Iron Man 2

So I had wanted to see this movie because it looked promising enough especially with all the boring movies that were playing recently, although I’m no comic enthusiast. We actually had a great turnout for the film club and it looks like this marks the first week of the summer blockbusters where some highly anticipated movies are finally starting to come out. Iron Man 2 totally rocked the box office this weekend taking home a cool $128 million in it’s opening weekend. Apparently, movie-goers are also starting to come back to the theater as well and hopefully the trend continues through the summer.



The premise of this sequel to the hugely popular Iron Man, is fairly simple and incorporates various other Marvel comics and characters, although may go unnoticed to the non-comic reader, such as myself. Tony Stark, Robert Downey Jr, has come out as Iron Man and must deal with the pressure and side effects of his alter ego now that the world is in a state of unprecedented peace. Soon trouble surfaces in the form of a hardened Russian, Mickey Rourke, who is the only person capable of building a suit that can compete with Iron Man and unleashes his fury in order to find vengeance for his family and soon teams up with the greedy Justin Hammer, Sam Rockwell, in order to gain the resources to create more evil suits. Stark works with his faithful assistant, Gwyneth Paltrow, and a new legal assistant, Scarlett Johansson.


The plot incorporates a lot of different characters, an apparently several different comic lines, which makes it more interesting than most comic movies where it just focuses on a single character’s plight against a single villain. The plot was also very easy to follow at the same time, unlike Transformers. The dialogue was very witty and didn’t take itself to seriously, which made for more entertainment than a straight action movie. There was also some nice political satire splashed in there which was a definite plus. Some plot points were highly un-plausible however this is based on a comic book and the characters were believable even if their actions and resources were not.


The effects were great, which is to expected in a movie of this caliber. It had some great fight sequences, and I especially enjoyed Scarlett Johansson’s hallway butt-kicking scene. The film was edited by a pair of A.C.E.s and this was obvious with the level of maturity and professionalism in this highly complex editing. The sound mixing was amazing and had great foley and natural sound along with an awesome soundtrack. Any movie that can mix in The Clash and Queen is a hit in my book. The cinematography was really a masterpiece as it seamlessly incorporated all these different elements and editors.


The performances were great and everyone was believable in their roles. Robert Downey Jr. has really made this his own role and stays true to the characterization he created in the first. Gwyneth Paltrow gives enough strength to her role while still being super likeable. Scarlett Johansson totally rocked Black Widow and hopefully will make The Avengers awesome. Mickey Rourke was . . . interesting. He’s definitely one of a kind now and I actually really liked him in this movie.


Overall, it was very enjoyable and lighthearted which made for an entertaining time. Out of all the recent PG13 and under comic book movies, this is probably my favorite. Apparently, there were a lot of allusions and references to other comic series, but this was over my head since I’ve never picked up a single comic book. Also, there is a ‘secret special’ scene after the world’s longest credits, and I’ll forewarn you not to stay for it unless you’re a die-hard comic fan, I guess. There were some highly implausible plot points in this movie but the characters were so believable and witty, that it didn’t matter much. I’d recommend this movie as a great escape and entertaining movie. “I don’t want to get off on the wrong foot here, do I look at you or the eye patch?” – Iron Man 2.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being

Tagline: A lover's story.

So I had always heard of this movie and wanted to see it at some point in my life, hey even the cast of Friends mentions this movie. I finally put in on my queue since Netlflix offered a streaming version. I had to watch it over the course of two consecutive nights since it is a three hour movie. I ended up enjoying the film but didn’t really see what the big deal was although I think it may have lost some of it’s flavor, now twenty plus years later.



The plot follows a Czech couple (who speak English ) that falls in love and get married right in the midst of the Cold War and Soviet invasion. Tomas, Daniel Day Lewis, is a renowned brain surgeon and falls in love with a simple small town girl, Juliette Binoche. Even though he falls in love, this doesn’t stop his active sex life, and most prominently with his closest friend, Lena Olin. The stories follows the lives of these three characters from the before the invasion until after.


