Brave 2012

I love PIXAR, those three words just say it all. Since their first big leap to the big screen with the beloved TOY STORY in 1996, I haven't doubted for a second that PIXAR produces quality, and only quality work of the highest callibre. Having highly anticipated BRAVE from the day it was announced, and being a genuine lover of all PIXAR films, I entered with extremely high expectations, I was anything but disappointed.

BRAVE centers around Princess Merida, a teenager determined to make her own path in life, defies a custom that brings chaos to her kingdom. Granted one wish, Merida must rely on her bravery and her archery skills to undo a beastly curse.

Yet another outstanding, excellent and absolutely beautiful release from PIXAR, BRAVE exceeds in every aspect imaginable. Each character is lovingly crafted with depth, vividness, heart and sheer fun, while it's cast is unique, skilled and overly qualified in every way. Kelly Macdonald does a superb job with Merida's voice work, capturing the sense of teen youthfulness perfectly, while giving an exceptionally heartbreaking performance near the end of the film. It's plot is highly inspired and original, if a bit Disney-fied, made interesting with an unexpected twist, that had me hooked from the film's opening.

Despite being early marketed as quite a dark film, BRAVE features hefty amounts of stellar humor and memorable gags that literally had me, and certainly my packed theater, in stitches. Much of this humor originates from the triplets, Merida's three little brothers, who often get up to mischief, and are the cutest animated humans I have ever seen in a PIXAR film. With slapstick to appeal to both the young and old, verbal humor that will keep the grown-ups on their toes, and on-screen gags that leave you breathless in laughter, BRAVE will give you as many laughs as any other comedy this year.

PIXAR doesn't fail to impress when it comes to visuals, and BRAVE is no exception. Beautifully animated are the plains of Scotland, the CG forests on the outskirts of the kingdom, the intensely vivid characters and even Merida's beautifully textured hair. So it goes without saying that BRAVE succeeds with it's almost magical visual style, contributing to an equally stunning and immersive 3D experience.

But most impressive of all, was the emotional punch that BRAVE managed to pack. We know that PIXAR has left us emotional wrecks, one time or another after viewing one of their films, TOY STORY 3 has always been one to reduce me to tears (BRAVE was no different), but BRAVE, above all, does so in such a magical way. The films really is about Merida's relationship with her mother, a relationship that is so easily relatable to me as an audience member, and really how having a strong relationship with your parent can change your fate/life. A lesson reminiscent in FINDING NEMO, told beautifully in more depth here in BRAVE.

So, easily said with an overly talented cast, spectacular visuals and beautiful animation, fully immersive 3D experience, comedy just as golden in every sense, characters with heart, and a plot+moral with soul, BRAVE is a purely magical animated treat by the wizards of PIXAR, and definitely the best of the year so far.

Sherlock Series 10/10

As a die-hard fan of the source material, I have tracked down and went through nearly every radio, television, film, and comic book interpretation of Sherlock Holmes - which run a mean gamut regarding quality, as you probably already know - and so I approached this incarnation skeptical but sanguine. Doubtful it would match the eminent Jeremy Brett series in quality, but hopeful it might preserve Conan's tone - something I think that series did well and the Downey Jr. movie did not.

To my surprise, and delight, this show just so happens to be the bomb-diggity. Let me explain.

Ever notice how lots of Agatha Christie fans complain when screenwriters change Poirot and Marple stories? I'm not one of them. I like new and different interpretations of those stories because otherwise, in the case of literary characters brought on screen, what's the point? What's the point if we film and re-film the same story, the same story which we've already read once, twice, maybe three times? Especially in many cases, what's the point when it's been done so perfectly before? In the case of Sherlock Holmes, The Hound of the Baskervilles has been filmed at least 24 times according to Wikipedia. So another iteration won't thrill me. However, one that takes liberties with the source material, i.e. bringing the characters into the 21st century, I'm all for it. Surprise me. That's what I say.

