After some thought and consideration I have decided that there are going to be a few changes coming to my blog. When I started this I was primarily focusing on new or newish movies. Things either in theaters or films which had recently come out to DVD. While I enjoyed this and intend to still write reviews of new movies as I go along, I feel the need to branch out a little in order to keep up my number of posts. Between there just only being a limited number of new movies at any given time, and my own limitations in time due to school, I realized that it is more realistic for me to just review whatever it is I have time to watch.
That being said, I feel I should mention that this will at times make the movies reviewed seem somewhat random. They may be old, they may be new. They might be things I haven't seen before or things I've watched a million times. I am also hoping to start doing some television show reviews, because now that I am back in school I tend to find TV shows fit into my schedule better than movies. So, I've been making the transition from renting, buying, or streaming movies, to watching TV shows instead. As with the movies some of them might be newer shows, since there are always new things I want to check out this time of year, and some of them will probably be a bit older, things I find to rent or buy or stream online.
I hope that everyone will enjoy these changes as it should actually increase the amount of content I am able to post and will allow me to put stuff up on a more regular basis. I felt it was more important to be providing somewhat regular posts to my readers than to be sticking to stuff that's just the latest and the greatest. Thanks for the continued reading and support.
- Lynx
Friday, September 20, 2013
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
World War Z
I know, I was supposed to blog about this movie while it was still in theaters, but my life has been a little overly busy of late. So I thought I would write about it now that it's finally out on DVD.
As someone who has been slowly making my way through the novel World War Z by Max Brooks, for some time now I must say I wasn't sure how I felt about it when I heard they were going to make a movie based on it. While I really enjoy what I've read of the book so far, it didn't strike me as something that would translate well into a movie.
To give a brief idea of why this is to those who haven't read the book and or seen the movie I need to explain a few things about it. First off the book takes the stance that it is a nonfiction, oral history of the zombie war (fascinating to write nonfiction about something fiction I think). The main character, or narrator of the book, really isn't in the story that much. Rather it is his collection of interviews from other people as he works to try and find the source of the 'zombie' creating disease. The narrator admits in the opening that his purpose for writing the book is because he couldn't include the 'human' element in the report he wrote up for his employer, the United Nations.
Now on to the movie version of World War Z which goes at things from a different angle. In the movie we have a character, Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) who is a former U.N. employee who is focusing on being a family man now. When the 'zombie' outbreak finally arrives in his part of the world he goes on the run with his family. After making it to relative safety he learns that he is expected to resume his former job and investigate what is causing this outbreak and where it originated.
There are certain changes which I understand being made between the two of course. For instance a movie that was just a series of interviews about past events probably wouldn't be all that interesting. Therefor I understand why it makes more sense to actually follow Gerry around as he is collecting the information, rather than getting it from him later second hand. Also without making the movie in a mockumentary style it would be difficult to capture the 'real' tone that the book takes on and again I'm unsure how that would have worked out as well.
After watching the movie, I think I would have to say that I still stand by my opinion that it wasn't a book that should have been made into a movie. Now that isn't to say that I didn't like the movie, because I thought it was pretty good for a zombie movie. It didn't have the usual feeling of if you've seen one you've seen them all to me. It just didn't feel like it really carried the same weight as the book. The book goes so much more in depth into the process of finding the source of the problem and traveling around that in comparison the movie just doesn't stand up. It also doesn't provide the opportunity to hear from as many people about how this has impacted their area of the world. The other thing I felt watching the movie, was that while I'm not sure it needed to be longer, I needed to feel that there was a little more passage of time throughout it because it actually seemed a bit rushed and it seemed like things came to a conclusion too quickly.
Personally while I would say that both the book and the movie World War Z can be fully enjoyed, it might be better off to view them kind of as two separate stories, because that's really how they seemed to me. So I wouldn't say that people should avoid the movie, just don't expect it to be too much like the book if you've read it. If you haven't read the book I recommend you do, but not necessarily before watching the movie because there are some drastic differences between the two.
- Lynx
As someone who has been slowly making my way through the novel World War Z by Max Brooks, for some time now I must say I wasn't sure how I felt about it when I heard they were going to make a movie based on it. While I really enjoy what I've read of the book so far, it didn't strike me as something that would translate well into a movie.
To give a brief idea of why this is to those who haven't read the book and or seen the movie I need to explain a few things about it. First off the book takes the stance that it is a nonfiction, oral history of the zombie war (fascinating to write nonfiction about something fiction I think). The main character, or narrator of the book, really isn't in the story that much. Rather it is his collection of interviews from other people as he works to try and find the source of the 'zombie' creating disease. The narrator admits in the opening that his purpose for writing the book is because he couldn't include the 'human' element in the report he wrote up for his employer, the United Nations.
