From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Mon Feb 9 20:34:46 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Mon Feb 9 20:34:49 2009 Subject: Review: He's Just Not That Into You (2009) Message-ID: HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): ** I'll say this much for HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU. While the movie is a comedic dud, it's at least good enough to engender lots of conversation afterwards about how it could and should have been so much better. Director Ken Kwapis has trouble hitting an effective middle ground when it comes to comedy. His last film, LICENSE TO WED, starring Robin Williams and Mandy Moore, was a frantic flop with every joke being way over-the-top. In contrast, HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU takes a big bunch of A and B list stars and shows them sleepwalking through the entire production. Only Ginnifer Goodwin (Margene from "Big Love") consistently shines. Stealing every scene she is in, Goodwin's performance and her endearing smile are the only possible reasons to see HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU. The rest of the cast of what feels like thousands, but is probably only tens, includes Scarlett Johansson, Jennifer Aniston, Jennifer Connelly and Drew Barrymore. None of the women, except for Goodwin, are the least bit memorable, but the men are especially bad, giving very generic readings of what is supposed to be acting. The movie is a one-joke affair, based on a book by Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo. The joke, with its many slight variations, revolves around when and under what circumstances someone should call another after or before a date. Of course, one variation on this theme is what it means if the other person doesn't call back. There isn't a single scene worth a big laugh, but, to be honest, you'll probably laugh a little every now and then. What is infuriating about HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU is that so many of the problems are definitely fixable, especially given its strong cast. Let's start with the easiest. There is no reason, especially when your material is this thin, to bring the movie in at a running time of over two hours. Romantic comedies need to be breezy and crisp. Cutting a half hour out of HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU would easily make it much better and more focused. Really good movies with well-written scripts can effectively utilize large casts. But, if you've only got one idea, you don't want to spread it around among too many characters, or none of them will be well developed. Of all the single and would-be single people in this narrative, almost none of them are more than one dimensional. This means that whenever they get themselves in trouble by cheating or by confessing their cheating, the audience just doesn't care. John Bailey's cinematography does none of the actors any favors. With the film's lackluster colors and its unflattering lighting, the movie made you want to go home and watch just about any series on your HDTV so that the images won't appear so second rate. Finally, if your director can't elicit some terrific performances with actors such as Johansson, Aniston, Connelly and Barrymore, it's time to replace him and get someone who can. HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU runs 2:09. It is rated PG-13 for "sexual content and brief strong language" and would be acceptable for kids around 10 and up. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, February 5, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From homeryen88 at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 20:37:24 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Mon Feb 9 20:37:26 2009 Subject: Review: Taken (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000902072007j2619c763h4b041657fb60237c@mail.gmail.com> Liam Neeson is "Taken" It to the Limit by Homer Yen (c) 2009 The period between the time the Oscar nominations are revealed and when the Oscars are telecast is when studios begin to dump their excess inventory. It is a month marked by films of varying quality and varying absurdity. And, I suppose that "Taken" qualifies as that on both counts. It's sometimes (more often than not) good and sometimes bad. Meanwhile, it's pretty absurd and yet fairly watchable. You never know what you'll get sometimes with these January releases. Yet, I was surprised at how much I enjoyed watching Liam Neeson as the overprotective dad. You know, the casual movie-goer probably can't even think of 3 films that he's starred in. And, to be honest, if you've seen this film, you'll forget about the title and the star come spring time. But, I give him credit for raising the "daddy bar" and empowering men with his must-get-it-done attitude. Neeson plays the now-retired-but-itching-for-something-to-do Bryan Mills. I liked that the Bryan Mills character isn't depicted as a devolving drunkard or a loser. He merely has chosen a less strenuous lifestyle so that he can be with the daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace) that he cherishes but hardly ever sees. His previous life as a CIA agent resulted in divorce from his wife (played by Famke Janssen). His friends are also from the CIA, and their collective experiences