http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0126816/
john woo's blackjack features the dumbest heroic weakness ever: fear of the color white. i mean, really? white? oh, but he is ok so long as he keeps his shades on. it was all tied to his father, who was a vegas card-counter. it was just one more thing in a string of things that did not make sense. you know what else does not make sense? me watching all these godawful movies.
blackjack gets an ace of diamonds. you might think that is awesome because an ace is a high-ranking card, but i would remind you that there is another interpretation, which is that it is the "one" card.
2012-11-21
2012-11-14
super mario bros
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108255/
with any luck, this will be the last entry in this fever-induced series of bad judgement calls.
at 1:37 (that is minutes:seconds, not hours:minutes) into the movie, it went from bad to worse. this is a new record. the previous holder of this record was guyver: dark hero, at 4:30.
when a voiceover explains the premise of the film to you in the opening scene, it is a bad sign. when the characters emphasize the plot in their opening scenes, it is a real bad sign. as bad as the plot was, though, it had nothing on the sound, scenery, acting, and costumes.
i made a movie once with some friends when i was in high school. actually, we made several movies. they were awful. what kind of production values do you expect from tenth graders? super mario bros is essentially the movie we would have made if it had occurred to us to rip off video games instead of movies like raiders of the lost ark. actually, there is one major advantage to the movies my friends and i made: they were much shorter.
super mario bros gets one goomba trooper.
with any luck, this will be the last entry in this fever-induced series of bad judgement calls.
at 1:37 (that is minutes:seconds, not hours:minutes) into the movie, it went from bad to worse. this is a new record. the previous holder of this record was guyver: dark hero, at 4:30.
when a voiceover explains the premise of the film to you in the opening scene, it is a bad sign. when the characters emphasize the plot in their opening scenes, it is a real bad sign. as bad as the plot was, though, it had nothing on the sound, scenery, acting, and costumes.
i made a movie once with some friends when i was in high school. actually, we made several movies. they were awful. what kind of production values do you expect from tenth graders? super mario bros is essentially the movie we would have made if it had occurred to us to rip off video games instead of movies like raiders of the lost ark. actually, there is one major advantage to the movies my friends and i made: they were much shorter.
super mario bros gets one goomba trooper.
only the strong
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107750/
troubled kids: threat, or menace? just kidding, this is an uplifting story about how martial arts can turn a troubled kid's life around. usually they do it with karate or something like that, but "only the strong" harnesses the beat-driven power of capoeira. other than flavour, you can really plug any kind of activity that requires discipline into a movie like this. the plot is the same.
so anyway. as far as martial arts films like this go, it had terrible acting, fighting, stunts, and morals. interestingly, they went with the non-standard message that fighting is encouraged. i imagine capoeira practitioners everywhere exercising one big, long, drawn-out wince that lasts the whole movie long.
only the strong gets one handstandy kick to the face. it would be less, but the scale does not go any lower than that. sorry.
troubled kids: threat, or menace? just kidding, this is an uplifting story about how martial arts can turn a troubled kid's life around. usually they do it with karate or something like that, but "only the strong" harnesses the beat-driven power of capoeira. other than flavour, you can really plug any kind of activity that requires discipline into a movie like this. the plot is the same.
so anyway. as far as martial arts films like this go, it had terrible acting, fighting, stunts, and morals. interestingly, they went with the non-standard message that fighting is encouraged. i imagine capoeira practitioners everywhere exercising one big, long, drawn-out wince that lasts the whole movie long.
only the strong gets one handstandy kick to the face. it would be less, but the scale does not go any lower than that. sorry.
armored
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0913354/
the fever-addled movie marathon continues. armored is the story of an all-american hero who is down on his luck and associates with persons of relaxed morals.
if you are going to steal "a lot of money" and you have to split it more than one way, expect problems. this is kind of a universal truth. since this is so well-known, everything about this movie is completely predictable. there were literally no surprises. none. like this review.