The characters are very believable and somewhat complex, after all the film is adapted from a novel. Their actions are correlated to their personalities and even though each have their own flaws, we sympathize for them. The plot is quite long and includes a lot of material. As a history major, I enjoyed the bits and pieces of history which spurred a lot of plot turns. Honestly, the plot wouldn’t have really made much sense or have been so prolific without the history in there.


The film was obviously made in the 80’s and had some weak editing which was jumpy and not cohesive throughout the movie, but again this was 1988 and non linear editing was still a learning process. That being said, there was some awesome camera work in here. Especially the first love scene between Lena Olin and Daniel Day Lewis where it’s a reverse shot from a mirror on the floor was just great. There were other shots such as these in the movie. I miss this time of avante guarde camera angles, such as in The Graduate from the same era. I also loved how they used real footage from the Soviet invasion and spliced it in with new footage with the actors shot to look the same. That was innovative and gave it real legitimacy to the film. It’s also even better because this was filmed right at the end of the Cold War and stood on it’s own feet even with backlash from the Soviet power.


The three leads did an equally superb job with their roles. Juliette Binoche achieved the most character development but the other two were playing characters which were already pretty well developed. Yes, there were a lot of sex scenes in the movie but it wasn’t completely gratuitous and incorporated innovative and interesting aspects into them. The actors worked extremely well with each other which made them all the more believable. The only thing that wasn’t exactly believable was that they were all speaking in English to one another, but oh well. At least their accents were believable.


I see now why the movie would have been a big deal back in 1988. With today’s generation, who don’t even know about the “Tear down that wall” speech or that The Cold War wasn‘t a typical war, the importance of this movie will probably be lost. I would recommend this to an older audience who hasn’t already seen the movie. I enjoyed it and I’m glad I experienced it but it was just a good movie. “Take off your clothes” -- The Unbearable Lightness of Being.

The Piano Teacher

So I had decided to watch this on my Netflix queue and just start at one end and slowly make my way to the other instead of trying to pick and choose which movies to see. I had put this movie on my list because they recommended this to me and I swear I had seen it back in high school but really didn’t get it. All I could really remember was the bathroom scene which is depicted on the cover. So I thought I’d watch it now and see if I got it with all my life experience I now possess. It also looked like an interesting foreign love/affair type movie. I was not expecting to be appalled and scarred for life.



The synopsis of the movie states that it’s about a piano teacher who meets an attractive young student and begins a tumultuous sexual affair with him. The synopsis is highly mislead and should read more like this; The plot actually follows a demented mentally ill piano artist/teacher and the sick things that does to herself and others due to her mental instability at the end part of her life.


The plot is actually super bizarre, dark, and sick. Obviously the story was trying to portray her mental illness although there was no real message or purpose that revealed itself by the end. It wasn’t an advocate of seeking mental health treatment nor was is about artistic madness since the main character wasn’t really an artist per say, but a piano teacher at a university who played in a few recitals here and there. She lives with her mother and is middle-aged and reclusive when she meets a very attractive young student at the school who instantly is drawn to her. This attraction is completely unbelievable because her character in no way should have been appealing to his. The things she does in this movie were disturbing, ie self mutilation, incest with her mother, and not to mention gross sexual stuff. There really should’ve been a warning about this movie.


The movie was filmed cheaply and was the first time I saw actual graphic porn in a movie. It actually showed it. The set up the scenes nicely but that was it and I really don’t want to say anything else good about this movie.


Well the main actress was believable as this sick crazy woman so I assume that she was proud but I still can’t get over the context of this movie. The young student was very handsome and came off very charming and likeable.


I’ve read reviews about how great of a movie this was and I honestly don’t get it. There aren’t many films out there that I don’t respect even if they are edgy and taboo but this one just crossed the line of weirdness and disturbia. I didn’t see a meaning or a message about this fictional character. I almost felt dirty for actually sitting through the whole thing. There honestly isn’t anybody I know or anyone who knows anyone I know, that I would recommend this movie to. There, I think I’ve made my point.