and memories must make for some interesting dinner conversations as they rehash their missions and killings and such. At most, Bryan may moonlight as a for-hire bodyguard, but his focus is rebuilding his relationship with his now-17-year old daughter. And that could be tough considering the fact that his wife has remarried a nice-enough but really, really, really rich guy (Xander Berkeley). His chance to become her hero arises when Kim foolishly follows her dim-bulbed best friend to Paris. They promptly become kidnapped and are now for-sale-items in the black market of woman-traffickers. That gives dear old Dad about 96 hours to find her before she becomes the newest possession of some Arabian Sheikh. The absurdity level ramps up like the noise level at a Rihanna concert. Now, even if you haven't seen the film yet, these observations won't really spoil your experience, so don't worry. But, I did wonder how he could pose as a French Inspector and yet can't speak French. I did wonder how his America-based friends were able to so efficiently help Bryan determine where he should start looking. Bryan, for those critical 96 hours, is basically the luckiest man you'll ever see on screen. To his credit, he is trained in weaponry, fast pursuit, hand-to-hand combat, and being a no-nonsense Dad. And, I do give him props for his creative use of an Albanian translator and a prostitute. He's Jason Bourne, but older and with a teenage daughter. I like that the film is very efficient. It runs at just over 90 minutes. Action sequences are brisk. In fact, I think that this one features the shortest car chase scene ever. It's a good-looking production. And who knew that Neeson could be so engaging? On the flip side, Famke Janssen needs to find something edgier than this thankless role; there could've been more gratuitous action; and Kim should've been grounded for life. All's well that ends well, I guess. Grade: B S: 2 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 3 out of 3 From mleeper at optonline.net Tue Feb 17 17:30:45 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Tue Feb 17 17:30:47 2009 Subject: Review: Coraline (2009) Message-ID: CORALINE (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: With charming images in 3-D animation we have the story of a girl who finds a tunnel to a parallel world where she has two "other" parents who just love her to death. Everything is wondrous in this world until she finds out that ... but that would be telling. This is based on a story by the incomparable fantasy author Neil Gaiman. Somewhere between Gaiman's writing and the rendering on the screen written and directed by Henry Selick, this film loses coherence with too little happening that makes sense. Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4) or 7/10 One thinks of fantasy as a genre in which anything can happen. Though it seems paradoxical to say it, this means that fantasy is very highly dependent on fixed, even if arbitrary, rules. The viewer has to know what the ground rules are. In DRACULA we know what kills vampires. If at the end Dracula gets up and we find that a stake through the heart really does not work, we would feel cheated. Suppose Frodo threw the ring into the fires and it turned into a dragon that kills him, and Sauron is as powerful as ever. What would be the point of the story? ALICE IN WONDERLAND is fun whimsy, but one never really empathizes with Alice. The real world does not have to make sense, but a fantasy really world does if the viewer/reader is going to buy into the plot. If anything can happen there is no point to the hero's striving. Coraline (voiced by Dakota Fanning) is a pert young girl who moves with her family into a strange house with some stranger tenants. There is an odd Russian (Ian McShane) in the third floor who is doing something unexplained with mice. There are two sisters who live in the basement. These people are all weird eccentrics. But when Coraline gets frustrated with her parents' lack of attention to her, she focuses her attention on a strange little locked door in the wall. After some effort she opens this unused door and find it leads to a mysterious tunnel into the head of John Malkovich. No, I am getting my movies confused. At the end of the tunnel is a house identical to hers with a mother and a father who look like her parents but they have buttons instead of eyes. It seems everybody in this world has buttons for eyes. These parents are just like Coraline's own parents, but they love her more. Where here the food her parents serve is something of a dog's breakfast, her "other" parents serve her delicious food, much of which seems chosen to be the short route to the diabetes ward. The Button World parents just love Coraline so much that they cannot bear to let her leave. So they may not. And why should Coraline want to go home to parents who are so indifferent and oblivious to her presence? Neil Gaiman is fast becoming to the fantasy film with Philip K. Dick is to the science fiction film. His CORALINE in the film version is a story in dire need of just a few ground rules to make sense of what we are seeing on the screen. It is an interesting fantasy film done in a visual style reminiscent of Tim Burton animation. And the film's stop-motion animation is even more impressive in 3-D. But at a certain point