My Review of Juno

Juno (2007)

When I think of great films of the 2000's, there is one comedy that definitely comes to mind for me. That comedy is Juno, one of the best movies of its year and one of my all-time favourite movies. Nominated for four Oscars (winning Best Original Screenplay for a reason), Juno is a sharp and witty look into the life of a pregnant teenager and the couple whose lives she gets a bit too involved in. Besides the wonderful script, there is a cornucopia of brilliant performances, including the Oscar-nominated turn by Ellen Page as Juno herself. It also reigns as one of the most quotable movies of all time as well as one of the best dramedies. Dramedies are a tricky breed of movies, as too much of one element can make the other feel out of place, but Juno blends the two genres perfectly, making for a brilliant and memorable film.

Juno starts.....with a chair. Actually, it starts with Juno MacGuff (Ellen Page), a funny and smart-mouthed teenage girl who finds out that she's pregnant by her best friend Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera). The only people who know at this point are her friend Leah (Olivia Thirlby) and the hilarious convenience store clerk played by one-scene wonder Rainn Wilson. After considering abortion and rebuffing the choice, Juno has to fess up to her dad (JK Simmons) and stepmom (Allison Janney), as well as Bleeker. Thankfully Juno and Leah found a nice couple in the Pennysaver who will adopt the baby.

That couple is Mark and Vanessa Loring (Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner), a typical cookie-cutter suburban couple. The film follows Juno over the course of her pregnancy, exploring her relationship with Bleeker as well as her interactions with the couple. The film's interpersonal conflicts begin when Juno and Mark begin to bond over horror movies and rock music and she begins to spend too much time with the Lorings'. It doesn't take a genius to spot that Mark is unhappy and repressed in his marriage. It also doesn't take a genius to know that he is not ready to father anything. However, it is

Vanessa that insists upon having a baby and Mark appears to have no choice in the matter.

This would almost make Mark sympathetic except for the fact that he is a petulant manchild with a hinted-at yet never explicitly stated attraction towards Juno. Creepy. Regardless of whether he's into Juno (or if she's into him for that matter), it is made clear that he would rather go back to living as a teenager and would rather pursue his rock-star dreams as opposed to grow up. This dynamic between Mark and Juno is played brilliantly by Page and Bateman. Of course, this is one of two perspectives to take on the character, and that's what makes the film more interesting. You can see him as a petulant manchild who's a thorn in the side of his mature, realistic wife or a henpecked represed husband who happens to be married to a total tight-ass. The viewer's interpretation of him depends on their opinion of Vanessa. That is why I find him the most fascinating character in the movie, although not the most memorable, and that's why I have so much respect for Jason Bateman's performance in this movie, which is my favourite of his to date.  Just a brilliant character written by a brilliant writer, helped by an excellent performance which I honestly think Jason Bateman deserved an Oscar nomination for.

The script by Diablo Cody is simply brilliant not only in plot but in dialogue, perhaps one of the funniest scripts put to film. The script is sharp and witty, and rather than blather on about how great it is, I will share a few choice lines from the film:

"That ain't no Etch-a-Sketch. This is one doodle that can't be un-did, homeskillet."

Mac (Simmons): "No, I know I mean who's the father, Juno?"
Juno: "Umm... It's Paulie Bleeker."
Mac: [in amusement] "Paulie Bleeker?"
Juno: "What?"
Mac: "I didn't think he had it in him!"
Leah: "I know, right?"

Juno: Can't we just like kick this old school? You know, like I stick the baby in a basket, send it your way, like Moses and the reeds?
Mark: Technically, that would be kicking it Old Testament.

That's only a taste of the dialogue in this movie, there are dozens of ingenious lines. The film won Best Original Screenplay, the only Oscar it won, and it was entirely deserved (despite its worthy co-nominees). Despite the hilarious nature of the film, the dramatic elements are excellent as well. In essence, Juno is a story not about pro-life-ism or any spectrum of the whole pregnancy debate, but about growing up. It is about Juno growing up over the course of the film, as she starts out as a typical immature teenage girl, but becomes more mature over the nine months. It's also about Mark's unwillingness to grow up, and while Juno is successful in her coming-of-age story, his story is yet to be told and if it was ever told, I don't think it would end well.

Ellen Page plays the role of Juno, and she gives a phenomenal performance, both comedic and dramatic. She is a very talented actress, and Juno is probably her most iconic role and likely always will be, as it earned Page her first (and hopefully not her last) Oscar nomination. She has decent chemistry with Michael Cera, who also gives his best performance here. Anyone who knows me well knows that I am generally not a huge fan of Michael Cera. I don't think he's a bad actor, I just think he's a one-trick pony, and he hasn't done anything to convince me otherwise. Here, his one trick works best, as he plays Juno's best friend and the father of her baby. He's decently funny and although he doesn't stretch far in terms of acting, it strangely works.

The secondary cast is amazing as well. First, there are two awesome performances from typical awesome secondary character-actors JK Simmons (Jameson from the Spiderman movies, who has made a career out of being awesome) and Allison Janney. He plays the supportive father and she plays the far from evil stepmother, and both are hilarious as well as heartwarming. Olivia Thirlby is great as Leah (who seems to be the ditzy cheerleader, but is still a loyal friend to Juno), Bateman is great as Mark (as I priorly said) and Jennifer Garner is excellent as Vanessa as well. All in all, this has a fine ensemble cast with a slew of amazing performance.

