The Hangover Part II

What to say about this movie?  Was it as good as the original?  Probably not.  Did it live up to expectations?  Pretty well.  Was it damn funny?  Hell yes!

Obviously this movie had all kinds of pressure on it to deliver on the surprise success of the original.  And while you could argue they played it safe by sticking to the same formula as the first movie, they certainly raised the bar.  The set up may remain the same, but the stakes are higher, the exploits gorier and the disbelief that this is happening AGAIN manages to be plausible. The first movie found the guys searching for a lost groom in Las Vegas, and while they may have been desperate to get home without getting caught, the only thing in danger was their relationships to the women at home.  Here they are lost in Bangkok, and the damage moves way beyond a possible canceled wedding and a missing tooth; we've got severed fingers, gunshot wounds, and the ever looming threat of being lost to the city, which I'm assuming means getting sucked into the delights of the sex trade and human trafficking.  Not to mention any chances of being thrown into a Thai prison, which given the drugs, dead bodies and destruction the characters leave in their wake must be an all too real possibility as well. Fun stuff.

Aside from increasing the horror in the details of the main characters' forgotten evening, the filmmakers have left all the other details the same, which is where the biggest stumbles happen.  There is still a wedding in two days (the lucky groom is dentist Stu, played by Ed Helms), and they still have to find their lost companion (this time the bride's 16 year old brother) in time to get back for the wedding.  Only instead of being righteously pissed off like the bride in the original, Jamie Chung plays the bride all smiles and cheer, like it's really no big deal her groom lost her brother and vanished for two entire days right before the wedding and returned rocking a facial tattoo.  Methinks that highly unlikely.  The 'aw shucks' exclamations made by Zach Galifianakis' Alan also rang a little forced to me most of the time, which is a shame because that character is really the best part of the first movie.

Basically it comes down to this: there is pretty much no way any movie can ever live up to the expectations everyone had going into this movie.  The FIRST one wouldn't have done so well if we all expected it to be the funniest thing we'd ever seen, so how can the sequel?  But that doesn't mean it isn't still incredibly funny - I laughed pretty much the entire time with varying degrees of hilarity, and that's probably all any comedy can aim for.  There is drug use, death and dismemberment, f-bombs galore, stolen monks, a drug dealing monkey, and plentiful full-frontal nudity (unfortunately not by Bradley Cooper), so maybe don't take your grandma, but by all means, if you liked the first one, go see the second.

The Hangover Part II  1hr 42 min R

Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides 3D

Let me just say that I did not intend to see this in 3D, nor do I particularly suggest you do so.  I try to avoid 3D whenever possible, but because of technical difficulties at the theater that resulted in all of us lowly 2D seekers getting to see the movie in 3D for free I really had no choice.  Now, since I don't really ever go to 3D movies because I think it's just stupid and distracting and I never feel like I can properly focus on the screen, I'm just going to comment on the movie itself and not the 3D effects because I don't know how they compare to others and if they were really good or not.  I do know there were some pretty cool shots that the 3D captured beautifully (a neat stone arch, a view up through the rigging of a ship), but I certainly wouldn't pay extra money for those shots.
Anyway, after the first couple of minutes when the movie got going and the screen stopped looking all squiggly through the 3D glasses (without making me either nauseated or giving me a headache) I could finally relax and enjoy myself.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (to be called just Pirates 4 from now on, because jeez that's a long title) starts out with Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) up to his usual tricks to save an old friend from a trial, in which he is accused of being... Captain Jack Sparrow.  And there is apparently another Captain Jack Sparrow out there trying to find a crew.  None of this is really addressed or explained, but it also doesn't really matter too much as it is basically only a conceit to reintroduce all of the characters and set them upon the main adventure.  There is action right from the start, accompanied by the fabulous Pirates theme music which serves to make every stunt seem that much more daring, and Depp's Sparrow swaggers with such floppy confidence that he somehow manages to turn his exceedingly poncy gait into something to be admired.

The movie takes place an unknown number of years after the previous 3 movies, and while we see a few familiar faces (most prominently Geoffrey Rush as Jack's nemesis Barbossa), most of the main characters from the earlier films are nowhere to be found.  And that's not all that's different.  Pirates 4 has also trimmed the fat from the plot lines, leaving the main story of the various characters' search for the Fountain of Youth.  Gone are any random subplots and the twisty turning abandonment of all logic or coherence or explanation that drowned Pirates 2 and 3.  Seriously - I've seen both of those movies several times (they're always showing up on cable somewhere) and I don't think I could tell you what happens in them if my life depended on it.  I'm not even sure, if you put one of them on right now, if I could tell whether it was #2 or #3.  So the streamlining of storytelling in #4 was more than welcome.

