IHAO on ... Boyhood

This is the second in my series of Best Picture nominee reviews for the 87th Academy Awards, the first being Birdman, or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance.  A little backstory, since this movie actually has some: this movie took 12 years to film.  It actually films in semi-real time a story about a child, and his growing up.  Actors signed up and worked for 12 years in short stints, including our lead little kid actor.  It is a huge stunt, and something that absolutely needs to be watched.  So let's dig in.

*turns on the blu ray*

*turns off the blu ray ... almost three hours later*

Ugh.

Roll credits.

Boyhood.  A film that took 12 years to make.  12 years to write this script.  12 years to come up with a story that was worth watching.  Instead, we get a drama about all the moments that are just about people talking about the moments that were worth watching.  Why show a divorce when you can hear people talk about it after they are emotionally over it?  Why show a kid excited about a scholarship when you can just have him talk to a random NPC out-of-nowhere character we only see in this scene to talk about it?  Why show a kid having a hard time with classes and homework when you can just have random characters show up and telling him that he is doing bad at turning in his homework and such?  Why have plot when you can have conveniences and coincidences?  There are multiple scenes where characters talk about things that happened in this kid's life that WE DO NOT GET TO SEE!  WHY NOT?  WHY DO WE JUST GET LIP SERVICE INSTEAD OF REAL FILMMAKING AND STORYTELLING?!

I do not want to disregard the gamble and the work put into this film.  Filming for 12 years, making decisions on the fly, having to cast your actors at a young age and hope they continue to do well all throughout.  And I won't even say that the gambles didn't pay off, with Ethan Hawke getting his big resurgence recently.  But I cannot say this is a good movie.  It isn't a bad movie, or even an average movie.  But it is not a good movie.  It fails to be about anything that mattes.  It is like watching a fake documentary about uninteresting people.  It is just people talking about things that happened between cuts in the lives of these fake people.  There is only one sequence that kind of has anything actually happening, and that is the end of the "first act" if I can even call it that.  What a novel approach to filmmaking, film a bunch of idiots doing nothing, talking about nothing ... well, not talking, more like mumbling.

I cannot understand how a film that's only achievement is that it took a super-long time to make, had no final script, and barely does anything beyond just being a movie.  It doesn't strive to do anything but an exercise in filmmaking.  It doesn't succeed at anything it tries to do, it merely accomplishes them.  It isn't hard to be perfectly in "period" when it was shot in order over 12 years.  It isn't hard to show a child grow up when he literally does that and you don't have to work for it or do any filmmaking, clever writing, or make up.  This movie just wastes time, showing its theoretical exercise as some huge technical achievement, and people act like it is.

I am mad that so many people are talking about how amazing this film is, when it isn't!  It is nothing.  It is the lack of art.  It is an exercise.  Even I was bamboozled by it in this very review!  I was all "this movie isn't mediocre, it is good, it really is!" and then I list all the terrible problems.  All the details that prove that statement.  This film will be remember as an exercise, and completely forgotten outside of that.  I do not, cannot, and will not recommend this middle of the road, boring, LONG AS HELL, talk-fest that does nothing of value.

Grade: C-

IHAO on ... a bunch of movies!! - 26 Reviews

Hello everyone! 

Time is an enemy to everyone who is trying to do anything important.  Or at least time-sensitive.   I love being able to write reviews for everyone about everything, current, old, wrestling, television, just on everything, as well as writing all the sillier or more intricate reviews, like the Arbitrary Numbers and the Fantasy Bookings.  But that leaves very little time for me to be able to actually cover everything.  I can’t put out two reviews a day, because that is too much to ask you folks to read.  And I only put out 5 a week, but every week there is probably on average one new film or wrestling event to writing about, and that takes a slot.  Then there are weeks with many films, like I’ve had recently and will be moving into with Oscar season continuing.

So I came up with an idea.  I asked my facebook to give me a list of movies that they did not think I had seen.  I absorb entertainment and media like a sponge, and have watched a LOT of movies.  This way I can give shorter reviews on a bunch of things people might not think I’ve seen, as well as have a fun bank of things to come back to when I need inspiration.  In the nice long list of films, I probably saw a fifth of them, which is a great number.  So I’m going to review all 26 of the movies that were suggested that I have seen.  This will be a rapid fire barrage of reviews.  Let’s get going!

 Dinosaurs! – Nicole Clockel
An edu-tainment Claymation-y fun short about dinosaur life.  I remember specifically sitting with my best friend at the time, Karl, when we were 7 or 8 at his house, and between playing TMNT SNES games or with figures or running around outside, we watched this little video.  I’ve seen it since then as well, but it is a silly thing to talk about.  It is purposefully silly, and all kinds of weird, but really enjoyable.  It is on youtube, and I’ll linky it here.  I definitely think it is worth your time, because of nostalgia for some of you and just for fun in general.  It isn’t great by any means, but it is fun.
Grade: C+



Rat Race – Lenton Lees 
The semi-rebooting, more “another version” of It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, Rat Race features an incredible cast, and is a big ole chase/race comedy.  It is hilarious, has some heart, and some awesome music.  It is probably one of the best comedies to introduce people to a bunch of great comedians all at once, including Mr. Bean, Seth Green, Whoopi Goldberg, John Cleese, Breckin Mayer, Amy Smart, and Jon Lovitz.  Really enjoyable, though it doesn’t quite shoot that extra mile.  It sits in a nice comfortable zone that most good comedies do, where it is real good, but the actual film never tries to be any greater than that.  Highly recommend.
Grade: B++