When it comes down to storytelling, Juno is a coming-of-age story, and a damned good one at that. It is one of my favourite movies of all time, definitely in my top 20, and I give it my strongest recommendation for anyone who hasn't seen it, as well as anyone who has. I wouldn't say it is without flaw, but I would say that it is a dramedy masterpiece and one of the greatest teen films since the Hughes days of the 80's. It's nice to see smart teenagers, not the vapid teenagers (teenage girls especially) that are so present in films nowadays. There are brilliant performances, a fantastic Oscar-winning script, great characters, and I forgot to mention, a pretty good soundtrack. In short, Juno is not a must-see, but it is damn great and I give it my highest recommendation possible and if teenagers watch more films like this, we may have smarter teenagers.

9.5/10- EXTREMELY highly recommended





My Review of I Love You, Man

I Love You, Man (2009)

Judging by his offscreen reputation, Paul Rudd could easily win the title of nicest, most relaxed man in Hollywood. Second place for that title could likely go to Jason Segel. So, why not put them in a movie together? Well, they did, and it worked out brilliantly. I Love You, Man is an excellent comedy with a quasi-original story that rises on the great chemistry of its leads (Rudd and Segel, as well as Rudd and Rashida Jones) as well as the strength of its script, which is oftentimes hilarious. Compared to the flashier comedy that came out that year, a little comedy called The Hangover, I Love You Man is much more realistic and much sweeter although still raunchy, making for a slightly better comedy.

I Love You, Man starts out with our main character, a real estate agent named Peter (Paul Rudd) proposing to his girlfriend Zooey (Rashida Jones). All his life, Peter has been a girlfriend guy, and it takes Zooey agreeing to marry him for Peter to realize that he has no close male friends. This will prove a problem as Peter needs a best man. However, if one were to liken this film to real life, this would not be a problem. Women can have men of honour, one would think it would work the same way for men. Peter enlists the help of his gay brother (Andy Samberg) in finding guys to go on platonic "man-dates" (casual lunches or after-work drinks) with so he can find a best man.

After a montage of disasters (including a really hilarious guy from Reno 911 that actually turns out to be gay), Peter finds a viable choice in Sydney (Jason Segel), whom he meets at his open house. The open house is a subplot that appears throughout the movie, as Peter needs the money from the Ferrigno estate (yes, that Ferrigno, Lou Ferrigno in a hilarious bit part) to pay for the wedding. Sydney is a pretty cool guy, and it is with his help that Peter learns to loosen up and over the course of the film, Sydney helps him become more confident in himself. You see, Peter starts out as a very wound-up character, mostly because he has no male friends.

It is my belief that everyone, both men and women, needs friends of their own gender. No matter how well you get along with your guy friends if you are a woman or your lady friends if you're a man, there will always be limitations on what you can talk about. With friends of the same gender, you can completely let loose, like Peter and Sydney do in Sydney's man-cave. Peter and Sydney bond over Rush concerts, screaming like gorillas, and talking about sex. He inspires Peter to take more risks, and in turn, Peter helps Sydney overcome some of his flaws. Although Peter thinks that Sydney ruined his life at a point in the film, it turns out that Sydney has improved his life. This is what friends are supposed to do for eachother, make eachother better people while appreciating the eccentricities of the other person.

The story, when one thinks about it, is somewhat original, although it plays out much like a romantic comedy. The exact story of a man who realizes he has no male friends who tries to remedy that by going on several platonic dates has not really been told in any other movie. Despite the idea being somewhat original, it runs exactly like a rom-com meaning it is extremely predictable and you know the ending from a mile away. That is one of my few problems with this movie, mostly because one of the things I hate most about the rom-coms that this parodies is their utter predictability. Another problem I can see coming out of the movie is the fact that since all of the characters are extremely reasonable, there is next to no conflict. I actually think it works in the film's favour because it feels like how real people act as opposed to characters in a movie. Peter, Zooey, and Sydney feel like real people, not caricatures, and that to me gives this film a refreshing touch not often present in movies.

Predictability aside, this film rises on the strength of its actors as well as the oftentimes hilarious script. This film is incredibly well-written, providing for some great laughs as well as good characters. The script, however, brings us to another flaw and another thing that prevented me from ranking this film higher. Some of the raunchy humour feels out of place due to the nature of the film. Some of it works, but a lot of it doesn't and it sometime shifts the film into extremely awkward territory. There are some crudely hilarious moments that kind of appeal to my childish side, like Paul Rudd projectile-vomiting all over Jon Favreau. However, most of the humour works, some prime examples being Lou Ferrigno putting Jason Segel into a sleeper hold and Paul Rudd slappin' da bass, as well as the fact that whenever Peter leaves Sydney voicemails, he flubs his speech almost like a little boy talking to the girl he likes on the playground . It's not the most hilarious movie ever made, and the humour is sometimes awkward, but it is mostly consistent and that's pretty much all I ask in a comedy nowadays. As long as it consistently makes me laugh, I will generally be pleased with it.