La Vie en Rose

So I had kinda wanted to see this movie since Marion Cotillard won the Academy Award for best actress and it was a foreign language film which is just so rare. I had been putting it off however because it looked depressing and I wasn’t sure if I’d really be able to get into the movie. I decided to watch it now after seeing Cotillard in Love Me If You Dare which made me an even bigger fan of hers. After seeing this movie, I’m just amazed at her ability and I think she actually surpasses some of my favorites of all time.



The movie is a bio-pic of the iconic French singer, Edit Piaf. If you haven’t heard of her as an American, don’t worry because you have heard her most famous song, aptly named ‘La Vie en Rose’ even if you think you haven’t heard it. She became a national figure for France and was such a revered singer, even now. She really rose from the bottom and worked hard for what she achieved and used her divine talent to bring harmony to an entire nation.


The plot weaves nicely throughout all periods of her life, instead of some bio-pics which center on one or two periods of a person’s life. This story was really great and captured her essence and we really watched her develop on screen. The plot brings together key moments in her life as well as character development which is just great so that we’re not just given a factual account of her life and also not exclusively character building pre-fame.


The movie was filmed beautifully and the set decoration was amazing. It really captured all locations and eras which were depicted in the movie. The other Academy Award that it received was for make-up and I’ll say the Academy really got it right with that one. It is just breathtaking how they transformed Cotillard into Piaf. You really don’t see the actress at all, it’s truly Edith Piaf singing and acting in the movie. Sometimes when young actors are put in old makeup it doesn’t work, and most often that is the case. The older Piaf makeup was just amazing and truly innovative.

That brings us to the performance. Cotillard really give the performance of a life time. I don’t think there will be anyone who would disagree. It’s amazing the ability she has. She really became this person and devoted herself to this role. She sat in makeup for over five hours per day. She shaved off her eyebrows to resemble the singer more. She was perfectly in synch with all of the songs sung in the movie, and there was a lot. It’s also amazing how this beautiful and young actress can become this other person who has a completely different persona and looks about her. I could write an entirely separate review on this performance alone. It’s also nice to see such great acting in a role like this instead of roles in the past where the actresses must ‘go ugly’ and deal with taboo subject matter in order to be commended for their work. Oh yeah, the other actors in the movie did a great job as well.

I would recommend this to anyone who enjoys foreign films. It’s a movie that will stay with you for a long time. I would also recommend to fans of method acting and amazing performances. It is a long French film however and somewhat depressing, but uplifting subliminally. “If you were to give advice to a woman what would it be? Love. A young girl? Love. A child? Love.” -- La Vie en Rose.

Cashback

So this movie sat in my Netflix queue for a long time because at one point I’d thought it looked interesting and put in there but then passed it up every time I chose a movie because the cover art didn’t look that interesting. On the advice of a friend who really liked it, I decided to watch it and ended up loving it.

The plot is fairly simple; a young college student realizes that he has the ability to stop time after a bad breakup with a girlfriend while becoming an insomniac. In order to deal with the extra twelve hours of time he is awake, he takes an overnight job at a local grocery store. He then begins to understand himself better and creates lasting relationships while understanding his newfound talent.

The plot is incredibly unique and genuine. The characters are highly believable and only a few are slightly stereotypical. The main character develops and finds himself during the movie but the rest are rather static and simple. Although the idea of time manipulation sounds cheesy and immature, the plot is actually very smart and witty.

The cinematography was just beautiful throughout. There is an incredible shot which probably lasts 20 second where the main character moves seamlessly from a pay phone into his bed which was probably the coolest shot in the entire movie. It was one of those shots you sometimes find in movies that just put you in awe and you can’t help but respect, or at least for me. I really enjoyed the soft filter on the film and the unique camera angles.