Now on to the movie version of World War Z which goes at things from a different angle. In the movie we have a character, Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) who is a former U.N. employee who is focusing on being a family man now. When the 'zombie' outbreak finally arrives in his part of the world he goes on the run with his family. After making it to relative safety he learns that he is expected to resume his former job and investigate what is causing this outbreak and where it originated.
There are certain changes which I understand being made between the two of course. For instance a movie that was just a series of interviews about past events probably wouldn't be all that interesting. Therefor I understand why it makes more sense to actually follow Gerry around as he is collecting the information, rather than getting it from him later second hand. Also without making the movie in a mockumentary style it would be difficult to capture the 'real' tone that the book takes on and again I'm unsure how that would have worked out as well.
After watching the movie, I think I would have to say that I still stand by my opinion that it wasn't a book that should have been made into a movie. Now that isn't to say that I didn't like the movie, because I thought it was pretty good for a zombie movie. It didn't have the usual feeling of if you've seen one you've seen them all to me. It just didn't feel like it really carried the same weight as the book. The book goes so much more in depth into the process of finding the source of the problem and traveling around that in comparison the movie just doesn't stand up. It also doesn't provide the opportunity to hear from as many people about how this has impacted their area of the world. The other thing I felt watching the movie, was that while I'm not sure it needed to be longer, I needed to feel that there was a little more passage of time throughout it because it actually seemed a bit rushed and it seemed like things came to a conclusion too quickly.
Personally while I would say that both the book and the movie World War Z can be fully enjoyed, it might be better off to view them kind of as two separate stories, because that's really how they seemed to me. So I wouldn't say that people should avoid the movie, just don't expect it to be too much like the book if you've read it. If you haven't read the book I recommend you do, but not necessarily before watching the movie because there are some drastic differences between the two.
- Lynx
Monday, August 12, 2013
2 Guns
When asked, I typically tell people that my favorite genre of movies is action, or action adventure. However, while I love fast intense action sequences and scenes filled with car chases and shootouts, I also dearly love to laugh. For this reason, perhaps I've been telling people the wrong thing all along, perhaps I should be telling them my favorite genre is action comedies. After all, they have a little bit of everything I love in a movie. This being the case, when I found out about the new film 2 Guns I couldn't wait to see it.
Add to this an intriguing plot and some great actors and it's no wonder that I went to the movie little more than a week after it came out. 2 Guns tells the story of Bobby (Denzel Washington), a DEA agent who is working undercover, and Stig (Mark Wahlberg), an undercover Navy Intelligence officer. The twist? Both think that the other is an honest to goodness criminal. From there on the story continues into a twisted mess of inter-agency miscommunication, botched crimes, and betrayal. It's a movie that is equally full of crazy action shots and a lot of laughs. This is largely due to the interaction between Bobby and Stig, two vastly different characters, personality wise, who play off each other fantastically.
The plot may get over the top convoluted at times, due to the large number of competing parties at play, but the character interaction makes up for it all and Washington and Wahlberg pull off some great performances. All said, its certainly a movie worth seeing, especially if you are in the mood for some good summer laughs and action.
-Lynx
Add to this an intriguing plot and some great actors and it's no wonder that I went to the movie little more than a week after it came out. 2 Guns tells the story of Bobby (Denzel Washington), a DEA agent who is working undercover, and Stig (Mark Wahlberg), an undercover Navy Intelligence officer. The twist? Both think that the other is an honest to goodness criminal. From there on the story continues into a twisted mess of inter-agency miscommunication, botched crimes, and betrayal. It's a movie that is equally full of crazy action shots and a lot of laughs. This is largely due to the interaction between Bobby and Stig, two vastly different characters, personality wise, who play off each other fantastically.
The plot may get over the top convoluted at times, due to the large number of competing parties at play, but the character interaction makes up for it all and Washington and Wahlberg pull off some great performances. All said, its certainly a movie worth seeing, especially if you are in the mood for some good summer laughs and action.
-Lynx
Thursday, July 25, 2013
And the Winner Is...
The winner of the recent poll of what in theaters film should be reviewed is World War Z. Therefor sometime in the next few days I will be going to see that film and a review shall appear shortly after. Polls like this will be held on a somewhat regular basis particularly during blockbuster seasons such a summer and Christmas break. Thank you.
-Lynx
Monday, July 22, 2013
Broken City
At the beginning of the movie Broken City we meet Billy Taggart (Mark Wahlberg), a New York City police officer who is potentially facing charges of murder. Some believe he shot an armed suspect in self defense, others believe he intentionally gunned down the "known" criminal who got off on a technicality. However, when evidence, and a witness comes out that could prove Taggart's guilt, Mayor Hostetler (Russell Crowe) who considers Taggart a "hero" covers it up under the condition that Taggart retire from the force.