Jobin. If you've seen the film you'll get that joke

The actors, especially the three leads, all do excellent jobs. I have a feeling that if different actors were cast in the roles of Peter and Sydney, the movie would have lessened in quality because the film is dependent on the chemistry between Paul Rudd and Jason Segel. Thankfully, the two actors work brilliantly off of eachother and have great chemistry, each of them turning in excellent performances as Peter and Sydney respectively. I am a huge fan of Paul Rudd and after The Muppets, I am growing to be a huge fan of Jason Segel as well, and it is great to see two of my favourite comedic actors of all time in a movie together. Rashida Jones was excellent as Zooey, Peter's fiancee. She and Rudd have excellent chemistry together as well and they make for a relatively realistic couple in that they have a relationship based on mutual love and respect, unlike the romantic comedies that this film satirizes. The supporting cast is brilliant as well, like Andy Samberg as Peter's brother, JK Simmons as Peter's father, Thomas Lennon as the one of Peter's man-dates that turns out to be gay, and especially Jaime Pressly (AKA Joy Turner on My Name is Earl) and Jon Favreau as Denise and Barry, Zooey's friend and her complete ass-hat of a husband. His mere presence in the movie makes it no question why Peter wants to hang around with women. If you were forced to hang out with Barry and his friends, who wouldn't want to hang out with women? All in all, a strong cast that elevates the film to the quality that it is.

All in all, I Love You Man is a sweet movie that kind of flew under the radar because The Hangover came out that year, despite the fact that this film came out before The Hangover. It has an excellent cast and an excellent script, which are what gives the film any semblance of memorability. It is not a classic, and not a masterpiece, but it made me laugh consistently and I enjoyed the main characters, which is enough to want to watch this movie again and enough to recommend it. I Love You Man is a genuinely funny and genuinely touching look at friendship filled to the brim with great comedic performances, and it is definitely worth a DVD rental sometime in the future.

8.5/10-  Highly Recommended

My Review of Shaun of the Dead

Shaun of the Dead (2004)



With this review, I have decided to start a new style of review. Though I will still be doing long reviews, I am going to be doing this as a mini-review. Anyway, I absolutely adore Shaun of the Dead, arguably the greatest horror-comedy since Scream and my current favourite zombie movie. It is a wildly entertaining masterpiece of a film that has awesome zombies and kick-ass action, but it also has memorable and fleshed-out (no pun intended) characters played by great actors to back it up. This is my second taste of the Pegg/Wright/Frost combo, and it is a winning combo for sure, making me want to see Hot Fuzz all the more.

Shaun of the Dead is often described as a "rom-zom-com", that is, a romantic comedy that happens to take place during a zombie apocalypse. The film is centred around the titular Shaun (Simon Pegg), a deadbeat who lives with his equally deadbeat friend Ed (Nick Frost). After plans for a date with his girlfriend (Kate Ashfield) go south due to his incompetence, he is dumped, which merely adds to the shitty things in his life. He has a crappy job, a crappy relationship with his stepdad, and he's treated crappily by pretty much everyone he meets. Shaun was entirely asking for it, as he happens to be an incompetent dolt at the start of the movie. The only person that seems to be nice to him is Ed, who's still a total douchebag and inadvertently keeps screwing things up.

Things have only started though, because Shaun and Ed are attacked by a girl in their garden who they think is drunk, but turns out to be dangerous and only stops her attack when Shaun hits her in the head with a cricket bat. Shaun also walks through his normal morning routine too hungover and oblivous to realize he is in a zombie apocalypse. Ed and Shaun first deny that anything is going on ("Don't use the Z word"), but after hearing the news, they wise up to the fact that something is wrong and make their plan. They are to go and get Shaun's mother (who has told him that his stepfather was bitten and feeling a little 'under the weather'), take care of Philip (the stepdad) and then go to Liz's apartment and make sure she is okay.

The rest of the film is a survival story, where Shaun, Liz, Ed, Liz's annoying roommates David and Dianne, and Shaun's mother and stepfather. The entire second half is them at the Winchester (Ed and Shaun's favourite pub which Liz grew tired of after being taken their night after night) fighting the encroaching zombies. This half of the film gets more serious, whereas the first half was more comedic in satirizing zombie films like Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead. Shit starts going down and that's pretty much all I can tell you without my words being rife with spoilers, so the plot summation will stop here. Being honest, the film is not so much about story so much as characters, and these are characters we grow to like over the course of the movie.

The first of these characters is Shaun, played by Simon Pegg. He starts out as an incompetent fool but grows to become more competent as the movie goes on, eventually turning into the only competent person in the survival team. I shouldn't say that, Liz is extremely competent as well, but it is Shaun that is the most sympathetic and likeable character. He goes through so much that we can't help but feel sorry for him, especially near the end, when the film looks bleakest. He feels his failure to fortify the pub is just another one of the failures in his life, and this is one failure too many, as Shaun faces the ultimate despair. This leads to a truly excellent performance from Simon Pegg both during the comedic and dramatic parts of the film. I had only seen him in a few comedic roles before this and I never knew how brilliant an actor he was until now. By far his best performance.