armored gets one dollar.
the fever-addled movie marathon continues. armored is the story of an all-american hero who is down on his luck and associates with persons of relaxed morals.
if you are going to steal "a lot of money" and you have to split it more than one way, expect problems. this is kind of a universal truth. since this is so well-known, everything about this movie is completely predictable. there were literally no surprises. none. like this review.
armored gets one dollar.
asylum
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804443/
i am out sick today, and i think the fever has made a mush out of my judgement because i would normally never watch a movie like this. with good reason: they are uniformly terrible. the formula: supernatural monster guy + handful of stereotypical college age kids + creepy setting = crap. the math works out.
as usual, the weaknesses that the evil monster guy will exploit were prominently displayed in the first ten minutes, as well as every device that was needed to propel the story along. dangerous catwalk leading to asylum area? accessed. weird and vaguely creepy groundskeeper? guy with plot-furthering information. strings guy? death by strings. slutty girl? abused as a child, death by...i dunno, something superficially related to that. the closest thing to a plot twist was that the jock douchebag was an ex-glutton (who died by being stabbed in the stomach or something like that.)
asylum gets one lobotomizing spike through the eye. both eyes. whatever.
i am out sick today, and i think the fever has made a mush out of my judgement because i would normally never watch a movie like this. with good reason: they are uniformly terrible. the formula: supernatural monster guy + handful of stereotypical college age kids + creepy setting = crap. the math works out.
as usual, the weaknesses that the evil monster guy will exploit were prominently displayed in the first ten minutes, as well as every device that was needed to propel the story along. dangerous catwalk leading to asylum area? accessed. weird and vaguely creepy groundskeeper? guy with plot-furthering information. strings guy? death by strings. slutty girl? abused as a child, death by...i dunno, something superficially related to that. the closest thing to a plot twist was that the jock douchebag was an ex-glutton (who died by being stabbed in the stomach or something like that.)
asylum gets one lobotomizing spike through the eye. both eyes. whatever.
bitten
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1249294/
ever wonder what jason mewes does when he is not playing jay and silent bob? eesh. wonder if you must, but do not bother looking through his film catalog. the evidence before us suggests he has mastered the art of saying the fuck word and many of its variations, but actual acting remains beyond him.
bitten gets one bloody smear all over the floor. it would be less, but there were vampires. it would be more, but they were not very good vampires.
ever wonder what jason mewes does when he is not playing jay and silent bob? eesh. wonder if you must, but do not bother looking through his film catalog. the evidence before us suggests he has mastered the art of saying the fuck word and many of its variations, but actual acting remains beyond him.
bitten gets one bloody smear all over the floor. it would be less, but there were vampires. it would be more, but they were not very good vampires.
2012-11-08
skyfall
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/
this was a very exciting movie for me because i got to see it before the official release date. legally! what is even more exciting is that if i hurry up and post this, my review will be out before any regular people could *possibly* have seen it. JUST LIKE A REAL MOVIE CRITIC!!!11ONE oh, how i have waited for this day.
skyfall took bond in a direction i do not remember him going before. old. the whole movie was about how bond, and, to a lesser extend, M and the entire MI6 organization, is getting a bit long in the tooth. presumably, this was inspired by their market research's findings on the age groups likely to be viewing the film. while inevitable, i thought it was poorly played. the whole magic of james bond is that he does *not* get old. his skills are always in top shape, he handles everything with panache. that is what james bond is. not old.
also, fascinatingly, skyfall featured an openly bi-curious villain, another thing i am also pretty sure i have not seen before. that scene served as a great reminder to me that i am highly unlikely to hold up under torture.
skyfall gets two nonsensical descriptions of highly technical things.
this was a very exciting movie for me because i got to see it before the official release date. legally! what is even more exciting is that if i hurry up and post this, my review will be out before any regular people could *possibly* have seen it. JUST LIKE A REAL MOVIE CRITIC!!!11ONE oh, how i have waited for this day.
