Best Films of 2012 **Updated**

Time for me to update my "Best Films of 2012" list. I was trying to wait until after I watched Amour, but it is taking waaaaaay too long to be released to DVD. Honestly, it doesn't really seem like my kind of film anyway.  So, here it is: 

1. Seven Psychopaths
2. Argo
3. Zero Dark Thirty
4. Rust and Bone
5. The Dark Knight Rises
6. Take This Waltz
7. The Cabin in the Woods
8. Looper
9. The Grey
10. Django Unchained

I had a really hard time making this list, this year.  There are a lot of great movies that are left off - Headhunters and Silver Linings Playbook both got bumped off the original list, plus there are several movies that I debated adding; Robot & Frank, The Intouchables, Holy Motors, The Master, God Bless America, and Jeff, Who Lives at home are all worthy contenders.  I hope I have the same problem for 2013. 

3 Thoughts on Only God Forgives

1. It's so pretty - There have been many (not so) valid complaints and critiques of this movie, but I think everyone can agree on one thing: it's fucking beautiful.  Every single shot; every single scene. Yes, even the violence is beautiful.  This is the same exact feeling that I have about Drive.  When someone first mentioned the violence in Drive to me, I actually had to stop and think "oh yah...I guess it is pretty violent", but when the scenes are so visually stunning, the violence is hardly noticeable, for me.  When someone can take all of the ugly things in this world and turn it into something like this, I call it "art".  Nicolas Winding Refn has my full attention (and no...I haven't seen Valhalla Rising yet. I know. I KNOW! Stop yelling at me).

2. Ryan Gosling....is so pretty - This is what my dreams are made of: Ryan Gosling. Scruffy. White T-shirt. Not talking. When I told my friend I wanted to see this movie, she commented on the fact that she was "so over" his whole "silent brooding thing".  First, who cares?! Do you not have eyes? Are you really going to complain about looking at Ryan Gosling for 90 minutes?  To be honest, I never even considered him as "hot" until Drive. I thought he was a fantastic actor and yes, he was attractive, but I don't think he maintained "hot" status until recently.  He's definitely getting more attractive as he gets older, as most men do (and I would argue that most women do too. For example, Jennifer Aniston and Sandra Bullock. Oh and speaking of Sandra Bullock, remember like 10 years ago when she dated Ryan?  The gossip mags called him her "boy toy". This woman is my hero.).  I know how awful my objectification of him might sound, but it's really not just based on his looks. There's just something about him (and yes...I totally just sung "there's something inside you...it's hard to explain..." as I typed that). Second, as far as the whole "silent brooding thing", I'm not "so over" it. He does it well, and every actors best asset is to play to their strengths.  I LOVED him in this movie, mostly because he had this smirk on his face through the whole thing. It was the kind of smirk that I have on my face when I'm pretending to listen to someone, but instead I'm thinking in my head "I hate every fucking thing about you".  I think the smirk was appropriate for his character in relation to the other characters, but it also had this slightly personalized feeling.  It's as if Ryan is in on the joke; he knew that his performance would be widely criticized and this smirk is a big "fuck you" to everyone.  It makes me love him even more. Also, The Huffington Post had an article about how Ryan "wrote" the dialogue in the dinner scene with his mother and...um..."girlfriend", which is awesome if true.  That's my favorite scene of the whole movie!! It should also be said that Kristin Scott Thomas is unbelievable in this role.

3. Everyone is crazy - It's fine if you don't like the movie. Everyone has a valid opinion and obviously that is what makes the world so much fun to live in. Blah, blah, blah...whatever.  However, I've heard some downright baffling comments about it. Words like "empty", "soulless", "unwatchable" and my favorite, "one-dimensional".  Personally, I think if that is how you describe this movie, you belong in a loony bin!!!  It's classic Greek tragedy stuff and everything in the history of story-telling can be linked back to Ancient Greece.  If you don't like it, then you don't like movies!!  I realize that not everyone is as obsessed with Greek literature as I am (in high school I translated the Iliad from the original Latin. For fun. And no, I wasn't a geek; I was actually quite popular), but I think everyone can appreciate the layers of drama that unfold within these tragedies.  This is not a simple movie. It will take time, energy and several re-watches to absorb all of it.  I loved Drive when I first saw it, but after several viewings I found so much more depth than I initially thought.  I would now describe Drive as a "perfect movie".  I don't see myself ever loving Only God Forgives in the same way, but one never knows.

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. The Oranges - Fantastic cast and an interesting story somehow ended in a mediocre movie.  Two families (who are neighbors and lifelong friends) have their lives uprooted when Nina, the daughter of the one family, begins an affair with David, the father of the other family. It's especially "icky" because the original intent was to set Nina up with David's son AND Nina was best friends with David's daughter when they were kids. It's also a hard relationship to root for, no matter how much they try to spin it.  I simply can't root for people that are completely selfish; unfortunately there are some cases where you have to put your feelings aside and think about how your choices affect other people (especially your children).  There is absolutely no reason David should have ever pursued this relationship. EVER. However, the film remains interesting throughout, due to the amazing cast. While I didn't see any particular spark or chemistry between Leighton Meester and Hugh Laurie, I still love them both.  It was also strangely comforting to see Allison Janney and Oliver Platt as a happily married couple; especially after having just watched a very intense scene with them in an episode of The West Wing right before I popped this movie in (pure coincidence).  Of course, I love Adam Brody more than words can ever express (HUGE fan of The O.C.).  He plays the same role in every project, but I am completely fine with that.  I think the movie could have worked better if it went either in a complete all-out comedy or an intense, complicated drama; instead it straddled the line of being mildly amusing, but not really saying anything meaningful.

