The jReviews trial license has expired. To remove this message you need to upgrade to the full version or uninstall jReviews and all it's modules and plugins.

Reviews written by csage

8 results - showing 1 - 8

Results per page:

Observe and Report

Movie Reviews

Occasional dullness, occasional hilarity, and lots of Seth Rogen

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Celebrate Seth Rogen being Seth Rogen!

Review

You didn’t seriously expect anything high brow did you?
I think what’s funniest about this film is thinking about how
much fun Jody Hill and Seth Rogen must have had making a film about not much more than Rogen chasing a public exposer around a shopping mall for an hour and a half. That’s not to say Observe and Report is only fun to laugh at from a distanced view- as long as you are a fan of Rogen and understand this film is not about being inventive there you will laugh right along with it. Rogen quickly establishes that he’s not taking himself seriously (more so than usual), and actually creates suspense about what absurd lengths he is willing to go to.
It is not that Rogen films have ever had a problem with extreme physical humor or irredeemably stereotypical characters, but he and director Hill take it even a step lower than Pineapple Express to a point where it would border on insulting if it wasn’t for his sheer likeability on screen. Despite the opposite feelings from everybody around me, I thought Anna Faris worked perfectly opposite Rogen for the same reason. She plays the stuck-up, slutty blond at just the right level of stupidity to match Rogen’s. Ray Liotta also has a large part to play as Rogen’s rival legitimate detective, and although he is involved with many of the best moments, he seems to be thrown in for the sake of getting a laugh out of having someone with his name being involved with something so ridiculous. I also was not all that impressed with the talented Michael Pena as Barnhardt’s mischievous second-in-command. He was wasted under a ridiculous accent and overly simplified vocabulary that made the racial stereotype the only real noticeable side to the character.
The story revolves around Rogen’s Ronnie Barnhardt setting out to catch a pervert who has been exposing himself in the mall parking lot. As Ronnie becomes motivated to bring him to justice he decides to fulfill his dreams of becoming an actual police officer. These lead to some of the film’s funniest moments with Liotta, whereas it’s the other scenes in Barnhardt’s life that should (and do, to an extent) give him more depth that are a bit short on laughs. It really feels like Rogen is playing a character we already know so all I found necessary or particularly interesting were the most absurd scenes, which do pick up towards the end. Barnhardt occasionally steps out of his fat, stupid persona and pulls something brilliant and surprises pleasantly while reminding us not to take it one bit seriously. Rogen and writer/director Jody Hill truly have no inhibitions about what they will do for laughs, and because they do not ever pretend to be that high-brow or original it is easy to enjoy a mere 86 minutes of their play.

Recommended?

Yes

Overall rating:		4.5
Story:		3.0
Actor Performance:		6.0
Cinematography:		4.0
Sound Track:		5.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
April 22, 2009

Report this review

Knowing

Movie Reviews

Knowing offers fresh style for action thriller

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

An inconsistent(for better and worse) thriller with overall solid acting

Review

Alex Proyas has followed up I, Robot with another large-scale thriller that tries to equally balance a crisis for all of humanity with the personal life of one dominating lead. Knowing shifts between horror, thriller, and family drama to create an original feel, even if it is difficult at times to adjust to.
After a creepy opening classroom scene in which a disturbed young girl named Lucinda obsessively writes numeric codes for a school time capsule, we jump to present day to Professor John Koestler(Nicolas Cage), an MIT professor and single parent. Koestler is an amiable professor who alternates jokes and serious reflections on the meaning of the universe in one of his most important but slightly forced scenes. At home, he spends his time grilling hot dogs and sharing his life with his son Caleb(Chandler Canterbury). These scenes are some of the strongest and show promise for Cage as the slightly awkward but devoted father. When Caleb receives the encoded message out of the time capsule and Koestner realizes it holds significance to both his life and disasters in the past and future, the scale is bumped up and turns to a race for Koestner to prevent crises threatening the planet.
A friend of mine frequently talks about how Cage is a better actor than the mediocre rap he gets, and is simply miscast as the action star. Knowing sways back and forth on the action and character drama sides, making it difficult to classify both the film and Cage’s performance. It is a bit difficult to swallow him as an MIT professor. He plays the part of not always having it together much better than a quiet genius who somehow happens to be good at everything and just appear clumsy, and after National Treasure it’s really feeling like a stretch for him to keep on doing. I’d like to see him in a less honorable role and let his acting outplay his character’s entitlement.
Rose Byrne gets a fair amount to do in the second half as Lucinda’s daughter Diana, and gives another well-rounded supporting performance. Diana is also a single parent trying to look after her daughter while dealing with her mother’s ominous predictions that have shadowed over her for her entire life. It’s the presence of her and her daughter that brings the focus back on the family and the relationships of the single parents to the kids, which ultimately plays a critical part for the disaster story.
While tighter editing and more focus may have helped Knowing as a thriller, it holds much more depth than the average action flick and avoids all the major pitfalls. It may be muddled in places, but there is substance behind Cage’s, Canterbury’s, and Byrne’s performances that add to a unique approach worth watching and discussing.