The two leads of the movie, Sean Biggerstaff and Emilia Fox, did a really great job with their roles and really brought the movie to life. At different parts of the movie I kept thinking to myself how they looked like young college kids in some scenes but older in others. Later did I find out that this was actually first an award winning short film which the director/writer then made into a feature film by adding on the already shot footage from the short film. I’ve never know of a feature that was created this way, but it just makes the movie even that much cooler. The rest of the characters are entertaining but it was really the two leads who really made sure the movie was on this side of non-annoying and believable.

This movie really did a great job in all aspects, with smart writing, unique plot, beautiful cinematography, and good acting. I ended up really liking this film. Even though the cover of the movie doesn’t hint at the awesomeness of this movie, it really is enjoyable. You do have to be ok with female nudity however. I would recommend to anyone who enjoys quirky cinematically astounding British films. “Crush. It’s funny how the same word for the feeling of disappointed can be used for the feeling of attraction.” -- Cashback.

How To Train Your Dragon

So this week it was How To Train Your Dragon and it was partly due to the insistence of Lina, the other co-founder of the movie club, even though I was leaning towards The Last Song. Given the lack of new releases and the fact that we’ve seen pretty much everything out there, we were down to the bottom of the barrel when it came to this week’s selection. It definitely looked like a super cute movie at the very least. It was also my second 3D adventure so that was something at least.



The plot is very simple and the title sums it up nicely, a young Viking boy befriends a dragon and helps him to learn to fly again after damaging half of his tail wing. This friendship goes against the village’s ideas that dragons are to be feared and killed on sight. When the village angers the tyrannical queen dragon, its up to little Hiccup and his dragon to save the village. The robust cast includes, Jay Baruchel, Kristen Wiig, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, and McLovin’.


The plot was interesting and unique. It mixed fantasy with history and was nice, simplistic, and easy to follow. There was an element of violence and so I actually wouldn’t recommend for the very young crowd, probably at least 5 years and above.


The animation was superb. The main dragon, Toothless, was just cute as a button and really made the movie enjoyable. The director, who also directed Disney’s Lilo & Stich modeled a lot of Toothless’ attributes after Stitch, which is very apparent in the movie, as well as a house cat. The only thing lacking in this movie was an identifiable soundtrack, ie Up, Finding Nemo, etc.


Everyone does a nice job and I really didn’t recognize Gerard Butler or Kristen Wiig until I read the credits. It’s really hard to criticize voice work and I believe that’s a main reason a lot of stars take on these roles, because there really is nothing to lose.


The movie did turn out to be super cute and enjoyable. The cute dragon provided a lot of actually humorous parts to the movie which was nice. Animated movies really aren’t my thing, but this one was quite nice. The 3D imagery was much better than Clash of the Titans, but I’m still not a fan of 3D. I would recommend this to families with boys or girls that are at least 5 years old. I just think some of the fighting/violence may be a little much for very small children. “This is Berk. It’s twelve days north of Hopeless and few degrees south of Freezing to Death.” -- How To Train Your Dragon.

Shall We Kiss?

Tagline: True love is a complicated affair.

So this was to be a cute little French movie called Shall We Kiss?, of course I wanted to see it. It was recommended to me by Netflix otherwise I would have never heard of this movie. The movie doesn’t have any internationally acclaimed stars or directors and seemed just like a lighthearted good time of a movie.



The plot follows the course of one night when a young woman visiting a small town in France meets a man who offers her a ride and asks if he can kiss her at the end of the night. She refuses and cites that it’s because of a story of how one kiss changed everything for a couple of friends of hers. She then recounts the tale to the young man about her friends, Judith and Nicolas, who were life long friends until one day they kissed. This kiss was the product of a so called solution to help Nicolas who was suffering for a longing of physical affection that he couldn’t find elsewhere. The kiss sparks a hidden love between the two which wouldn’t be a problem if Judith wasn’t already happily married.