The Longest Yard – Lenton Lees
Wrestlers!  Sandler the last time he was funny!  Except there’s sequences of it totally not being funny, too, because Sandler has to always ALWAYS write his characters as having enormous penises or getting the hottest women in the world.  But that’s fine, because that has very little actual impact on the movie.  This is probably one of my favorite sports films I’ve seen.  It actually goes that extra mile in film quality and technique, as well as just having incredible actors in Burt Reynolds, William Fichtner, Terry Crews, and a slew of awesome wrestler … not “cameos” as everyone’s screentime and character weight is larger than that.  It is an incredibly fun sports movie with a moving story, it is really funny, and even though it blatantly steals an entire scene from the British remake of the Longest Yard, Mean Machine, it is still a really fun movie that is also really good.  Probably my favorite Sandler film, and easily the one I think that is his best film.
Grade: A++

Ernest Saves Christmas – Lenton Lees
Here’s the thing about Ernest: you either love Jim Varney’s shenanigans, or you just don’t get it or see a point.  I personally find Ernest endearing.  In fact, this is the first Ernest film I saw, which is good, because it is also easily his highest budgeted, best looking, best acted, best directed, BEST Ernest film.  It tells a great story, has fun comedy, and is a Christmas classic in the Jessel household.  On top of that, I do believe it has my absolute favorite Santa Claus in film, played by the same dude who is the Sultan and Jasmine’s father in Aladdin!  He is perfect as Santa, and adds some amazing gravitas to what could have just been a frivolous and silly kids movie.  It isn’t one of the best movies ever made, and the effects are absolutely dated, but it is a wonderful movie.
Grade: B++

South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut – Lenton Lees
Trey Parker and Matt Stone have made all of two things I like: South Park and Book of Mormon.  I do not like BASEketball, I don’t like Cannibal: the Musical, I don’t like Orgazmo.  But this movie is excellent.  It is an amazingly well made musical parody of just about every single style of musical, from Les Mis to Disney to Sound of Music.  The story itself has a purpose to exist as a film because it is about censorship, parental choices, and really nice satire of the “crusade” against cursing.  I really think this movie does everything right.  And its unique animation style makes it in a sense timeless, which is great!  Great movie.
Grade: A+

Much Ado About Nothing (Whedon version) – Lenton Lees
Not every movie that is a good movie I like.  Wes Anderson movies prove that.  As does this one.  One of the best things about Shakespeare is that every adaptation is 100% the director’s intention.  And some of Joss’ choices are awesome.  And some are not.  I think Whedon was able to really elevate the parts of Claudio and Don Pedro fantastically, making both parts have a lot more weight and interest than most versions of the show.  He also made some very good comedic choices early in the film.  But very quickly, the comedy of this comedy goes away.  And that’s … just … wrong.  Much Ado About Nothing is a comedy, pure and simple.  And Whedon treated it as a drama.  And that is a disservice to a lot of the characters, a lot of the language, and a lot of other choices.  Dogberry wasn’t particularly funny, even though he’s written to be.  Don Jon isn’t very menacing because everything is treated so seriously so he isn’t a foil.  Benedict and Beatrice don’t have a banter-filled romance because the banter is more catty and snide than humorous and joyful.  There are some bits I really enjoyed, generally whenever he had the actors get more physical, because otherwise they just pontificate into the wind at each other.  In the end, Whedon focused on the “Much Ado” while forgetting the point that it is all about “Nothing.”
Grade: B-

Oversexed Rugsuckers From Mars! – Jason Abraham
I’ve been saving this one for a Nanarsday review, but I’m MORE than happy to talk about this HORRIBLE MOVIE now!  It is a gloriously terrible movie about a man who has sex with an alien vacuum cleaner, and it becomes a rapist and rapes a woman, who gives birth to a human-vacuum hybrid baby.  It is gross, and hilarious, and terrible.  One of the worst movies I’ve ever seen and I LOVE IT!  I found it randomly years ago, and it is a pride of my collection of films because of its ridiculous-ness.  Really, if anyone ever wanted to watch it, FIND ME and we’ll watch it that second.
Grade: F+

Chasing Amy – Jason Abraham
I have a love/hate relationship with Kevin Smith.  I either love his films and buy into them completely, or hate them and find them worthless.  Chasing Amy falls in the worthless category.  The script is preachy, the situation is so narrow that no one can relate to it, making the characters unlikable and just complainers.  Smith doesn’t direct Affleck very well here, which is crazy considering how great Affleck is in other Smith films.  It just … I just hate this movie.  Give me Dogma, Mallrats, or Clerks II any day.
Grade: C--


Dawn of the Dead; Day of the Dead; Land of the Dead – Tony Daniel
I love this little bit.  I may have never seen Night of the Living Dead, but I have absolutely seen and own all of the Romero trilogy of Dead films.  Comes with being married to a zombie lover.  Let’s touch on all of these:

Dawn of the Dead – This film is perfect.  Acting, tension, shots, characters, story, everything.  This may just be my favorite zombie movie, period.  I was blown away because what I THOUGHT this movie was and what it actually is are two VERY different things.  The effects are real old and not very good looking, but I like to see them like a time capsule of effects, and completely buy into them.  I say it all the time, but dated-ness is not a real negative, and these may not be the best effects, but they are great effects for what they are.  I cannot recommend this film more highly.  Grade: A++

Day of the Dead – I thought this would be my favorite, and I do really like it.  It is much more of what I thought it would be.  And it easily has one of the best villains a zombie film has ever had in it.  It also explores the zombie mythos more, which is very cool, and Romero continues to push the envelope with his characters.  It has better effects and is really interesting … but just not as good as Dawn.  I don’t know if I can put my finger really on why, but I think it is something to do with our protagonist, who while being interesting just isn’t as good of an actress, and the pacing of the film itself is a little off, leading to some boring stretches.  But the effects, and the other characters, are all well worth price of admission here.  Grade: B+