Recommended?

Yes

Overall rating:		6.0
Story:		5.0
Actor Performance:		6.0
Cinematography:		7.0
Sound Track:		6.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
April 19, 2009

Report this review

Les Triplettes de Belleville

Movie Reviews

Les Triplettes de Belleville offers new approach to characters and detail

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

A fresh, alternate world that makes the most of its animation to aid its plot.

Review

Les Triplettes de Belleville, a 2003 French animated film, overflows with both heart and creativity and is film a world and a half away you will not want to leave. Through its lack of dialogue and emphasis on its manipulation of elements as common as the human body it works as a universal and timeless hit. Triplettes radiates true creativity through its focus on everyday sights and sounds to develop its story and characters. The French Mafia are structured as dark rectangles with square shoulders above their heads, travelling in packs of three with the short head man in between the two larger blocks. A speechless waiter has his own 30 second development through being built as a loopy wire of a man easily bent and pushed around. The fat, aging, disproportionate dog Bruno is the biggest star of the show with his large whimpering snout and small lively tail. If you think my emphasis on these unusual elements strange I recommend watching and trying to figure out why it is so captivating, because it definitely is not any of the conventions most American films tend to rely on.
The story itself is complete and pretty dark, which works juxtaposed with the strange beauty of the settings and subjects. Madame Souza is a squat, kind woman with just a slight edge of attitude raising her orphaned grandson Champion. Her gift of a tricycle to him hooks him on riding and he grows up to make it to the Tour de France. There he is kidnapped along with other riders by the French Mafia, causing Madame Souza and her dog Bruno set out to rescue their loved one. One night on their lonely, desperate quest they encounter three elderly and straggly but kind women who have the habit of breaking out beats and performing using whatever objects are in sight. Back at their place, Madame Souza learns that they are The Triplets of Belleville, a once famous group of starlet singers. A performance at a fancy restaurant that Madame Souza and Bruno join them for leads to clues about Champion’s whereabouts, and the five of them must work together to save from the ruthless mobsters.
The adventure in this premise is obviously a driving force, but it is the moments and settings more than the overall action that make this film unique. Each character’s shape tells us something about their personality. Each angle tells us something about the character’s feelings of desolation or excitement. The lack of dialogue and simplicity of small actions telling the story resonate at our deepest levels of being human. Great sound and scoring creates a real world around these silly animations. And with just 78 minutes of runtime there is nothing that feels excessive or boring, and it comes across as great individual elements connected under a fitting premise as opposed to a general framework of a story someone’s trying to fill in.
Les Triplets de Belleville offers more heart and creativity than recent American animated feature and displays a whole new way of presenting characters, actions, and settings. As a novice to most foreign films this makes me want to see what other styles of storytelling they have to offer. Come into it with an open mind and you will walk out with a different way of seeing things.

Recommended?

Yes

Overall rating:		8.1
Story:		7.0
Actor Performance:		8.0
Cinematography:		9.0
Sound Track:		9.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
April 10, 2009

Report this review

12 Rounds

Movie Reviews

Cliched thriller "12 Rounds" fails to generate tension

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

A derivative, overdone thriller that loses most of it's heart by following convention