it is just not clear what is happening and how the characters' problems have to be fixed. There are questions such as, who has multiple manifestations and why do not other characters? What does it signify that when Coraline collects certain artifacts, that the world around them suddenly seems to turn gray? Nor do we really know when the story is over. What makes this particularly puzzling is that the story is by Neil Gaiman, who usually is a master of the fantasy art form. I have not read the book, but my suspicion is that it would make a lot more sense. Henry Selick's previous fantasies, JAMES AND THE GIANT PEACH and THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS, are good-looking films, but may not be completely engaging fantasies. Reportedly Selick makes some major revisions to the story adding a major character, Wybie, who is not in the book. And Coraline can slip between the worlds in ways she could not in the book. Perhaps my problems with CORALINE were just me being dense, but too often I was not sure what was happening and why. Our second button fantasy of the season is visually lush and the stop-motion works as well as the emotional core of the film. But even so good an effort in so many different ways fails if the viewer is left confused by scenes that should be better explained. I rate CORALINE a high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or 7/10. For those who sit through the credits there is a reward of a tour de force scene of 3-D that has nothing to do with the plot but is still nice to see. In fact it is worth some extra effort to see this film in 3-D. Film Credits: What others are saying: Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Tue Feb 17 17:32:38 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Tue Feb 17 17:32:39 2009 Subject: Review: Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009) Message-ID: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** What a delightful surprise! CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC is as wonderfully silly and charming as it is absolutely hilarious. If you loved LEGALLY BLONDE, as I did, then CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC is definitely the movie for you. Consistently hitting every one of her comedic marks, Isla Fisher (WEDDING CRASHERS) plays Rebecca "Becky" Bloomwood, a lovable and endearing character with just one flaw, she can't stop shopping. Like an alcoholic who hears beer bottles beckoning from every liquor store, Becky has department store mannequins calling out to her from every shop window. This is shown quite literally, as mannequins come to life with motions that appear like animated dummies rather than humans trying to act like mannequins. It's all done very cleverly. In fact, you'll spend the whole time smiling profusely and laughing often while watching the movie. While growing up, Becky was in a constant state of awe of grown women and their "magic cards." With their slender pieces of plastic, they were able to adorn their equally slender bodies with colorful and outrageously expensive designer clothes. Now a journalist, Becky has only three wishes. She wants to work for Alette, "the" magazine for high fashion, she wants to avoid Derek Smeath (Robert Stanton), the collection agent hired by her credit card company, and she, of course, wants (read "needs") to continue buying all of the latest fashions. Becky's roommate, Suze (Krysten Ritter, "Veronica Mars"), is about to get married, but the red-headed Becky is as attractive as she is unsuccessful with men. "If a man doesn't fit, you can't exchange him ten days later," she says, explaining why shopping is so much easier for her than dating. With her credit cards being declined everywhere, Becky desperately needs a new and better paying job. Her ditzy behavior works to her advantage, causing her accidently to get the most unlikely job possible for her, one at a money magazine. Her new boss, Luke Brandon (Hugh Dancy, ELLA ENCHANTED), a handsome hunk if there ever was one, decides to give her a byline of the "Girl with the Green Scarf." Actually, this comes about because Becky doesn't want to use her real name with a debt collector in hot pursuit. Her column isn't like most financial articles, since her advice includes homilies such as, "Risky investments are like a pair of platform boots." The movie is filled with cameos that work. Kristin Scott Thomas (I'VE LOVED YOU SO LONG), for example, is perfect as Alette Naylor, the snotty editor of Alette. In a typical scene, Alette has Becky's mother (Joan Cusack) slice her a piece of cake so thin that it looks like a piece of writing paper. As a lovable motormouth, Fisher is also quite adept with the physical comedy aspects of her role. She makes pratfalls look as natural as they are funny. Don't try to fight the ever-resourceful Becky at a designer fashion sale, or you will lose. When she sees fancy shoes that she wants, people would be well advised not to get in her way. Even regular attendance at shopaholics' support groups isn't enough to treat her addiction for long. Don't resist the urge to shop for a ticket to CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC. It'll be one purchase you won't regret. CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC runs a fast 1:44. It is rated PG for "some mild language and thematic elements" and would be acceptable for all ages. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, February 13, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Tue Feb 17 17:35:56 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Tue Feb 17 17:36:00 2009 Subject: Review: The International (2009) Message-ID: THE INTERNATIONAL A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** Slow and preposterous but intriguing and engaging as well, THE INTERNATIONAL is a odd film. In many ways, it is diametrically opposed to the traditional Hollywood thriller. THE INTERNATIONAL is set in a world in which the good guys and the bad guys possess very few high tech gadgets. Even their hit men are reduced to using a public pay phone to get their messages. And, when tracking a suspect, the cops carry no communication equipment, relying instead on visual signs to communicate with each other. This throwback of a story, however, is set in today's world, or more precisely today's world as viewed from a 2007 perspective. More on this later. Director Tom Tykwer appears to forgotten everything he knows about how to make a fast paced, highly energetic film. In contrast to his RUN LOLA RUN, THE INTERNATIONAL might be titled PONDER LOUIS PONDER, as Tykwer's lead character this time, Louis Salinger (Clive Owen), spends more time contemplating action than doing it. The film does contain one great gun battle, as a nearly infinite number of Uzi-wielding thugs try to take out Louis, an Interpol agent who is trying to bring in a hit man. With shades of the ending gun fight in BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID, this long scene is an adrenaline-pumping rush. But, the rest of the movie relies solely on appealing to the viewer's intellect, not always a wise decision for a big budget production. While I found the movie fascinating, others may find all of it, save the shoot-'em-up sequence, to be a snoozefest. Set mainly in Berlin and in Manhattan, the story concerns a banking cabal intent on world domination. When the movie was being made a year or so ago, viewers -- with several leaps of faith -- might actually have envisioned bankers as would-be masters of the universe, so powerful than nothing could stop them from taking over the planet. But in today's world, in which the biggest banks have been effectively nationalized, it's hard to see them as all-powerful, as this movie makes them out. And, not just financially powerful, the lead bank in THE INTERNATIONAL, the nefarious IBBC, is in the process of cornering the world arms market, since they want to use this power in order to control the entire world, not just its money. THE INTERNATIONAL opens on the same day as CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC. Ironically, both films are equally untimely. The only spendthrift left is the federal government, whose leaders would probably view shopaholic activity as stimulative and thus something to be encouraged, not shunned. Extremely well cast down to the smallest supporting player, the movie has one other major star in addition to Owen; Naomi Watts plays New York ADA Eleanor Whitman. When Louis sees a conspiracy of world-wide proportions, Eleanor is the first one to believe him. A major uncredited star of the production is the architecture. Finding -- and probably creating with CGI -- some monstrous and imposing edifices, Tykwer makes the actors look like ants compared to the buildings, which appear as if designed by Nazi architect Albert Speer. And with every day overcast, the gloomy weather and sometimes lightly blowing snow gives a constant and consistent feeling of foreboding doom. Especially good in a key supporting role, Brian F. O'Byrne (Colin from "The Brotherhood") plays a character called "The Consultant." What he consults on are assassinations, which he carries out efficiently and stealthily, helped immensely by the protection of law enforcement agents who, of course, are card-carrying members of the same evil group seeking world domination. Besides working as a good -- even if always ridiculous -- political thriller, the movie provides some homilies that do ring true. If you can control the debt, you can control everything, one of the bankers explains. Politicians today have definitely come to learn the power of that thought. But probably the best way to enjoy THE INTERNATIONAL is by trying not to question anything. Just sit back and go with the narrative. If you can stay awake, you'll probably enjoy it. THE INTERNATIONAL runs a slow 1:58. It is rated R for "some sequences of violence and language" and would be acceptable for teenagers. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, February 13, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Cinemark theaters and the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From mleeper at optonline.net Tue Feb 17 17:37:02 2009 From: mleeper at optonline.net (Mark R. Leeper) Date: Tue Feb 17 17:37:05 2009 Subject: Review: The Reader (2009) Message-ID: THE READER (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: In the 1950s a German teenager has an affair with an older woman. Later, when the woman is on trial for wartime crimes, her former lover realizes that she has a secret shame than runs deeper than that of the crimes of which she is accused. Revealing the secret would lessen her punishment. This is a powerful drama touching on German guilt and responsibility, but also about a humiliation is greater still and shapes a woman's life. Kate Winslet reveals herself to be a much more versatile actress than we could have suspected before. Stephen Daldry directs a screenplay by David Hare based on the book by Bernhard Schlink. Rating: +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10 (It is impossible to discuss this film without revealing an important plot twist. There are minor spoilers throughout and a spoiler paragraph after the main review.) The story is told mostly in flashback as a lawyer Michael Berg (played by Ralph Fiennes) thinks about his life. In the late 1950s a teenage Michael (David Kross) becomes very ill and takes refuge by the door of what turns out to be a tram conductor, Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslet). She shows him some kindness and he becomes obsessed with her. The relationship blooms into passion, explicitly portrayed. But she chooses a peculiar sort of foreplay. She wants her lover to read aloud to her. Having people read to her becomes an obsession. The desire for readers goes the very core of who she is. Eight years later Michael's path crosses Hanna's again. Hanna is on trial for her crimes as an SS guard at Auschwitz and elsewhere. Michael will make a deduction that casts all of Hanna's strange behavior in a new light. Michael may be the main character, but the viewer's eye throughout is on Hanna. In spite of the leads being played by two good actors, Michael is a character we have seen before and who in the first two of the three sections of this film is more acted upon than he is acting. The film seems intended to be about Michael and a moral decision that he is forced to make. But Hanna pulls our attention so strongly that what should be the central moral issue is just demoted to a plot turn. The film as it was made is now really about Hanna and how she could be the person that she is. Her character cannot elicit much sympathy from the audience, but she can come to be understood. Acting honors have to go to Kate Winslet. Even in a year in which she is being touted for her acting in REVOLUTIONARY ROAD her Academy Award nomination is for this film, and for once I agree with the Academy voters. She not only has to convincingly play a German woman (okay, she does it in English with a German accent), but she has to play the woman as she ages over several decades and is uniformly credible at each age. The film also has Bruno Ganz as a law professor. Ganz may be the best actor that Germany has had since it lost Peter Lorre and Conrad Veidt. Ralph Fiennes is quietly professional as a man totally bottled up within himself. He is completely believable, but his role is just not very compelling. Perhaps the same can be said of David Kross playing the same character at a younger age. Lina Olin is along in a double role as mother and daughter involved in the trial. One touch that we have not seen much before is the ferocity with which the generation after the war turned against their parents' generation. They see the Holocaust as a crime against their own country and want to disassociate themselves violently from their parents' actions. Films like ZENTROPA dramatize the undercurrent of secret loyalty to the principles of the Third Reich after the war. This film shows us that much of the next German generation turned on an older Germans who could commit such brutal crimes. At heart what makes the film powerful is Winslet in so strong a performance and so totally different from anything she has done in the past. I rate THE READER a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale or 7/10. SPOILER WARNING: Somehow there is an uneasy feeling about the point of view of this film. Much of the point of the film is that Hanna is treated unjustly by the system of war crimes justice. And while we are watching the film we feel for her. Because we have come to know her we feel that she deserves a lighter punishment. But at the same time she is getting a lenient punishment for her actual actions. The implication is that if others get punishment that is lighter than they deserve, she should also get a punishment that is too light. At heart this film is about a case of sympathy for the devil. Film Credits: What others are saying: Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2009 Mark R. Leeper From homeryen88 at gmail.com Tue Feb 17 17:38:03 2009 From: homeryen88 at gmail.com (Homer Yen) Date: Tue Feb 17 17:38:05 2009 Subject: Review: Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009) Message-ID: <4a52a9000902162150i30052855k9a5be6bc5db9f57f@mail.gmail.com> "Confessions" Doesn't Have a Whole Lot to Say by Homer Yen (c) 2009 In many ways, "Confessions of a Shopaholic" follows the same trajectory-of-euphoria as purchasing a cashmere coat with your credit card. It seems great at first. Then you stop paying attention to it. Then you realize that you'll have to keep paying for it long after there isn't any more use for the coat. That is not to say, however, that I didn't like "COAS". In fact, I took that cute metaphor from the film. But for all of its initial promise, I wished that there was more to it. I wished that it could've left a lingering, positive impression. Instead, it