2. Not Fade Away - Honestly, I never heard of this movie until recently.  I heard it mentioned a few times during conversations about the sudden death of the great, James Gandolfini.  I added it to my list without giving it much thought, but then I heard it was written and directed by the creator of The Sopranos (David Chase) so I instantly moved it to the top of the list.  While The Sopranos isn't my favorite drama, it is certainly near the top of the list and, more importantly, it paved the way for my favorite, Breaking Bad, and my second favorite, Dexter. Gandolfini is a force of nature as Tony Soprano, a character that will live forever, and seeing that I live in Northern New Jersey, he is a character that I hear quoted on a daily basis. However, my personal favorite Gandolfini performance is from True Romance - where he is both absolutely terrifying and mesmerizing. His performance in Not Fade Away is definitely the best part of this movie. I mean, it's miles above everyone else's performance, most of whom are terrible - especially the main guy. I don't even want to know his name. That's how bad he is. The story takes place in New Jersey (surprise!) in the 1960's, during the rise of the "British invasion" of music. There are some fun clips of The Beatles, The Rolling Stones etc., but the rest of the movie is pretty dull and predictable.  It seems from the poster that it is supposed to be a romantic movie; yet it's horrifically unromantic. The hatred of women is apparent (and appalling - "Once a conceited bitch; always a conceited bitch" is an actual line the guy says to the girl that he is supposed to be in love with.).  I'm not saying that is necessarily a flaw in the movie. If it was done well, I wouldn't have an issue.

3. 21 & Over - If you took The Hangover, set it in college, and took away everything funny about it, you would end up with this movie.  The plot is simple: guy turns 21, celebrates with his friends, gets too drunk, hijinks ensue.  I don't think girls celebrate the whole "turning 21" thing as much as guys do because girls don't get carded as much getting into bars/clubs (at least when I was around that age they didn't. In fact, I celebrated my 21st at my "regular" bar - A bar I had been going to every week for 2 years).  I remember it always being a huge issue when I would try to go places with my boyfriend because he would get carded.  Actually, come to think of it...things have definitely changed because I get carded more now than I ever did when I was under-age.  I guess that's a good thing, however I think the drinking age should be lowered (to 18 at least, but I would even go to 16).  I don't think kids would drink so recklessly if it was legalized. Anyway, back to the movie.  Many of the actors seemed really familiar to me, but I couldn't quite place their faces.  I realized that Miles Teller is in Project X (which is weird because this movie was compared to that movie, but I don't really see the comparison. It's certainly not as excessive).  Then, Skylar Astin is a dead ringer for Dane Cook (also his name is extremely similar to the name that I wanted to name my future non-existent daughter, Skylar Austin. He's lucky that I don't actually want to have kids.) and Sarah Wright looks exactly like Alice Eve, so they aren't actually familiar faces, they just look like other people. All of the actors are really entertaining and charismatic; it's the dialogue and plot that disappoint.  I did laugh twice though, so that's a step ahead of the next two films in this post....

4. Movie 43 - Obviously, I already knew this movie was going to be terrible.  I don't always trust reviews, but I didn't hear any positive remarks for this movie. Not a single one.  In fact, most of the hate seemed really intense.  It was pretty hard to believe.  I mean, how can it be that bad with a cast like this? Is it like Valentine's Day bad? Oh...it's worse than that?  Really?  Yes. Really.  It's disastrous. It's an odd phenomenon because it seems like the intent is to be a bad movie. The plot (?) is about a screenwriter, pitching his terrible movie idea to a studio executive. The pitch is told in visual form, so essentially the audience is forced to sit through this terrible movie idea. The irony is spelled out for us, as the executive says "Kate Winslet is not going to make a movie with a guy with balls hanging from his neck." , yet, she is in the fucking movie.  I guess that's supposed to be the funny part, but instead it feels like a really bad SNL sketch. Try to think of the worst SNL sketch you've ever seen and then multiply it by infinity and then repeat it 10 times. That's this movie.  I did laugh once, with the iBabe sketch ("Don't fuck it."), but that is mostly due to my hatred of Apple products.  This movie will be #1 on my worst of 2013 list. I have no doubts in my mind.

5. Identity Thief - I just watched this movie last night. Usually I wait at least a few days before I write down my thoughts on a movie, in order to let it sink in.  I don't need any more time to decide that this is a terrible movie.  It's disappointing because I just saw The Heat the night before last and I really enjoyed it and Melissa McCarthy in it (a post will follow soon, but overall reaction is: surprisingly funny). She is really, truly terrible in this movie, as is Jason Bateman. They have zero comedic chemistry, which is what I blame this disaster on.  The plot is interesting and relevant, but then it just turns stupid. If you're going to go into stupid plot territory, then you need the leads to really sell it and Bateman and McCarthy just don't.  I did love Eric Stonestreet because every time I see him on something besides Modern Family, I remember how good of an actor he is on Modern Family.  