The rest of the cast rounds out brilliantly. First, there is Nick Frost as Shaun's deadbeat roommate Ed. He seems to always play second fiddle to Pegg and one day he should definitely play first fiddle, because he is an extremmely talented comic actor as well. Pegg may give the best performance, but Frost certainly comes close, making Ed just as memorable and sympathetic as Shaun, despite the fact that Ed keeps screwing things up. Kate Ashfield is good as Liz, the only other sane character in the film, and she and Pegg (as well as Pegg and Frost as always) work very well off of eachother. The rest of the cast includes Penelope Wilton as Barbara (Shaun's mother), Bill Nighy as Philip, Lucy Davis as Dianne (one of Liz's roommates) and Dylan Moran as David (her other roommate). Dylan Moran deserves special attention because he plays David as such an asshole that (SPOILERS) when he gets ripped apart limb from limb and disemboweled through the same window he broke when there was a back door to get into the pub (END OF SPOILERS) I actually cheered because I was wishing for his eventual fate. Moran played him very well though, especially during the mexican standoff scene with the rifle and several broken beer bottles.

The script, written by Wright and Pegg, is absolutely brilliant in both the fields of comedy and drama, and especially in the field of character writing (as I had priorly mentioned). It is equal parts hilarious and heartbreaking. Some of the particularly hilarious scenes include Ed and Shaun throwing records at the zombies while bickering on which ones to keep and which to throw, Shaun and the gang running into near-exact doppelgangers of themselves (except with a woman as the leader), and Shaun and Liz beating up zombies with pool cues while Queen plays in the background. There are a lot of funny lines as well, and the film is as entertaining as it is well-written and occasionally horrifying.

All in all, Shaun of the Dead is a total masterpiece in the fields of both horror and comedy, as well as in the field of character writing.  The characters are memorable, the zombies are cool, the gore effects are amazing, the actors are brilliant, and the movie is just straight-up awesome in general. Another thing I loved about it was the ending. I won't tell you what it is, but it's likely one of my favourite endings to any comedy. I highly recommend it to fans of zombie films, as well as fans of the Pegg, Frost, and Wright combo. This now reigns as my favourite zombie film as well as my second favourite horror movie (Scream just barely inching it out) and is definitely in my top 20 favourite films of all time. I thought I would like this, but I didn't think I'd like it this much, and I just can't run out of excellent things to say about it. So in short, see it. Plain and simple.

10/10- Must-See

This prat deserved his fate for being a whiny little know-it-all and a complainer at every turn. May that fact be shouted from the rooftops





My Review of The Muppets (2011)

The Muppets (2011)

Nobody seemed to be very interested in the Muppets after their last movie (1999's Muppets in Space) was released. That's why Jason Segel had to fight tooth and nail to get his dream project up and running, and once he did, you could be damned sure he would do it right. Well, he did, and what resulted was the single best movie I have seen this year. Just thinking about this movie I have a giant ear-to-ear grin, and I just saw it and already I want to see it again. This is pretty much a flawless movie, in fact, it is flawless. That's right, I could not find a single thing wrong with this movie. It is unapologetically saccharine and sweet, and it had me weepy-eyed with joy while also busting my guts with laughter. It's also ably acted by both humans and Muppets, and it's just plain awesome.

The film centres around Walter, a puppet who lives in Smalltown, USA, with his brother Gary (Jason Segel) and his girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams). Walter and Gary are huge Muppets fans, and on a trip to the Muppet Studio, Walter overhears a plan by oil tycoon Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) to tear down the theatre and drill for oil. In order to prevent this from happening, the Muppets have to get back together and hold a telethon to raise 10 million dollars, buying back the theatre and effectively bringing the gang back together. Walter, Gary, and Mary go to the house of Kermit, who now lives entirely off the grid in his mansion, longing for the good old days.

With the help of Kermit and his assistant/butler 80's Robot, they track down Fozzie (who now works

with a Muppet cover band in Reno), Gonzo (now the CEO of a plumbing empire), and the rest of the Muppets via montage. The only one who seems to have trouble coming around is Miss Piggy, who now works as a plus-size editor for Vogue Paris and doesn't want to rejoin the troupe because she and Kermit called it quits over his lack of commitment. However, the gang gets back together and starts to work on their comeback special, while a cynical TV executive (Rashida Jones) says she won't air the show unless they get a celebrity host. So they kidnap Jack Black and the show goes on, serving as the climax of the film.

There are several attempts at sabotaging the show by Richman, who will not only get the Muppet Theatre if they don't raise enough money, but he will get the Muppet name as well (as that is included the contract). I won't give away anything more, but one of the many things I like about this movie is that it has a relatively simple plot. Kids movies don't need labyrinthian plots to be good, and this is refreshingly straightforward. It's also not filled with pop culture references and crass humour like so many kids movies. There are a lot of fourth wall jokes though, and pretty much all of them are hilarious. In fact, pretty much the entire movie is hilarious, even when it's being tear-jerking.

I was happy to see all the Muppets back together performing their show, and if this film was used as a way to relaunch The Muppet Show, I would be extremely happy. In fact, the film takes advantage of the fact that there hasn't been a Muppet movie in over ten years and that a good chunk of the world has outwardly forgot them, using it for jokes and heart-wrenching moments at the same time. This film also inspired a wave of nostalgia to wash over me although I never really watched The Muppets as a kid (either the show or the movies), and I'm sure it will do that for longtime fans of the Muppets as well. Around the middle of the movie, Chris Cooper's character tells Kermit that he and his gang are relics, and they are relics, in the best possible way. They're soft and sweet in a cynical and hard world, and that's exactly what we need in times like this. This is what children's entertainment should be like, and this film should be held up as an example of how great kids movies are made.