Land of the Dead – So Dawn of the Dead got a remake, and Romero was all “I can make a ‘modern’ zombie film better than that.”  So he continued the story of his world of zombies.  And man, I love it.  It isn’t as good as the last few, but it has some GREAT characters, some awesome world building, and while the plot is less interesting, the overall effect leaves me very happy.  I love this movie, even if it began the decline in quality of Romero’s writing.  Grade: B++

The Man Who Knew Too Little – Beth Lyons
This comedy was actually suggested to me by Beth probably a year or so ago, so I bought it, and I watched it.  I wish I had been writing reviews then, because then I wouldn’t have to think about this movie again.  Oh, yeah, that should make it obvious, I don’t like the movie.  I don’t think it is bad, I just didn’t find most of its comedy very good.  The entire idea is fine, and some of the scenes are fine, but the whole product just leaves me cold, as our protagonist has to be continually stupider and stupider to allow the very thin premise of “believes all the spy stuff is fake, accidentally gets caught in real spy stuff” to continue.  The climax of the film is just long and tedious with the whole Russian dance sequence and the bomb and … ugh.  I just did not care for the film, and really do not think it is very good, and mostly forgettable.
Grade: C--

The Bank Job – Jason Schmidt
Good ole Jason Statham.  Action star, good actor, British.  Ok, so Bank Job isn’t a GREAT movie.  It’s a real good one, though.  Based on a real heist, with some good actors and some great camera work, the film works.  I’ve seen a lot less memorable Statham films, though this one only barely jumps above that pack.  It isn’t great, but it is fun.  And if you are a history person or a heist person, this one may do even more for you.  For me, it was just a good movie.
Grade: B

Jackie Brown – Jason Schmidt
Jackie Brown is a neat little movie.  That actually sounds more belittling than I mean it to.  It has a slow first act, but not a BAD first act, just a slow one, that builds really well to an amazingly well made finish.  Lots of great actors all throughout the film, including the wonderful Pam Grier, Samuel L. Jackson playing the character that we all actually attribute to him in the modern zeitgeist, and Robert De Niro who may have … 8 lines in the whole movie?  But it is still one of his best roles.  I really like this movie.  It isn’t the easiest sit because of that long first act that really needed an editor, and Robert Foster is good but doesn’t quite keep me as interested for those long sections as Tarantino has found Christoph Waltz can.  But it is still a very good, very ambitious movie.
Grade: B+

State and Main – Jason Schmidt
David Mamet is a playwright, director, and a screenwriter and director.  He is known for things like Glengarry Glen Ross and American Buffalo, but he’s done a lot of other stuff.  State and Main is one of those other stuffs.  It … isn’t particularly good.  There are bits and pieces I really like in there, but there is also some stunt casting that does nothing for me and some of the comedy beats come across VERY Mamet, in that every character rushes through their dialogue as fast as they can.  The actual movie is about the filming of a movie in a little town because they like a stained glass window, and all the turmoil it causes everyone.  I don’t really think it is worth a watch, but for some people, all that fast-talking is actually a turn-on.  If you are a Aaron Sorkin fan, this may just be up your alley.
Grade: C-

Devil’s Advocate – Jason Schmidt
I love talking about good Keanu Reeves films.  Mostly because I think he is an underrated actor.  As an actor myself, I can see the actual “craft” in what he is doing, and I get why for some he doesn’t come across like he acts.  He is very stoic faced a lot of the time, and his voice is generally calm no matter the emotion.  But what Keanu does really well is expression of emotion through his eyes and his body.  There are very few actors who can pull of supreme confidence just by standing there saying nothing like Keanu can.  And there are very few that can show the deterioration of a soul like Keanu can, that slow wearing down that was necessary for this film.  Devil’s Advocate is a GREAT movie.  It is a morality play in a time period when morality was pretty gauche to begin with.  Al Pacino is fantastic in the movie as well.  It is a great film.  One I used to own, and I need to buy again.  I recommend.
Grade: A+

Man on the Moon – Jason Schmidt
The biopic on Andy Kaufman, made by dear friends of Andy Kaufman, paying homage to the man, played by the only person anyone that knew Kaufman thought could play him.  This is a great biopic.  It has great music.  It has great acting.  It has a compelling, albeit very movie-fied as admitted by the prologue of the film, story of the real life of this enigmatic actor.  I own the soundtrack.  I own the film.  I love both.  It is a shame that Jim Carrey did not get the Oscar for this performance, but of course he should have since 1999 was the year of terrible Oscar decisions and Shakespeare in Love sweeping through almost everything.  Man on the Moon was called by some the best picture of 1999, and others just didn’t get it.  Which is kind of perfect when it comes to talking about Andy Kaufman.  I highly recommend to anyone that loves comedy and the history of comedy.
Grade: A++

Mars Attacks! – Jason Schmidt
My dad took me to see this movie.  My mom didn’t like that he did.  It is a weird, silly, off-putting, crazy kind of film.  Definitely not for everyone.  It is absolutely unique, and everything I want from a Tim Burton film.  It also holds the honor of being the only live-action film based on a trading card series, which is a mindboggling piece of information by itself.  A tongue-in-cheek homage to 50s sci-fi horror films, and filled with just … craziness.  Man, I just … this is a weird movie kids.  Too weird to be good, too weird to be bad, it is its own brand of quality.
Grade: W (for weird … I actually give it a C)

The Departed – Jason Schmidt
Hey, wanna know a great movie?  The Departed.  Done.  Go watch a great movie.  What you need more?  How about its pedigree of actors and directors and cinematographers?  I’ll wait while you imdb it.  I know right?  How about the incredible filmmaking just in general?  Or the tight script?  Or the intriguing characters?  Or the amazing conceit?  Or the original that is ALSO good, but this remakes for western audiences in an old school mafia way that transcends the original?  This movie is great.  Period.  Watch it.
Grade: A+