3 Thoughts on This Is the End

1. The cast - I was really skeptical of the premise of getting all of these actors, most of whom are irritating, and having them play themselves.  It sounded incredibly obnoxious.  Luckily, it works really well, for the most part. The plot of the movie (aside from the whole "end of the world" thing) is that Jay Baruchel (mildy irritating) is visiting his best friend, Seth Rogen (super irritating, although not entirely his fault; instead it is mostly due to the fact that my neighbor sounds exactly like him and somehow thinks it's OK to call me "babe", so I hear "Hey, babe" in Seth Rogen's voice pretty much every day of my life. It's my own version of Hell.). Jay isn't exactly a fan of the L.A "scene", and his friendship with Rogen has been strained due to Rogen's burgeoning career. Rogen convinces him to go to a big bash at James Franco's house where we meet the rest of the group. Franco (on-and-off irritating) is a particular highlight with his somewhat creepy obsession with his former Freaks and Geeks co-star (Rogen), while Jonah Hill (the least irritating of the bunch) is hilarious as the nicest guy in the world.  Craig Robinson (not memorable enough to be irritating) and Danny McBride (the absolute height of irritating) round out the main cast. I've never liked McBride in anything and this is no different. He's just not my idea of funny at all.  I would have preferred to see more of Michael Cera (love him!!); although, I didn't really think his whole "coke-head" thing was very funny and neither was his bit with Rihanna.  Speaking of Rihanna, let's talk about all those cameos!

2. The cameos - I was really looking forward to some amazing cameos. I heard they were there and I heard it's better if you don't know who they are. This is a lie. The trailer shows the main sequence in which 90% of the cameos happen. My entire knowledge of this movie was based on the trailer and one clip that played while Jonah Hill was on Jimmy Fallon to promote the movie. Yet, there is only one surprise cameo (two if you count the cameo at the very end; but that was foreshadowed like crazy. I would have been surprised if that didn't happen.).  How disappointing is that?  I'm very confused as to who everyone was raving about. Sure, Emma Watson was pretty funny - but it was IN THE TRAILER!  People were quoting "Hermione just stole all of our shit" way before the movie was even released.

3. The apocalypse - It's weird that I am more impressed with the story than with the comedy. There are plenty of laughs, but none of them are very memorable. In fact, I saw this movie almost 2 weeks ago and I can't remember a single thing that made me laugh. This is similar to how I've experienced previous Seth Rogen movies, except, of course, Superbad (which is one of the funniest movies ever. I don't care what you say.).  What I will remember is that the movie goes for it; apocalypse and all.  It's not about them trying to save the world from "the end"; instead it's about the actual apocalypse - you know, the one that's in the Bible. It's actually really funny to think about it actually happening; like if the "good" people were "saved" by being sucked up into Heaven. I'm surprised it hasn't been done before, mostly because it's the most ridiculous thing ever.  It works perfectly for a comedy, especially one that's based on actors (most of whom think they are somehow "better" than the rest of humanity).  Overall, I enjoyed watching This Is the End; it's definitely the best comedy of the year, so far, but it's far from the "masterpiece" that some claimed.

3 Thoughts on World War Z

1. The intensity - Holy crap! From beginning to end, this movie is freakin' intense. I was on the edge of my seat for the entire running time.  It's non-stop thrills.  It baffles my mind that some criticize it as boring and slow, when I found it the complete opposite.  I was actually hoping for some slow moments, so that I could take some proper breaths.  There are some scenes that I would even describe as having Jurassic Park-type thrills (and that is meant as a huge fucking compliment).  Sure, it gets to the point where it's unbelievable that our protagonist would find himself in so many "oh my God" scenarios, but it's meant to be gasp-worthy so I can look past the unbelievable parts and just have fun with it. If you can't, I feel bad for you.

2. The trailer - My biggest complaint is that I saw too much already with the trailer.  Several of the key scenes are shown in the trailer (and/or during other promo clips).  It's weird that the marketing department was so oddly against using the word "zombie" or even showing them, yet they thought it was ok to ruin some of the best scenes in the movie.

3. The ending - The movie is absolutely nothing like the book (I already expected this).  If it was titled something else and the book was never mentioned, I wouldn't even see a correlation between the two.  The reason that I liked the book so much is that it focuses on humanity, as opposed to the individual. The movie, however, does the opposite.  I'm tired of the "hero" being a "hero" only because he is concerned with his family, as if he wouldn't want to save the human race if he wasn't married with children.  It's almost offensive to think about.  The ending of the movie, although not a complete ending, was so dissatisfying because it was focused on this one family having a happy conclusion.  I found out tonight that the ending we received was not the original ending. I knew they did a lot of re-shoots, but I never read about what they were about.  Apparently, the original ending is less of a happy one and would have been much more satisfying.  I also learned that Matthew Fox is in the movie! Who knew??! Apparently, everyone else but me!

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. A Good Day to Die Hard - I'm a fan of the Die Hard franchise. Not like a huge fan (a "die-hard" Die Hard fan?), but I find all of the movies entertaining.  The first one is obviously the best, but the rest have been sufficient fun.  I was planning on watching A Good Day to Die Hard in the theater when it was released on Valentine's Day, but the terrible reviews deterred me.  I don't think it was as bad as the reviews suggest and I even preferred it to the previous one, Live Free or Die Hard (mostly because I can't stand Justin Long). The plot felt a little lazy and the dialogue consisted mostly of John McClane yelling out "But I'm on vacation!!", but the action is fun and that is really all I was expecting. It's clear that this was an attempt at setting up Jai Courtney to take over the franchise. No thank you, he's no Bruce Willis.

