out Liam Neeson is hardly in this movie. There’s a bummer. I really counted on him to carry what had the potential to be a disaster. But the movie isn’t actually that bad. Based on the classic board game, Battleship follows a group of naval officers who witness an alien invasion during war games near Hawaii. After the aliens raise a force field, only three naval ships are able to engage the threat. Taylor Kitsch’s unruly character finds himself in charge and must try to save the day.

As I tried to explain what the movie is about to a friend, I realized how ridiculous some of it is. If this guy is untrustworthy and lazy, I doubt he would rise through the ranks of the Navy so easily. Then there is the fact that aliens happen to land right where the Navies of the world are all assembled. I think I saw this in an episode of the GI Joe cartoon in 1990. But the movie improves a bit with some interesting minutes. In place of the expected “you sunk my battleship” moment, the characters use tsunami buoys to find the location of the enemy. This is possibly the least corny way the filmmakers could tie it back to the board game.

The acting is better than expected, but the script is full of campy one-liners and observations that would be better left unsaid. Even Rihanna isn’t as bad as anyone would expect. That’s because the film is a stereotype of what pretentious film critics think of summer blockbusters. It’s big on explosions and special effects. But it’s also fun and entertaining. There is also an obvious effort to include actual servicemen in the project. This is a nice gesture, but when a film has a budget north of $200 million, it would probably be smart to keep the dialogue of untrained actors to a minimum. Did anyone keep track of how many critiques were titled, “Battleship Sinks”? That’s a clever one.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Rock of Ages

After the now customary 15 minutes of previews that preceded Rock of Ages in the theater, I apparently forgot that I was strapping in for a two hour musical. I have nothing against musicals, but for us non-theater folk that first moment of singing tends to be a bit jarring. Based on the Broadway hit of the same name, the film uses classic rock hits of the late 1980s to tell the story of an LA based venue, two young people looking for fame and a jaded rocker, who has lost his edge.

Having not seen the play, the casting in the film is a great asset. Tom Cruise’s performance as an Axl Rose-type front man, Stacee Jaxx, is both hysterical and perfect. From the scenes of implied craziness to the surprisingly believable stage performances, it’s pretty clear the guy can act outside of his Mission Impossible comfort zone. Even with some awkward and bulky dialogue the majority of the cast does well, Alec Baldwin, Russell Brand, and Catherine Zeta-Jones are among the big names. The leads, Julianne Hough and Diego Boneta, fit their roles though they don’t provide the same spark of entertainment the supporting players do.

The film runs too long, as some of the ballads in the middle do little to move the story along. But a number of the musical numbers translate well to the screen, especially the mash-up songs. Being that the audience also knows the music, there is a sense of inclusion there that wouldn’t come with original songs. I know I was tapping my feet along with Tom Cruise dressed like Axl Rose singing Bon Jovi. What a movie this is. Ultimately, fans of musicals and classic rock will be most drawn to Rock of Ages. But most other should find it reasonably enjoyable.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

That's My Boy

Adam Sandler is at a point in his career where he could release the next Citizen Kane or Casablanca and critics and viewers alike would write it off before they even saw it. That’s My Boy is not one of those. It actually falls pretty far away from the classics on the cinematic spectrum, but it is a comedy that the target demographics would enjoy. Plus the general plot fits with Sandler’s earlier films that made him famous. Sandler plays Donny Berger, who as a teenager fathers a son (Andy Samberg) with his middle school teacher. He then raises the son as a single parent. After a long estrangement, Donny shows up right before his son’s wedding and creates some awkward situations (because he’s trashy).

It works out much better having two separate actors playing the two main roles in the film. I’m looking at you Jack and Jill. Samberg plays the straight man for most of the film, which works well, but it would be nice to have him more involved on the front end of the jokes. For the most part, those jokes are fairly raunchy and funny. The Adam Sandler host of actors makes their allotted cameos, but using Samberg, Will Forte and other more relevant players gives That’s My Boy a fresher feel than the recent maligned Sandler movies.