Black Swan – Jason Schmidt
Darren Aronofsky is so so good.  And Black Swan is amazing.  Tense, thrilling, psychological, amazing acting from Natalie Portman (got an Oscar for it, well deserved), this movie is phenomenal.  The music is of course going to be great because it is Swan Lake.  But really, this movie is amazing.  It should have gotten at least a cinematography and a best director nod.  It got neither.  These kind of psychological thinky thrillers tend to not do well in the Oscars.  Aronofsky deserves awards.  And this film is one of his best, written as if tailored to his style specifically even though it wasn’t.  Watch this very very intense film some time.
Grade: A++

Waterworld – Jason Schmidt
Waterworld is one of the biggest financial flops in history.  Doesn’t make it a bad movie, though.  It makes it a great punchline, but as a fantasy movie, it is actually all kinds of AWESOME.  The setting is all practical and all amazing.  The acting is great from Dennis Hopper and even Kevin Costner.  The script is a great story filled with little nods and secrets to the what happened in the world.  The action is awesome.  I love the movie, and really don’t understand why others don’t.  Maybe because they only know the joke and never actually watched the thing.  Give it a chance.
Grade: A++

12 Monkeys – Jason Schmidt
Time travel movies are difficult, and sometimes their plots just don’t quite add up.  Other times they are too simple.  12 Monkeys is both.  Confusing and simple.  I don’t think it is a bad movie, it has some real interesting parts to it and some good acting.  But I ultimately found it boring.
Grade: B-

Four Rooms – Jason Schmidt
Four very different vignettes from four pretty different directors all based around rooms in a hotel.  Uh … I guess I’ll say this: Tim Roth is great.  Each individual sequence is so incredibly different I’ll just grade each one.
Part 1: D
Part 2: C-
Part 3: A+
Part 4: B+
So when I watch it, I just skip to the middle.  Yup.

Deathproof – Jason Schmidt
Man, I do not know how to talk about this one ... ok, lemme list the things that are good. The direction is fantastic. The movie looks and FEELS good, from a filmmaking and thematic standpoint. Kurt Russel is AMAZING as Stuntman Mike. The action and car sequences are really amazing and frenetic. A lot of the things that I love from Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained are here and this is the prototype for him directing like that. This movie is a bridge from his old style (which I generally don't care for) and his new style. There is a lot to like. But this movie SERIOUSLY needed an editor. A stronger edit would have helped this movie incredibly. And another sequence of Stuntman Mike doing what he does would have been perfect. Trim down all the standard Tarantino talky talk that didn't really do very much and give us another Stuntman Mike sequence. Tarantino learned to trim himself for Basterds and Django, making much stronger, engaging films. And that's the problem, I suppose. I really wanted to be engaged the whole time, and was really only engaged when Kurt Russel was onscreen and for the basics of the chicks. The genre subversion at the end was interesting, but for me, abrupt, and right at the end, I actually found myself rooting for Stuntman Mike because I knew more about him and understood him better, and he had less dialog than the chicks that I was supposed to be rooting for. Showing, not telling, made him a stronger, more engaging character. And they just left Mary Elizabeth Winestead with the crazy redneck! What the heck!? This movie is hard to grade. I can see myself wanting to watch it again, and I LOVED everything with Kurt Russel, but I dunno if I wanna slog through the rest.Grade: B-

High Fidelity – Jason Schmidt
One of the first “serious” comedies I’ve ever seen, it made a huge impact on me.  I am a collector and sponge for media much like John Cusack is in the film, though my own life and his represented in the film has nothing in common, and I don’t actually relate to him, but that doesn’t actually matter.  He resonates.  And his relationship struggles opened my eyes.  The film is unique, which is a huge plus.  It is a really well written and well acted film, so that’s real cool.  Honestly, though, it just didn’t stick with me like I thought it would, and I don’t care to see it again.  I don’t hate it.  I just don’t like it.  I remember how good it was, but that’s the extent of it.
Grade: A

Harvey – Cindy Carrin
The only Jimmy Stewart film I’ve seen and loved.  It is a great play, a great old movie, and just awesome all around.  A classic.  You absolutely should watch it.  Everyone.  Do it.
Grade: A+






And there we have it!  A LOT of films reviewed in a handy dandy quick way with beautiful pictures that took me way too long to format.  Thanks everyone, and I am positive I will do an exercise like this again!  Until tomorrow, where we have some newer films, a Wes Anderson film, some wrestling, and probably other stuff!

IHAO on ... See No Evil 2

I really really liked See No Evil.  Like, super duper liked it.  I would dare say it is a GREAT movie ... except I know better.  Yeah, it is not the best written thing when it comes to dialogue, and it is VERY trope-oriented for a slasher film.  But what makes See No Evil great is that it uses all those tropes and either subverts them or embellishes them.  Jacob Goodnight is just a human, a big ole monster of one that isn't quite right in the head.  But you watch him run, you watch him think.  He is an incredibly interesting slasher villain.  And the camera never shies away from him, either.  We get to watch him think, and act.  He isn't one-liners, he isn't one-note, he is a complicated villain, that makes the stakes even higher for our young adults (they aren't teenagers at all) trying to survive.  See No Evil is easily my favorite slasher film.  Grade: B+++

I actually reviewed it earlier on this site, if you wanna go digging through archives to find when I did video reviews, cursed more, and lived in a different state.  I'm actually pretty proud of the See No Evil review.  But that is neither here nor there.  See No Evil 2 is awful.  It is no bueno.

"No bueno" is the actual words that I said after viewing it.  It was the only thing I could say.  See No Evil 2 = No bueno.

It makes me very mad and sad, because it ... it is just terrible.  It has so many flashbacks from the first film, and is already super short, but feels super long.  All the good stuff that they did with Jacob Goodnight before, now he is spouting out weird monologues and awful stuff.  The characters are all terrible.  The set is atrocious.  The deaths are unmemorable at best.  The plot is terrible, because there isn't one.