2. Spring Breakers - Overall, I like this movie.  I'm not sure I agree with the praise that it has received (I've seen it on several "Mid-Year Best of 2013"), but I do agree that visually, it is stunning.  The beginning is basically a really beautifully shot "Girls Gone Wild" video. There are some really cool shots throughout, my favorite is the shots of the girls in the hallway with their legs against the walls.  I didn't like the repetitive dialogue, but now I understand why people constantly quoted the film. It definitely gets under your skin.  As soon it was over, I actually turned to my cats and asked "why y'all actin' 'spicious?". While the film is commentating on the current state of our youth, it conveys a bit of contradictory sentiment.  While it criticizes youth (and mostly women), it continues to glorify guns, violence and rape culture, instead of delving into any real depth of the problems in our society.  The whole "spring break" thing is not really my scene (shocking, I know), so it left me a little confused.  I spent a lot of the movie going "wait....what?".  For instance, "wait...what..." they are in college?  I thought spring break was a high school thing? These girls seem really immature for college (one of them is carrying a backpack that is a teddy bear. I don't understand.).  Another, "wait...what..." do they think James Franco as "Alien" is hot??? Because...um ew. I don't even think he's hot without the gangster getup.  I agree that Franco really went all out for this role and he killed it.  One of the best performances he's ever done, but if he was supposed to be "hot", then he failed miserably.  Also, "wait....what...." why the constant Britney Spears references?  I've thought about this one, at first I was confused because I think of Britney as being "my" generation and not the current generation of young girls, but I realized that these young girls were actually the ones that grew up with her (while I was already in high school).  It all makes sense now and it is actually a brilliant commentary on the sexualization of young girls.  It also gave us the greatest scene in the history of movies: James Franco singing "Everytime". Absolutely fucking brilliant.  Last one, "wait....what...." is that Heather Morris from Glee?  How did I not know she was in this?  (Unavoidable side-note: Speaking of Glee, I woke up to some terrible news this morning with the death of Cory Monteith.  If you look under the "Glee" tab at the top of my blog, you will see my love for Cory. Writing about Glee was just an excuse for me to gush over Cory. I am heartbroken.  Seriously.  I'm not one to get upset about the death of someone I don't know, but this one hurts.)

3. The Giant Mechanical Man - I appreciate that the title is explained within the first 5 minutes of the movie.  I really like the idea of this movie; its main theme is finding what you love, be passionate about it and find someone that appreciates you for your passion.  It's not as easy as it sounds. Tim (Chris Messina), finds this out when his girlfriend tells him "I never believed in you Tim, I just thought it was charming".  Jenna Fischer plays Janice, a woman who is struggling to find her passion.  You can guess how the story ends and in all honesty, there isn't much to the movie.  The whole thing is boring and obviously predictable.  The actors are likable enough.  I really like Chris Messina, he's one of those typical, genuine New York guys. Every time I see him in a movie or show, I think, "wait, I know him!" but I don't.  Topher Grace is probably the most memorable part because he plays the creepiest of all creepy guys (a motivational speaker).  He gives advice like "If you don't know what to talk about, then talk about yourself". Worst advice ever.

4. The Imposter - This is one crazy, unbelievably real, true story.  I'm not a huge fan of documentaries.  As a Film Studies student, I had to take 2 classes on the subject and I referred to those classes as "nap time". I'm usually fascinated by the story, but I just hate the style in which the story is told.  What struck me about this film, is that it plays like a typical documentary, but then there is a twist!  It's quite thrilling to watch, and it held my interest for its entire run time. I guess, it's not a twist if you know the story, but I didn't, so it all played out very well for me.  The story is about this guy, Frederic Bourdin, a French man who pretended to be a missing child from Texas. The beginning will leave you baffled as to why his family would believe that this man is their child.  None of it makes sense. The family isn't really portrayed as being at all intelligent - the sister actually asks the question "isn't that like across the country?" when talking about Spain. But really, the missing child had blue eyes, blond hair and a Texas accent - he comes back 3 years later with brown eyes, dyed blond hair and a French accent and they believe him? No one is that stupid. Then, the film reveals some theories that make a whole lot of sense, although we still don't know what actually happened, which is ultimately frustrating.

5. Dead Man Down - I was really excited for this movie.  Colin Farrell, Noomi Rapace and the director of the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; I thought it would be a slam-dunk.  I wanted to see it in the theater, but it was gone before I could blink.  I didn't think that meant it was bad, just that it was poorly marketed.  It wasn't really bad; it just wasn't all that exciting.  There's a whole lot of tension, but none of it develops into anything memorable.  The film suffers from bad lighting - most if it takes place at night, so most of it is really dark.  How are we supposed to see how hot Colin is when everything is so dark!!! Also, while Colin does a decent American accent (and actually it's supposed to be a Hungarian accent that is pretending to be American...which had to be difficult), he's just not as hot.  I have huge problems with Noomi's story line.  She is supposed to be a disfigured woman, from a tragic car accident, but painting some scars on her face hardly makes her a monster (plus you barely see the scars because everything is so fucking dark!!). She is definitely supposed to be seen as physically flawed (kids throw stuff at her and call her names), but she is still more beautiful than an average woman (scars and all).  I can't relate to her need for revenge, instead I see her as being ungrateful and vain.  His need for revenge was real and gut-wrenching, hers was petty and unnecessary.  The movie could have easily fit into a compact 90 minute action-thriller and it would have been a much better movie.