Fast forward seven years and Taggart seems to be doing well for himself. He is working as a private investigator and in a long term relationship with an aspiring actress. This being the case he is more than a little worried when the mayor calls and asks him to meet with him. When he gets to the mayor's office he finds out that the mayor is in need of his private investigative abilities. Though the mayor's request seems simple enough at first, Taggart quickly gets drawn into a dangerous political battle leading up to the next election. In the end he will have to decide which side he wants to be on and how much he is willing to give up in order to uncover the truth and bring the guilty to justice.
Broken City was a fairly decent action movie with a lot of good political intrigue and more plot than many other films of its genre. It keeps viewers on edge as they wonder what Taggart is going to do, and who is going to win in the end. There is certainly a battle of many wills going on throughout the movie, and it all comes down to how well the opponents can predict each others actions, who has the most to lose, and who is willing to give that all up to win.
I enjoyed this movie quite a bit and would say it is worth a watch. The acting is superb and the plot is both intriguing and suspenseful, as it should be. It certainly keeps the viewer curious as to how things are going to turn out in the end, the whole way through and makes one think about actions and their subsequent consequences.
-Lynx
Fast forward seven years and Taggart seems to be doing well for himself. He is working as a private investigator and in a long term relationship with an aspiring actress. This being the case he is more than a little worried when the mayor calls and asks him to meet with him. When he gets to the mayor's office he finds out that the mayor is in need of his private investigative abilities. Though the mayor's request seems simple enough at first, Taggart quickly gets drawn into a dangerous political battle leading up to the next election. In the end he will have to decide which side he wants to be on and how much he is willing to give up in order to uncover the truth and bring the guilty to justice.
Broken City was a fairly decent action movie with a lot of good political intrigue and more plot than many other films of its genre. It keeps viewers on edge as they wonder what Taggart is going to do, and who is going to win in the end. There is certainly a battle of many wills going on throughout the movie, and it all comes down to how well the opponents can predict each others actions, who has the most to lose, and who is willing to give that all up to win.
I enjoyed this movie quite a bit and would say it is worth a watch. The acting is superb and the plot is both intriguing and suspenseful, as it should be. It certainly keeps the viewer curious as to how things are going to turn out in the end, the whole way through and makes one think about actions and their subsequent consequences.
-Lynx
Sunday, July 21, 2013
Oz the Great and Powerful
I suspect that most of us are probably familiar with the original Wizard of Oz movie from 1939. If not, then perhaps it is time to brush up on your pop culture knowledge. I hope that even those who haven't seen the film are aware that it was the first color film. The story was of course first a book, and then a Broadway musical before it became a movie. The interesting thing about the new film Oz the Great and the Powerful is that it takes a look at what happened before the Wizard of Oz. Of course other stories have done this, such as Wicked, but this particular one is about the mysterious wizard himself.
I really enjoyed that this movie covered most of the important elements which are found in the original book and movie versions. For instance, the beginning of the movie takes place in Kansas and as with the 1939 film, is in black and white until the character arrives in the land of Oz. While it certainly doesn't hold the shock and awe factor that it did in 1939 when the film switched to color for the first time ever, I'm glad that this new film retained that feature since it makes the land of Oz seem even more mystical somehow. Besides this there are of course appearances by many familiar character such as the three witches, Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz), and Glinda (Michelle Williams). There are also scenes with the flying monkeys or baboons, the munchkins and many of the famous Oz landmarks such as the poppy field and the Emerald City. Of course one can't leave out the wizard Oz played by James Franco since he gets to be the one the story is about this time around.
Overall I enjoyed the film Oz the Great and Powerful, a lot. I felt that it provided a new and unique take on a familiar story. Really, it just seemed like a film that was lots of fun for the whole family. I recommend this to anyone, and if you haven't seen the original Wizard of Oz, you should consider watching that first, not because it is necessary to the story, but just because you are missing out if you haven't.
-Lynx
I really enjoyed that this movie covered most of the important elements which are found in the original book and movie versions. For instance, the beginning of the movie takes place in Kansas and as with the 1939 film, is in black and white until the character arrives in the land of Oz. While it certainly doesn't hold the shock and awe factor that it did in 1939 when the film switched to color for the first time ever, I'm glad that this new film retained that feature since it makes the land of Oz seem even more mystical somehow. Besides this there are of course appearances by many familiar character such as the three witches, Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz), and Glinda (Michelle Williams). There are also scenes with the flying monkeys or baboons, the munchkins and many of the famous Oz landmarks such as the poppy field and the Emerald City. Of course one can't leave out the wizard Oz played by James Franco since he gets to be the one the story is about this time around.
Overall I enjoyed the film Oz the Great and Powerful, a lot. I felt that it provided a new and unique take on a familiar story. Really, it just seemed like a film that was lots of fun for the whole family. I recommend this to anyone, and if you haven't seen the original Wizard of Oz, you should consider watching that first, not because it is necessary to the story, but just because you are missing out if you haven't.