Here you wanna know the plot?  Jacob Goodnight, who the first movie absolutely 100% kills without any doubt in an over the top ridiculous way, didn't die, and is killing people in the morgue.  That's it.  That's the end.  There's no character arc, no story progression, he just kills everyone.  The only surprising, trope redefining thing that See No Evil 2 does is there is no survivors.  Spoiler.  Except not, because I don't want anyone to watch See No Evil 2.

I love supporting WWE films.  I watch all of them when I get the chance.  I buy them even more likely.  But this movie was trash.  The only good thing about it was Katharine Isabelle, better known as Ginger Snaps from the horror franchise of the same name.  She was always over the top and entertaining.  No other character, not a single one of the other characters were.  Well, that's not quite fair.  The film didn't really start going downhill until Michael Eklund died.  He was also good.  That's all the nice things I can say about this movie.  The deaths were lame, the props were lame, the costume was lame, the writing was lame, the direction was boring, the film was probably 1/10 flashbacks in an already ridiculously short 90 minute film, and it felt like it was probably another hour on top of that.  Avoid, and do not watch.  Go watch the original one.  That one is great!

Grade: F-

IHAO on ... A Fantastic Fear of Everything

Hitchcock meets Edgar Wright.  That is exactly what this film feels like to me.  If that isn't enough to sell you, then I don't know what is.  Oh, right, the rest of my review will be.  Or won't be, as the case may be.

Simon Pegg plays an author with crippling paranoia and suffering from delusions and hallucinations.  The film starts out as a clever deconstruction of the author and all the difficulties he is having with his paranoia and fears as we slowly learn more about him, his life that has been a very sad series of events and traumas.  It actually continues to be that as we watch the very solid cinematography and direction pile on the crazy and blur the lines between reality and paranoia.

Then the entire movie throws all of that out at the 2/3 mark and just becomes a comedic thriller where Simon Pegg has to save the hot girl he just made a fool of himself in front of from a silly serial killer.

Talk about the villain from the second Iron Man film, which is totally underrated, by the way.

It is very frustrating to me as a movie viewer to sit down to a movie that starts off promising to be a certain kind of film and then shifts to some ridiculous parody without any connection to the film before it.  It is painful to sit through.  Simon Pegg had such an incredible character, and the first 50-ish minutes were so incredibly fun to watch.  And then it became ... blah.

The direction is very Edgar Wright styled, which worked really well.  The writing was missing Wright's style of character depth and dialogue, but Pegg had something really interesting going on.  "Had" is the operative word here.  I can't even recommend the movie with how just awful the final act is.  It doesn't even feel like it was directed by the same guy, with crazy sound editing mistakes and horrible lighting.  My wife said a thing that I want to quote: "On the one hand, I'm really relieved that he gets a happy ending, but that makes it a worse movie."

I am not relieved.  I am not relieved the film is over.  I'm tired.  I'm sad.  I wanted this to be as good as Paul was, the film that got me writing these reviews in earnest again.  Or at least as good as The World's End, which also had a disheartening finale, though nowhere near as bad as this film's.

Grade: C-

IHAO on ... Good Morning, Vietnam

This is the film that launched Robin Williams' career, going from stand-up and playing a lovable alien on television to being a funny man in a surprisingly dour war drama.  This film made clear the identity of Robin Williams we all loved, that of the lovable fast-talker who shows real emotion and acts far better than he has any need to in most films he is in.  I wrote a piece on Williams after his unfortunate passing on his film World's Greatest Dad, and in there I touch on my own feelings on Williams and his career.  So now, a little over a month later, its time I watched the film that started it all.

Good Morning, Vietnam is a semi-autobiographical Vietnam war film about a radio jockey for the US military.  He played by his own rules and his own comedy, lifted the spirits of those around him, and maybe some unfortunate mistakes as well.  Not any mistakes that were truly his fault or even shown as true mistakes in the film, but nonetheless, he is forced to by the end of the film leave his surprisingly short tenure as a radio personality in Vietnam with a dishonorable discharge.

The film's drama focuses on two sides to Williams' character's life: the army, and the locals.  In the army, Williams has to deal with fighting to do things his way, bringing good music to the troops out there, and arguing over idiot officers over him who don't know what comedy is.  They end up trying to discretely get him murdered by the Vietcong at one point, but in the end are more easily able to just get him kicked out of his own volition or he'll be charged with treason.  Why?  How?  Well, a young Vietnamese kid he became strong friends with turns up to be a Vietcong bomber.  It isn't particularly subtle or surprising, especially once a GI bar gets blown up, but the emotions and thoughts it brings to mind are interesting.  And since Williams was hanging with a Vietcong member, they offered him his way out so that the officers, who are the antagonists, got what they wanted.

Hurray?

If you can't tell by the above, I found this film a little hollow.  There are some nice scenes, with the aftermath of the explosion at the GI bar being the best of the film, as well as some interesting ones where the idiot lieutenant argues about what comedy is with Williams then proves himself wrong by being terrible as a replacement.  But the whole film just falls flat for me.  There isn't a lot of weight given to the occurrences, the passage of time is very very fast so it feels like only a week or so passes by in the 6 months the film takes place in.  On top of that, the film is a long sit.  And even worse, all the characters, other than Forrest Whitiker's, stay the same from beginning to end.  There is no real purpose in this film.

Now, part of this is because of the writer of the film writing about his own experiences.  He is not a writer by trade.  He was a radio personality.  Good Morning, Vietnam was originally conceived as a sitcom, where these two-dimensional characters would have fit more at home.  But in a film, we get no real movement or change.  We just watch events happen, and then that is the end.  Nothing changes, life moves on, the war continues.