And there are two things I really love about this series. 1) For longtime fans there are many, many "Easter eggs" to discover in each episode. And, best of all, 2) My boyfriend loves this series. And I can't pay him to watch a Jeremy Brett episode. He did enjoy the Downey Jr. movie (as did I, I just prefer a less swashbuckling Holmes - one reason among many that I didn't love the film), but he's never excited to watch Sherlock anything. This series is different. He loves it. For any Sherlock fan that would like to get their significant others on the band wagon, this is a great gateway. (And my boyfriend's actually a very good barometer for high-quality mainstream television shows. Usually, if something's firing on all cylinders, he knows it. More risky fare - he's off-put.)

And, you may rightly ask, why should I give a crap what my boyfriend likes? Good question. I happen to be of the mind that TV and film can accomplish what my favorite art form - literature - cannot. The TV and film experience can be enjoyed by a group. Sure, book clubs discuss books, but with TV and film you and whomever you want to hang out with, experience story at the exact same time, in real time, and you can easily observe each other's initial, unguarded reactions. Plain and simple, it's fun to enjoy the mediums with others - to laugh together, to be scared, sad, thrilled, etc. It enhances the experience. I think literature's strength is the opposite. For me, the best thing about settling into a good book is that I'm alone. Just me and the test, together making up a story.

Well, if anybody has read this far, I apologize for the rant. But if you're on the fence about buying the DVD or renting it or whatever, take a chance. Take a tip from me. You'll be pleasantly surprised. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The butterfly effect

 

10 out of 10 for me!!! I am very glad I read the reviews posted by reviewers (thanks a bunch people!). I didn't see this movie in the theater, though I was intrigued too. After reading many reviews saying to watch the directors cut, I rented it and watched that version first. Wow was I blown away… I'm glad that I never saw it in the theater and instead saw the directors cut first. I actually was very teary eyed at the end as it made such an impact (and that never happens to me). Every now and then a movie comes along that makes such a profound impact that it takes a part of you with it, or changes you in some way. This was one of those movies for me. And I can count on one hand the movies that have done that to me… I can't give an unbiased opinion on this, but had I seen the theatrical version first, I probably would have given it an 8 out of 10 instead.

As with many movies, once they hit DVD, there is often additional scenes or a directors edition, and many times they are subtle additions or changes, not with this movie, mark my words. That is why it's important to watch the directors cut first. All this being said, I can see why they released the theatrical version instead as the directors cuts wasn't very Hollywood like. It would have been a risk to release the directors cut as the original theatrical version, but I think it would have done better (again my opinion). So just know the directors edition is more or less a different ending with one or two additional scenes in the middle to support it. But wow how 5-10 minutes of change can make a difference.

I certainly don't want to give much away in this review and for your sake don't read too many reviews or your bound to find one that will spoil it for you, and this is one of those movies that you don't want spoiled if you haven't seen it. So that being said I won't give any spoilers away. I thought the acting was well done by all the actors. The story line is intriguing and kind of Sci-Fi, but is one that you kind of have to accept the time travel thing up front, otherwise you simply can't get into the story. The effects were good, though they weren't a big aspect in my opinion, meaning I don't think the movie depended on them like so many others to succeed. Often times with time travel movies, you always have guys going ape over things and pointing out loopholes. Admittedly they bug me too when they are obvious. With this movie, it was either so carefully thought out or too much for my brain to handle, but in essence I didn't see any major plot holes. I thought the flow of the movie was excellent as it reels you in the more you go along, so much so that you don't even want to pause it to hit the bathroom.

If you like suspense, Sci-Fi's, drama's, `What if' kind of movies then see this movie (Directors cut first) and make up your own opinion. Then watch the theatrical version after. As said in another review, this movie is very involved and interwoven in that if you miss anything, get up to do something or tune out for a bit, you will loose your place and will get confused. So no getting up for pop corn, no bathroom breaks and no other outside interruptions without pausing it first, very important. In fact I would wait until you know you will have 2 hours to yourself before watching. Good nighttime movie. It also has good replay value too as you will understand things from a different perspective the next time around. I wouldn't recommended this movie to those who have been abused in there early childhood, or at least if you have, be ware. It can be a bit much at points as there are some sensitive scenes and I don't recommend to children at all. But the best movies IMO are the ones that chew you up and spit you out, and this one certainly does that.