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Oz the Great and Powerful - Really cool idea with some interesting references to The Wizard of Oz.  The movie tackles all kinds of questions that one might ask about The Wizard of Oz and answers them. Some of these answers are downright genius. However, that's all the positives I can think of.  It's a terrible movie.  The beginning is torturous.  I find it hard to take James Franco seriously after his appearance in General Hospital (yes, I watch that show. I have been watching it for over 20 years).  He's given some great performances in the past, but this isn't one of them (neither was GH; truly horrific).  In fact, despite a fantastic group of actors, most of the acting was horrendous.  Rachel Weisz is the saving grace.  I've never hated Mila Kunis before, but this was a terrible performance; her crying scene was rough to watch.  Also, it seemed like it is supposed to be a surprise as to who the "wicked witch" is, but Entertainment Weekly gave that shit away months ago when they plastered her on the cover.  The basic plot of the movie is how the witch turns "evil", and of course it's because she is heartbroken - "I want him to know he made me this way". Fucking stupid.  Visually, it is also a bit disappointing.  CGI overload.

2. Deadfall - The movie has a lot of potential, but there are too many things wrong with it.  The plot is really strong - a brother and sister rob a casino, but during their escape they get into a car accident near the Canadian border, during a white-out blizzard.  The beginning starts off really intense but the inconsistencies are obvious right from the start.  I questioned their accents - Olivia Wilde was doing a Southern accent, while Eric Bana was trying to hide his Australian accent (First, taking away his accent is taking away half of what makes him great. Second, I'm still not sure what accent he was going for.  Even worse, by the end, I think he gave up altogether).  I assume they were in Michigan (that's the only place that makes sense) and the Michigan accent is pretty distinct.  Sure they can be from somewhere else (should have been addressed), but if they are siblings they would have similar accents.  I was also really distracted by the dried blood stain on Bana's forehead (which can be seen on the poster) because it kept changing in size and consistency.  Things like that drive me insane.  The reason that I was able to focus on all these little errors is because the movie (after the initial crash) is really boring.  Then the end picks up and goes way over the top.  I'm sure I won't remember anything about this movie a year from now.

3. Safe - Really boring for an action movie.  I hate movies that have people fighting, but you have no idea who they are or why they are fighting each other.  I love action movies, but I like my action movies to have a basic plot.  I gathered from the trailer that this movie was about this tough guy protecting this young girl from mobsters.  This is, indeed, part of the movie but it feels more like a subplot with the main plot being fight scenes that have no point.  I seriously questioned what was going on at least 3 times.  Sure, I could have paid more attention but it's the movies job to hold my attention and this one didn't.  I really like Jason Statham, but I rarely like movies in which he is the star.

4. Beautiful Creatures - The consensus seems to be that it's "better than Twilight", but I don't think that is saying much.  It's practically the same thing just switch the gender roles, swap "vampires" with "witches" and set it in the deep south.  It reminded me more of True Blood than anything else and I hate True Blood (amazing concept, poorly executed and acted.  I actually gave up watching it after the second season and it takes a lot of terrible for me to give up on a show).  In regards to the cast, the actors are a thousand times stronger than the Twilight crew (which I think accounts for the "better than Twilight" comments). The main guy (don't care enough to look up his name) is actually more creepy looking than attractive, but his acting was decent.  The supporting actors included Jeremy Irons, Viola Davis, Margo Martindale and Emma Thompson - all of whom should have been doing something better.  I don't like Emmy Rossum (it's an unjustified dislike. I have no solid reason, but she has yet to change my mind).  The movie overall was pretty dumb and predictable, but I did laugh when the kids were doing the Civil War reenactments and one of them said "Do you want to just kill each other?".  That made the whole movie worth watching.

5. The Call - Unfortunately, this is a disappointing movie as well (that's 5 for 5! Usually, I like at least one of the movies in these posts. Sad face.).  It's a shame, because the first hour of this movie is excellent.  It felt like something different.  Has there ever been a movie that focused on 911 operators?  Because it's actually a really interesting (and stressful) job. Halle Berry plays Jordan, an operator who makes a totally understandable, but devastating mistake that effects her psychologically and emotionally.  Then, she comes across an emergency call from a teenage girl who wakes up in a trunk.  Jordan comes up with some pretty fantastic ideas to try to save this girls life (I was taking mental notes....you know...just in case).  There were some frustrating moments, of course, *slight spoilers ahead*, like if the car got off an exit and they know which exit, then a helicopter would have definitely been able to spot them.  Also, if you have a chance to scream where someone might hear you, then ALWAYS SCREAM.  You're going to die anyway.  And, if you light a match and throw it in a gas station, the fire wouldn't be contained - the whole station would go up in flames.  OK....I'm done picking apart the plot (I wrote down 7 other things that bothered me...but it's unnecessary to nitpick any further).  Despite all these things, like I said, the first hour is completely entertaining and intense.  Then all of the sudden, it becomes another movie. It's a fast decline into what-the-fuck territory. The the last minute of the movie will make you hate everything that came before it.  It's also completely unnecessary to have Abigail Breslin in her bra for the last 20 minutes. She's 17 and it isn't essential to the plot at all.