What amazes me with Sandler is how he can act like an idiot with a bad fake Boston accent for a whole movie, but at the end the audience feels for his character. Was I crying for Donny Berger? No, but Sandler movies always end with a message. Hidden between the wedding clichés, pervy jokes and retro pop culture references, there is actually a story here. But those who would enjoy That’s My Boy aren’t really looking for an intellectual experience.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

The Dictator

Someone recently asked me if The Dictator is funny and if I laughed while watching? Well no, I rarely laughed but somehow the movie is funny. That is the enigma of Sacha Barron Cohen. Having emerged as a legitimate actor with his roles in movies like Sweeney Todd and Hugo, the comedian still returns to these immersive roles that made him famous. In The Dictator, Cohen plays Admiral General Aladeen, the dictator of a fictional North-African country. When he travels to the US to address the United Nations, he falls victim to a plot to secretly kill him and seize his power. But don’t believe that this is some complex mystery. The plotline acts as a vehicle for a number of uncomfortable skits to play out in the context of a story.

While the shock value is still present, there is a precedent that was set with Cohen’s previous films, Borat and Bruno, which allows the audience to avoid the film if they don’t like his brand of humor. They do however move away from the documentary format of those other films that would showcase the embarrassing actions of civilians interacting with the film’s characters. The Dictator is a fictional film through and through with actors playing all of the parts. That makes for a less awkward viewing experience.

The film seesaws between witty moments and tired stereotypes. Environmentalist women with hairy armpits just don’t push the envelope like one would expect from the controversial star. But then there are some moments that are quite ripe. I won’t post them here because this is a family blog. Overall, the film is polarizing with audiences. It falls into a small demographic, which is willing to embrace the shock style comedy of Jackass or Borat and will offend and disgust everyone else.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Snow White and the Huntsman

Who knew Snow White had battle armor? Well she needs it to lead an army against the evil queen in the epic action film Snow White and the Huntsman. The story follows a princess who is held captive after an evil queen kills the king and usurps the kingdom. When Snow White escapes years later, the queen forces the Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth) to track her down. Kristen Stewart stars as the fairy tale mainstay. This time we get a bit more of the emotional trauma that would come with being held prisoner your whole life. For fans of the story’s other incarnations, don’t fear, everything from the poison apple to the seven dwarfs make an appearance.

The film is heavy on themes in order to set the desired tone, which is quite dark. There is actually more in common with Lord of the Rings than the Snow White Disney cartoon. The supernatural elements that mostly come from the queen are visually compelling. Most interestingly, there is even a suggestion that the queen suffers from some kind of mental illness, as is revealed when she speaks with the mirror. Small touches like that really build the believability and quality of a high concept film like this one.

So the big question on my mind going in to the theater was Kristen Stewart. Her performance as Snow White is much better than those in the Twilight films, but her lack of dialogue can be credited for that. The other half of the title, playing the Huntsman, Hemsworth continues his rise to action lead prominence building on his breakout role as Thor. I suppose it also must be mentioned that Charlize Theron is a completely despicable villain. In fact, her recent performances have left me to assume that she must be a terrible person in real life. I guess that’s good acting. Overall it’s a successful take at turning Snow White darker.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

What To Expect When You're Expecting

With the help of a strong marketing campaign, I believed that it was possible to convert the advice book What to Expect When You’re Expecting into a successful film. Now I haven’t read the book, but I think it’s safe to assume I know what it’s about. The film, however, follows a number of different couples going through the difficulties of being new parents. There is the couple who has had a difficult time getting pregnant, the one night stand pregnancy, adoption, etc. There is an obvious effort to try and be diverse, but the result is a few too many story lines.

I get the impression that the script attempts to include as many points as possible from the book. This works well in instances like the dads group and the adoption, but at other points it’s forced and annoying (Cameron Diaz being a jerk all the time). The inclusion of comedy at the forefront of the dramatic story lines is by far the film’s biggest strength. Dramatically it doesn’t connect very well with the audience. Perhaps parents who have gone through events like these would disagree.

The overabundance of main characters slows the pace of the film. And the trend of cramming films with celebrities, like Valentine’s Day and New Year’s Eve, has never been completely successful. There seems to be an attempt to bring the stories together in the film’s final act. The result is lazy and doesn’t happen like one would hope it does. It can be said though that Jennifer Lopez, Anna Kendrick and (surprisingly) Chace Crawford stand out among the rest as the best performances in the film. The other key players fall somewhere in line between passable and decent. Be warned general public, I don’t think watching the movie will prepare you for parenting. This isn’t like that time you rented Of Mice and Men on VHS to avoid reading the book in high school literature.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.