skyfall took bond in a direction i do not remember him going before. old. the whole movie was about how bond, and, to a lesser extend, M and the entire MI6 organization, is getting a bit long in the tooth. presumably, this was inspired by their market research's findings on the age groups likely to be viewing the film. while inevitable, i thought it was poorly played. the whole magic of james bond is that he does *not* get old. his skills are always in top shape, he handles everything with panache. that is what james bond is. not old.
also, fascinatingly, skyfall featured an openly bi-curious villain, another thing i am also pretty sure i have not seen before. that scene served as a great reminder to me that i am highly unlikely to hold up under torture.
skyfall gets two nonsensical descriptions of highly technical things.
2012-11-07
the switch
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0889573/
jason bateman and jennifer aniston seem to just make the same movie over and over again. i do not mean that in a bad way, really, because it is not a terrible movie. it is just the same one you have already seen. so if you have seen either of them in a movie, then you already know what you are in for. there was also a cute kid. i did not think he was that cute, but i am told that he was adorable.
the switch gets two viking helmets.
jason bateman and jennifer aniston seem to just make the same movie over and over again. i do not mean that in a bad way, really, because it is not a terrible movie. it is just the same one you have already seen. so if you have seen either of them in a movie, then you already know what you are in for. there was also a cute kid. i did not think he was that cute, but i am told that he was adorable.
the switch gets two viking helmets.
total recall
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1386703/
given the title and the number of references to familiar topics from the previous total recall movie, it is pretty much impossible to not make a comparison between the two. including those things was a bad move on the part of this film's creators because the new version fares...poorly...against the old one.
they really did it to themselves. total recall--both versions--is based on a short story by phillip k dick called "we can remember it for you wholesale." i have read it. it is pretty good. both film versions deviate wildly from the short story in the details. the only part which is really borrowed is the hook, wherein a person goes to have a fantasy implanted in his brain which corresponds to a previously unknown reality, causing all hell to break loose.
the first total recall movie went nuts with this idea, adding a colony on mars, mutants, a civil war kind of arrangement, and some alien artifacts. i rather enjoyed it. the second total recall deviated from the first movie much in the same way that the first movie deviated from the short story, but they deviated *in the wrong direction.* mars? gone. mutants? gone. aliens? gone. civil war kind of thing? kind of...
what did they keep, exactly? only a few references to the first movie, really. and they sort of stuck them in there, just to let you know that yeah, they saw it. for example, why was there a girl with three boobs? NO REASON. other than that there was a girl with three boobs in the first movie. there were no boobs at all in the short story. arnold schwarzenegger was the innovator here. surprise!
what did they add? three things: bad science, terrible science, and shockingly bad science. i mean, ok, there were some boggles in the first version, but there were *zero* tunnels through the middle of the earth. i know because both bill clinton and i counted. zero.
if i were looking for a bright spot, i would settle immediately upon kate beckinsale's performance. she has come a long way from pearl harbor, and she now qualifies as a genuine bad ass. it was really too bad that her character was so unidimensional, but that is not too surprising, especially if you have been keeping up with the underworld series. if i were looking for another bright spot, i would look for a long time and then probably bring up either kate beckinsale or the girl with three boobs again. i do not even like boobs that much.
i rate this flop a generous one robo-enforcer, primarily on the strength of kate beckinsale's performance. save your time and money by reading the original short story instead.
given the title and the number of references to familiar topics from the previous total recall movie, it is pretty much impossible to not make a comparison between the two. including those things was a bad move on the part of this film's creators because the new version fares...poorly...against the old one.
they really did it to themselves. total recall--both versions--is based on a short story by phillip k dick called "we can remember it for you wholesale." i have read it. it is pretty good. both film versions deviate wildly from the short story in the details. the only part which is really borrowed is the hook, wherein a person goes to have a fantasy implanted in his brain which corresponds to a previously unknown reality, causing all hell to break loose.