3 Thoughts on Man of Steel

1. My overall reaction - I think very highly of Zack Snyder. He's shown true moments of genius. Seriously, watch the beginning of Watchmen. Sublime. Even with Sucker Punch, a movie that was on my "worst of 2011" list, I can't deny that it has moments of sheer beauty (again, the beginning).  I went into Man of Steel expecting, at the very least, a moment that blew me away.  Instead, the whole movie felt very average (parts of it are even above average, but nothing spectacular).  There's nothing wrong with it, but I didn't find it any different than a typical summer blockbuster.  Part of my disappointment also lies with the cast.  Henry Cavill just didn't do it for me.  He's in the same category as Chris Hemsworth (Thor) and Chris Evans (Captain America) - the "hot but bland" category.  I was informed that I was going to love the bad-ass female villain (because I love when strong women are represented in movies), but I didn't really see what was to love.  A machine could have played that role; she barely even had any lines.  I like Amy Adams but she was practically forgettable as Lois Lane - it was clear that they were trying to do something different with this type of character, by making her stronger and less of a "victim", but they also took out her sex appeal.  There is a way to create female characters that are both "strong" and "sexy", but most male directors can't figure out how. Michael Shannon is probably the best part of the cast, because even though he was a bit over the top, at least he was interesting to watch.

2. My views on the destruction - I think it's really weird that people are criticizing a movie like this for its depiction of collateral damage.  I'm pretty sure innocent people are killed in most summer blockbusters.  Why is it such an issue now? Some of the critics are citing 9/11 sensitivities, but I'm calling bullshit on that.  There have been dozens of films since 9/11 that have scenes in which cities are destroyed.  It's no longer an issue (yes, I realize, for some, it is.  I know someone who will not watch movies like this, but that is her personal decision.  We can't create movies based around the sensitivity of others). Also, superhero movies have thrived in a post-9/11 world because people have witnessed real life destruction and long for a "hero".  How can we create a fictional hero without destroying something first? Isn't that how heroes are made?  Some critics are also claiming it's not in Superman's character to be a part of such mass destruction, but I think that is something that is going to be addressed in the sequel, so let's all chill the fuck out.  This movie felt like an opportunity to "go big or go home".  They went for it, destruction and all.  I think it was a satisfying re-introduction to Superman and I am convinced that the sequel will actually be stronger.

3. My state of mind - Sometimes my enjoyment of movies depends on my state of mind, which unfortunately in this case, I think affected my thoughts on Man of Steel negatively.  I realized this when the movie was over and my friend claimed to "love it".  When I said, "eh...I don't know", he was really surprised.    He knows my taste really well, so I think it all comes down to my mind-set.  First, I was really looking forward to this movie for over a year, but as it grew closer to being released, I actually dreaded sitting through it.  I knew that it would remind me of someone that I am trying my best to not think about (I fail miserably, everyday).  Spending two and a half hours trying to not think about someone is taxing on the brain.  Second, I purposely tried to avoid the crowd by waiting to see it until a week after the release - seeing it really late on a Thursday night at a theater that is usually empty seemed like a good plan.  Yet, the theater was way too packed for my liking.  I was distracted several times by the couple in front of me, especially in the beginning when the girl turned to her boyfriend (I presume) and said "wait...Superman is an alien?", to which he replied "yeah...he's from Krypton".  Her response was golden. "I knew that he was from another planet...I just didn't know he was an alien".  He was stunned into silence for a few minutes, but then spent the entire rest of the movie explaining the plot to her (clearly, she needed help. At least she was cute.).  Third, as much as I love loud, obnoxious, blockbuster action movies, this one gave me a headache within 30 minutes (and I didn't even see it in 3D!). I suffered with a pounding headache for the next 2 hours, praying for some silence. All in all, not a great combination for watching a movie.

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Mama - I'm not big on supernatural horror movies, especially modern ones, so I guess it puts this movie at an automatic disadvantage for me.  However, I can usually keep an open mind, plus I adore Jessica Chastain.  It's a well-made movie, for sure, but it just didn't captivate me or scare me in the least.  There are some beautiful shots, Chastain is excellent (minus that awful hair cut) and I was pleasantly surprised that the super hot bad guy from Headhunters is in it as well (or if you prefer, Jaime Lannister from Game of Thrones. I'm sure he has a real name and one day I will learn it).  The movie just lacked intensity and aside from the creepy kids, I just didn't see anything all that scary about it.  I was pretty bored for most of it, waiting for the conclusion to wrap things up (no surprises there).  It started to pick up at the end, but really, how fucking stupid is that ending? Really fucking stupid.

2. Promised Land - Allow me to gush over John Krasinski for a minute.  He's always been super adorable as Jim on The Office, and I thought Brief Interviews with Hideous Men was really fascinating, moving and thought-provoking (he wrote and directed it).  Then, John went on Jimmy Fallon and did the best lip-syncing contest ever and I fell in love (I've searched and searched for the video and it has been erased from the Internet. WHY!?? Stupid legal crap).  When I first saw the trailer for this movie, I thought, "really, John Krasinski is going to out-charm Matt Damon? No one out-charms Damon, except maybe James McAvoy (because...duh!)."  But he does. And he does it well. I think it was the "Dancing in the Dark" performance that really sealed the deal. Best part of the whole movie!!!  Speaking of the movie, I guess I should write about that now. There are some good elements and some bad elements.  I appreciate that it took on a topic like fracking and delivered more points than just "fracking is bad".  It's actually a much more complicated issue than that, especially when you have these farming towns that are dying - we say that money shouldn't be a factor, but when you put it in non-materialistic forms (i.e better education, better health care, etc - sadly, in this country, you need money for those things) it's hard to ignore. I think the film did a great job at exploring why people would consider the option.  It also did a fantastic job at stereo-typing a group of people (that's sarcasm).  It's an extremely offensive depiction of people who live "2 hours outside of any city" (also if you drive 2 hours in the other direction from Philly...guess what you hit...NYC!).  It's disappointing and insulting, but I guess it's supposed to be funny to laugh at non-city folk.  There is also *SPOILER ALERT* a huge fucking twist in the movie that I wasn't expecting. I won't say what that actually is, but I think saying there is a twist is a spoiler (although some people are so fucking sensitive, saying the movie is about fracking is probably a spoiler, too).  I really liked the twist; it made the film a little less black & white (and also, strangely, more black & white).  The biggest thing that kept the film from falling into complete mediocrity, is the cast. Matt Damon, Frances McDormand, Rosemarie DeWitt and of course, John Krasinski, are all superb.