only achieves being a semi-cute romantic comedy splashed with elements from just about every film starring Hugh Grant "COAS" is actually two separate films-in-one. On the one hand, it is a humorous-if-only-superficial look at the irresistible urge for some to shop and the consequences that arise from mounting debt. Shopping (actually...buying) is especially addictive for Rebecca (Isla Fisher) who says in an early scene, "there are real prices and there are Mom prices. The real prices are for real things like shoes with sparkly things on them that probably last one season. The mom prices usually involve something that's unattractively brown and lasts forever." Well, it's the sparkly things that people like Rebecca want. Now, to the passers-by, it may look like a coat by Burberry or a blouse by Chanel. But the real story is: coat by Visa and blouse by American Express. That's fresh and I liked how the film starts. The other part of the film involves Rebecca unexpectedly landing a job as a personal finance columnist. Now, the irony begins to take shape. She is in huge amounts of debt with an overly aggressive debt-collector pursuing her. Yet, her personal musings on why purses are better than men (you can return purses and instantly pick another) make for great reading. She's a simple girl with not-so-simple tastes. Her romantic interest (Hugh Dancy) is her editor who is a not-so-simple guy with simple tastes. Sure, there are cute scenes between the two, especially when he saves her from an embarrassing moment at a company dinner. Yet, while the film has a generally amiable feeling, it doesn't go any further. And, her parents (John Goodman and Joan Cusack) are totally underutilized. "COAS" has an unexpectedly whimsical nature. It starts with the buoyancy of the film's star. It continues on with the lifelike mannequins that adorn the windows of 5th Ave that taunt poor Rebecca into buying something that she can't afford. And it charges forth with screwball silliness. Our in-debt heroine is wonderfully ditzy. At the same time, it doesn't really manage to distinguish itself from any of the other Hugh Grant/meet-cute films. As Rebecca herself laments, shopping is like a drug or an aphrodisiac. The euphoria never lasts as long as initially hoped. Sadly, the same is true of this film. It's kind of like asking yourself at the checkout counter, with your 12% credit card in hand, should I go ahead and get it? Do I really want it? Despite flashes of radiance, the film begins to feel long. And, when I say *feel*, it's the same feeling you have when you have a balance on a high-interest credit card and make only the minimum payments. Grade: B- S: 1 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 0 out of 3 re From kamhung.soh at gmail.com Wed Feb 25 17:37:03 2009 From: kamhung.soh at gmail.com (Kam-Hung Soh) Date: Wed Feb 25 17:37:06 2009 Subject: Retrospective: Invisible Waves (2005) Message-ID: After Kyoji (Tadanobu Asano), a young Japanese cook, murders his lover Seiko (Tomono Kuga), he flees Macau on a cruise ship, where he meets Noi (Hye-jeong Kang), a Korean mother with a toddler, on vacation. When he arrives in Phuket, he finds he is being hunted by some gangsters, possibly hired by Seiko's husband (and his Thai boss), Wiwat (Toon Hiranyasap). This is a languorous film made by Thai director Pen-Ek Ratanaruang and writer Prabda Yoon. It is filled with dreamlike scenes set in strangely deserted streets of Macau and Hong Kong, or aboard the near-empty cruise ship. Kyoji's journey is punctuated with minor mishaps and annoyances, perhaps reflecting his punishment for his crime. Christopher Doyle's lovely fluid and off-centre cinematography and the hesitant use of English between the characters from different cultures (obviously everyone's second language) further add to the dreamlike feeling. Most of the action occurs off screen and its only near the end that the horror of Kyoji's crime is revealed. While accepting that this is a slow-moving mood piece and admiring the writing and technical achievements, I found this film to be a challenge to watch. The scenes on the cruise ship go on and on interminably, and Kyoji is annoying dim (why go to Thailand to evade the law when your dead lover's husband may be connected to Thai gangsters?) and passive. Stars: 2 out of 5. Kam-Hung Soh 22 February 2009 http://morvahouse.blogspot.com From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Feb 26 16:14:06 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Feb 26 16:14:09 2009 Subject: Review: 12 (2009) Message-ID: <76mdnXNPdP4GYTvUnZ2dnUVZ_hGWnZ2d@earthlink.com> 12 A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** Okay, I've got to be honest. One of my absolute favorite genres of films are ones about juries. And, while I like most trial films, it is those focusing exclusively on the jury deliberations that I like best of all. There aren't many pure jury movies. The one that is the most famous and that is one of my all time favorite films is 12 ANGRY MEN. I've seen three versions of this story, and I love them all, with, not surprisingly, the 1957 film version starring Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, E. G. Marshall and others being the one I love the most. 12, while acknowledging Reginald Rose's screenplay, is a loose adaptation, with only the basic