The other big difference from the first three movies, is that Jack Sparrow falls squarely into the side of the good guy.  Whereas before he wasn't necessarily evil, if always only looking towards his own desires, in this movie he is definitely less selfish.  I mean, in the very first scene he is rescuing an old shipmate which is not something we would have seen before, unless perhaps that shipmate owed him money.  I find the loss of the ambivalence in Sparrow's character (will he or won't he betray them?) a perfectly fine development, because honestly we always knew he'd never do anything truly terrible to anyone else.  And although the writers did try to hold on to it, showing him playing all sides against each other, there is less a feeling that he is doing it for amusement as opposed as strictly a way to survive.

And that could be because the bad guy in this movie is truly bad - Ian McShane plays Blackbeard with zero sense of humor and less patience.  Personally, I think a little bit more fun can be had in playing a villain, but he gets the point across that joking around with Blackbeard will only lead to a quick and even more quickly forgotten, death.  The final player in this outing is Blackbeard's daughter (Penelope Cruz), who is the least developed character.  She was supposedly about to become a nun when Sparrow seduced and fell in love with her.  This all makes sense then that her basic trust in faith would lead her to try and redeem her father with the fountain of youth - except I'm not really sure I would have known this back story if I hadn't read about it in advance reviews.  It was only referred to ever so subtly in the movie, and as such her insistence on saving her father rang a little hollow.  Plus, it seems such a shame to cast such a bombshell in a movie and not use her sex appeal even once (although understandable because I believe Cruz was pregnant during filming).

All in all this was a fun trip back into the fantastical world of Pirates of the Caribbean, and one I'd recommend.  And as usual, there is a little tidbit post credits if you feel like staying for it.  I will warn you that it is literally after the ENTIRE credits, so you'll be waiting for several minutes for about 30 seconds of scene which isn't really anything more than a wink.  No big secrets revealed or sequels hinted at, so decide on your own whether staying is worth it.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides 2 hrs 17 min  PG-13

Bridesmaids

Let me just say, that with a title like "Bridesmaids," and a poster like that ^, this movie should have had a lot more wedding mania related hijinks.  Not that I would have necessarily preferred that - thw whole bridezilla thing has been done - badly by Hollywood (Bride Wars), and even worse by reality tv.  So it's cool that this wasn't your typical chick flick catfight type movie, but still - expectations people.

Instead this movie is more about the implosion of one woman's life as her best friend is preparing to get married.  Which is fine and all, except that most of the implosions come as the result of her own pathetic, self sabotaging, woe is me behavior.  Not that Annie (played by Kristin Wiig with all kind of SNL character traits peeking through her body language) is a completely unlikeable character, it's just that because we are left never knowing why she has totally given up on trying at life we are left sort of thinking she should stop feeling so sorry for herself.

The relationship between Annie and Lillian (Maya Rudolph) is joy to watch, because the actresses are real life best friends, and their scenes pop with the chemistry of people who truly enjoy each others company.  But the true stars of the movie are Melissa McCarthy, who is by far the funniest thing in the movie, and Chris O'Dowd, who manages to be a truly dreamy romantic lead despite looking basically like a basset hound (I attribute this to his Irish accent).  Rose Byrne was well cast as the gorgeous, perfect wanna be maid of honor, trying to usurp Annie's spot as BFF, and Jill Clayburgh is ideal to play Kristin Wiig's mom; but Ellie Kemper and Wendi McLendon-Covey were sorely underutilized as a stereotypical naive newlywed and foul mouthed suburban mom.

This movie wasn't as funny as I had hoped, which isn't really saying much because my expectations were pretty unrealistically high.  To be completely honest, the movie was really funny- there were many times when I (and everyone else in the theater) laughed out loud.  This movie has been hailed as the female version of The Hangover, and while I don't know if it is going to have the shelf of life (or spawn the catchphrases) of that film, I do know that it is a really funny, and fun way to spend a couple of hours.


Bridesmaids 2hrs 5 min  R

Priest

 This movie was a real disappointment.  Not because it was particularly awful, but because it could have been so much better.  It had a cool premise - some dystopian future/otherworld where history has been filled with an endless war between man and vampire (NOT regular, Dracula/Twilight vampires, but a whole different species of animal).  The church has become the safeguard of humankind, partially in thanks to super warriors called priests who were strong enough and fast enough to fight the vampires.  At the time of the movie, the vampires have been locked away on "reservations" and the priests have been left on the outskirts of society, unable to be accepted because of the powers they are no longer able to use.

Unrequited love, corrupt government/religious figures denying the truth in favor of blind faith and self interest in power, the purpose and existence of warriors in a culture once there is no more war; these are all themes that were introduced and summarily ignored by this movie.  They also had the unique premise of a sci-fi horror western mashup, which was basically used for costuming only and not explored further.  Oh, and the eyeless vampires (which look exactly like something from another movie - but I totally can't think of what) made for some pretty badass creepies - too bad they didn't get much screen time either.