So yeah, I'm pretty sure you can tell I didn't care for it.  War films are a hard sell for me, and while there was stuff I liked, in the end, the whole film just meant nothing to me.  It just acts as a space holder.  Nothing really learned, nothing really experienced, no real stakes.  Just a hollow chamber of a film, with Robin Williams' voice and humor resonating on the inside.

Grade: C-

IHAO on ... Mr. Nobody - READER REQUEST

Requested by William Newman

Goodness.  The requester watched this very dense art film and just wasn't sure what to think.  So he requested I talk about it.  Because I, as a film critic, have gotten pretty good at being able to see the storytelling and artful techniques within films.  Or because we're friends and he was curious.  Or I dunno, he was bored.  I'm not sure the reason, but it was requested.  So I watched it, finally.  And ... goodness.

All right.  This film is an art film more than any other genre, which I said above and have tagged it with below.  It is the first art film that I've talked about on this site like this, where even the term "drama" doesn't fit.  So let me first try to explain the conceit.  Many folks probably don't really get art films.  Art films in general do not care for a lot of the storytelling aspects we've come to feel are standard in filmmaker.  It isn't about narrative in the rising and falling action sense.  There is narrative, but it is a symbolic and emotional narrative.  The purpose is to ask questions and to ... look, I'm just wasting time waxing on here about nothing important because I wanted to let you get a feel for this film.

This 2009 art film is about choices.  You see a man's life and every variation of his life he could have made at three specific points.  You see him have to make a choice between parents as they divorce.  You see him make choices in his important romantic relationships as a teenager.  And you see him make choices in his important romantic relationships as an adult.

The film is very dense.  Purposefully so.  Almost alienatingly so.  I think it is more ... hold on, let me take that back and try it from a different angle.

Oh, hello, I didn't notice you there.  Would you like a cup of tea?

This is not a new conceit, a film where we see the choices a character makes change.  Run Lola Run is my personal favorite of this narrative element.  But Run Lola Run works.  And Mr. Nobody doesn't.  Why?  Mostly because Run Lola Run is simpler and about more than just those choices.  Mr. Nobody is very much just about its philosophy, and forgets to actually engage the standard audience.  And yes, some films are not for the standard audience.  But unless you are purposefully alienating the audience, I feel a film does a disservice if they do not try to make the audience be able to grasp its purpose.

Let me talk about good things.  Juno Temple is wonderful.  I fall in love with her in each film I see her in, like the Brass Teapot I reviewed before.  That is an incredible skill.  It also means that the sequence with her in it is my favorite, and is also the sequence that gets the most time.  There is an actual dramatic and romantic and tragic story told there, and it gets the most uninterrupted, simple and ... no, not simple, it is a very interesting and thick sequence, but it is lacking in the artifice of symbolism and ART FILM that the rest of the movie has.

Unfortunately, that is all I really have good to say.  The movie isn't bad, or anything.  But I did ultimately find it not enjoyable, and fairly average.  It is shot perfectly fine, though it is dense.  And it is easier to follow than Septien, another art film that felt less arty than this.  But I find that I dislike this film because of its moments where it shines.  There are fantasy sequences that are treated like reality.  The "choice" the boy has to make isn't even a choice because the mother is an irredeemable [curseword]-blaster, and the way that scene is shot the child doesn't really HAVE a choice, or at least not a realistic one.

That's the film's biggest problem.  It's ideas are all perfectly fine, but when stapled to each other, you can see the holes, if you catch my metaphor.  Such as a sequence where for whatever reason one version of him has decided to make all choices based on a coin flip.  That is a GREAT idea for a film.  And it is about two minutes of screentime in an already dense film.  Much like the complication of the scenes with Juno Temple, which makes a great film all by itself without the rest.  This movie feels like the writer/director had seen Run Lola Run and other films like it and felt he had to one-up the conceit.  It works, but is ultimately mostly unenjoyable.

Grade: C-

IHAO on ... Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

I watched the first prologue to the famous Planet of the Apes franchise and reviewed it earlier.  Here it is.  If you want a quick version of my thoughts on that, lemme give you a blurb:

" I feel the movie is simple but endearing.  It is trying SOOOO hard to be cool, 

and I have to give it props.  I'll watch it and laugh at it over and over again.  

I think of it like the Happening: just filled with stupid and bad acting and terrible plot 

and awful CGI, but so so SO much fun to watch."

Yeah, I loved that terrible movie.  If it wasn't so competently made from just a cinematography sense, I would definitely consider it nanar.  It is just a little too good to be that bad.  And none of that is "bad" in any sense.  So Dawn looked pretty swell to me!  You got the apes on horseback in some posters, with guns!  It continues the story into a truly interesting part, the part where the planet is in transition.  I was very excited to go, and on Saturday at midnight finally got to see it.  And ...

Wait for it.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is a better movie than Rise.  It is better plotted, it makes more sense, and the technical abilities are clearly improved.  Some of the characters get a lot more emphasis, and there are a few shots that are truly just some of the best most thrilling stuff I've seen in theatres in quite some time.  Also, the dialogue is completely awful, the script is completely lackluster, and every single actor sleepwalks through the movie until they turn evil.

Yeah, I didn't care for this one.  It is a better movie, no doubts about it.  But I actually thought it was really a WORSE movie because I didn't enjoy myself.  There was one character that interested me in the whole film, and that was the villain.  Even the over-hyped Andy Serkis' Caesar was just dull.  Though not as dull as his Woobie son, Blue-Eyes.  

Because I refuse to put spoilers, I cannot really talk in details about a lot of things, but there were a LOT of moments where the film was primed to do something interesting.  And it instead chose to not be interesting, and just be standard.  And that's ultimately what I feel about the film.  It is a perfectly fine, middle of the road film, that I basically did not enjoy.  There was not enough of the fun apes fighting or riding on horses stuff, not enough camp to be enjoyable.  There was a lot of really terrible things, and while there were bits I enjoyed, almost every one of them was super short and then followed by a very long and boring sequence.  

