Trailer of the day: "Green Zone"

The Hurt Locker

Released: 2009
MPAA rating: R
Run-time: 2:11

It’s starting to look like a two-horse race between “The Hurt Locker” and “Avatar” for Best Picture this year.  While I loved “Avatar”, I’m not really advocating it for Best Picture as it was more about the “experience” of the movie than the movie itself.  Interestingly, “The Hurt Locker” is almost equally an “experience” movie.  No, it is not 3-D, but it totally immerses you in the Iraq War better than any news footage could.  The film follows a fictional bomb disposal unit deployed in Iraq as a part of Bravo company.  After an opening scene to establish what exactly this unit does, the unit is joined by SSG William James (Jeremy Renner) and we quickly learn that James does things very differently.  On his first mission, he foregoes the use of robotics to go check out the bomb for itself.  You aren’t quite sure if he is a thrill seeker or simply has a death wish.  As far as story goes, that’s about it.  The movie is basically a string of intense sequences of bomb disarmament and some other military conflict.  Perhaps the most intense is a sequence where the team finds themselves pinned down by a sniper and are caught in a deadly game of who can get their sights calibrated faster?  This is a very good, intense movie that gives you a pretty strong feeling of what it is like in a war-time environment.  However, I now find myself without a clear Oscar favorite.  I would bet “The Hurt Locker” will win, but I definitely did not find it to be as good as all the attention it is getting.  Maybe “The Hurt Locker” and “Avatar” will split the vote and my favorite, “Inglourious Basterds” can sneak in and take it.  (Although I don’t really see that as “Best Picture” material, either).  Oh, and since it is never explained in the movie, I give you the definition of “The Hurt Locker”, c/o IMDB:
To put someone in a "hurt locker" is to physically mess someone up, badly. It is roughly synonymous with causing someone "a world of pain." According to the movie's official web site, "In Iraq it is soldier vernacular to speak of explosions as sending you to "the hurt locker."

Grade: B+


Trailer:

The Final Destination

Released: 2009
MPAA rating: R
Run-time: 1:22

For a movie reviewer (and, let’s face it, I’m not one!!), “The Final Destination” presents an interesting challenge.  On the one hand, it clearly is not a good film.  On the other, I don’t believe it really pretends to be.  The schlock-horror genre it belongs to doesn’t really aspire to any dreams of Oscar, so the thought turns to:  Did it hit the mark it was trying to hit?  For this film, it is a mixed answer.  The "Final Destination” series is one that takes an interesting premise (What if you survive when you were meant to die?) and runs it thoroughly into the ground.  I’ve been watching them from the first one and they are simply silly movies that find more and more elaborate ways to destroy people.  Although they are not spoofs, they certainly do not take themselves too seriously and I actually laughed at out loud at how ridiculous every death scene was in this movie.  They even manage to bring to life one of Dane Cook’s great bits (“Did you hear what happened to Mary? She was killed by a tire!” “A what?” “A tire.  It hit her right in the face!!”  “Why was her face near a tire?” “No, this tire came right after her!!”).  I saw this on DVD, so it was not the 3-D version, although I doubt that made much of a difference.  So, bottom line:  Was it any good? For a horror film, no, but for a borderline comedy?  What can I tell you? I had a good time and a few laughs.  What more could you possibly expect??

Grade: C-


Trailer:

Edge of Darkness

Released: 2010
MPAA rating: R
Run time:  1:57

Mel Gibson returns in front of the cameras as Thomas Craven, a Boston detective whose daughter is murdered right in front of him on his front porch.  Initially, it is assumed that he is the intended target of the hit, but as he begins to look into her work, he finds she had some secrets that may have put her directly in harm's way.  He is visited by a mysterious man named Jedburgh (Ray Winstone, who nearly steals the movie and is swiftly becoming one of my favorite character actors).  Jedburgh is sort of involved with the bad guys, but also seems to want to help Craven blow the cover off the conspiracy.  Craven methodically moves through his daughter's contacts to get a sense of what she did for a living and how that ties into her death.  There is also a subtext where Craven sees and hears his daughter at different points, giving it a bit of a "The Lovely Bones" angle.  This is a movie that suffers because of its trailer on two levels:  On one, the trailer serves as a Cliffs Notes version of the movie itself, moving linearly through the storyline making you think you barely need to see the movie itself.  On the other level, it portrays the film as a big-time action movie, much like "Taken", but it is much more of a mystery investigation than an action movie.  Recently on "Saturday Night Live", they spoofed Mel Gibson doing an interview about this movie and the interviewers comparing it to many of his other films.  While this is somewhat accurate, this type of movie is what Gibson does best and it is a pleasure to see him doing it again. I feared it would be sort of a silly film. but it was better than expected.  It also featured a lead villain who had possibly the coolest office I've ever seen, reminiscent of the lairs of James Bond villains.