However, the people that The Muppets is most likely to please are the longtime fans, those who saw the movies and/or the show growing up and wish to revel in a blast from the past. Longtime Muppet fans with children can also take them to this movie and introduce them to characters that every child should know because like I have said so many times, a lot of children's movies have pop culture references (this one has a few, but not too many) and crass humour and The Muppets does not resort to that. Instead, it delivers on the old charm and pure joy that the Muppets have delivered for so many people. Just because the movie is a blast from the past doesn't mean that it hasn't updated itself to become relevant again. There are a ton of celebrity cameos by everyone from Neil Patrick Harris to Sarah Silverman to Whoopi Goldberg (but my favourites being an uncredited role by Jack Black and a hilarious cameo from Jim Parsons of Big Bang Theory fame) and they reference some modern songs, but not to a degree of overkill.

Besides the cameos and the Muppets themselves, there are three main human performances that I'd like to talk about (four if you include a new muppet, which I will). First of all, there is Jason Segel as Gary. Jason Segel was the main driving force behind the movie and it was because of him that the movie even got made. He is now one of my favourite people in the world because of that, and he gives a decent performance as Gary. He doesn't overshadow the Muppets because he's not supposed to, but we do care about his character and we want to see him, his girlfriend and his brother be happy. Speaking of which, I loved the character of Walter, the world's biggest Muppet fan and the guy who gets the Muppets back together. I'm not sure who voiced him, but they were great, and if they brought back the Muppet show, I would be very happy to see Walter in it. Amy Adams gives a great performance as Mary (which kind of reminded me of her performance in Enchanted), but most of the things that can be said about her can also be said about Jason Segel. However, I really liked her costumes in this movie and how they were almost reminiscent of the old 50's schoolteacher, only Amy Adams makes them work because she happens to be very attractive. Chris Cooper plays the villain, and every time he insulted Kermit and the gang I wanted to punch that bastard in the face, simply because I love the Muppets so much and it's just impossible to be mean to Kermit the Frog. It's like being mean to a really cute puppy, it just can't happen.

One thing I didn't know about this movie going into it was that it was a musical. I had heard that there were songs, but I didn't know that it was going to be a straight-up musical. The songs were written by Bret McKenzie (of Flight of the Conchords) and I must say he did an excellent job, especially with the film's main theme, entitled "Life's a Happy Song". If either version of the song (at the beginning or the end) does not get an Oscar, or even get nominated for one, I will be extremely unhappy. My other favourite song is "Man or Muppet", and they do play some of the classics too, like "Rainbow Connection" and "Mahna Mahna". The score was also excellent and I definitely smell Oscar for it (as well as the songs and maybe even the script).

This is just a fantastic movie, and I can't run out of great things to say about it. I offer one of my highest recommendations possible as my single favourite movie this year. This film had me weepy-eyed from the beginning and especially weepy-eyed at the end, and this is coming from someone who doesn't cry at movies. The three people who gave this negative reviews are clearly made out of stone, because even the most cold-hearted and cynical of people could very well give into the power of the Muppets. The film is extremely well-made, and it will please longtime fans of the Muppets most of all, and seeing as how a good many of them are of child-having age, this is a movie that can be shown to kids who aren't familiar with the Muppets. All the characters are back, and better than ever in a nostalgic romp that is reminiscient of a simpler time. All that's left for me to say is that Jason Segel is a very good man and he will be forever associated with The Muppets as one of the men (and the driving force behind the many men) that brought them back.

Thank you man, just thank you.

10/10

3:10 To Yuma

3:10 To Yuma (2007)



The western was once a staple of cinema back in the 50's and 60's, what with classics like High Noon and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. It disappeared for the longest time, but it is beginning to show a resurgence, starting with Unforgiven and culminating in the remake of True Grit. But in the middle lies the remake of 3:10 to Yuma, which is an excellent film and one of the best of its year, as well as one of the best remakes of all time (and so I hear, a remake that is better than the original). It has a complex and engaging story accompanied with impeccable acting and abundant atmosphere. This is the kind of western that makes me want to see more westerns, and one that you don't necessarily need to be a fan of the genre to enjoy.

One of two main characters in this movie is Dan Evans (Christian Bale), a poor rancher who has his horses stolen by the gang of the other main character (who will be mentioned later) in the beginning of the movie and is later enlisted to help deliver the criminal to the train station where he would take the titular 3:10 train to Yuma, where he would be hanged. Evans is a one-legged veteran of the Civil War, and he struggles to support his wife (Gretchen Mol) and his two sons (the elder being played by Logan Lerman and the younger being played by an unidentified child actor). His elder son William is an adventurous boy who dreams of being a cowboy and demands to come along with his father, and his younger son has tuberculosis, which is what ties the family to the failing ranch.

The other main character is Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), the criminal being transported to Yuma. Wade is the leader of a gang of criminals, and the gang (lead in Wade's absence by Charlie, played by Ben Foster) spends most of the movie tracking down Wade, leading to a violent confrontation at the train station. The rest of the movie is chronicling the journey of Evans and Wade (as well as the rest of the group taking him to Yuma which includes the likes of Peter Fonda and Kevin Durand). It also shows the interaction between Wade and Evans, which is fascinating in itself. Some emphasis is put on the strained relationship between Evans and his oldest son William, the latter noticing that the former is struggling to support the family. William also sees a sort of glamour in the renegade life of Wade and humanizes him despite Wade's attempts to convince William that he is an inhuman outlaw.