3. That's My Boy - I watched it out of curiosity.  I'm always interested to see how truly bad a movie can be.  I, like a lot of people, used to be a fan of Adam Sandler.  Happy Gilmore, The Wedding Singer, Big Daddy - all hilarious!  Sadly, I would describe his comedic attempts now as "unwatchable", which is exactly how I would describe this movie. First, his annoying baby-mumble voice combined with the atrocious attempt at a Boston accent was really hard to get through. Second, I don't know how funny it is to have the whole movie based around a teacher having sex with her student (and it wouldn't have been made if the gender roles were reversed because that wouldn't be funny...right?  So, why is this? It doesn't make any sense to me).  Third, who really thought that a Vanilla Ice cameo would be funny? Like, really...who?  Fourth, are three "waaassssuuuup" jokes necessary (it's a joke from over ten years ago! TEN!)? Fifth, this movie definitely wins the top spot on my worst movie of last year list (previous winner was What to Expect When You're Expecting).

4. Gangster Squad - This is a case in which I was expecting something much worse than what I got.  I heard terrible things about this movie, but honestly, I was entertained.  I think people were just expecting something more serious and dark, but instead it is a cartoonish take on the 40's gangster movies.  At first, it's a little jarring (Is it supposed to be funny? Why does everyone look like they are playing dress-up? Why is Sean Penn over-acting his heart out?), but once I got used to it, I found myself immersed.  The rest of the cast is top-notch (I'm a huge Sean Penn fan, so I am just going to ignore this misstep and move on).  The "gangster squad" includes Josh Brolin, Anthony Mackie, Giovanni Ribisi, Michael Pena, Robert Patrick and of course, Ryan Gosling.  Probably my favorite group of men put together in one film, in a long time.  Ryan and Emma Stone have a very natural chemistry, so it was fun watching them together again.  Also, there is a scene with Ryan in a tight white t-shirt that had my attention.  Seriously, I think that's the only thing guys should ever be allowed to wear.  Also, if you've seen the trailer, then you've seen the whole movie.  I hadn't seen it before, but then it played on the Cloud Atlas DVD, which I watched the next night.  It shows the entire movie!!  I probably wouldn't have had nearly as much fun as I did, if I had seen the trailer first.

5. Cloud Atlas - 2 hours and 52 minutes.  I repeat. 2 hours and 52 minutes.  After the first 30 minutes, I knew I was going to have a hard time making it through the whole thing.  Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of beauty to it, visually and thematically.  However, the acting is horrendous, the makeup is distracting and the editing is annoying.  Tom Hanks can not do an Irish accent or a Scottish one for that matter - he attempts both (at least, I think that's what he was going for).  Halle Berry just looks lost for the whole movie.  I'm guessing she has no idea what the plot of the movie is - because there really isn't one.  It's several stories that span time and space, none of them seem very cohesive, until the last hour.  Things start to come together, ideas are expressed more uniformly and it actually becomes a good movie.  It just takes sooooo long to get there.  I would love to sit down and re-edit it (I would actually consider film editing a "dream job" if it didn't involve sitting down and looking at a computer all day).  Having the same actors portray different characters is an interesting concept, but the novelty of it wears off quickly and I don't think it works visually.  I had a hard time with Jim Sturgess as Hae-Joo Chang, because it looked like Jim Sturgess with a creepy mask on.  I found the whole thing distracting.  Like I said, though, visually it is quite stunning.  There are some beautiful scenes, especially the "future" ones.  What I appreciate most is the different themes - all of them are ambitious to put on film, but the one that is done really well is the idea that "each encounter suggests a new potential direction".  I think about that everyday - how meeting one person can change your entire life (or not meeting them).  There is a nice broad theme of the evolution of a killer into a hero, but I'm not sure it entirely worked, considering that it was more based on circumstance than morality.  There are also quite a few scenes in which I have no idea how they relate to the movie at all, so I feel like a second viewing is necessary.  I would love to do that, if it wasn't 2 hours and 52 fucking minutes long, of course.