The plot was long and involved. It was not a quirky little love story as I was expecting instead a deeper darker look into the beliefs behind falling in and out of love. Overall, the plot was humorous enough and moving, but it did seem to drag on forever. I think the story could’ve been greatly condensed. Although this movie is a product from a different culture, the plot was a little bit anti-marriage which take it as you may for a good thing or not. The characters did seem to change by the end of the movie but not necessarily develop.


The movie was obviously lower budget and had cheap film. There also wasn’t any real stylistic editing or sound mixing in it which I think could’ve helped to make the movie not seem to drag on forever like it did. A good soundtrack will always make the film seem more enjoyable and less boring and slow. With the exception of Shubert’s compositions, the sound editing was lacking. The fact that the movie just drug on and on is also partly due to the editing which should have sped up the pace of the movie.


I found the two leads of this movie quite strange and I don’t think it really transcended cultures. At first they were very awkward and mechanical, which was comically during the love scenes but at the same time a little strange. I just couldn’t imagine those characters in real life. By the time their love developed fully, they then became normal people who acted like they were in love with each other. The transformation between the characters was just a little strange to watch.


Overall, the movie just didn’t make a whole lot of sense. The message was not very clear, although it could’ve had a lot to do with fate and dealing with consequences of your decisions. Although when she decides to go ahead and kiss the stranger she just met, even though she’s also happily married to the estranged husband of Judith, it just didn’t seem right with the story, even if she does put some rules in place so that nothing can be created as a result of the kiss. But apparently, its acceptable to kiss people when you’re married in France and it’s not cheating? The movie wasn’t what I was expecting. I probably would not recommend this movie to anyone that I know personally. As far as for a French audience, who knows. “Is it okay if I caress your other breast now?” -- Shall We Kiss?.

The Safety of Objects

Tagline: What do you hold onto when your world turns upside down?                                                                                                So I decided to finally see this movie because I remember I had heard good things about it back when it came out in 2001 and it was the last movie I hadn’t seen from Kristen Stewart’s filmography, and since I’m definitely a big fan it was on the list of movies I needed to see and last night I finally sat down and watched it. It was pretty much the only feature film from director Rose Troche, who also adapted the screenplay from a series of short stories written by A.M. Homes.

The movie is an interweaving tale between four families in a neighborhood who are all dealing with life changing events of their own and are working to find themselves amongst the chaos. Glenn Close plays a mother who is dealing with the aftermath of a tragic car accident which left her son, Joshua Jackson, paralyzed and in a coma, along with her daughter’s rebelliousness and pent up guilt over the whole thing. Durmont Mulroney plays husband to Moira Kelly and has to deal with years of hard work as a lawyer who works 60 hours a week and sacrifices everything to provide for his family only to miss out on becoming partner at his firm. Patricia Clarkson plays a divorced mother of two who is dealing with an absentee father to her children along with the loss of her love with Joshua Jackson following his car accident. Mary Kay Place plays a middle aged wife who questions her own marriage and life. And finally Timothy Olymphant plays a grieving brother who attempts to fill the void left from his younger brother’s death through unconventional ways with a ten year old Kristen Stewart.


The plot was deeply complex and connected most of the characters in believable ways. There have been many movies such as this over the years now that try to tie all the characters together and it can feel natural or sometimes not. This plot did feel natural and believable, with the exception of the end. The characters reacted in believable ways and I was able to sympathize with most of the characters even though most did have unconventional ways with dealing with their issues. The characters were complex and did have a little bit of development towards the end, in most instances. Enough emphasis was given to the right characters and at the right moments instead of some similar movies which try to give each character in the entire movie the same amount of screen time. This plot on the other hand felt natural and realistic. The only part that wasn’t natural and realistic was the very end when everything was conveniently tied up and all the characters were brought together for a nostalgic ending, but hey this is a movie so I understand the reasoning behind choosing that ending.