the first total recall movie went nuts with this idea, adding a colony on mars, mutants, a civil war kind of arrangement, and some alien artifacts. i rather enjoyed it. the second total recall deviated from the first movie much in the same way that the first movie deviated from the short story, but they deviated *in the wrong direction.* mars? gone. mutants? gone. aliens? gone. civil war kind of thing? kind of...
what did they keep, exactly? only a few references to the first movie, really. and they sort of stuck them in there, just to let you know that yeah, they saw it. for example, why was there a girl with three boobs? NO REASON. other than that there was a girl with three boobs in the first movie. there were no boobs at all in the short story. arnold schwarzenegger was the innovator here. surprise!
what did they add? three things: bad science, terrible science, and shockingly bad science. i mean, ok, there were some boggles in the first version, but there were *zero* tunnels through the middle of the earth. i know because both bill clinton and i counted. zero.
if i were looking for a bright spot, i would settle immediately upon kate beckinsale's performance. she has come a long way from pearl harbor, and she now qualifies as a genuine bad ass. it was really too bad that her character was so unidimensional, but that is not too surprising, especially if you have been keeping up with the underworld series. if i were looking for another bright spot, i would look for a long time and then probably bring up either kate beckinsale or the girl with three boobs again. i do not even like boobs that much.
i rate this flop a generous one robo-enforcer, primarily on the strength of kate beckinsale's performance. save your time and money by reading the original short story instead.
2012-11-01
knockout
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1691453/
did you know that stone cold steve austin starred in a karate kid ripoff? which character do you think he played? it turns out, stone cold steve austin is the biggest mr miyagi this world has ever seen. except he was a wise janitor instead of a handyman. and the coach of the antagonist was his son instead of some guy he had never heard of. and the protagonist's love interest was not the antagonist's love interest. and it was boxing instead of karate. the whole mess was so much worse than karate kid. although, thinking back on how bad karate kid was, it was actually not much worse.
let me tell you what i learned about boxing from watching this movie.
the first thing is to punch the other guy in the face when he is not expecting it, like after they ring the bell or yell "stop." this makes sense to me. nothing bad ever happens to you when you are ready for it, but as soon as you let down your guard, POW.
another good idea i learned about is to isolate your opponent from their support network or from any impartial bystanders who might try to impose "fairness." fairness is for losers. winners hit hard, fast, and first. and repeatedly.
finally, the main thing i learned about boxing is that i do not want to do it. i am far too pretty to risk being punched in the face, especially if it is hard, fast, first, repeatedly, and when i am not expecting it.
knockout gets one jab to the face. stone cold steve austin garners two additional jabs to the face, purely for putting his guts into his role. not because his fists are as big as my head.
did you know that stone cold steve austin starred in a karate kid ripoff? which character do you think he played? it turns out, stone cold steve austin is the biggest mr miyagi this world has ever seen. except he was a wise janitor instead of a handyman. and the coach of the antagonist was his son instead of some guy he had never heard of. and the protagonist's love interest was not the antagonist's love interest. and it was boxing instead of karate. the whole mess was so much worse than karate kid. although, thinking back on how bad karate kid was, it was actually not much worse.
let me tell you what i learned about boxing from watching this movie.
the first thing is to punch the other guy in the face when he is not expecting it, like after they ring the bell or yell "stop." this makes sense to me. nothing bad ever happens to you when you are ready for it, but as soon as you let down your guard, POW.
another good idea i learned about is to isolate your opponent from their support network or from any impartial bystanders who might try to impose "fairness." fairness is for losers. winners hit hard, fast, and first. and repeatedly.
finally, the main thing i learned about boxing is that i do not want to do it. i am far too pretty to risk being punched in the face, especially if it is hard, fast, first, repeatedly, and when i am not expecting it.
knockout gets one jab to the face. stone cold steve austin garners two additional jabs to the face, purely for putting his guts into his role. not because his fists are as big as my head.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)