Review

It’s possible to overlook a lack of engaging acting, an original premise or twist, or overdone, annoying cinematography for a B-movie thriller if at least one of these aspects is done well. None of these, and very little else, redeem 12 Rounds and actually give us a reason to care as John Cena runs around for nearly two hours playing a sadistic criminal’s vengeful game to reclaim his girlfriend Molly.
Cena plays Detective Danny Fisher, a cop with it all coming together when a high speed chase leads him to killing thief Miles Jackson’s beautiful girlfriend. Before being arrested, Jackson swears to remember him and claim vengence. A year later, we see Danny struggling to hold both his relationship and life together, and he is pulled into facing his demons once and for all when Jackson calls one morning with the news that he has escaped and taken Molly. His danger is legitimized as he blows up Danny’s house and car. These are the strongest 20 minutes of the film, as Cena gets a chance to show a decent amount of arc and proves he may have what it takes if he escapes the cookie-cutter wrestler-turned-actor role. Unfortunately, it’s not enough to keep us interested in the next hour and a half of extended car chases and moral dilemmas that just aren’t that original and the intensity dies just as the main action starts to pick up.
It really is a shame that an at least a halfway original premise, decent writing, or editing could not be applied because none of the acting is necessarily bad. Aidan Gillen is a solid baddie as Miles Jackson, showing some sincerity for his girlfriend at the beginning before turning into the taunting, ruthless villain. Ashley Scott does fine with what she’s given as the object of both Fisher’s love and Jackson’s game, but also feels contained by the story.
The shaky, shady cinematography and fast editing should work in theory for the film’s style but I often just found myself annoyed with how hard they were trying to create tension with everything but what it actually needed. Even in an action thriller not trying to be especially innovative or original, there is no need for shaky, five minute car chases one after another. The same can be said for the jumpy, cookie-cutter action flick score. More intense and complete thrillers have been made in the past that were half an hour shorter. Director Renny Harlin has clearly never taken to heart the “less is more” proverb.
If John Cena ever wants to be taken seriously as an actor he needs to stop The Rock/ every other wrestler-turned-actor impersonation and take on a role that’s more about him than the action. He shows promise in the few scenes that he’s given a chance here, like the rest of the cast. Ultimately the film’s unwillingness to break from any action conventions, no matter how small (even just a shorter run-time could have worked wonders) prevents it from doing anything exciting. I wanted more than anything to turn the thinking down and enjoy an intense, if not revolutionary thriller, but there’s not enough here to keep your attention through one sitting.

Recommended?

Overall rating:		4.2
Story:		3.0
Actor Performance:		6.0
Cinematography:		4.0
Sound Track:		3.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
April 10, 2009

Report this review

Milk

Movie Reviews

Bold performances, style hold Milk above the norm

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

A film with great relevance that does not overshadow the daring acting performances.

Review

Milk joins some of the other best films of the past year as effectively focusing around one lead performance and a stand-out directorial style. Although it may not be as directly gut-wrenching or funny as Gran Torino or The Wrestler, it takes a fair and captivating approach to a real-life figure that finds a solid balance between documenting history and remaining entertaining. After director Gus Van Sant's previous experience of putting intelligent representations of tragic stories from Kurt Cobain to the Columbine shootings on screen, he was unquestionably the man for the job. Sean Penn, apart from being a talented actor legendary for his gay rights activism, was going to be a tougher sell for me and likely many others.
Thankfully, Penn gives probably his best, and certainly his most original performance yet and carries a film that needs his caliber of acting to remain exciting. The story follows Milk's humble beginnings, disarrayed personal life, and rise to power as he runs for San Francisco's Board of Supervisors, and Penn transitions fairly coherently between these segments. He pulls off the romantic lover and ambitious political figure with equal swagger and enthusiasm, creating a lead who is far from perfect but is always exciting to watch.
This is the first time in a while Van Sant has really worked with mainstream actors, and for the most part he does a fine job pulling them, like Penn, into unexplored territory. Most notable is James Franco as Scott Smith, who enters as a new lover to Milk in the first few minutes and retains a crucial bond to him for most of the film. The weakest points come in the middle of the heavy two hour run time when Milk and Smith are separated and Milk begins a relationship with Jack Lira (Diego Luna). Lira is by nature not a happy figure, but he seems like more of an afterthought to both Milk and the film as the politics heat up.
One character who is never boring to watch is Milk's fellow supervisor and rival Dan White, played by Josh Brolin, who takes on another tough political figure. Brolin makes the most of each scene and receives plenty of screen time during the second half, but does not ever quite get the chance to develop wholly opposite Penn. Like the Lira problem, this comes from the film being about Harvey Milk and following his life chronologically. Since Van Sant is fine with cutting away occasionally to show White's personal life, I would have liked to see even more of it and earlier on. And do not get me wrong, the thirst for more only comes from the fact that the story's finale is extremely tragic and emotionally intense, just a little more focus on White and less on other minor characters could have made it even sharper.
As one can probably deduce, the acting makes or breaks every scene and Milk works mostly because of Penn, Franco, and Brolin under Van Sant's direction. Also noteworthy are Emile Hirsch, Allison Pill, and Lucas Grabeel as fellow activists who each obviously had fun playing off of Penn's spirit.
In terms of narrative, the last nine years of Milk's life are pretty evenly shown chronologically, with a narration from Milk right before his assassination at his kitchen table cut in. While this serves to keep all the meanderings of Milk's life tied into a cohesive story, it is the only part that feels like it is Sean Penn giving us a history lesson rather than creatively showing it through his acting. I would have liked to see what it would have done for the film in terms of pacing and suspense without the
commentary. The usage of real footage of San Francisco at the time, on the other hand, adds to the feel and complements the distinct image Van Sant gives it.
Milk is a well-executed and fair biographical piece, relating to today's struggle for gay rights without letting the campaign Van Sant and Penn war for off-screen overshadow a compelling story. For those with no interest in Milk's life or a story about a ferocious fight for equality, it may be a bit lengthy and unfocused. That being said, its talent, unique approach, and relevant subject matter make it well worth an enthusiastic movie-goer's time.