I enjoyed the editing in this movie, especially the motion cuts where one character’s action would cut into another character’s action. This helped to give the characters a connection symbolically even if there was no direct plot connection and I always liked stylized symbolic editing. The film flowed and didn’t seem to lag. It was also a nice touch with the car accident and how we learned bits and pieces up until the end when the final truth burst out, which seemed to mirror the building guilt that also finally exploded with a few characters, and again the editing was highly symbolic. The movie was small and intimate which was in keeping with the type of emotions and characters involved.


The movie was definitely performance driven between these characters and their relationships. I especially enjoyed the subplot between the young Alex House and his imaginary Barbie girlfriend. It was a nice addition to the movie and really added to the quirkiness and believability of the movie. Glenn Close did amazing as is to be expected. Patricia Clarkson also did a great job and was super believable. Everyone was on par with their parts although most seem to be in roles that were comfortable to them. This was Kristen Stewart’s first film role and it’s pretty amazing that she landed this complex part as her first role. She did great when she was interacting with Timothy Olymphant’s character and it was obvious then that she was deeper and more introspective that other actors her age. It was interesting to see her first film to say the least.


I think this was a really great character movie although it was a little depressing. I especially enjoyed Kristen Stewart, Timothy Olymphant, and Patricia Clarkson in the movie. I really do enjoy these little independent character pieces from time to time. It was interesting enough to keep me entertained until the end however it’s not going to be on my list of favorite movies or anything like that. I would probably recommend this to anyone who likes introspective depressing character movies. “When you start collecting things, you start thinking that you care about these things. And when they’re gone, you feel like a part of you is gone as well. Nothing should make you feel like that . . . Except when you lose a person.” -- The Safety of Objects.

The Joneses

Tagline: They're not just living the American dream, they're selling it.

So I had wanted to see this film since it premiered at the Houston Worldfest Film Festival earlier this year however I didn’t get the chance to go. It has been getting good reviews since it’s first premiere at the Toronto Film Festival in 2009 and I finally got the chance due a limited theater release. The plot was unique enough and the cast appealing enough that it looked like it would be a good movie. It was also the directorial and writing debut for Derrick Borte.



The film follows a ‘family’ of sorts when they move into an affluent neighborhood and seem to have everything going for them, including all the latest products and furnishings. The house is ran by Demi Moore and David Duchovny plays Mr. Jones. Amber Heard and Ben Hollingsworth play their high school age children. Soon it’s revealed that they are actually no family at all but instead salespeople hired by a marketing company who have placed them in that house in order to introduce their products into the neighborhoods.


The plot was very unique and quirky and really made the movie memorable. With that being said, it wasn’t exactly believable although I think it was more symbolic of how materialism is rampant today. The characters were not very complex and were pretty one-dimensional but again it was more about the plot instead of the characters. The plot then took some un-natural turns and there was a love story element thrown in there, which made it entertaining however less believable. Overall though, it was a fun innovative story.


The movie was very beautiful and obviously the set decoration was awesome. It seems like the perfect set-up in order to get free set pieces in exchange for product placement from the prominent companies advertised in the movie. The costumes were beautiful and everything else as well but it had to be since the plot centered around them selling high-end products to consumers.


The actors were very pretty and believable in their roles. Amber Heard and Ben Hollingsworth were both given subplots which didn’t really seem believable with their characters, but it wasn’t distracting. Demi Moore did a good job and definitely can pull off a powerful business woman. David Duchovny also did a good job pulling off the naïve aloof Mr. Jones while looking sharp in all his costume changes.


Overall, it was very enjoyable and didn’t feel like a small time indie film. It obviously has a message about consumerism but it doesn’t become overbearing and dogmatic about it. It just provides a nicely entertaining and fun to watch film without getting too deep or complex. It was very unique with the whole plot of the movie and it makes it memorable. I think that Borte did a fantastic job for his first film. It was an entertaining film and I would recommend it to those who have the chance to see it however I wouldn’t go running to find it. “If you’ve met one Mr. Jones, you’ve met them all” -- The Joneses.