The interaction between Wade and Evans is the core of the movie, because when you look at it, the story is quite basic, and it's the characters that make it good. This is helped by the magnetic chemistry between Christian Bale and Russell Crowe and their excellent individual performances as Evans and Wade respectively. The character of Ben Wade is fantastic alone, and as opposed to being the cliched western bad guy, he is an interesting character. He doesn't really have any sympathetic qualities to him, but the writers don't try and make him sympathetic. After all, the writers of The Dark Knight did not try to make the Joker sympathetic, and he is arguably the greatest movie villain of all time. I'm not comparing Ben Wade to the Joker, but he has definitely earned his spot on the list of best villains of all time, due to the fantastic writing accompanied with the fantastic performance of Russell Crowe.

The other main characters, namely Evans and his son, are both fantastically written as well. They aren't quite as good as Russell Crowe, but Bale and Lerman give fantastic performances. Logan Lerman's performance serves as the linchpin of the movie in my opinion, the cherry on top of the wonderful ice cream sundae that is this movie. He is a credible actor, not just the teenybopper star that Percy Jackson has set him up to be. I am excited to see what projects he does in the future, and depending on the success of Percy Jackson (which to me looks like a second-rate Harry Potter but you never know), he could turn into one of Hollywood's next big thing. The chemistry between him and Bale is great, as they make a believable father-son duo, and the antagonistic chemistry between Bale and Crowe is electric as well. This trio of fantastic performances is easily the best thing of the movie, and I could even go so far as to say that Bale and Crowe deserved Oscar attention that they sadly did not get.

The film also has a fine supporting cast, which is lead by Ben Foster as the film's secondary antagonist. Foster is a fine character actor, and it shows through. I had only seen him as Angel in X-Men 3 prior to this, and he is certainly no angel in this one (sorry, I just had to do that) as he is much more violent than Wade. Wade could be violent, but he was more cold and calculating, whereas Charlie was the hair-trigger tempered second-in-command with undying loyalty to Wade. Evans' wife Alice was played by Gretchen Mol, and she gave a good performance as well, but she was only in the beginning of the movie, before they depart on the movie's mission. The actor who plays Evans' younger son is unknown to me, as he was not listed on the movie's wikipedia page, but he wasn't bad, at least by the lax standards of child actors. Peter Fonda is in this movie as well, and Luke Wilson comes in around the middle. They are both good, and that pretty much wraps up the film's good supporting cast. The film on a whole is peppered with fine performance, but none of them can live up to the excellent performance of Crowe.

There is also praise to be had for this movie's visuals as well. The film has the atmosphere of an old-style western despite being made only four years ago, and that definitely works in the film's favour. I loved the design of this movie, everything from the old barns to the city to the ornate (at least by 19th century standards) hotel room where they hide Wade so his gang won't find him. This film could have gotten praise for its art direction but it sadly didn't. In fact, that's a common theme for this movie. This film only got two Oscar nominations, one for Original Score (which it won and deserved) and Sound Mixing (which it lost to The Bourne Ultimatum). It deserved so much more than that though. Crowe and Bale deserved acting nominations (who would be up for which award is debatable) and the art direction definitely deserved a nomination. Not getting enough attention is what has partially placed this film into underrated territory.

So, I bet you're wondering why I gave the film an 80 and not a perfect score when I have been giving the film endless praise. Well, there are a few small problems I have with this movie. The first problem is its rather odd pacing. Some of it is a bit too fast, so fast that I had to rewind it to see what had happened. The rest of the film moved at fairly normal speed, so these moments stuck out even more and they kind of annoyed me. The beginning was also kind of abrupt. We are rushed into the action of Dan seeing his barn on fire, and we aren't even introduced to the characters yet, so it has little impact. However, these are very tiny flaws, and they do not majorly detract from the awesomeness that is this movie.

All in all, 3:10 to Yuma is an underrated remake, and one of the best westerns I have seen (but that's not saying much because I haven't seen too many westerns, something I would like to fix). It didn't get nearly as much attention as it should have, so it is with that I recommend 3:10 to Yuma to most everyone. Even those who don't really like westerns could find something to like about this movie, especially if you are a fan of Russell Crowe or Christian Bale. I took a chance on this movie, because I didn't know too much about it and I wasn't sure whether or not I'd like it. However, I ended up adoring it, and if you take a chance on it, you might too. I might also end up seeing the original someday, but in the meantime, I need to see a ton more westerns to be a better judge of them. Yuma has pretty much everything. It may not be perfect, but it has great acting, great visuals, and a great story, and it is well worth the watch.

8.5/10

District 9 Review

District 9 (2009)



There haven't been many sci-fi classics in the last little while, but that chain was broken in 2009, which was a fine year for sci-fi. We had Avatar (which I still haven't seen), JJ Abrams' Star Trek, and we had District 9, whic is one of the best films of that year and one of the greatest sci-fi films of all tiime. It has an intelligent allegorical story, it has some good performances from both the human and alien characters, it has extraordinary special effects and makeup effects (which I don't really talk about that often in reviews), and it has emotional resonance. It almost feels like a news feature on the aliens, especially in the beginning, which is shot in the "mockumentary" style. Even though that style of filmmaking has been done before (like in Christopher Guest's movies and even some TV shows like Modern Family and The Office), it is given a new twist in this movie.