Instead we were treated to numerous shots of high tech, high speed motorcycles racing across the barren wastelands (a great image, but seriously, once or twice paints the picture just fine, thanks), and a climactic battle where never once did we question the good guys' ability to win, and that was over almost before it started.  if anything, the big climactic battle of this movie played out like the initial fight scene in a normal action movie.  You know the formula: movie intro, set up, fight scene where the good guy prevails, twist where the good guy gets his ass kicked or learns it goings to be way harder than he thought, climax where he wins by the skin of his teeth, most likely after being severely wounded.  This movie threw out that formula, but not in favor of originality- instead it was more like someone said "okay, this is great, but let's edit out anything that seems like it might cause hardship for our hero."  So we're just left with a battle that is entirely too easy to win, and a victory that seems that much more hollow for it.

The cast (lead by Paul Bettany and Karl Urban) was good, even with the sparse dialogue and limitations they were given - look serious and tough and world weary seem to be the main acting directions- and the special effects were fine, if a little derivative - super high, slow motion jumping are great to demonstrate super fight skills, but feel a little thin in the absence of real tension.  This movie is based on a comic, and I'm wondering if the director was a little ambitious when adapting this movie, because it has a real serial feel to it.  To be honest, the lack of emotional depth and serious drama wouldn't have felt as gaping if this were the pilot to a tv show or something.  The ending clearly sets up future action as the world of the movie seems to be headed back into war - and if the closing credits had rolled over a "to be continued...." I would feel invigorated and excited about the next installment.  As it is, the movie may have been hoping for a sequel, but they seem to have misunderstood that to leave 'em wanting more you have to give them something to want first.  Nobody likes a story if they only hear the first chapter, and nobody is going to greenlight a sequel to a movie no one liked.

And seriously, what is the point of having a whole army of vampires if we never see them in action?

Final verdict: if the previews have tempted you in anyway, it is worth a rental.  But not really worthy the cash for feature film, and definitely not worth 3D (I'm assuming, I never see 3D).  And somebody should really get on the idea of using this as the launch for a tv series or miniseries at least.  Four or five little segments like this and we could have a pretty satisfying story.  Which of course, is the problem.


Priest 1hr 27min PG-13


ps: if you like the whole combo of western and graphic novel type sci-fi (this time with ninjas!), check out: The Warrior's Way 

pps: the best line in the whole movie - after one character has let loose with his shotgun at a horde of vampires "you'd have made a good priest."  Heh.

Fast Five

Let's face it: if this movie appeals to you, you are probably already planning to see it, and if it doesn't, then nothing I say is going to sway you.  And that's cool- obviously, this is not really a franchise that is seeking to expand it's audience across all demographics.  So I'll just tell you what I thought about the film (oh let's face it - this ain't no film, it's a MOVIE).

I have seen every installment of the Fast and Furious franchise (although I can't remember the last installment at all), so I feel confident saying that this is, if not the best one, at least a return to the glory days on the first movie.  Is it high art? Of course, not.  But it is super fun, and what it lacks in depth it sure makes up for in flash.  The plot is thin, but also a little more coherent than some of the other movies - seriously, what the hell was going on in the first sequel?- and slightly more than just an excuse to have the characters drive around in wicked cool cars.  In essence this is actually a heist movie, with a cast of characters from all of the other sequels popping up to fill the various roles of gadget guy, master of disguise, bickering brothers, etc. as dictated by the new modern heist.  Never mind that why these people fit into these various roles is unclear - they are never really asked to do anything to fill them anyway.  I mean, the chick that is supposed to be a weapons expert never does anything with any weapons except for clean them in one scene.  Basically, the writers tried a little something to echo the cool cast of characters intro in movies such as Ocean's Eleven, and it didn't quite work.  They would have been better off just being like "hey, let's call some people we know who can drive super well and know random stuff about safe cracking and whatnot, and that will be our team."  But none of that really matters, because once the team gets together it is clear they work well as a cohesive unit, so stereotypical movie characterizations be damned.

The biggest draw for this movie is the long awaited match up between Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson (forever The Rock).  And while it is a great fight scene, let me just say that it is only in the movies!  The real life toughness of Dwayne Johnson shines through so strongly against the false actory bravado of Vin Diesel, that the fact that the fight is a fairly even match kind of comes across as a joke.  If there is any way The Rock wouldn't completely wipe the floor with Vin, then I fill out a bikini like one of the girls in this movie.  I also found it a wee bit difficult to root against The Rock - after all, Vin and Paul Walker are the heroes of this film, so we don't want the big bad Fed on their tail to catch up; but it's kind of hard not to want Dwayne to get his guy.  Of course, as is typical of this kind of movie, everything works out in the end, so no real worries there.

Despite the draw of two big screen macho men duking it out, the real highlight of this movie is of course the driving stunts.  The climactic chase involves two identical black cars (yes, that is as detailed as you are going to get out of me, a total car dunce), speeding in unison through the streets of Rio, trailing a giant bank vault.  The sight of that thing swinging through turns like an enormous wrecking ball was great fun, especially since the characters apparently are such skilled drivers that, with no practice whatsoever, they are able to accurately swerve to crash it into police cars at will. Ridiculous?  Yes.  But still thrilling as hell.

Basically,  this movie is everything you would expect, or hope it to be.  It may not be your cup of tea, but it is one hell of a ride.  Oh, and heads up - if you do go see it, stay through at least the first few minutes of the end credits.


Fast Five 2hr 10min  PG-13

SuperBowl Ads Psuedo Wrap Up

I am not doing my usual analysis of the Super Bowl commercials this year, a decision I made a while ago based on the fact that it takes me several hours to do (I can't do it live because there are kids around here), meaning I am often up until Midnight or so watching my DVR of the game, making notes and blogging my opinions.  I just didn't feel like making that kind of effort this year, plus I'm a little under the weather and in general I'm trying to get to bed at an earlier time anyway.  So I was just going to watch as a spectator.

And then of course, I SAW the commercials, and wow am I ever glad I didn't devote a ton of time to analyzing this crap.  Was it just me or was this year especially lame in terms of the commercials?  I realize that a large portion of my disappointment is most likely due to the general increase in good commercials year round - overall ads have gotten funnier and more unpredictable in an attempt to fight the ever dominant DVR system.  But apparently that means ad companies have used up all of their creativity and wit before ever getting to the Super Bowl, because this year's crop was LAME.  Nothing especially clever, nothing especially funny, and there wasn't even a classic Budweiser Clydesdale commercial to make me cry (at least, there wasn't in the first 2/3 of the game before I went to bed).  Blah de blah blah.  So I am truly grateful that I didn't waste my considerable talent (heh) on any of these poor excuses for Super Bowl ads.  Let's do better next year, ok folks*?

I hereby present you with my favorite ad of the night:




And the runner up:





*also the Bears. No losing to the Packers next year!

Fairly Legal

So, I've watched Fairly Legal  a two times now (with a third episode sitting on my DVR), and I like it okay.  Of course, I've pretty much watched every original show on USA since Silk Stalkings (ha! remember that show?) so it's fair to say I am biased.  But all in all, it's a decent show - which is not to say there aren't a few things that need tweaked:

First: lose the weird random references to the Wizard of Oz.  What is that even about?  I think she could keep the wicked witch of the west ring tone on her cell when her stepmother calls, because that is amusing and actually sort of realistic - but having everyone in her life linked to characters from Oz is just plain bizarre.

Second: Drop the whole she's right outside her office building, making someone wait, lying on the phone about where she is and hopping in a cab thing.  I get it.  She set her own priorities regardless of what else might be happening.  But you know what?  It doesn't come off as cute, it comes off a rude and self centered and obnoxious.  Being terminally late, canceling appointments with no justifications, lying, and just generally treating everyone like they are less important than you are, are not endearing qualities.  Plus, she does it like four times and episode, which is just overkill.  The show is lucky Sarah Shahi is so charming (with such a megawatt smile) or these horrible personality traits would have left it stranded at the gate.  Yes, she can be a free spirit who bucks the system.  Doesn't mean she has to be a jerk.

Three: Either develop the other characters further, or show more of the stepmother character.  The dignity and vulnerability she managed to convey with hardly any expression in the scene when she was faced with a client attempting to get her into bed in exchange for keeping his business is some of the most nuanced acting I've seen on tv in a long time.  They have allowed her to move outside of the cookie cutter ice queen role and show hints of her struggle as she tries to hold on to her dead husband's law firm despite resentment from her stepkids and being judged as a trophy wife my the clients.  More of this type of depth, please.

Which brings me to
Four: do something with the main character and her ex husband's relationship.  I understand that it is supposed to be love/hate, where they are still very attracted to each other but have such different views of the law that they argue all the time.  Except the ex husband is never on the right side of the argument.  He is always a stick in the mud, by the book jack ass without any justification behind it.  In order to make this kind of relationship pleasing to the viewer we have to like BOTH characters.  We have to see the merit in both of their sides when they argue, and so far, that is not being achieved.  Basically, as it is now, I'm just wondering what the hell she still sees in him, other than that he is a convenient source in the DA's office when she needs something done.  Make them both equally right and equally wrong, and equally likable so we can root for the relationship the way it's intended to be.

So there you have it.  I like the show, but it can be SO much better.  Hopefully it will find a surer stride as the season progresses.