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Jack Reacher - Satisfying and fun action/thriller.  I probably would have enjoyed it more if I liked Tom Cruise, but I am not a fan.  I am most certainly not a fan of him as a person, but I can separate the art from the artist (case in point: Woody Allen).  However, Cruise hasn't impressed me since the early 90's; most will probably argue that he was great in Magnolia, but my response to that is: it's not hard to play an egotistical douchebag, if you are an egotistical douchebag.  He's not bad in the Mission: Impossible movies (especially the most recent one) and he's not bad here.  It just would have been a better movie, for me, if I liked the central star of the movie.  Also, I don't think I've seen Rosamund Pike in anything other than Wrath of the Titans, and I thought she was bad because of the writing, but she was really bad here, as well.  I can't blame the writing because it is a solidly written screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie (known for writing The Usual Suspects, but he also wrote and directed one of my favorite action/thrillers, the criminally underrated, The Way of the Gun).  The story is tense and interesting, the pace is fast and the dialogue is mostly witty (my favorite part: "I can't afford you".  "I'm not a hooker". "Well, then I really can't afford you.").  Yes, there is a fair amount of cheesiness and implausibility but that doesn't make it any less fun.  The only part that really bothered me, plot-wise, is when Reacher is running from the police and the crowd hides him.  I screamed "HE COULD BE A TERRORIST! SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING, YOU FUCKING IDIOTS" at my television.

2. John Dies at the End - I struggle coming up with ways to describe this movie without it sounding awful. "Incoherent mess" comes to mind, but then it seems like I didn't like it.  I did.  It's a fun and wacky, incoherent mess.  Combining horror and comedy with some genuine gross-out moments, it's certainly never boring.  The plot was a little too complicated, but I think that will only be enhanced on multiple viewings.  There's multiple dimensions, alternate universes and a drug called "soy sauce," creating a fantastically chaotic environment that you just can't look away from.  I can't really say anything else, because honestly I'm not sure I understood all of it, but I did have a ton of fun watching it.

3. We Bought a Zoo - I cried. I cried hard.  I can't remember the last time I actually cried real tears during a movie (every once in a while I get a little emotional, like with The Intouchables, but I can usually hold back the tears).  I thought I would get emotional with all the animal stuff.  I get really upset even thinking about animals in zoos. I refuse to go to them, because watching wild animals confined to small spaces is not my idea of a good time.   However, I was actually able to contain my feelings on the matter.  The part that made me hysterical (seriously, it was a flood of tears) was the last 5 minutes of the movie; the "20 seconds of courage" story about Matt Damon's character meeting his future wife.  What the fuck?! Why did I cry about a love story between humans?! What is wrong with me? Really though,  Matt Damon is just too good within the scene and the real reason it made me cry is because it reminded me of the scene in Good Will Hunting with him and Robin Williams ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg_9FQk6UnA - makes me cry. Every time.).  I think it makes me cry because I can't imagine anyone ever loving me that much.  That sounds really depressing, but it's totally true. Anyway, in regards to the rest of the movie, other than Matt Damon, the acting is horrible. The movie makes a great case against Scarlett Johansson, as an actress.  She's awful. Like, truly terrible. I honestly don't understand how no one else sees what I see.  Don't get me wrong, she's an absolutely stunning girl and in interviews she seems nice, intelligent, funny and well-spoken.  She just can't act. Also, the kid that plays Damon's son looks just like him (and a little like a young Brad Pitt, as well), so I understand why he was cast, but I cringe thinking about his emotional scenes.  The movie bordered on made-for-television territory for its entirety.  If I caught it on the Family Channel, I might be impressed; but it's not too impressive for a feature film.

4. Upstream Color - Kudos to you if you actually understood what was going on in this movie without looking it up.  I understood the first part fine, and it is an amazing concept, but the second half started to lose me. I looked it up after I finished the movie, and I still don't fully understand.  If you tell me you do, I honestly won't believe you.  It's obviously meant to be abstract. Even without a full understanding, it is still mesmerizing. Actually, hypnotic is probably a more apt word to describe it. I don't think the audience is meant to fully understand the science behind it; otherwise we would be able to pick apart the flaws in logic. Instead, we can focus on the beauty and intrigue of it all.  There are some really intense "horror" moments as well, which makes me question which genre it really belongs to (Psychological horror? Science fiction drama?).  The sound design is intoxicating and definitely enhances the creepiness.  It's absolutely gorgeous to look at, with themes of human behavior, psychology, post-traumatic stress disorder, genetic manipulation and so much more, this film is surely going to end up in my top 10 list for 2013.

5. Struck By Lightning - As a former fan of Glee, I really want certain stars of the show to succeed in a post-Glee world.  Lea Michele needs to go back to Broadway (when this happens, I will be there. Front row.).  Cory Monteith is a movie star (Trust me. I'm right about these things 95% of the time.).  I really like Chris Colfer, so I was excited to hear that he was doing some writing (this screenplay and he has a book deal, with one book already published).  I thought this movie would be a cute, cheesy high school movie with a great message about accepting people for who they are (that seems to be his thing), and that's what it was.  It just wasn't any good.  Colfer struggled a lot in the main role, because he seemed to be fighting his Glee character so much (a character that was created around Colfer, himself) but instead of becoming a different character, he is still Kurt, just with more snark and attitude (making him unlikable, instead of lovable).  He also stole a lot from Glee (the same type-cast characters, the blackmailing of students to write for the literary magazine).  He seems to think he is much more clever than he actually is, because he really isn't saying anything profound or new about the high school experience.  I hate to say it, but the whole thing is just a bit of a mess.  It's amateur screenwriting, at best, that would never have made it past the interns desk and onto the desk of an executive, if it wasn't for the power of Glee.  The film also, somehow, attracted some great actresses for supporting roles - Allison Janney and Christina Hendricks.  However, their story-line is just plain ridiculous and over-dramatic to even pay attention to.