POSSIBLE SPOILER WARNING

District 9 takes place in Johannesburg, South Africa, where out of nowhere, an alien ship arrives. It shows no signs of movement, so the military cut their way in and discovered alien life. Over the course of twenty years, the aliens lived segregated from humans in the titular District 9. They live in squalor and filth, and are under persecution from the humans living in Johannesburg, who cruelly nicknamed them "prawns". They are especially persecuted by the MNU, which has a mission to serve the aliens with eviction notices to relocate them away from the humans. The evictions naturally don't go well, and there are many alien casualties.

The leader of this mission is Wikus van de Merwe (played by Sharlto Copley) an MNU employee who is sprayed by a mysterious fluid while searching the shack of one of the aliens. He immediately dismisses this as nothing and continues on with his job, confiscating the tube which the liquid was in. Later on, he starts getting sick, and it is revealed that the thing under his arm sling (he wounded his arm in a fight between the aliens) is no longer a human hand, but a giant alien claw, not unlike the "prawns". It turns out Wikus was infected with alien DNA and he is slowly becoming one of them. Because of this, he is brought to a medical experimentation facility. They test his ability to fire the alien weapons (which can only be used by the aliens because of biological engineering) and he narrowly escapes being vivisected.

After these events, Wikus becomes a fugitive from the MNU and the entirety of Johannesburg, and he hides out in the only place nobody would dare look for him. He hides out in District 9, where he meets the alien that developed the fluid, an alien named Christopher and his son. Christopher says he can help Wikus if they can get the fluid back from the MNU. The entire climax of the movie is focused on fighting the military that was infiltrating District 9 to get Wikus for busting into MNU. The climax is exciting and thrilling, and this is one of the rare movies (like Inception the year after) that is thrilling as well as being intellectually and emotionally satisfying as well. That is everything that goes into a sci-fi classic in my eyes, and District 9 has it.

One of the best elements of the film and what makes it so good is the allegory. It is fairly obvious that this film substitutes racism for species-ism, and it does that extremely well. The humans are incredibly callous towards the aliens, cruelly nicknaming and even killing them for no apparent reason other than they fact that they are different. They keep the aliens in squalor and intend to move them to even more squalor (Wikus says it's like a concentration camp) just because the humans in Johannesburg don't like them being there (even though they are already extremely segregated). This treatment could be connected to the treatment of any number of races, but the segregation especially connects with the ghettoes and eventually, concentration camps in WWII. I know, I can find WWII allegories in nearly anything. It's kind of spooky. I guess when you have a vested interest in something, you can find semblances of it in things that appear to be unrelated.

District 9 has a lot of things going for it and one of those things, although lesser than some of the other elements of the movie, is its decent cast. There's only one actor of relative name in this movie, and even at the time he still wasn't that well known. The actor's name is Sharlto Copley, and he did a fantastic job as the main character, something he could have gotten an Oscar nomination for. The rest of the actors are not big-name ones, but they all do a decent enough job for the characters they are supposed to play. The alien that is most featured is named Christopher, and he could go down as one of the greatest CGI characters (and that is a great honour considering he is not played by Andy Serkis). For someone who doesn't speak any discernable language and for someone who can only be understood through subtitles, he gets across a lot emotionally.

The film is more talk-y than most recent films involving aliens, but that's not to say that the film is not a thrilling one. The second half of the film is very thrilling and the climax is extremely entertaining. The special effects were great but not overblown, not unlike JJ Abrams' Star Trek, and they were seamlessly integrated into the human world of the movie. The design of the aliens is some of my favourite alien design in any movie and the design of the hovering mothership (which the aliens are unable to get to) is splendid. The art direction is wonderful as well, especially the design of District 9 itself. I don't normally talk about makeup effects in my reviews, unless I feel that they are absolutely extraordinary and worth remarking on, and I feel that way for this movie, as the makeup effects showing Wikus' transformation are amazing.

The script was Oscar-nominated and rightfully so, because it is great. District 9 was nominated for a few other Oscars as well, like Visual Effects (which it lost to Avatar), Adapted Screenplay (which it lost to Precious), Editing (which it lost to The Hurt Locker) and Best Picture (also lost to The Hurt Locker). Admittedly I haven't seen a lot of the 2009 Best Picture nominees, but out of the live action ones, this one is my personal favourite. This is pretty much a perfect movie, and there is nothing wrong with it in my eyes. District 9 has the potential to become a new sci-fi classic and I hope it does because it is a truly great film. It has everything going for it. It has great performances, a heart-wrenching story, great special effects, a thrilling climax, and a great allegory. If you haven't seen this movie, then I would strongly encourage you to do so ASAP, as it has transcended into must-see territory, whether or not sci-fi is your thing. Because it's not just sci-fi, it's great drama as well. So see it, and you won't be disappointed.

Cars 2- Review

Cars 2 (2011)

I happened to come across this film while in a hotel, so we shall be taking a brief foray into Pixar before we return to classic Disney. After watching Cars 2 and seeing the critical response for it, I have only one question: what did critics hate so much about this? If I were to pick a theory, I would say that since Pixar has set the standard so high upon itself, any mild low comes as a crushing one and the movie is hated for it. One could compare it to a merciless verbal lashing of an A+ student for bringing home a B on a test. Another possible reason is that when mining for material from their previous works to make sequels out of, Cars wasn't exactly an obvious choice, or a first choice for the audiences of Pixar. Many people (myself included) would love to see a sequel to The Incredibles instead. My final theory is that if this film was made by a different animation company, or made in live action as the long-awaited third Bond movie with Daniel Craig, it would be better received. But enough with my theories, on with the review.