21 Jump Street

 
When I first came to know that (yet) another old TV show is dusted off for a big-screen adaptation, I wasn't that excited at all. After all, that show happens to be the once-popular 21 Jump Street which starred then-young Johnny Depp who became a star here before he gradually earned his distinctive reputation in the Hollywood cinema. Back then, the story about an undercover police unit composed of young-looking officers specializing in youth crime is refreshingly new. But now, it's seriously a worn-out cliché. Then there's the casting of Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum -- oh, wait -- Channing Tatum does a comedy? I smell an immediate recipe for disaster here, but directors Chris Miller and Phil Lord's (2009's CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS) live-action debut here seriously caught me by surprise . For all those naysayers out there, this big-screen version of 21 JUMP STREET is surprisingly funny and very entertaining as well.

Like the TV show, the movie revolves around Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum), two young-looking cops who both transferred to the 21 Jump Street division where they will be going undercover posing as students to infiltrate the drugs-dealing business that has been going on at a local high school. Both of them go by their names of Doug and Brad, and once there, they must find way to investigate the rampant use of a dangerous hallucinogenic called H.F.S. Their first lead is a dealer and classmate Eric (Dave Franco), whom they are trying to get close with, in hope that one day he will lead them to the mysterious supplier.

Story-wise, Michael Bacall and Jonah Hill's screenplay is actually nothing new at all. But what makes it refreshingly different than most like-minded script out there is the way how the execution is played out in such a hilarious manner. While there are times the script is trying too hard to be funny, rest assured most of the scenes never fail to elicit some genuine laughs. Thanks to the hard R-rating, Bacall and Jonah Hill let the story rip with all those colorful profanities like nobody's business. Added to that, is some of the worthwhile self-parody gags throughout the movie, especially the highway car chase scene involving the theory of exploding vehicles.

Directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller knows well how to keep the pace as entertaining as possible, while the cast here are no doubt the main star attraction here. Jonah Hill proves once again he's one of the genuine comic talents working today, but it was Channing Tatum who totally hits the ballpark with his surprisingly hilarious performance. Personally, I always thought Tatum's acting skill is always wooden at any given genre he's been involving so far (action, drama, romance) but he's finally proved himself as an excellent performer. In fact, both he and Jonah Hill are terrific together. And that's not all -- the rest of the supporting cast are equally playful and memorable as well, including Brie Larson as love interest Molly and Ice Cube at his profane best as Captain Dickson.

Apart from a flair of comedy, Phil Lord and Chris Miller does show some genuine talents in term of delivering well-crafted action sequence. Case in point is the aforementioned highway car chase scene and the violent shootout finale. Overall, 21 JUMP STREET is one of the best action comedy movies really need to be checked out for. And while you're at it, there's a surprise cameo appearance (priceless, indeed) throughout the movie.

Taken

 
I went with very few expectations, despite being a fan of Neeson and Besson. I came out pleasantly surprised. The film is very much in the Bourne trilogy mold - Neeson's character is a been-there-seen-it-all former CIA agent who knows all the tricks and is also a dab hand at dispatching henchmen quickly and effectively.

Another reviewer (while giving the movie 1/10) noted all the clichés in the movie. That is true, pretty much everyone is a composite of previous action movie stock characters. The acting is pretty wooden at times, and Neeson's American accent (as usual) doesn't overly impress.

I say above "could've been even better" and sadly it does seem like this was an opportunity missed to make a movie that would challenge Bourne. Sadly it falls short there. The action is excellent, Neeson is a very believable tough guy, though the audience I watched it with laughed towards the end when his character takes on almost-superhuman powers.

The film offers a very brief glimpse into the world of sex traffickers but you get the sense that Neeson's character doesn't care about any of these women except his daughter. I think in the end that saves the movie - Neeson doesn't try to save the world, he only wants to save one person and will do pretty much anything to achieve that.

Highly recommended, but don't expect any daring social commentary, just sit back and enjoy, while wondering why Liam Neeson has never tried his hand at any role of this sort before.