Grade: B-

Trailer:

The Soloist

Released: 2009
MPAA rating: PG-13
Run time: 1:57

As indicated in the poster above, this one is all about the acting.  The movie, even though it is a true story, is fairly cookie cutter although it does go off in some directions I did not expect.  Robert Downey, Jr. plays Steve Lopez, a columnist for the LA Times suffering from writer's block.  It's not so much that he has a problem with writing itself, it's more like none of the topics he has to write about are particularly interesting to him.  It is around this time that he comes across Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx), a homeless man playing the violin who mentions he was Julliard-trained.  This provides Lopez his inspiration.  How is it that an immensely talented violinist is living on the streets?  He learns that he is not a violinist at all, but is actually a trained cellist. Ayers decides he must get to the bottom of this and, at the same time, find a way for Ayers to live to the level of his talent.  The movie takes an in-depth look at homeless people in general and many of the "actors" playing the homeless are actually homeless.  It is an inspirational, sometimes emotional and even educational story, but the real wow factor of the film is Downey Jr. and Foxx, who are at the top of their game.  Sure, Foxx comes from a comedy background and is sort of annoying with his auto-tune singing, but as an actor, he is really extremely good.  Downey Jr. is at least as good, but at this point in his career, that is hardly a surprise.  So, the movie is pretty good, but see it for the acting.  It does not get much better.

Grade: B

Trailer:

Vicky Christina Barcelona

Released: 2008
MPAA Rating: PG-13
Run time: 1:36


My history with Woody Allen films is sort of a love/hate one.  Early in his career, when he made straight-on comedies, I loved him.  As he grew as an artist and became more of an art-house director, I sort of trailed off.  "Vicky Christina Barcelona" definitely fits the art-house criteria, but after hearing some positive buzz from people other than critics, I decided to give it a try.  Well, it certainly was high-brow film-making, like I expected, but it was also more enjoyable than some of those films.  It actually had the "feel" of a foreign film (I'm sure the Barcelona setting has something to do with that).  Right off the bat, you find out that "Vicky Christina Barcelona" is not a character, but a list.  I'll explain.  The story involves around Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Christina (Scarlett Johansson), friends who take a trip to spend their summer in Barcelona (see how that works?).  Vicky is a straight-laced and engaged woman taking some college courses abroad.  Christina is a much more adventurous type who is pretty much up for anything.  One night at dinner, they are approached by local artist Juan Antonio Gonzalo (Javier Bardem), who arrogantly invites them to spend the weekend with him so they could enjoy the sights and "make love".  Vicky is horrified, but Christina immediately jumps at the offer.  This sets off a chain of events that becomes so complicated it could hardly be called a love triangle, especially when Juan's erratic ex-wife, Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz) enters the picture (Cruz won an Oscar for her role). I was very impressed with Javier Bardem, who exploded onto American screens in "No Country for Old Men" and plays an extremely different role here, equally as effective.  It is an entertaining film exploring the complexities of love and monogamy, but it is certainly not for everybody.  While it is a comedy-drama, it really doesn't get funny until Elena enters the picture and then, only moderately so. One of the best running gags is Elena's insistence on speaking Spanish, while Juan chastises her for doing so, only to end up speaking Spanish himself.   I did like it and I developed a new appreciation for Woody Allen.  His films are still not quite in my wheelhouse, but he is a master craftsmen both as a writer and director.

Grade: B-

Trailer:

The Boondock Saints

Released: 1999
MPAA rating: R
Run time: 1:50


Who are the Boondock Saints?  Conner (Sean Patrick Flannery) and Murphy MacManus (Norman Reedus) are two Irish brothers in South Boston who have gotten it into their head that they have been chosen by God to rid their neighborhood of its criminal element.  After they take down a couple of Russian thugs who are trying to muscle in on their favorite bar, they get the attention of FBI agent Paul Smecker (Willem Dafoe), who is somewhat flamboyant, but brilliant at dissecting crime scenes.  The action and violence is completely over-the-top and Dafoe's performance, in particular, is also.  For fans of ultra-violent crime dramas a la Tarantino, this is an entertaining movie.  It is shocking and funny, although not even remotely realistic.  From people I have talked to about this movie, I've decided this is either a love it or hate it film.  There does not seem to be any in-between.  Well, in my case, I was closer to loving it, but it is not on the level of the Quentin Tarantino movies it looks to emulate.  It is certainly a fun tale of revenge and retribution that somehow manages to find a religious angle to the whole thing.

Grade: B

Trailer:

District 9

Released: 2009
MPAA rating: R
Run time: 1:52

"District 9" is a very thinly-veiled metaphor for apartheid.  Setting the movie in a shanty-town in South Africa sort of makes that point extremely obvious.  The premise is that aliens live her on Earth and have been for quite some time.  However, they are confined to a small area outside Johannesburg, where their ship hovers above.  They are unable to leave as the ship has no fuel and their designated district is over-run with filth and garbage.  As a solution (at least from the human perspective), it is decided that the aliens should be evicted and relocated to another area.  The relocation effort is being led by Wikus Van de Merwe (Sharlto Copley), who almost enjoys his work too much, at least until events find him being very sympathetic to the aliens cause.  Copley does a great job morphing from a comedic role into some sort of bad-ass action hero.  The movie itself starts of as a pseudo-documentary but eventually moves into being a straight-ahead movie.  The alien effects are completely believable as every alien you see (known as the "prawns") look completely real.  In scenes with humans, there is no drop-off in quality to take you out of the movie.  The movie was very entertaining for the most part, if somewhat slow to start. The acting was very good and the movie is set in modern times, not the future, which makes it feel that much more authentic.  While I don't think this deserved an Oscar nomination for Best Picture (10 films is just too many), this is a very good film.  Despite being a metaphor for apartheid, you never really feel the politics beaten into your head.

Grade: B

Trailer: