This past weekend I had the pleasure of going to see John Carter. To be quite honest I did not really know what to expect from the film. I was only tangentially aware of the John Carter franchise but it is difficult to be a fan of science fiction literature and not have at least heard the name in passing. I sat down with my oversized soda in a theater filled with more ten year-olds than I had expected, and after double checking that I hadn’t stumbled into a Lorax theater by accident, I prepared myself for whatever was going to happen on screen in front of me.

Ryan’s Favorite List from 2011

I was going to sit down and make a “best of” list for the year, but it struck me as so cliché that I couldn’t go through with it. However, being the sentimental type, I wanted to at least write something about what pop culture has brought me this year. What I decided on was to create a list of the best things I have experienced this year, not necessarily what was released this year. This is not THE year in review; it is MY year in review.

Scotty and Zoe's Movie Blitz

Zoe: Scotty got a job

Scotty: Yay!

We used to go see all our movies on Wednesday but now that she’s all employed and no one seems to have movie showings in the 8 o’clock hour, we’ve gotten a bit behind.

Boo!

But now we’ve settled on a new day, Friday so we can be extra timely.

*applause*

But that also leaves us going into this week behind on some movies we wanted to see so, tada! It’s movie blitz time. Three movies, one week, and one super review.


Movie #1 - The Green Lantern: Hal Jordon Learns the Power of Talking about his Feelings
This movie stars Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordon, a reckless test pilot who is granted a power ring that can project his “will” as anything he can think of, as long as it’s green.

The kind of omnipotent power you’d expect from the company that brought us Superman.

It also gives him the ability to fly and make instant green clothes. Unfortunately this green ring means that he is now part of group alien space cops charged with protecting the universe from evil, and the color yellow.

The two are related.

Mainly, yellow represents fear (Maybe because it’s the color your underwear turns when you wet yourself.) There’s a giant physical embodiment of fear/yellow that is consuming planets.

It’s basically a tentacled Galactus except actually threatening.

The problem, Hal is a giant commitment-phobe. Add in a creepy guy with a bulbous head (That reminds me of several boys I knew in high-school) and you get a superhero movie!

And Good Lord was it boring!

In parts.

A lot of parts.

But not all parts.

Seriously movie, alien space cops. How do you make alien space cops boring! The plot was pretty basic, but unlike Thor which had a similarly basic plot, there was just no life to Green Lantern, no spark. I mean, a girl can only oggle at Ryan Reynolds for so long.

But you can oogle at Chris Hemsworth forever...

That’s because he was in a better movie. And here’s the most annoying part of Green Lantern, deep down, it’s not bad. You can tell that a couple drafts ago, this was a genuinely fun movie. I like the character interactions, I like the actors, I liked the Green Lantern Corps and the main villain Parallax (the Galactus guy) even if his name does sound like an anti-depressant. The pacing and flow of this movie was just so BAD. The movie is only about an hour and forty-five minutes, it felt like two and a half hours.

True. I felt that this film’s greatest weakness was an over use of exposition. You know how in English class teachers would always say “don’t tell us, show us.” I think this film took it a little too close to heart. They decided to add scenes that explained things that were already explained.

They exposited about the Green Lantern Corp twice at the beginning and during the requisite training scene. There was no new information the second time, I guess they just thought we forgot.

They also had an obligatory parental death scene that was just way too cheesy. There was also a scene with Hal Jordan and his nephew that was cute and gave great character development but was just totally unnecessary plot wise. After that scene at the beginning, that kid was never mentioned or seen again.

I will give Green Lantern credit for the best line I’ve ever heard in a comic book movie...

I’m gonna cut you off to prevent spoilers. That line was too awesome to ruin.

Awww.

There are parts about this movie that I really did like. The standard female love interest was probably the most likable “comic book love interest” I have watched. And their romance was totally believable because they had “a history.” It’s not like they fell in love in three days like some other movies I’ve seen.

Starring Natalie Portman.

Other than that, the special effects were decent and the general mythos was really cool. It churned my imagination, which I find as a good mark of a watchable film.

It made me want to read the comics more than watch it.

It was bad. I knew it was a bad movie while watching it. I still liked it for some reason.

Ryan Reynolds in a speedo being examined by aliens. There’s your reason.


Super 8: Cloverfield and E.T. Make a Baby
Oh my God I love this movie. I think out of every movie we’ve seen so far this summer, this has been the only one I will put on my Christmas list.

It was very good and it would have stirred in me feeling of nostalgia if it weren’t for the fact that I have no memory of the 70’s or 80’s. Jaws, E.T., Close Encounters and Indiana Jones were “old-timey” movies for us.

We were like three. So we weren’t exactly the target audience for the giant Spielberg nostalgia-love fest that is Super 8.

Two for me, you old fogey. I feel like we should be filled with childhood whimsy when thinking of Steven Spielberg. However, the four biggest movies Spielberg directed when we were kids consisted of Jurassic Park, Amistad, Saving Private Ryan and Schindler’s List.

None of these movies we were allowed to see in theaters.

And one of which still gives me nightmare. (Here’s a hint: it involved Velociraptors.)

Also, you forgot Hook which I actually remember going to see but not anything of the movie itself.

I just remember being traumatized by Robin Williams in tights.

Let’s move away from that haunting image....

Right, so if we don’t have an ample amount of Spielberg-nostalgia, then why did we like the movie so much?

It’s just so atmospheric. It pulls you in and just lets you steep in the world they’ve created that’s still totally relatable even though I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Super 8 camera in person. On top of all that, there’re really cool explosives.

Scotty’s watching the trailer for Sherlock Holmes, so I guess I need to copy the summary from Wikipedia. Super 8 centers around a group of friends who are filming their own Super 8 movie when a train derails. Engines, microwaves, and people begin to disappear and the army shows up and is being terribly mysterious in a Roswell kind of way. As the only witnesses to the accident, the kids of course have to investigate these new events all while trying to finish their movie.

The kids were funny and cute, and not really annoy like child characters tend to be. I also liked the lack of (Or so good I didn’t notice) CGI.

The kids acted like real kids. During the movie’s climax, one of them even decided not to go. He was like “fuck that shit, I’m staying here where I’m not going to die,” which I loved.

Kids are awesome, but that train explosion was cooler.

Oh man, that train explosion. But I have more to write about the kids.

Fine, talk about those suckers.

Also, as someone who has tried to make a movie with her friends, I totally related to Charles (Riley Griffiths), the kid director. The whole movie within the movie subplot is really what endeared me to this movie. Trying to coerce all your friends with no acting experience to convey what you believe to be your fantastic vision of a film and having to walk them all through it.

The train explosion had such a great use of pyrotechnics and flying stuff. I’ve become too used green screen scenes, which this might have been, but it definitely didn’t seem like that.

I honestly couldn’t tell what was real exploding train and what was computer exploding train and on that note, the monster or really lack thereof because you don’t really see the bugger until the last thirty minutes.

And, in my opinion, it was a bit of a letdown. Maybe because it was obviously CG or maybe because nothing was exploding.

They were totally going for a Jaws thing where we would only get a glimpse or blurry look at the monster before its big reveal. But just like Jaws, the monster is never as cool as what you’re imagining it is.

I think I would have liked it better if it was animatronic, like Jaws.

A walking animatronic shark....?

YES


Bad Teacher: More Like Bad Movie, Am I Right?
Actually, it wasn’t that bad. Wasn’t that good, but not bad. Unremarkable.

Jason Segel as the gym teacher was funny, Cameron Diaz was funny but they didn’t have much to work with as far as the script was concerned. Also, so not worthy of the R.

The movie was not as crude as I was expecting. Also, Justin Timberlake.

It was like he was in an extended SNL sketch and he sure is wacky!

In case you care, it’s about a teacher who’s more interested in finding a rich husband than shaping the youth of America. Stuff happens and we’re all better people at the end of it. This movie definitely had the potential to be a good, edgy black comedy but the creative team that brought us Year One was just not up the job.

Eh, I don’t want to waste anymore time on this film.


Transformers
Lots of explosions and a pretty sexist stereotypical girlfriend (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley).

Mind you, talking about Transformers is like grading on a curve. The big booms were pretty, the “story” was stupid and the movie opened with a shot of the new girl’s ass. However, I didn’t hate her nearly as much as Scotty did. She was actually relatively likable and while she did spend the movie running around in heels and not getting nearly as dirty as anyone else in that movie, you can’t really blame her for that.

Not just heels, jeggings. And when she wasn’t wearing notpants, she was wearing mini dresses. But it’s not just that, it was that she was a replacement with very little back story. But that doesn’t matter in the Transformers universe, because no one cares about women.

I say, for what she had to work with, she made a likeable character. I also remember there being racist robots...again...but don’t remember exactly what they were and that’s basically what Transformers is, a big dumb movie that’s fun to watch.

I will have nightmares about those jeggings for the rest of my life.

So, are we all caught up now?

Nope we still need to write about Harry Potter and Captain America, not to mention go see Cowboys and Aliens.

Crap...

A Brief Treatise on the Pitfalls of Pirates

Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides is a movie that had more impostors than At World’s End had betrayal. Everyone wants to be Jack Sparrow. No one wants to be Will or Elizabeth, including Will and Elizabeth. This simple fact was the kick in the right direction that places On Stranger Tides alongside the stronger of the Pirates franchise films.

We realize that we’re closing in on two months since the movie came out but trust us, this review was lovingly crafted and is well worth the read. Also our local cineplex still has On Stranger Tides showing so quit your complaining. Join Brian and James on their critical review of Pirates of The Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides. We may be a little off in our timing but the time taken is reflected in quality. Y’all know this to be true. Enjoy

James: On Stranger Tides starts us on familiar tides. The city of London. With a hanging of pirates. Or so we can all hope for.

Brian: As usual, Pirates does a lovely job with its crowds and bloodthirsty mobs. Even though the London streets teem with “respectable” citizens and finely-dressed children, the similarities between their behavior and that of a ship full of scallywags is humorously similar.

I’d like to get started right away by saying that I’m very interested in the Blackbeard character. Though the series constructs its pirates using bits and pieces from history (Barbossa is loosely based on Henry Morgan, Jack takes some elements from Calico Jack Rackham, and so on), this is the first time it directly lifted a (mortal) pirate personality from history (not without embellishment, of course).

J: In my mind there are two main questions about Blackbeard. There is the initial question of whether or not he was a good addition to the Pirates cast of characters. There is also the secondary question of whether or not he was wasted by being killed off after only one film.

B: I would answer yes to both of those questions. If you are going to have a franchise titled “Pirates of the Caribbean,” you’re tacitly promising your viewers (is this the correct term for movie-goers?) that someday, they will have a beard-burning, fire-ship driving, treasure-fleet-plundering pirate of the truly mythical proportions to which Blackbeard has risen. Before Johnny Depp started trying on dreadlocks and even before a little underground boat ride was built in Orlando, Blackbeard was a legend. But it is my opinion that On Stranger Tides failed to treat him thus.

I agree. To the second question though, I disagree slightly. I feel like Blackbeard was wasted as a character not because he was killed off so quickly, but because he was developed as a highly magical character. In a franchise so loose from reality in terms of magic and the like, I saw a character like Blackbeard, who was so mythological even in the real world, I thought that making him actually magic rather cheated him a little. I really would have liked to see a Blackbeard who was a straight pirate, fighting for his position of top pirate in a world filled with shamans, undead, and deathly octopus men.

Exactly. Blackbeard was impressive because of his behavior when he first appeared- all he has to do is walk through a doorway to cow his crew, no magic involved whatsoever (“I find myself... in a bewilderment.”). The voodoo I have no real problem with (insofar as pirates have a religion, it is generally identified as Voodooism or Vodoun ), but the character is less meaningful for the pervasive magic in which Disney wrapped him. He’s at least as magical as Tia Dalma, who, you might recall, turned into crabs and became the weather in At World’s End, after resurrecting a twice-dead Barbossa in Dead Man’s Chest and chaperoning an adventure to the afterlife.

I think looking back on the series that perhaps we can hope that this is not the last we will see of Blackbeard. Hopefully he’ll be back, without his magic, and pirating again.

Perhaps. There’s plenty of precedent in the franchise for temporary death. What there is very little, if any, precedent for is actual piracy. Aside from Barbossa’s sack of Port Royale in Curse of Black Pearl, Disney fastidiously avoids any actual piratical acts (probably because they’re all pretty filthy, immoral, violent, graphic, and completely inappropriate for their audience and canon).

Which only stressed more why I was looking forward to a Blackbeard, who might have been out doing some real pirating, while all of the others were out and about not doing the nitty gritty pirating.

Maybe the monkey will reinvigorate that aspect of the world.

We can’t possibly fully explore the addition to the series that Blackbeard represents without addressing the other new addition: his daughter.

Don’t you mean his “daughter?” I adored Angelica the first time I saw the film, and not just because she’s Penelope Cruz. The character hearkens back to the Jack Sparrow of Curse of the Black Pearl, when no one knew whose side he was on, whether he was a “good guy,” and whether anything he said was true or false. For me, On Stranger Tides didn’t point us to one particular “truth” for Angelica, except that she is a master con artist. Even when she attempts to sacrifice her life for Blackbeard, she could easily have anticipated Jack’s maneuver with the chalices, or even, as Jack suspects midway through the film, “fallen for her own con.”

I liked the character as well. While Elizabeth, the former token female character, certainly made a play to become a powerful, non-objectified, female character she really fell short since she was so motivated by her love interests with almost all of the main characters. Angelica on the other hand is motivated by a lot of things, the least of which is her feelings for Jack. Her feelings do tend to sway more to hatred for him then love never-the-less.

If Blackbeard’s future with the franchise is dubious at best, I think it’s safe to say that we haven’t seen the last of Angelica.

This is especially true due to her Spanish heritage. On the open seas where the pirates rule something like nationality isn’t too much of an issue. But now that we’ve seen the Spanish solidly enter the game alongside the English we will have to start thinking about nationality of the characters. She adds a character, on the pirate side of the playing field, who is not English like all of the others. I don’t think the couple Asian pirates that we’ve seen really count, since I’ve tried to forget as much of the third movie that I can.

And the multicultural crew of Blackbeard’s Queen Anne’s Revenge was so blatantly globally representative, it hardly counts.

So much of the tension between nations that allowed piracy to exist so extensively in the historical Caribbean was a result of the national hatred. It is nice to see the series finally getting into that.

Before this turns into a brilliant, reflective, but ultimately off-topic rumination on the Golden Age of Piracy, allow me to divert us to a character who can be loosely discussed in the same paragraph, or at least on the same page, as Angelica: the priest whose name everyone always forgets (Philip). If Penelope Cruz replaces Kiera Knightley as our token power-chick, then Sam Claflin replaces Orlando Bloom as our token moral compass.

I was unclear, was he really a priest, or simply a highly religious character? Furthermore was he Catholic or Church of England?

The characters, especially Blackbeard, often referred to him as ‘priest’ or ‘cleric,’ and I think at one point (during the exposition of his capture) it’s indicated that he’s a missionary. As for his denomination, I believe it’s Church of England, but I suppose in a world of Jesus and Not-Jesus, it’s a technicality.

I think the Spanish Inquisition might disagree with you.

No one expects it. He’s about as useful as Orlando Bloom, if perhaps slightly less annoying. Also, as far as I’m concerned, Sam Claflin is a no-name actor, which allows us to more easily accept him as a fairly attractive piece of eye candy (for those of the persuasion), and a relatively easily ignored piece of narrative furniture (for everyone else).

I think his first appearance in the film really stresses this. He’s just part of Blackbeard’s mast.

Speaking of Blackbeard’s mast, I simultaneously love and hate the role played by the infamous vessel Queen Anne’s Revenge. I love it because it, like Blackbeard, is one of the great pirate ships in history and myth, and the film absolutely treats it thus. QAR gets a much more reverent treatment than Blackbeard, who is paranoid and mentally fragmented from the prophecies of his zombies from the get-go (“THE ONE LEGGED MAAAAAN!”). The ship is huge, it’s dark; it’s barely controlled chaos. It represents Blackbeard’s reputation better than Blackbeard. It (literally) dwarfs the Black Pearl, which was previously held up as the most fearsome mortal ship on the sea. And, perhaps most interestingly, it is left in the hands of my favorite pirate, Hector Barbossa.

All said I did really enjoy PoTC 4. It marked a series return to a lot of what made the first movie great. It certainly had its pitfalls. If this makes any sense, it had good issues. They were the issues of a series being rejuvenated and not the issues of a series dying. I don’t know if they plan to make any further PoTC movies but they have certainly separated the wheat from the chaff. Stranger Tides is a movie that fans of the franchise will not be embarrassed to place on their shelves alongside the previous films. I know I might even push it up next to the first movie while accidentally knocking at least one of the other two completely off the shelf.

Given my immense bias towards the Pirates films, there was never a question of whether my review would be favorable. The question was: Will I be enthusiastically trumpeting its successes, or will I be savagely defending its wounded honor? For the most part, it has been the former. By my own admission, the movie has its faults, both in and out of the context of the other three, but as James said, those issues are simply indicative of the g-forces generated by turning the franchise in a new, brighter direction. It may not be the strongest entry in the series (which most people agree is Curse of the Black Pearl), but neither will it be the last we hear from the Pirates of the Caribbean.

Horror Movies to Hook Up To Presents: Trick ‘r Treat (2009)

Even if Halloween is still a few months away, that doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy a good scream fest. What better way to celebrate Halloween in June (Give it time it’ll catch on like Christmas in July) then by watching a terrifying movie? It will save you money on your air conditioning bill with all those spine tingling chills, and you get some sweet make out time. Science has proven that fear is a wonderful aphrodisiac. Why? Who cares but it’s been proven by scientists, in their science outfits, in labs.

Where was I? Oh right, a Halloween themed movie for those non-Halloween nights.

Trick ‘r Treat is set in an Ohio town celebrating Halloween like they’re Greenwich Village, look it up, and visited by a spirit whose only purpose seems to be announcing impending doom and being a creeper, A creeper in an outfit made of adorable shabbiness. The main stories are about a serial killer and his latest victim with an angelic child who testifies what we’ve all been thinking about Charlie Brown. Next we got some pretty, I guess they are pretty, girls out for a night on the town. Including TrueBlood’s own Anna Paquin who decides to wander through town, alone, and later a dark forest...alone. It’s a horror film and pretty girls do rather silly things. Please note it is Anna Paquin by herself, and if you watch Trueblood than you can guess what happens to her. My favorite segment involves a town legend about a bus of drowned schoolchildren and some jack o lanterns with a revenge plot worthy of a Shakespearian play. Tie it all together with a bitter old man, and his adorable little dog, who learn the true meaning of Halloween.

One of the best features of this movie is how the stories interconnect. It’s linear only in the sense that you see what happens over the course of a night. The film jumps between different moments occurring simultaneously a second watch is necessary to pick up on all the little details. If you prefer more shock and less intestines, then this is a film for you. Everything from costumes, whether childish or slutty, to candy bars, to pumpkin carving are rendered creepy and dare I say gruesome. Yes, I do say. There are a couple hokey gotcha moments but those are few and far between with plenty of gruesome deaths involving children and drunks.

If you see one Halloween themed film not involving men in coveralls or overly complicated traps, let it be this one. Everything about this film oozes Halloween, the costumes, the pumpkins, the falling leaves, the decorations. It’s what I wish Halloween was really like, all the tradition, and the threat that those traditions are really there to protect us from something darker.

X Men First Class Or How I Learn to Screw Continuity and Just Go With It

X-Men: First Class is a brotherly prequel sequel to the on-going X-Men movie franchise. The film follows a young doctoral candidate Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and his adopted sister Raven (Jennifer Lawrence). Their childhood experience growing up as mutants is paralleled by Erik Lehnsherr's (Michael Fassbender) much more violent youth as a Jewish boy in a Nazi prison camp. Charles is contacted by Agent Moira MacTaggert (Rose Byrne) after she stumbles onto a possible plot to start a third world war being masterminded by group with strange powers. As well as being an expert on human mutation, Charles Xavier is also a mutant himself. Charles and Erik cross paths for the first time when they both attempt to confront Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), the mutant mastermind and Nazi doctor responsible for the death of Erik's mother. Although Shaw escapes in his convenient submarine Charles convinces Erik to join him in finding other mutants like themselves to form a government sponsored team of mutants to fight Shaw and get revenge.

From here on the film follows the typical super hero mold. Charles and Erik seek out and gather a team of mutants. They deal with self doubt and risk the temptations of their darker natures. There is even a pretty good training montage after the team is attacked and decides they need to be more prepared. They move on the enemy, avert a world war, but ultimately remain fractured as Erik takes his revenge and assumes the role of Magneto, the moral heir of Shaw minus the Nazi collaboration.

The film is set roughly somewhere before and after X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and for the most part before the rest of the X-Men series. Fans of the comic books and the films will notice that X-Men First Class exists as a temporal abnormality. Although featured prominently as the second in command to Shaw in First Class, Emma Frost (January Jones) is shown as a child (Tahyna Tozzi) in Origins: Wolverine, which should take place later on the timeline. We also witness Hank McCoy’s (Nicholas Hoult) transformation from man to Beast even though he shows up in his non-hairy form in X2. The film also ends with an explanation of how Charles loses the use of his legs, even though we have seen him, much older, in The Last Stand able to walk to meet young Jean Grey.

Although the film has more temporal abnormalities than a typical episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation I found that they were easy to overlook. The film is a return to the fonder days of X-Men when we enjoyed the first movie and still had fresh memories of the 90's cartoon. Turning over the film to director Matthew Vaughn of Kick Ass and Stardust fame was apparently the kickstart the series needed to get out of its Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine slump. Although the story was still by Brian Singer, First Class features a fresh group of writers and producers. Their take on the X-Men universe actually works quite well, all fact checking aside. I quite enjoyed their take on working the X-Men super hero names into the story. This is always a challenge to do without making it seem forced or come off as just plain silly. Having the teens pick names for themselves during a late night drinking session worked organically and only came off a little awkwardly.

One of my only complaints coming out of the theater was that of all of the thousands of mutants they could have picked for the original X-Men they chose some of the most uninteresting characters. While I'm sure Angel, not to be confused with the other X-Man named Angel featured in The Last Stand, has a very important role in the X-Men universe, it doesn't really make any sense why Charles and Erik would go out of their way to pick up a erotic dancer if they knew they were organizing a strike team.

Technically the film holds up to its predecessors. Personally I would have enjoyed a slightly darker, sepia-toned feel to the film to really set it apart from the rest of the series. I got the feeling that the problems with continuity were less fact checking errors and more of a discrete effort to distance themselves from the rest of the series and really do an X Men movie their own way. It helps that their own way happened to be a pretty good one.

It is also important to note that this is the first film of the franchise to not blatantly feature Wolverine as a main character. In fact, outside of a small but humorous cameo, Wolverine is almost entirely not in the film. Finally it seems that producers are realizing that one of the strengths of the X-Men comic series was that it was an organization that featured many faces and many powers. First Class is truly an ensemble piece and not a vehicle for telling more of the Wolverine story. Hugh Jackman is a fantastic actor and Wolverine is certainly one of the most well known X-Men, but after three films that highly featured his story and one prequel entirely devoted to him I continue to find his back story flat and uninteresting. Hopefully this means that we can look forward to more X-Men movies absent of Wolverine.

Considering that both The Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine were failures with the X Men fan base and critics alike, First Class is a definite step in getting the franchise back on track. I know that I certainly enjoyed it quite a bit.

Bridesmaids: Jon Hamm Strikes Back

Zoe: We had quite the ordeal in order to see this movie.

Scotty: Actually I had quite and ordeal trying to see this movie, Zoe just waited confused.

For 45 minutes.

Yes, I’m just as upset about it as you are. So while Zoe types up the summary of the film, I will explain what happened.

Bridesmaids is about Annie (Kristin Wiig), who’s had a bit of a personal crisis. Her bakery failed, she’s sleeping with an asshole (Jon Hamm), she’s living with some strange Brits, and her car’s a piece of crap. Then her friend Lilian (Maya Rudolph) asks Annie to be her maid of honor. Annie’s in charge of planning all the bridal party events and hilarity ensues.

So, Zoe called from the Metro, saying she would need to be picked up for the movie in about 40 minutes. I thought, “Hey that’s enough time for a run around the neighborhood.” So I put on my shorts and a tank top that showed way too much of my sports bra, grabbed my iPod and headed outside thinking that I had left the door to the garage unlocked. Of, course, the door was locked. Without keys or a cell phone, I did the natural thing and kicked the door a couple (or more like a dozen) times while cursing profusely.

At this point, I was cursing the stupid kids in uniforms on the only bench at the Kiss and Ride that were keeping me from sitting down. Heels will do that to a girl.