Recommended?

Yes

Overall rating:		7.7
Story:		7.0
Actor Performance:		9.0
Cinematography:		8.0
Sound Track:		6.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
April 01, 2009

Report this review

Taken

Movie Reviews

Taken is intense, if predictable, thrill ride

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Liam Neeson is fun to watch in this solid mainstream thriller

Review

If you’ve seen the trailer, read a synopsis, or even heard word-of-mouth a minimal amount of information regarding Taken you know what you are getting into. That is an hour and a half of Liam Neeson kicking ass, predictably but satisfyingly. From the get-go it’s all about him, first setting him up as a sympathetic father who we know will soon be facing much worse. Neeson plays Bryan Mills, a retired security guard, or “preventer,” who spends most of his energy trying and usually failing to reconnect with Kim(Maggie Grace), his 17 year old daughter living under the custody of his ex-wife and her new rich husband. Just as Bryan is given the chance to do something special for her, Kim convinces him to let her go on a trip to Europe with her friend Amanda (Katie Cassidy) to follow a band around.
This extended exposition may be the slowest part of the film, but also features the richest acting from Neeson, his daughter, and ex-wife (Famke Janssen), before the film turns into a breathless hunt with little to mix up the chasing and torture. There are no bad performances, and Neeson and Grace share a pretty strong chemistry that establishes some significance in their relationship within the first half hour. Neeson plays Mills as fearless and relentless, to the point that it almost becomes a game for the viewer to see what sick lengths he will go to in order to reclaim his daughter. Although certain scenes of action and torture seem redundant, even with it's brisk 91 minute run time, Neeson demands attention and respect the entire way. The role does not offer all the range of his previous work, but he certainly gets the most out of it.
To complement Neeson’s edgy performance, the action is all fast-paced and cut fluently and each scene is executed well, even if put on top of each other they begin to feel the same. Director Pierre Morel also deserves credit for not shying away from brutality, whether it is the kidnappers’ treatment of Kim and the other girls or Mills' willingness to do whatever it takes.
Taken is an intriguing, fast-paced thriller but does have its share of flaws. As mentioned earlier, a monkey could predict every “twist” of the film just from the trailer. Even with its short run time and long setup there is not much to break up the last hour of the film and by the time its finale arrives I had twice wasted my excitement on what I thought it would be. It also presents every European character, even the ones who first appear all right, as having a hand in the sex-trafficking business that is responsible for Kim’s disappearance, a point I am not sure how foreigners will take.
Taken is a decent but predictable thriller that is carried by Liam Neeson’s potent performance. Anyone looking for a good action movie that is a branch off of Bourne or Bond with less complexity should check it out.

Recommended?

Yes

Overall rating:		6.8
Story:		6.0
Actor Performance:		8.0
Cinematography:		8.0
Sound Track:		4.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
March 15, 2009

Report this review

Watchmen

Movie Reviews

Watchmen adaptation pleasing, entertaining, not redefining

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

A visually packed, faithful adaptation that brings many new things to the superhero genre but fails to redefine it for films as the graphic novel did for comics.