outline of the plot being followed. Set in Russia, this script, by Nikita Mikhalkov, Vladimir Moiseyenko and Aleksandr Novototsky, uses the trial to explore the intense hatred and disdain that the Russians have for the Chechnyans. The trial, which appears to be a slam-dunk for the prosecution, concerns a Chechen teenager charged with murdering his Russian stepfather. With two eyewitnesses and a unique knife used as the murder weapon, the jury appears to have a case before them that can be decided quickly. And, since many of the jurors have pressing engagements and trains to catch, it's good that they should be able to dispose of the case easily and efficiently. As you can guess, this rush to judgment grinds to a halt when one of the jurors shocks the others by voting "not guilty." It's not so much that this juror believes that the accused is innocent. It's just that the juror wants the jury to postpone final judgment until it considers the facts a bit first. The movie is a long march from the 11-1 vote in favor of conviction to the inevitable freeing of the defendant. 12 ANGRY MEN is crisp and riveting in every interchange, but director Nikita Mikhalkov's 12 is filled with long, rambling stories by the jurors about incidents from their lives. When the jurors stick to discussing the case, the film works best. The director's BURNT BY THE SUN won the 1995 Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film, and 12 was a nominee at last year's Oscars. While this overlong film is well worth seeing, one juror best captured my main criticism of the film. "I beg your pardon," he tells another juror after yet another long story about someone's life. "Why did you tell us all of that?" Perhaps the most interesting part of 12 is the ending twist that comes from the reasoning behind the last juror's brief hold out in voting for innocence. He comes up with a reason to continue to vote guilty that the others had not ever considered. 12 runs 2:29. The film is in Russian and Chechen with English subtitles. It is rated PG-13 for "violent images, disturbing content, thematic material, brief sexual and drug references, and smoking" and would be acceptable for teenagers. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, March 13, 2009. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the Camera Cinemas. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Thu Feb 26 16:15:18 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Thu Feb 26 16:15:21 2009 Subject: Review: Wake (2009) Message-ID: <2KOdnRUcZqyBYzvUnZ2dnUVZ_hGWnZ2d@earthlink.com> WAKE A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** >From its opening sequences, Ellie Kanner's WAKE appears that to be headed straight for some black comedy a la HAROLD AND MAUDE, but, since WAKE's writer Lennox Wisele said at our screening that she had never seen HAROLD AND MAUDE, any parallels are unintentional. Actually, the movie that WAKE most mimics is that of THE WEDDING CRASHERS with a bit of the creepy KISSED thrown in for good measure. When we meet Carys, she is a dead woman, lying on a table in the preparation room at a funeral home. We watch Carys as Shane (Danny Masterson, "That 70s Show") applies her make-up. What we might not expect is that she isn't dead after all. She is just a girl obsessed with all aspects of the funeral industry. However, she doesn't take her weird proclivities quite as far as Sandra Larson (Molly Parker) did in KISSED. There is no attempt at sexual relations with the deceased. Bijou Phillips (ALMOST FAMOUS) delivers a consistent and easily likeable performance as Carys. Although she appears in almost every scene, Phillips isn't the star of basically a one-person production. She is surrounded by a large cast that you've seen in many television series, including Jane Seymour ("Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman"), Sprague Grayden ("Jericho"), Kevin Alejandro ("Shark") and David Zayas ("Dexter"). Everyone on the set clearly had a good time, and their fun easily transfers to the audience. While WAKE is no laugh-riot, it is a film that will have you smiling along with it. The movie starts off with its quirkiest and weirdest scenes, but shortly thereafter switches gears, becoming a more traditional comedy about misconstrued intentions and hidden identities. Carys, who lost her sister a long time ago, attempts to find consolation by crashing funerals. Actually, we only witness her doing this once, which is at the funeral of Anna. Tyler, Anna's fianc?, wants to know how Carys knew Anna. Of course, Carys has trouble making up the right lie to convince Tyler, but, as Carys's prevarications multiply, she falls in love with him. Ian Somerhalder, the brother who loved his twin sister too much in "Lost", plays Tyler. "Have you ever had an unusual hobby?" Carys asks Tyler in one of her many failed attempts to extricate herself from her lies. Every time she tries to come clean with him, something gets in her way. Meanwhile, she begins to suspect that all is not right with Tyler. Carys's roommate, the ever-distrustful Lila (Marguerite Moreau, "The O.C."), warns Carys to "expect the worst" from Tyler. WAKE is a breezy comedy that doesn't ask much of its audience other than relaxing and going with the flow. Although its opening sequence is a bit shocking, the rest of the movie is a more traditional comedy with the enjoyment coming from watching a carefully assembled ensemble cast work together. WAKE runs a quick 1:37. The film is not yet rated but would probably be PG-13 and would be acceptable for kids around 10 and up. The film was shown as the opening night film of San Jose's Cinequest Film Festival (www.Cinequest.org), which runs February 25-March 8, 2009. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Fri Feb 27 14:12:09 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Fri Feb 27 14:12:11 2009 Subject: Review: Johnny Cash at Folsum Prison (2008) Message-ID: JOHNNY CASH AT FOLSOM PRISON A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** Filled with great songs and a great story, JOHNNY CASH AT FOLSOM PRISON is, nevertheless, a film that manages to disappoint more often than it should. Relying too often on still images, animation and very wide video shots of buildings and prison yards, the movie is more to be listened to than watched. Whenever I would close my eyes, physically or metaphorically, I was the happiest. As Johnny Cash's wonderful music washed over me, I was in heaven. But when I looked at what was on the screen, I kept getting distracted and somewhat annoyed with director Bestor Cram's choices. It does, however, get better in the last half, when Cram mixes in more old footage of Johnny in concert. The talking heads (prisoners, Johnny's fellow music makers and Johnny's children) tell good stories about Johnny and about their lives in the era when Johnny was singing. While the images frequently disappoint, the story is consistently intriguing. We learn, for example, that, as everyone knows, before Johnny Cash spent his time in prison, he grew up on a small cotton farm in a poor area of northeast Arkansas. Actually, everything in the previous sentence is true, except that, contrary to the widely held belief, Johnny never was in prison. As the movie demonstrates, he showed an enormous empathy for prisoners and for prisoners' rights and he wrote a long list of songs about prison, but he was never incarcerated in one. Of the many surprises revealed in the film, perhaps the most fascinating is that Johnny stole -- okay, maybe adapted is a better term -- the song that set his career on the road to success. After hearing the slow and melodic "Crescent City Blues," he borrowed the tune and the phrases, but he speed up the rhythm and switched out some of the words, coming up with his signature "Folsom Prison Blues." JOHNNY CASH AT FOLSOM PRISON runs 1:27. The film is being shown as part of San Jose's Cinequest Film Festival (www.Cinequest.org), which runs February 25-March 8, 2009. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line. From steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com Fri Feb 27 14:13:28 2009 From: steve.rhodes at internetreviews.com (Steve Rhodes) Date: Fri Feb 27 14:13:30 2009 Subject: Review: Bitter & Twisted (2008) Message-ID: BITTER & TWISTED A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2009 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): * 1/2 BITTER & TWISTED -- I think not. A much more appropriate title for this snoozefest would be SLOW & POINTLESS. Set in Australia, this film, by writer and director Christopher Weekes, has a bunch of characters and lots of stories, which are interspersed but not so obviously connected. In perhaps the central story, Steve Rodgers plays Jordan Lombard, a man so overweight that the clinical term for his condition would be morbidly obese. Jordan, an increasingly unsuccessful car salesman, spurns the affections of his wife Penelope "Penny" (Noni Hazlehurst). He spends most of the movie going deeper and deeper into a funk. Penny, who thinks she might be pregnant, is a fifty-three-year-old woman whose pudgy and aging body is helped by her sporadic smile. Still, when a handsome young hunk picks her up in a bar and takes her back to his apartment, she doesn't find it the least bit strange that he is attracted to her. Meanwhile, another character is trying to work out his sexuality issues. He might be gay or might not be. He's not sure. Another story is the canonical one about the spurned lover who can't get her boyfriend to leave his wife. With little music or ambient noise, this quiet film slowly meanders its way across the screen until the closing credits let us leave. None of the characters ever seem genuine or interesting enough so that we'd be ready to suspend disbelief. Never are we motivated enough to wonder about where any of the stories are headed or to try to figure out any of the small mysteries the characters are trying to unravel about their lives. "Here's some free advice," Jordan's boss tells him, trying to get him engaged in the world again. His boss then screams at him, "Wake up!" This is exactly what I kept wanting do. I wanted to scream at the movie itself, which kept doing the cinematic equivalent of sleepwalking through just about every frame. BITTER & TWISTED runs 1:30, but it feels more like three hours. The film is being shown as part of San Jose's Cinequest Film Festival (www.Cinequest.org), which runs February 25-March 8, 2009. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want reviews of new films via Email? Just write Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com and put "subscribe" in the subject line.