POSSIBLE SPOILER WARNING

Unlike the first film's fish-out-of-water premise, Cars 2 takes place on a much grander scale, when Lightning McQueen is invited to compete in the World Grand Prix, which would consist of three races in Tokyo, Italy, and England. McQueen accepts and takes his best friend Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) along for the ride. Prior to seeing Mater and McQueen, the audience sees a spy car named Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) listen in on a nefarious plot that is slowly revealed throughout the course of the movie. When Mater and McQueen are at a party in Tokyo, Mater embarrasses himself and there is the misunderstanding between friends that leads them to separate temporarily.

During a chance encounter in the bathroom, Mater ends up with the tracking device of an American spy (Bruce Campbell) who is captured by the film's villains, a German car (Thomas Kretschmann) and two mooks, a Gremlin (Joe Mantegna) and a Pacer (Peter Jacobson). This leads Mater to be mistaken for an American spy and tracked down by McMissile and another spy named Holly Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer), who Mater mistakes for a car asking him out on a date. Mater is targeted by the villains and we learn about their nefarious plot.

Before I reveal that plot I may have to do some explaining. You see, Miles Axlerod (Eddie Izzard), the creator of the Grand Prix and a reformed oil tycoon has created an alternative fuel called Alinoll and it is the required fuel for all racers in the Prix. The villains have created a camera that is an electromagnetic pulse creator, and when mixed with the fuel, the electromagnetic pulse causes cars to explode. The resulting mayhem would discredit Axlerod and make alternative fuel look bad, increasing the car world's dependency on common gasoline. The mooks are cars commonly known as "lemons", like Gremlins and Pacers, and it's up to Mater, Holly, and McMissile to stop them before McQueen's last race in England, where they intend to use the camera to kill him.

This is Pixar's first spin at a spy movie, and I priorly said that this easily could have been adapted into the next Bond movie and it would have probably gotten good reviews. I must say that they did the Bond thing better in The Incredibles, but this movie has a decent storyline. I don't know how this could have been considered "rusty" because it is surprisingly smart for a movie about sentient cars (as well as boats and planes in this one). The premise for the first one was rather basic, but this one is more complex, and on a grander scale than its predecessor (obviously taking place in several countries). The dialogue was okay, but some of the jokes were kind of kiddish, this film probably being the one that adult Pixar fans without children would be least likely to go to. There are also some parodies of modern human things in the car world and I liked that, like the separate bathrooms and everything in Tokyo being anime-fied. I also liked the fact that they had sentient boats and planes as well as the cars.

There are two real things that this film has going for it. The first thing is the quality of the animation. The visuals of this movie are fantastic. One of the strengths of the first Cars was the amazing scenery, and this is doubled in Cars 2, showing gorgeous animated scenery of three different countries. My favourite scenery was in the ultramodern Tokyo, but the animation of England and Italy (as well as small parts of France) was gorgeous as well. The France animation wasn't Ratatouille good, but it was still great. Obviously, I saw this in my hotel room, so there was no 3D, but I can actually imagine this kind of working, although there were a few gimmicky moments obviously created for the 3D presentation. Needless to say, this film has great animation, and it's definitely up to the Pixar quality.

The other strength the film has going for it is its all-star voice cast, easily the most star-studded Pixar has gotten (I mean, this is almost Dreamworks star-studded). Owen Wilson and Larry the Cable Guy reprise their roles from the first one, but the latter is featured much more often. I didn't mind it, but this is what ruined the movie for some. I am generally annoyed by his type of aggressively lowbrow humour but anything that can make his voice tolerable (not exactly pleasant, but tolerable) is a plus in my book. Plus, Mater isn't a bad character, he's decently good-natured (albeit slightly annoying) and we genuinely want to see him win. Wilson, on the other hand, is featured much less and is pretty much only there for the racing scenes and the climax. Both are decent in their roles, nothing great but nothing terrible.

The rest of the voice cast is fantastic, especially Michael Caine and Emily Mortimer as the main spy cars. There is an awesomely badass cameo from Bruce Campbell as an American spy car, but there was no doubt of the Bruce Campbell cameo being awesome. Why? Because what the formidably-chinned man does best is being awesome. Thomas Kretschmann did a good job as the German car, and Eddie Izzard was great as Miles Axlerod as well. I could list the rest of the voice actors but it would take too long and they all were pretty good for what they were supposed to do. The film did right in taking full advantage of its awesome voice cast and the only slight weak link is Larry the Cable Guy, but were you really expecting top-notch from him?

I really don't see what was so bad about Cars 2, but I do understand the reasons for why people would dislike it, in reference to my theories at the beginning of this review. However, for those with an open mind, Cars 2 is a wholely enjoyable watching experience. It has gorgeous scenery, a solid story, a great voice cast, and it was a generally fun movie. There are some things I like more in this film than the first one, and some things I like better in the first one. However, for being in the same series, they are two entirely different films in terms of style and tone, and honestly shouldn't be compared because they have a few common characters. I don't know if the film was successful enough to warrant a Cars 3, but I could see one happening. Could it work? Only time will tell.....