Review

Review	Given the near 20 years of studio squabbling and failed attempts to translate Alan Moore’s masterpiece to the big screen, Watchmen could have turned out much worse. Zach Snyder somewhat surprisingly sticks incredibly close to the source material, which ends up being the film’s greatest strength and weakness. The two and a half hour spectacle kicks off with a healthy dose of action and an opening credits sequence to Bob Dylan’s The Times They Are a Changin, which is arguably the coolest and richest part of the film. I won’t spoil the surprises, but we get to see what nearly every defining historical and cultural moment of the Cold War era looks like in Moore’s alternate history. The only problem is those who have not read the novel will likely be lost on half the references, a flaw that recurs often throughout the well-layered story. After the engaging intro we settle into about two hours of direct, often line-for-line translation from the graphic novel. As a fan of the source material, I found this to be a treat and scenes kept showing up that I thought would be cut. Unfortunately, not all of the dialogue really transfers onto the screen and the rich performances needed to bring it all to life are rare. Patrick Wilson turns in a strong performance as Night Owl II, successfully showing the most range and keeping us into his story each moment he’s on screen. Jackie Earle Haley does as a very solid representation of Rorschach, even if the novel’s iconic hard-ass will never be brought to life on screen as potently as he was on the page. The same can be said for Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian, who gets props for committing all the worse crimes known to mankind and still drawing empathy here and there. The rest of the cast is not terrible, but does not manage to hold its extensive screen time or bring anything special to the characters. Malin Akerman and Billy Crudup eat up a lot of time as Silk Spectre II and Dr. Manhattan, and while both do a fair job representing the characters from the novel it gets kind of flat over two and a half hours on screen. Matthew Goode’s Ozymandias is probably the most different from the novel, and his exaggerated cocky-intellectual demeanor ends up taking away a bit from the finale and its message. As for the rest of the final act, I did not hate it as much as I thought I would upon hearing it had been changed, but still had some faults. Snyder and the writers suddenly choose to take a couple characters in slightly different directions after strictly adhering to the source material most of the film. Just changing a few lines or arrangements may not seem like a big deal, but it nearly sends the opposite message of Moore’s original work and simplifies the film after two and a half hours of complexity. While in some ways this makes the end easier to swallow and gives the actors more range, it takes away from the ultimate message of the novel and reminds us that we are only watching a superhero movie after all.
Additional Remarks	If you've read the graphic novel check it out, just don't expect too much. If you haven't read it get on that first.
Recommended?	Yes

Overall rating:		7.1
Story:		7.0
Actor Performance:		5.0
Cinematography:		9.0
Sound Track:		8.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by csage
March 10, 2009

Report this review

The Wrestler

Movie Reviews

Rourke, Aronofsky pack enormous power into low budget drama

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

They weren't lying when they said Mickey Rourke was back, and even if you don't know anything about him or wrestling this drama will stay with you for days.

Review

Director Darren Aronofsky and Mickey Rourke have not had any problem putting painfully flawed, empathetic characters on screen before. Who would have thought that a simple, low budget film about a wrestler dealing with being forced into retirement could provide both with the opportunity to push their talents to new limits, as they do in this sentimental but gritty drama.
Make no mistake, this is Mickey Rourke’s film, and everything and everybody else on screen simply fills in the gaps or plays off of his dynamic performance (I’d rather not imagine Nicolas Cage, the studio’s original choice, in his place.) Rourke and Aronofsky clearly work in elements from Rourke’s real-life struggles, allowing his performance to have that much more impact, yet he never overshadows the character he is playing and keeps us chanting “Randy” over “Mickey.” Do not be fooled by the sappy comeback buzz regarding Rourke’s return, it’s not a pretty role and does not shy away Randy’s devastating flaws as he struggles to adapt outside the ring. The film’s ability to be relentlessly violent and bleak towards human nature in one scene but strangely touching in the next creates a perfect balance that rarely leans too far either way. “The Ram” commits numerous offenses without necessarily learning from his mistakes, yet he never loses our heart and pulls off the tragic-hero as good as anyone.
To complement the rough look into all parts of a professional wrestler’s life, Aronofsky has gone in the complete opposite direction stylistically from his past couple films. He captures much of Randy’s life handheld over his shoulder as he enters the ring or storms down an aisle of his real job at a grocery store. The crew reportedly showed up at actual wrestling events and filmed scenes in between fights with portable equipment, and the risk pays off in the dirty, realistic feel of all the fights.
Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood co-star as Randy’s stripper love-interest and alienated daughter. Both hold up fine opposite Rourke in emotionally-charged roles, although neither necessarily brings any vital pieces to the puzzle. Tomei does share some of the strongest scenes with Rourke as they grow closer on screen, particularly in an unforgettable bar conversation about eighties rock.
Wood and Rourke also share a few heartfelt scenes, although their relationship ends up being the only subplot that feels more like a plot device than anything else.
Finally, the biggest snub at the Oscars was not Rourke losing Best Actor (that’s the second biggest), but Bruce Springsteen not even garnering a nomination for his closing number, which shares its title with the film and provides perfect closure.
Making every moment and dollar count, The Wrestler is a heartfelt display of remarkable talent that deserves a place among the best films of 2008.

Recommended?

Yes