Also, I should point out, the apes are the protagonists in this.  The humans are completely the bad guys.  I do not care how much you pretend like these humans are good guys or justified, they aren't.  The apes are completely right in every single situation where the two races have to bump up against each other.

OH!  And sign language doesn't work when you sign to someone who isn't looking at you.  That happens CONSTANTLY.  I don't care how cool of a pose your CGI ape makes, sign language to the camera does not let anyone beside or behind you see what you are doing.

ALSO!  Characters should notice other people even if they aren't onscreen when they are not obscured by anything in this movie.  I HATE when characters cannot see things because the audience can't.

DOUBLE ALSO!  There is a thing called "pay off."  If you set something up, pay it off.  Don't do a shot of a rocket launcher, and then have not a single rocket launcher be shot.  Don't do a big uplifting moment for a character, only for that character to continue to do nothing of worth.

TRIPLE ALSO!  If you are a female in this film, regardless of species, the movie hates you.  There are three women in this movie that are actual characters, and two of them don't have names, and the other is Felecity who is incredibly miscast.  Hell, every human is hilariously miscast.  They took the casting budget, gave a little to Gary Oldman to just be Commissioner Gordon again, and spent the rest on the CGI.  Also, can I just say Gary Oldman is about the most overrated actor in film today ... other than Andy Serkis.  

QUADRUPLE ALSO!  The movie is constantly raining.  Are they trying to say that once humans are mostly killed off that San Francisco becomes a rain forest?  Because it is raining in a forest?  AND 5x 5x 5x 5x 5x ALSO!  If it is raining in your CGI shots on the apes that are in the water, have some daggum practical rain on the humans that are right next to them!  AND ANOTHER THING, SCIENCE FICTION IS SUPPOSED TO BE ALLEGORY, SAYING SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE AND LEARN FROM, NOT JUST A BORING STORY THAT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING! AND ANOTHER THING ---

Combo breaker.  Thanks.

Yeah, ok, I'm wasting time.  This movie is technically better than Rise, but it is not as entertaining.  Save your money for a rent, don't go to theaters.  That's my verdict, anyway.

Grade: C-

Also, I've been putting this at the bottom of all my reviews last week.  And I got zero questions.  Come on people, I can see how many of you looked at these, I know at least ONE of you had to have seen this at the bottom.  I can't do an Ask Me Anything if you guys don't, well, ask me anything.  So help me out, leave some questions in my ask box on Tumblr or in the comments here or on facebook or to my email or something.  Let's get this thing going, we only got half a month to do this thing!  WOOOOO!

IHAO on EVERYTHING, TOO on August 1st

Fantasy Booking ... ALTERNATE ENDING to Alien

Not too long ago, I did an AMA.  I super enjoyed that because it got a lot of folks asking me some really interesting questions about ... well, everything!  And I LOVE that.  I mean, the name of the website is I Have an Opinion.  Of COURSE I have opinions on just about anything.  Going through it again, I realized that I answered a question semi-incorrectly, or at least not as was intended.  I was asked about three alternate endings to major films.  Now, I answered over in the AMA (it's the last question, if you want a refresher) thinking it was meant to be which three I thought already existed were best.  But I got a clarification: create three NEW alternate endings to films.  So I guess it is time for me to get the old creative juices going in another rendition of ...

Fantasy Booking

Ok, so it isn't exactly Fantasy Booking ... but I like the image, and I'm gonna use it.  Plus, it gives me an excuse to use it as a tag.  Time to pick some films.  The first film I'll do is one I recently watched, hated, and is well beloved.  I did a quickie on my Tumblr (go ahead and follow me, it'll be really nice) and I think I have an interesting idea ...

Alien (1979)

Yeah, I found this movie dumb.  Really dumb.  Quick grade is D-.  The climax of the film comes as ...  Oh yeah, just in case:

The dumb film is 35 years old but just in case.

The xenomorph has killed all the rest of the crew.  The original ending then creates its tension by having Ripley running about now that she has gotten the cat and sets the ship by herself into self-destruct mode.  But as she rushes to the getaway ship, she almost runs headfirst into the xenomorph.  She leaves Jones the cat there, and with her escape cut off tries to run back and stop Mother, the ship's main computer interface, from blowing everything up, but reverses the process a few seconds too late, unable to stop the self-destruct.  She heads back, pissed and scared, finds the cat was untouched in its carrier-case, and makes it on the getaway ship and watches as the main ship explodes in a ridiculous technicolor explosion.

But oh no!  Ripley has gotten comfortably almost naked and the xenomorph got onto the ship and is curled up taking a nap.  Ripley gets frightened, puts on a space suit, opens the air lock, and the xenomorph goes flying out the ship, and then blown up with the engine port.  She then went to hibernation sleep, and the movie abruptly ends there.

Did I say I found it dumb?  I did.  The xenomorph was less terrifying in the film than the damned cat, which had two jump scares.  It might be the original cat jump scare!!!!  Ok, it isn't, the first cat scare was in the 1942 film Cat People, though ironically it is subverted by it being a bus making a cat noise that scares the heroine.  Anyway.  Let's change it up.

Time to hit the CRAY BUTTON!

Ok, so the xenomorph has killed everyone but Ripley.  She does the whole self-destruct scene as before, then goes running off and runs into the xenomorph cutting her off again.  She puts the cat down, but instead of sliding down the wall, and instead of the xenomorph being a huge puss and not doing a daggum thing for the rest of the film, she gets her guts up and presents herself, flamethrower in her hand, and she says some power statement as she let's loose with the fire ...