-Lynx
Gangster Squad
While this might be another book inspired film, like several of the others I've reviewed so far, it certainly is a lot different, but I was thinking it was time for a change so here it is. More than anything I would say that Gangster Squad is a modern film noir. It has a similar darkness and feel to an old time gangster movie, and is set in the late 1940's (the era of classic film noir movies), but it's got modern filming techniques, and a level of violence that probably wouldn't be seen in most movies from the 40's . The first thing that came to mind when I started watching the movie, was the 1997 movie L.A. Confidential, which is often regarded as a modern film noir itself.
Gangster Squad tells the story of a gritty 1940's Los Angeles which is being taken over by the vicious mob boss Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn). In the midst of this is the good cop John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) recently returned from the war and upset with the state of his town. However, nobody seems interested in doing anything about it. O'Mara may have returned from the war, but for him the fight is still going on, and he decides to go after Cohen. After an initial success in breaking up one of Cohen's businesses, the police chief tells O'Mara that he wants him to get together a squad of men and go after Cohen but not as cops. Instead he wants them to attack Cohen's businesses, drug shipments, and everything else, until he is forced out of the city. O'Mara assembles his force from fellow cops who are unwilling to be bought by Cohen, but are willing to work a little outside the law to defeat him. One of them, Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling) had entered into a risky relationship with Cohen's girl, Grace Faraday (Emma Stone) prior to joining the group. This relationship is in turns useful and very dangerous to the mission of the six men to bring down one of the biggest mob threats to L.A.
This film had some incredible acting in it, as well as some fantastic cinematography. Sean Penn executed his role as the merciless Cohen perfectly while Josh Brolin made an outstanding appearance as the determined cop who is still a little bit too much the soldier. Add in Ryan Gosling's somewhat reluctant to get involved character and you have a fine mix. Besides this the cinematography and editing of this movie brought a lot to it as well. While there is plenty of violence in the film (the opening scene is none to pleasant), there are also slow motion scenes, close ups, camera angles, and lighting and help to draw the viewer away from the violence at times. For instance in a intense gun battle there may be a slow motion close up of the empty casings bouncing on the floor, rather than a scene of someone getting shot.
All together Gangster Squad was a very impressive gangster film that should please fans of the genre. It has some great actors in it, and great elements in the filming. Besides all of this it is an interesting story of how six men took on one of the greatest mob bosses the city of angels had ever seen. While I occasionally watch movies of this type I do not watch them on a regular basis, so I was impressed that I enjoyed this particular one even more than I expected to going in. I hope that this helps people decide whether they want to see this film or not, and at very least maybe it provided a nice change from the other things I have been reviewing. Until the next time :)
-Lynx
Gangster Squad tells the story of a gritty 1940's Los Angeles which is being taken over by the vicious mob boss Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn). In the midst of this is the good cop John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) recently returned from the war and upset with the state of his town. However, nobody seems interested in doing anything about it. O'Mara may have returned from the war, but for him the fight is still going on, and he decides to go after Cohen. After an initial success in breaking up one of Cohen's businesses, the police chief tells O'Mara that he wants him to get together a squad of men and go after Cohen but not as cops. Instead he wants them to attack Cohen's businesses, drug shipments, and everything else, until he is forced out of the city. O'Mara assembles his force from fellow cops who are unwilling to be bought by Cohen, but are willing to work a little outside the law to defeat him. One of them, Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling) had entered into a risky relationship with Cohen's girl, Grace Faraday (Emma Stone) prior to joining the group. This relationship is in turns useful and very dangerous to the mission of the six men to bring down one of the biggest mob threats to L.A.
This film had some incredible acting in it, as well as some fantastic cinematography. Sean Penn executed his role as the merciless Cohen perfectly while Josh Brolin made an outstanding appearance as the determined cop who is still a little bit too much the soldier. Add in Ryan Gosling's somewhat reluctant to get involved character and you have a fine mix. Besides this the cinematography and editing of this movie brought a lot to it as well. While there is plenty of violence in the film (the opening scene is none to pleasant), there are also slow motion scenes, close ups, camera angles, and lighting and help to draw the viewer away from the violence at times. For instance in a intense gun battle there may be a slow motion close up of the empty casings bouncing on the floor, rather than a scene of someone getting shot.
All together Gangster Squad was a very impressive gangster film that should please fans of the genre. It has some great actors in it, and great elements in the filming. Besides all of this it is an interesting story of how six men took on one of the greatest mob bosses the city of angels had ever seen. While I occasionally watch movies of this type I do not watch them on a regular basis, so I was impressed that I enjoyed this particular one even more than I expected to going in. I hope that this helps people decide whether they want to see this film or not, and at very least maybe it provided a nice change from the other things I have been reviewing. Until the next time :)
-Lynx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)