I could have given up then and waited for Zoe to find my mummified corpse days later,. But no, I’m a problem solver. So, I went through my father’s tool box to find something to pick the lock with. (I learned quickly that nails don’t work.)

Apparently, lock picking is really hard. Then I had a sudden brainstorm Maybe the door from our back porch to the house was unlocked. Unfortunately, the porch was dead bolted from the inside. So I did the logical thing and cut a hole in the porch’s screen with a screwdriver.

At this point, I was reasonably sure A rabid Yorkie had mauled Scotty.

I was quite pleased with myself until I realized the door from the porch to the house was also locked. So, I ended up asking my neighbor for a ride. Thank you Elmer!

We had to go pick up a third friend and we were still only five minutes late. It was magic.

Totally. On to the review!

We went to see this movie with two of our friends, both women and at the end, we were 50/50 on it.

Basically, me and Zoe liked it and our friends didn’t.

We are not good contrasting opinion-type reviewers.

Well, we can always have a guest reviewer since one of our friends is currently sitting next to us.

Mary, what did you think?

Darn, I have to think now. Well, honestly I wasn’t too excited when Scotty and Zoe told me that this is what we’d be going to see. Actually, let me rephrase that. I was really disappointed that I missed Thor last week and was stuck seeing some combination of raunchy, foul-mouthed comedy and chick flick.

That’s where I was wrong. Bridesmaids is not a raunchy, foul-mouthed comedy about a bunch of women going to Vegas for a wild bachelorette party. The trailers and commercials made it out to be. It was instead a film about friendship, and it taught me a valuable lesson: if any of my friends get married and one of the other bridesmaids is an uppity, elitist biotch, I’m going to throw a tantrum and ruin her chocolate fountain and destroy the expensive decorations at the bridal shower. Just seems like a good idea now.

That chocolate fountain freaked me out. It was like a real, tiered fountain with chocolate instead of water. I’m not a germ freak by any stretch of the imagination but ew.

As a person who hadn’t eaten that day (due to being locked out of my house) it looked pretty damn appetizing.

They had one of those at our prom, didn't they?

They had a food fountain, not a lawn fountain. But I have to agree with Mary, what the trailers and commercials are selling and what the movie actually delivers are two very different things. I actually noticed that a few of the lines from the trailer don’t make the movie.

Yeah, I noticed that as well. It was a shame, since those were probably some of the funniest one liners in this film...and they didn't make it. I was definitely expecting a comedy, and when this movie attempted to be funny, I thought it failed.

Am I the only one who actually liked the “chick flicky” aspect of the film? There are themes here that are very poignant to me, especially the whole “life sucks and the world is out to get me” thing.

I liked it! Bridesmaids is much more concerned with the relationships between its female characters than how they relate to the men around them, contrary to what generally happens in your average chick flick. Even in movies for women, about women, two female characters will serve as antagonists for each other (see Bride Wars and Something Borrowed). Dudes can be buds but girls are bitchy and evil.

Or sluts.

Agreed

The girls in this movie interact in very believable ways, albeit exaggerated. One of the best scenes in the movie for me was a conversation between Annie and Lillian that sounds like one I might have with a friend. It is the women and their relationships with each other that are the center of the story. There’s also a love story but it’s more or less relegated to the B-plot which I definitely think works in the movie’s favor because although Chris O’Dowd (The IT Crowd) is one of the most adorable people in the world, romances as A-plots are boring and not suspenseful.

However, it was a really cute romance.

Yeah, that was pretty much the only thing that saved Bridesmaids for me once I realized that it wasn't going to be a raunchy comedy. I called it that the cop was going to end up as the romantic lead. I was also (sometimes audibly) rooting for Annie to stop being a selfish idiot and for things to work out between her and Rhodes. I got what I wanted.

I also like the raunchy comedy idea. I have eclectic tastes.

It was way more subtle than I was expecting it to be. A lot of the humor comes from sheer ridiculousness, like trying to push over a giant fountain in anger or trying to get pulled over by driving past a cop multiple times doing increasingly illegal things.

Also, Jon Hamm.

That’s right kids, this makes Bridesmaids movie number two that we’ve seen this summer with a cameo by Jon Hamm.

He was hilarious. Honestly, the funniest sex scene I have ever seen was in the first five minutes of this film and it involved him.

Can we start a petition to make Jon Hamm President of Hollywood?

Hollywood is too far away. How about president of New York?

I can’t vote in New York.

Well I can’t vote in Hollywood.

President of Hollywood is like being given the key to the city. You don’t have any real power, but you can walk into any building you want.

How about president of Derwood? He’ll have to live near us.

I think I’d be okay with that.

So do we have any artistic opinions about this movie?

I do! The editing is really inconsistent in Bridesmaids, mostly in the beginning. One second, it’s holding on a scene too long and the next it cuts away before the joke has a chance to sink in. It settles down beyond about thirty minutes in but a good comedy relies on pitch perfect editing so it seemed odd that the beginning was so off.

I didn’t get that, but eh.

I have to prove I got a minor in Film at least once a review.

Now it’s time for me to prove that I have a BA in economics. Is this movie worth the 11 dollars plus the opportunity cost of 125 minutes? I say yes (especially since I’m unemployed). It’s a little weird because you are expecting The Hangover and getting something a little different. For some it might be a bit weird. I really liked it though.

I also say yes, although I was expecting a different movie, the one that exists in its place is funny, surprisingly heart-felt and adorable. The characters can come off as one-dimensional but since we so rarely get a movie about women where they aren’t all just bitches to each other, I say hooray!

We would have a final comment by our guest reviewer but she discovered Scotty’s iPad and Mary is now playing Angry Birds.

We win.

Thor: The Cutest Viking You’ve Ever Seen

Zoe: In place of our usual review tonight, Scotty will take this opportunity to talk about the most important part of Thor. The mind bending hotness that is Chris Hemsworth.

Scotty: I don’t know if it can be put into words...

You can’t see it, but she’s drooling.

Am not...

Most half-hearted rebuttal ever.

Sigh . . . Let me put it like this. Every single straight/bi woman or gay/bi man should see this movie. Don’t worry about the plot, the action, the cinematography, Natalie Portman, or the unpronounceable Swedish words. Just focus on the pretty, pretty, pretty, hot, hot, hot, cute, cute, cute, pretty hot, cute, cute, hot, pretty man.

I almost choked on my cracker watching her type that. She’s not far off though. Even if he rocking a creepy flesh-colored beard.

I totally dug the beard. It made his smiles adorable. The warm fuzzy feeling is going to last for months. His face should be put on the background of cuteoverload.com.

Do you think you can wait a year, or at least until you get some adorable Ryan Reynolds in Green Lantern?

Ryan Renolds may not cure this. But maybe, Alexander Skarsgård will when True Blood’s next season starts up.

You and your Scandinavian blondes....

Hemsworth is Austrailian.

Same difference.

True, they both have sexy accents. (A bit of trivia. The actor who plays Professor Erick Selvig is portrayed by Stellan Skarsgård who is Alexander Skargård’s father. He also has a cool accent.)

…..So anyway, before we get started, I would just like to point out the incredibly targeted marketing that was showed to us in the trailers before the movie started. We saw previews for Captain America, Super 8, Green Lantern, X-Men First Class and Cowboys and Aliens. Our AMC really knows who’s going to see Thor. Also, scrawny CGI’d Chris Evans makes me giggle every time I see it.

He’s also not pretty and doesn’t have dazzling blue eyes....

Also, stay until the end. This is a Marvel movie after all and we need our obligatory Sam Jackson Avengers tie-in

So, first thoughts on Thor. And you can’t talk about how pretty Thor was. Go.

OMG, The Avengers are going to have both Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Hemsworth in it!

Really?

*Gurgle*

Oh dear. That’s the Homer Simpson lusting after a donut noise, just in case you were wondering.

*Gurgle*

Ok, need to snap her out of this.............NATALIE PORTMAN!

God Dammit I hate her... I’m so tired of seeing her in films. Plus she doesn’t deserve the gorgeous-

Stop it.

OK, synopsis. Thor is a film directed by Kenneth Branagh (that guy in almost every Shakespeare movie since the 90’s) that tells the story of the god/alien (I’m still not sure.) of thunder. He’s a brash and impulsive person-

Because aliengodmanthing is too long to type each time.

-who is about to be sort of crowned King of Asgard by his father Odin.

This part wasn’t really all that clear since Odin (Anthony Hopkins) was totally still alive and not going anywhere, and I’m not sure if Thor is ever really supposed to become king and.........yeah.

The coronation thingy (It featured ridiculously great hats; kind of like the Royal Wedding!) is interrupted by a couple of frost giants. Don’t ask. It makes more sense if you see the film.

Sort of.

Thor decides, against his father’s orders, to venture into the Frost Giant realm which I cannot pronounce/spell and kick-ass/take names. After nearly starting a war, Odin decides to teach his son a lesson and banishes him to Earth where he is promptly hit by a car being driven by Natalie Portman pretending to be an astrophysicist. Meanwhile, Thor’s brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is having daddy issues (I think).

Again, not that clear exactly what his issue is, he kind of alternates between Daddy didn’t love me and I want to take over the world because I’m evil.

Yeah, so he schemes and stuff. Just see the movie...

Things blow up and stuff. Do not go see Thor for the story because as soon as you start really looking at it, it’s pretty basic and uninspiring, even a bit confusing. You will also not be able to pronounce anything after you have left the theater.

Maybe if you know Norse Mythology and/or read comic books.

I don’t know, I read the free Thor catch up comic and all it really did was help me catch one in-joke and recognize characters.

Norse mythology, even without Marvelness, is pretty messed up. Did you know that Loki gave birth to an eight-legged horse?

…........what.........

Look it up on Wikipedia.

I just don’t know what to say to that.

Puts the movie into perspective huh?

I’m going to grab some chocolate to forget about that. You literally derailed my thought process with that.

Ok, back on the rainbow bridge.

The movie is definitely able to rise above its source material in one main aspect: humor. Thor is a god of thunder with a giant hammer whose name no one can pronounce, wears a funny helmet and in the comic speaks in thees and thous. This could have very easily have turned into something cringe-worthy to watch. But luckily, Thor ditches the helmet about five minutes in and the movie actually pokes fun at itself quite a bit. It’s like the movie’s saying, “yeah we know it’s silly and no one can pronounce Mjolnir (the name of his hammer). This movie is kind of ridiculous and we’re ok with it.”

It’s kind of the opposite of Iron Man. In that film the main character doesn’t take himself seriously, but the movie does. In Thor the main character takes himself very seriously, but the movie doesn’t.

It knows it isn’t the Dark Knight, and it doesn’t try to be. It’s a fun movie which makes it easier to ignore some of the more glaring plot confusions in the name of enjoying the ride.

I hated Natalie Portman though. I know, superhero films are supposed to always have a love interest, but her character felt a bit forced, (I mean, an astrophysicist? I know astrophysicists her age. She should not be beyond a postdoc) especially since they fall in love in less than two days. Actually, a lot happens in two days. Supposedly, the titular character learns humility and goes through great personal growth. Which is ok, until you realize this movie takes place over a span of 3 days.

It’s like when you realize the whole of Romeo and Juliet happened in a week?

Yes, couldn’t they put a montage in there somewhere? However, if you ignore that, the plot is ok. Well, except for Loki. Loki, in my opinion, was not a good villain. He was too sympathetic. It’s ok when a villain has dimension to him. But, in the end, a villain needs to be villainous. Loki, kind of just seemed to be a kid who wanted to make his daddy proud.

He wasn’t even that terribly mischievous.

Unless it was all an act. Then this movie was deeper than we thought it was. Still, I wanted to hug Loki.

I didn’t. His armor made him look like a bug.

But, again, they minimized the helmets enough that I could ignore it. His acting job was just that great. Actually everyone’s acting was really good.

Kenneth Branaugh can do many things. He can get terrific performances out of his actors, but the man cannot direct a fight scene to save his life. Every time we were treated to a big show stopping action number, it looked like someone fed the cameraman some speed and told the editor to cut five seconds off each shot. So, not only were we treated to some very unnecessary shaky cam but there was nothing for me to focus on. It all just turned into a giant wobbly looking mess.

I saw no shaky cam. And the action scenes were fine, in my opinion. However, there was very little of it for a comic book movie.

It was moving all over the place. I like to be able to appreciate fight choreography but I guess since each time Thor was pretty much fighting CGI monsters there might not have been enough of that to focus on. The first fight on the frost planet was also way too dark, I had trouble making out the action. Just imagine if you were seeing this in 3-D, you wouldn’t be able to see anything!

I still thought it was fine. Maybe because I’m used to my contacts going out of focus, but still.

So in conclusion, did you know Chris Hemsworth is married?

What?

And he has a four year old kid.

Damn it.

You still have Alexander Skarsgård.

She Can Skin a Deer but she Can’t Turn Off a TV: A review of Hanna

Zoe: So Hanna is one of those scary white people with no eyebrows (the only other one I can think of is this guy from Cold Mountain and he totally creeps me out) who has been raised by her equally creepy but really hot Eric Bana dad somewhere where there’s lots of snow. She’s been trained by said creepy Eric Bana for a mission against a Texas-y CIA agent played by Cate Blanchett. But when she takes on the mission, it becomes clear that nobody is what they seem, secrets are abounding, Germans are scary, and there’s lots of running and shaky camera work.

The above is why Zoe doesn’t normally write the summaries.

Scotty: Excuses...excuses... The last summary I did used the phrase “blah blah blah CIVIL LIBERTIES.”

Ok, first thoughts. Go.

HANNA What a roller coaster of a movie. That movie was so much fun. And the soundtrack was amazing. It’s still playing in my head. What was your impression?

The soundtrack was like sitting in a Euro Disco watching people fight. My honest first impression was: at what point in your CIA manhunt is it time to ditch the heels for some sensible shoes? Also, we’ve been hanging out too much; I’ve got you saying movie now.

I use them interchangeably. Also, I think the heels added a lot to the presentation of Cate Blanchett’s character.

I don’t really have all that much to say about Hanna. I felt it was a really well shot, acted and put together movie, if a bit predictable.

Well, you could talk about the visuals. Aside from the shaky cam which you hated so much, I feel this film had an interesting use of visuals. For an action film, it’s very pretty.

I had almost forgotten about the shaky cam. Thanks.

I thought it was cool, but I don’t get motion sickness from a screen.

I hate shaky cam. I get it: you want to make the audience feel like they’re in the thick of it with the characters. However, when you’re shaking it so much that I can’t see what’s going on, it kind of defeats the purpose. Now, I’m not saying all shaky cam is bad. Controlled use of it can look quite nice. Just don’t have your cameraman sprint with a camera. This isn’t Cloverfield; you don’t need to run.

I liked it. So, nyeh.

Let’s also talk about the plot a bit more... It’s not very complicated, though I thought it had an interesting Tabula Rasa thing going on. (This is a disclaimer: I am not a philosopher and i may be using this term in an inappropriate manner.) It’s fascinating to see this girl whose father taught her to skin a deer but didn’t bother to tell her what an electric kettle was encounter the world for the first time. In some parts, it plays like something from National Geographic, only with more violence.

I forgot the movie was PG-13 when we went in, so I kept expecting brains, bloods, guts, and protruding projectiles from people’s bodies, but the violence was actually pretty tame (sort of) with most of it happening off screen. But speaking of unmet expectations......the ending.

Don’t spoil it...

I’m going to do my best here but if you don’t want anything spoiled, skip this paragraph. I’m not going to refer to plot points specifically but just be warned. Basically, there’s no twist. The rest of the movie was so creative visually that I sat there waiting for the plot to mirror that, but it never did. There was no Cloud City grand reveal; the movie just kind of ended. And hey, maybe that was the point, a “there are no twist endings in life” type of thing, but I expected more from you, Joe Wright. The biggest twist is revealed in the movie trailer.

…..I can’t think of what to say next. It’s hard to review good movies. I guess most of our reviews are just us bitching about what were didn’t like. Even the twist ending letdown was only because Blanchett’s character had a complicated relationship with the protagonist. When asked in the film if she ever had children she responded with a pained smile and that she’s “made choices.” In a twisted way, she developed a maternal admiration for Hanna.

All the character relationships are done really well in this movie. So in short, see this movie, it’s awesome and totally worth your $11.

Agreed. But, since this is a late review, be sure to catch it before it leaves theaters.

Mr. Booth Goes to Washington: A review of The Conspirator

Zoe: She saw this movie without me....

Scotty: I didn’t want to, but it was either The Conspirator or Battle of Los Angeles.

You made me sad. So very sad.
 
Eh, I saw it again with you, and was bored out of my mind.

Yeah, it was kind of boring, like a two hour episode of Law and Order.

Hey, Law and Order is exciting. The entire time I watching the movie I kept on thinking, “this would be so much better if Jack McCoy was in this.”

Law and Order is the same thing every single episode.

That is totally not true.

Watch a Law and Order marathon and then I dare you to tell me the distinguishing features of each episode.

I do that all the time. Until last night I had four episodes DVR’d. There was one about whether or not the DA should seek the death penalty for an 18 year old who killed a Chinese food delivery man...
 
I was kidding.
So, The Conspirator was about the trial of Mary Surratt (Robin Wright). For those of you who slept through U.S. History (I know at least one person who is reading this did), Mary Surratt owned the boarding house where John Wilkes Booth and company met to plan the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. The movie is from the point of view of Fredrick Aiken (James McAvoy) who is assigned to represent Surratt, a task that no one else wants to do. The kicker is, which the movie spends a great amount of time reminding us of, that Surratt is a civilian being tried in a military tribunal that is headed by generals who are obviously biased. Drama ensues, blah, blah blah, CIVIL LIBERTIES!!!!!!

Ok, my main beef with The Conspirator is that it is, essentially, a courtroom drama, which I find to be terribly boring.

Watch out...

That said, it’s rant time! ::game show music:: When I heard about The Conspirator, I got excited, like really excited. I minored in Civil War Era Studies in college in a department heavily populated by Lincoln scholars and those who emphasize the War in our minor instead of the Era. I try to not get really excited about movies (just in case they suck) but I really wanted this movie to be good. Sure there’s the war element but it is focusing on a much more popular aspect of it. For goodness sakes there’s women in it whose role isn’t just to be the wife/daughter/girlfriend. Also, The Conspirator was made by The American Film Company, a production group which according to their website was “Founded on the belief that real life is often more compelling than fiction, The American Film Company produces feature films about incredible, true stories from America's past.” Now, I hold no allusions that they were going to make a completely historically accurate movie. History can be really exciting but it can also be very boring. I was ready for a little spicing up of the plot. So obviously this movie was going to be all kinds of awesome and reasonably accurate.

Except it wasn’t. It was boring, preachy and easily the most simple movie they could have made out of this story and now I’m disappointed.

The first time I saw it, it wasn’t that boring. The second time, I wanted to go to sleep. In all honestly, when there were fleshed-out characters, they were highly compelling. Mary Surratt was one of those characters. My heart gave a twang every time she cried. Aiken’s character was overly cliché in some ways (but James McAvoy looks so pretty) and starts out judgmental and then self reforms, to every one's chagrin. The prosecutor and the war department were overly villainized.

Oh, and another warning. Zoe is about to rant some more about her disappointment. But, I didn’t think this movie was that bad. Not entirely rewatchable, but still a decent film.

I think that’s really the part that gets to me, The Conspirator is not a bad movie, sure it’s boring in places but the actors are able to elevate this script to a place that, on its own, is actually quite good and props to director Robert Redford for creating a moment of genuine tension in a story with a well known ending. The hanging sequence at the end was also amazing, relying almost entirely on some very subtle acting and little dialogue.

The only thing that irked me about the acting in this film is the accents. This may be because I’m a Marylander who studied in Southern Maryland. For some reason some of the characters who are supposed to be from Maryland sound like they’re from Atlanta or Baton Rouge. Seriously, there is more than one type of southern accent; get them right.

See, the accent thing doesn’t bother me as much because I’m just used to it by now. It’s like people in entertainment believe that the only way an audience will recognize that the character is from south of the Mason-Dixon Line is if they speak in an overly stereotypical southern dialect. They all need to sound like they are Foghorn Leghorn or everyone will think they’re from California. People make the same criticism of True Blood so I almost laughed out loud when Stephen Root used the same voice in The Conspirator that he did in True Blood.

Also, Fredrick is supposed to be from New England. There is no way he should sound as generic as he does in this movie.

Accents or no, I was just excited that one of the like three famous Marylanders of the Civil War Era was up on the screen, and it was the one with the best name, Reverdy Johnson. Seriously, I want to name my next cat Captain Reverdy.

So, now we need to talk about an important aspect of the film

SYMBOLISM!

Yes, that this movie is essentially an allegory for the present day Guantanamo Tribunals. It hammers home how important civil liberties are and how important it is that we don’t forsake them in times of crisis. It’s not so subtle.

Seriously, in the courtroom scenes, they make the shots all hazy to show how blurred the justice of this trial is going to be.

I didn’t get that actually, I just thought it was bad cinematography.

I didn’t say it was good symbolism.

Really, the heavy handedness of the movie’s message seems to come at the expense of some of the movie’s characters and the plot. Anyone who doesn’t believe in the importance of social justice is painted as a black and white villain who is totally evil, while the protagonist gets elevated up like an untouchable hero. Edwin Stanton always appears like he’s one second away from a good ol’ Disney baddy cackle. Also, the movie is pretty much convinced from the get-go that Mary Surratt is innocent and thus, anyone that doesn’t is either portrayed as evil or ignorant.

Actually, I thought Surratt’s innocence had a level of ambiguity, which is probably why she’s my favorite character.

They say she knew about the conspirator’s plot to kidnap Lincoln which I think is the level of ambiguity you’re talking about but it’s nowhere near the level of ambiguity that existed in the real trial. Increasing the ambiguity and fleshing out the characters of the movie’s antagonists, I think, would have made a much richer, more entertaining movie. The reason Mary Surratt interests people is the question of “was she guilty or innocent” and the fact that we will really never know. The movie pretty much blows off this question and I would have liked to see the more compelling evidence proposed by each side without as much of a bias. I mean, they don’t even show the prosecution’s closing arguments because it doesn’t matter. The movie has had its mind made since the beginning, just like Mary Surratt’s judges.

That’s an interesting analogy. I wonder if they did that on purpose...probably not. So, Zoe, do you have any more rants in store for us?

None about the movie.

Good, because I have one.

What is it?

Beiber Hair

…...........

John Surratt had Beiber hair and a soul patch. Its the most ridiculous thing ever. Who thought that was a good idea? I mean, Beiber Hair!

The soul patch was kind of ridiculous.

Beiber Hair!

Ok....anyway...

Beiber Hair!

The American Film Company currently has two other movies based on historical events in development.

Beiber Hair!

The Arsenal, about John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry and Midnight Riders, about Paul Revere and co. (but not including Sybil Ludington of course).

Seriously! Beiber Hair!

Oh my God STOP IT.

This movie is set in the 1860’s. What the hell does John Surratt have Beiber hair!

Moving on, I glanced at the plot for The Arsenal and saw this sentence: “On a rainy October night in 1859, violent abolitionist John Brown and a rag-tag band of young men descends on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia.” It just made me sigh since it appears instead of making movies showing off the complexity of historical events and their players, The American Film Company seems to just want to make simple stories with black and white heroes and villains. Sigh.

And Beiber Hair.

The Life and Times of Mozart's Sister

Zoe: We kind of took a break last week in that we didn’t post anything. We still saw a movie, two actually, but I had the grand idea to film us reviewing the movies. It was bad, and by bad I mean forty minutes long and highly un-editable. I was going to transcribe it and put that up but I’m lazy and have soul-sucking projects due at work so just ended up watching a marathon of Ghost Hunters instead. I will try to do it this weekend but I make no promises.

Scotty: One day, if this blog takes off, we might put up that video for all to see, and we’ll have a good laugh. But, for now, it is going into the vault.

Will we release it every seven years?

No, we’re not mouse sized cicadas.

We decided to get all highbrow this week and went to a French film festival movie.

I was secretly hoping that going to see a movie in a film festival would be glamorous or at least filled with hipsters. The reality was that we were the youngest people there. I guess that’s what happens when you go to a 6:30 showing on a Tuesday.

Somebody won a bottle of wine. That’s sort of glamorous.

And people in the back kept on complaining that they couldn’t hear the announcer because the microphone wasn’t loud enough (it totally was). Plus, I didn’t win the tote bag in the raffle. I really wanted that tote bag.

I think that it says a lot about us that we went to go see a period movie although we both don’t remember why we picked Mozart's Sister over Young Goethe in Love.

I wanted to see Young Goethe in Love, but you vetoed it because you wanted to see Mozart’s Sister more.

No, I wanted to see both of them. You picked Mozart’s Sister!

No, I remember specifically saying that I wanted to see Young Goethe, and you convincing me other wise. I mean, German Shakespeare in Love, if someone didn’t die I would be thoroughly disappointed in the Germanic peoples.

And you know if it’s a German movie, there’s going to be at least one naked guy running around.

So, why wouldn’t I want to see it?

8:45 on a Wednesday. We can still go see it.

OK, then we shall.

We have now written over a page without actually talking about the movie we saw, so in case you couldn’t tell, Mozart’s Sister wasn’t really that memorable. It’s about, surprise surprise, Mozart’s older sister Nannerl who performs with her talented brother around Europe. But as she’s getting up there in years (fourteen, gasp), she needs to start behaving like a woman. Women don’t play the violin or compose and are subservient so she totally should too. The movie spends the whole time in France so along the way she befriends one of the king’s daughters and the angstiest dauphin who I swear took staring lessons from Jonathan Rhys Meyers’s Henry VIII. And it’s really hard to remember all of the movie’s plot points because the whole movie was pretty flat.

I thought the movie was very good. It just wasn’t that cinematic. It’s the type that would work just as well, if not better, on the small screen than the silver screen. This movie had a very intimate feel, and it was almost as if you were in the room with the characters, listening to their conversations. There are no grand establishing shots, very little noticeable score except for what is played by people in scene. And it worked; the director’s intent totally pulled though. It’s just that this film strayed away from so many movie conventions that it didn’t feel like a movie.

It’s like the movie was trying its best to not look like a movie. The movie also lacked some emotional peaks and valleys as well as an antagonist, although you could probably argue that she is her own antagonist. The editing was very fluid and panned from character to character more often than it cut.

However, the lack of the emotional rollercoaster that we’re used to in western storytelling lends itself to the realistic feel of Mozart’s Sister. If real life were all like movies, we would all be bipolar.

Also, there’s a scene when you see the titular character pee on the side of the road. I always wondered how women did that back then.

Really? I could have told you that.

I was not a very good girl scout.

Anyways, the one downside to this whole style is that every once in a while, the director would go and break it with a freaking zoom. I don’t like zooms in general, but in this case it was such a deviation from the style of the rest of the movie for seemingly no reason. Totally took me out of the movie every time he did it.

She ranted about it after the film. I totally didn’t notice it.

I hate zooms. It’s like the star wipe of cinema.

Enough about cinematography, on to the acting!

::Star Wipe::

The acting in this film also added to its realistic feel. It was very subdued and not too dramatic. The best part of this acting style is that it helped avoid one of the major pitfalls of making a film where the main character is an adolescent: crappy acting. The person who played Nannerl, Marie Ferét, did an outstanding job, as far as I could tell. I am not that familiar with the French language.

I know. You can’t hear it, but she keeps putting a t on the end of dauphin and her name is pronounced NA-nair (with a soft r) not na-na-rel.

It’s not my fault that the French phonetic system is so messed up. This is why I studied Spanish. En español, las letras dice un sonido todos las veces.

Il ya un poisson dans ta poche. The one French sentence I can really remember.

*sigh*

Speaking of French. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of readable subtitles in a movie. If you must have white subtitles, outline them or something. White subtitles on white snow makes Zoe very annoyed. Also, they randomly didn’t subtitle a scene. Nannerl gets very sick and we think her father is talking to a group of men about arrangements in case she dies. BUT THEY DON’T TRANSLATE IT! Way to defuse the tension movie.

Yay! Indie films!

Anyways, one thing we need to talk about before we go, just because we are both graduates of liberal colleges...FEMINISM! Did this pass the Bechdel test? Yes. Also, I found this to be a great feminist film because it ignored the conventions of a typical “feminist film” where the plucky female character fights against the establishment to achieve her dreams. This film was different in that it portrayed the uncomfortable truth that it was sucky to be a woman who had even the slightest ambition and most of the time, they couldn’t do anything about it.

Pretty clothes do not make up for lack of political rights.

Finally, we’re going to rate this movie with stars because the movie organizers gave us a piece of paper and told us we had to. We agreed too, both gave it four out of five stars.

So, we're gonna end this review here because this article is already way too long and we don't want to take up any of your/our valuable Facebook time.

Summer Movie Fantasy League

This post will be the first in a series. We're entering Summer Movie season. Look forward to a bunch of posts designed to help you get ready for all the hordes of movies that will be released this summer. Some will be bad, some will be good. We'll help you find out which aren't worth your time and which are worth a first born child.

Ryan and I are both huge fans of Leo Laporte’s brain child “This Week In Tech.” For those of you who don’t know anything about it, I’ll give you a quick run down. Leo Laporte is a tech guy who used to work for TechTV back in the 90s. After TechTV crashed, Leo bopped around for a while and eventually started “This Week In Tech” a radio podcast for him and his friends, all players in the tech industry, to chat about technology each week. It eventually expanded to other shows and quickly became a small network of its own. Now he also records video and live streams many tech events. One of the shows on the TWiT Network is “NSFW”. NSFW features Brian Brushwood, comedian/tech guy/stage magician, and guests shooting the breeze. Something that they did last year and enjoyed enough to bring back this year was the Summer Movie Fantasy League.

Yes, that is exactly what you think it is. Brian and his more regular guests bid on the movies that are coming out this summer and assign a point/dollar value to each movie. Then everyone has a pool of 100 dollars to assemble a “team” of movies. When the box office results are released for each movie it is added to a total. At the end of the summer who ever picked a “team” that grossed the most amount of money wins the league.

Being film buffs Ryan and I sat down and picked our brains and came out with a list. Ultimately his preferred list differed with mine slightly, but it was close enough that I submitted a list to be included in the official NSFW league.

You can find the full list and everyone’s teams here.

If I submitted my form in time, which hopefully I did, it’ll appear on the Chatrealm list way at the bottom under ScreenFix.

Here is my “team”



Source Code (valued at 9 points)
Although I personally am not excited for Source Code it is a solid early summer movie that has a wider appeal than some of the movies on the list. Overall it was a relatively inexpensive way to get a good solid start.


Thor (valued at 23 points)
Its a Marvel super hero movie. It wont be fantastic, but that wont stop people from going to see it in hordes. It was a good chunk of points but I think that the potential payoff is worth it.


Priest (valued at 10 points)
This is in the same category, for me, as Source Code. It is going to be a sleeper. It might not do fantastic, but since its a 3D movie it’ll make bank.


Super 8 (valued at 38 points)
Super 8 cost a lot of points but I think it will more than pay itself back. From what I’ve seen and heard about this film it is going to be phenomenal. It’s the only movie I’m really looking forward to this summer. It looks like J. J. Abrams at the peak of his career and Steven Spielberg getting back to the roots of what used to make his movies great. I think this movie will be the biggest hit of the summer. Hands down.


Zookeeper (valued at 10 points)
A good solid middle of the summer comedy. It was inexpensive and has a lot of potential to pull in some good money.


Smurfs (valued at 8 points)
This is the same as Priest. It’s a classic kids comedy. More importantly its 3D. Twice the ticket cost means that it only has to bring in half of the audience to make the same amount of money. At 8 points it was a responsible buy.


That puts me at a total of 99 points out of 100. I’ll keep everyone updated on how we do.

Sucker Punch: Jon Hamm can Lobotomize Me Any Day

Scotty: Sucker Punch is deeply serious and contemplative film about how fantasy affects people's hopes. It can be best described as a true piece of art and will definitely be one of the top contenders for the 2011 Academy Award for Best Picture.

Zoe: Or at least the Oscar for making Bjork sound kinda badass. There will be only one nomination, and she will win.

I’m astounded you didn’t detect my sarcasm there. This says a lot about you, or me.

It starts off with the death of the protagonist's, aptly named Baby Doll (Emily Browning), mother. Her stepfather, enraged at the fact that the mother’s fortune has been bequeathed solely to her two daughter, kills Baby-Doll’s sister and then frames her for the murder. Baby-Doll is sent to an insane asylum and scheduled to receive the ol’ pick in the eye socket in five days. Suddenly, we switch to her fantasy world where the asylum is turned into a cabaret/brothel, the orderly a pimp, the psychiatrist a choreographer and the lobotomy doctor a high priced john. What follows is an overly simplified scheme to escape the brothel with her fellow inmates/patients. The plan mostly consists of Baby-Doll dancing for people, mesmerizing them so that needed items can be stolen. These dances are never seen, but are turned into giant action sequences. Boom! Bang! Skimpy Clothes!

This movie was everything I wanted it to be. Hot girls running around in a post-apocalyptic steampunk world shooting/slicing and dicing WWI Germans (I will refer to them as Nazis because as anyone who has ever read a comic book knows, there are always Nazis) with some plot thrown in to pad. It was a giant video game cut scene and it was fantastic.

Actually, this movie was the closest thing to a live action anime I have ever seen. It had all the key ingredients, school girl outfits, robots, power wind and unnatural hair colors. Also, I thought there was too much plot involved, whenever there was plot it was kinda slow and rather corny. I feel like the movie would of been much better if all the scenes that didn’t have Samurai swords were removed. Because honestly, the plot was kinda dumb.

Also, they were wearing WWI helmets, flying WWI planes, talking about No Man’s Land and referring to the Kaiser, so not Nazis.

It was kind of like One Flew Over the Cookoo’s Nest, Moulin Rouge and Final Fantasy walked into a bar, found Zack Snyder and they all went back to his place for a slow motion four-way. The transition from Moulin Rouge to Nazi Final Fantasy was clear and well enough done, fantasy by way of a sexy dance. But Cookoo to Rouge was not at all, in fact it was pretty much confusing. “Why is everyone suddenly all dolled up, why are they dancing in a mental.....oh....this is.....a dream? Oh well, there will be robots soon.” I’m still not sure what it was supposed to be. The fantasy is supposed to be where they go to escape the real world but it’s more like they escape the mental institution by escaping to the bordello and then escape the bordello through shooting Nazis and Orcs.

WWI soldiers, not Nazis.

Can the orcs be orc-Nazis?

This isn’t LOTR.

They were totally orcs.

But LOTR has the WWII analogy, and in that scene the girls were killing both orcs and humans.

I’m not sure those were humans but I will concede Nazi Germans if you give me WW2 allegory orcs.

Never, there were no Nazis.

One of my biggest problems is that these fellow women she is escaping with are actually patients in this asylum. You don’t really learn much about them outside of the brothel fantasy, so for all we know Baby-Doll could be help a sociopath schizophrenic escape. And don’t say I’m looking way to much into the plot for this type of film. There are some parts where the film focuses way to much on plot and it gets a bit too dark. Otherwise this would of been a really fun, absurd (In a good way) movie, especially under the influence of alcohol. But the ending just ruined it for me. I can’t really explain it without spoilers, however, I'll just say this, the ending ruins the party mood. It would of ended better with a large explosion.

You see then in the real world for like ten minutes at the beginning and ten at the end so you never really invest in the characters. I mean they’re there and they do cool stuff but the world isn’t real so should we really care if anything happens to them? I find it hard to believe that she managed to team up with the four other girls in Asylum also imprisoned against their will. Honestly, I cared more for the baby dragon than for the chick from High School Musical.

Really, if you wanted to see a movie like this but with a serious tone to it, watch The Fall. The female lead is also way cuter.

She’s like seven but that is a super awesome movie.

And she’s adorable. One thing we need to mention is that the music was awesome, even if it was highly ironic the way covers of hippy music was playing during major fight scenes. It was awesome.

The beginning was a little bit like a music video but, like I said, Zack Snyder played Bjork during a fight with giant demonic samurai. He could do no wrong at that point.

So in summary, would you recommend this movie?

If you can go into the movie with pretty much low expectations in the plot department, I would totally recommend it. The fight scenes are so much fun both to look at and to watch and even the bordello has some pretty nice visuals. The acting is pretty good and there are even a few slight surprises. Also, Jon Hamm’s in the movie so there’s your price of admission right there.

I agree, especially on the Hamm part. He is one sexy beast. Other than him, this movie can be fully enjoyable if you take everything with a grain of salt.

They were totally Nazis.

Jane Eyre or Twilight for the Gothic Set

Zoe: After 2010 being the year in which I saw exactly five movies in theaters, I made a New Year’s resolution/pact with my friend Scotty to see at least one movie a week. Both being oral thinkers, once the movie lets out, we tend to find the nearest discussion bench and talk about what we just saw.

Scotty: And for some reason we tend to discuss these movies in such a way as if we have an audience listening to us, We even sit in the stage “V” position and periodically turn to face our nonexistent audience. We have issues.

So, to feed our fantasies of being prominent, well respected movie connoisseurs/critics we have decided to record our conversation via google docs. Unfortunately, for me, this means I cannot do funny voices. One day we may include audio, but for now we will stick the easily skimmable written word.

So, for our first review we’re gonna go chick flick on you. Jane Eyre, our most recent adaption of Charlotte (the one who people actually know and wasn’t crazy) Brontë’s novel that neither of us have read but both have on our bookshelves.

Emily was crazy? That explains Wuthering Heights.

I kinda like Wuthering Heights.

You would. Let’s start this review.

Jane Eyre starts in medias res with the protagonist (Mia Wasikowska) collapsing on the doorstep of a reverend and his two sisters. She is brought in and nursed back to health when a flashback occurs to Jane’s depressing upbringing, first at the hands of a resentful aunt and then at boarding school that can best described as the complete opposite of Hogwarts. Child trauma ensues. She leaves to take a position as a governess at Thornfeild for an adorable little French girl. There, she meets the owner of Thornfeild, Edward Rochester, who woos her with his dark and brooding manner, albeit while also seeming to go after another genteel woman. However, this man and his mansion hold a secret.

So, let’s start with the obvious, I really liked Jane Eyre as a totally atmospheric period piece. Your average movie-goer might have a problem with the pacing, which is really quite slow, but serves to immerse you in the gothic, dreary, puritan England of the 1840s. The movie is told mostly through flashbacks, they cut out most of Jane’s depressing school days in favor of spending most of their time at Thornfield interacting with our tortured (very attractive) love interest.

Twilight fans will eat this shit up though.

I had a problem with the pacing of the film, but I actually felt that it was too fast in some parts, specifically the build up to the inevitable romance between the principle characters. It felt almost rushed and a bit awkward, especially in contrast to the first and third acts of the film which had such deliberate pacing. I would have been all right with the movie being a little bit longer to give more room for the second act to breathe. Then, maybe, the two characters would have shown a little more chemistry.

The place where this movie succeeds above all else is in its sheer gothic awesomeness.

You should have seen Zoe’s face during the movie. It was hilarious. (Zoe is such a wimp when it comes to anything remotely scary; I’m surprised she wanted to see this movie.)

I didn’t know it was going to be scary in parts. Pretty much as soon as Jane arrives at Thornfield, the ghost story kicks in. There are strange sounds, the young ward tells her about a vampire that supposedly roams the house at night, things catch on fire, someone is stabbed and it’s AWESOME! Sadly, this part of the movie kind of gets made the B-plot in favor of the romance. Romping around in a fully lit garden is so totally not as interesting being bade to tend to a mysterious visitor who has been stabbed and being told they are not allowed speak. All of this after following strange laughter in the dead of the night, lit only by two candles. After reading the book’s plot on Wikipedia (the god of all knowledge) after the movie was over, we found out there is the perfect climax to this creeptastic vein in the story already in the source material that is discarded for a much tamer reveal. Seriously, look it up, it’s so cinematic that it hurts.

Really, if you want to make a rich man / poor girl love story, stick to Jane Austen. The Brontës are the owners of dark mansions and tortured shadows. The cinematography to create these effects slightly remind me of the classic horror The Haunting, showing little but whispers and bangs. The film also makes the use of extended close ups to establish mood, such as a lit match meeting tinder to light a fire. (There is a continuous theme of things being lit on fire in this movie.) As well, there are sweeping scenes that are overarching Brontësque, for example, a dramatic kiss with a graveyard in the background. It can be a bit cheesy at times, almost like the film is overtly saying “oooh, it’s moody!” but it fits in some way.

When you notice it’s off, you just say “eh, it’s Brontë” but when the movie gets it right, it gets it AWESOME. And just so I get it in here, the costumes are amazing even if all the back closing dresses bothered me. They might be a bit somber for the time period but they fit the tone of the movie perfectly.

So, to sum it up, if you can sit through a slow, atmospheric romance, it’s totally worth it. And it’s Mad Men slow, there isn’t constant action.

But, if you’re into this sort of stuff, it’s a great romp in the dreary, depressing, tortured, moody world of the Charlotte Brontë. (Not Emily, her world is nuts.)