Nothing.  Flamethrower is outta gas.  Probably from being on all the time and having the most enormous flame through the whole movie.  Anyway, the xenomorph pounces, knocking Ripley down to the ground.  She drops the cat box and flamethrower, and the xenomorph gets its dumb second mouth out.  Ripley kicks and punches and wriggles, trying to get free.  Just as the xenomorph is going to do its double mouth kill strike, Ripley gets her hands on the flamethrower and jams it sideways into the thing's mouth.  The xenomorph, stymied, slashes at Ripley, giving her a cut on her thigh or stomach, but it allows Ripley to run.
Ripley tries to get back and stop the self-destruct, but just as before, she is just a few seconds too late.  This time because of the scuffle, not just ... being late because she slide diagonally down a wall.

She rushes back, picking up a random pipe she breaks so she can swing it at the xenomorph, but returns to the spot to only find the ripped-open cat container, but Jones is still inside, scared.  She reaches down to get the cat, but the xenomorph does its own Cat Scare, third one of the film, popping out of the floor beneath the cat, hidden in the grating.  Jones in her hands, falling back, scrambling, the xenomorph now crawling after her, Ripley does the last thing she can, kicking at its face.  Double mouth kill shot through the foot.  Look at the clock that is there for this version to actually create tension and a sense of time slipping away, she's got very little time left.  She gets to her feet, Jones running away out of her hands.  She picks up the pipe and SMACK right across the xenomorph's head as it leaps at her again, American baseball style.  Acid destroys the pipe, and Ripley turns and runs.

Now running, injured, trying to get to the getaway ship.  Yelling and crying, unwilling to be the only living crew member left, she finally spots Jones almost out of reach.  Looking at the clock for the self destruct, it is so close to happening.  The xenomorph, showing some acidy damage along its big ole head, comes running up on her.  Ripley finally grabs Jones, then stumbles into the getaway ship and gets the airlock shut just before the xenomorph reaches her!  You hear it slamming against the door over and over as she stumbles and cries, getting to the command seat and setting the thing to fly with JUST enough time to not get exploded, but the space shockwaves spin and knock around the ship, throwing her end over end.

But it all settles down.  She can finally breath.  She makes her final statement as before, and we zoom in on her pod, then the camera pans to Jones' pod ... where something unearthly is moving in its belly.

BOOM!  I feel REAL good about that one.  Also, that's just over a thousand words.  So it looks like I'm going to cut this short.  But I will 100% be doing more of these in the future!  So stay tuned!

Wait a minute, put a little love in it!

OH!  WAIT!  Before you leave, I am going to do another AMA on August 1st.  So I need questions.  So send me questions in my email, in the comments here or in my ask on Tumblr.  So mark it on your calender, I'll see you then.

IHAO on EVERYTHING, TOO on August 1st

IHAO on ... Rocky IV

Rocky ends the Cold War.

ROCKY ENDS THE COLD WAR.

I just ...

This ... when I was a kid, this is the one I remembered the most of the bits and pieces I had seen.  I know I had seen the whole in Russia section.  Ivan Drago was super cool.  Now I watch the whole thing and ... I just ...

This movie isn't good.  5 montages.  5 song-segments of radio-play pop/rock songs played throughout, with one repeated (the one isn't "Eye of the Tiger").  Including a whole James Brown concert for "Living in America."  Ivan Drago is the least intimidating opponent Rocky has faced in 4 films.  Because he's the least interesting character.  Yeah, yeah, he SHOULD be intimidating, but he isn't.  At all.  All the good will these films had built up in me is replaced.  Just everything is wrong.  Paulie is now just comic relief, slipping and falling in the snow, a-hyuck!  Adrian doesn't act like Adrian so that there can be conflict that doesn't matter because it isn't given any weight because this movie is about the COLD WAR, DAMNIT!

AND THERE IS AT LEAST ONE HUMAN-SIZED, ANIMATRONIC, A.I. POWERED ROBOT.  I say at least, because there are two voices, and one is referred to as Paulie's and in a different scene a robot is referred to as Rocky Jr.'s.  Could be the same robot.  Doesn't matter, THERE IS A ROBOT!

All the grounded work, all the realism, all the character work is just gone.  The movie even opens with two boxing gloves, each emblazoned with the flags of Russia and the US, punch each other AND EXPLODE INTO A HUGE SHOWER OF SPARKS.  I got so fed up with all the montages and music video sequences.  I was yawning, barely able to pay attention.

Not only that, but all the tropes of the series that aren't montages and Survivor, they are just not there.  The saddest for me was the lack of the scrolling credit.  I loved seeing the credits scroll across the screen in the first 3.  But here, nope.  We need more ROBOT!

Haters gonna hate.

I'm sure that taken alone, without any acknowledgement of any of the other films ... nope, wait, all the characterization requires you to have seen at least Rocky III, if not everything.  I didn't mention it in my Rocky II or III reviews, but I loved that each film COULD standalone, it was strong enough and presented the characters in such a way that you learned who everyone was organically.  But nope, if you don't know about how Paulie is, then that sucks to be you in Rocky IV.  Same holds true for Apollo, his trainer, Adrian, even Rocky himself.  So many corners are cut to tell this story "efficiently" and just boringly.  We don't get any time to be with the characters, we just cut to the next montage to show time going by EVEN FASTER.

If you cannot tell, I am not a fan of this film.  I did not go in, expecting it to be ... this.  I did not go in expecting to be so heartbroken.  I did not go in to see such a ... just a bad movie.  I bet a lot of folks out there can really love it for its camp and ridiculousness.  But even the fights, which I praised in II and III ... they aren't anywhere near as good.  I am so saddened.  Ugh.  Tomorrow, Rocky V (the one considered the worst by most people I've ever talked to about the Rocky films).

Grade: C-

Rocky Movie Review Bank

Rocky

Rocky II

Rocky III

Rocky IV

Rocky V

Rocky Balboa