Movie Review: TOY STORY 3

Fantastic! What makes Toy Story 3 so incredible is how this Pixar animated movie elicits so much emotion from the audience. After all, it’s only a cartoon. But for those of us who grew up with Bambi (1942), Walt Disney’s animated feature film written by Perce Pearce and Felix Stalton, we know firsthand, the power of really good storytelling. I’m sure I’m not the only one with vivid memories of Bambi’s mother getting gunned down by hunters. I cried for weeks. Toy Story 3 is not quite in the same league as Bambi but it is good and even adults will find themselves cheering for Woody and his group of toy-friends and cringing at the sinister strawberry scented bear, Lots-O’-Huggin’, voiced by Ned Beatty. And everybody will be scared of the big, stalking, talking baby doll that can turn its head all the way around – creepy.

Toy Story 3, like its predecessors, is a tale almost too preposterous and worse, too sappy, to be taken seriously but this is Pixar’s gift; to take a farfetched premise (think Monsters Inc., Cars and Up) and make it believable, engrossing and captivating. Think of all the movies, with all the bells and whistles, that cannot capture its audience (the new Wolfman, Sherlock Holmes, and The Lovely Bones, to name a few).

Although everyone voicing this movie is perfect, no one quite reaches the ranks of Michael Keaton as the Ken doll; the metrosexual, hung-up on fashion, who falls head-over-heels for Barbie. Oh yes, it is love at first sight and he woos her by asking her to move in to his ‘dream house’.

Most important, the plot allows characters to gradually come to terms with the film's overreaching themes of friendship and loss, taking us right along with them on every step of that poignant journey and bringing our heroes (and the franchise) full circle. Most impressive, the movie ends with a surprisingly moving last act that will leave you in tears.

The story and animation are so good, you will love the movie whether you see it in 3D or not. In today’s world of virtual reality-like 3D, Toy Story 3 is technologically, minor league. See it with your family and friends and stay for the credits as you get a glimpse of what life is like for all the toys at Sunnyside Daycare with the new toys in charge – priceless!

Movie Review: The Karate Kid

The first question everyone will ask: “Is the remake of The Karate Kid as good as the original?” The answer is definitely “no” but it is entertaining and will hold the interest of most kids. The second question: “How could they have made this movie as good as the first?” The answer is easy; cut the running time down by 20 minutes to tighten it up- the original is 20 minutes shorter, get rid of the 2 or 3 unnecessary scenes and reshoot the one weak scene (I won’t tell you which scene it is). Then the movie will come close to reaching the ranks of the first; still a favorite, replayed, rented and re-rented 26 years after its release. That’s not going to happen with this one.

Jaden Smith (son of Will and Jada) is very impressive as Dre Parker, a 12 year old boy, transplanted from Detroit to Beijing because of his mom’s (Taraji Henson) job. Jaden commands the screen better than you might imagine and there’s no doubt, he really mastered some serious martial art skills (if you stick around the theater to watch the credits you’ll see some photos of his training). But the real star (other than the breathtaking shots of the Forbidden City and the Great Wall of China – I’m sure the Chinese Department of Tourism is thrilled!) is Dre’s nemesis, Cheng, played to perfection by newcomer, Zhenwei Wan; a young Chinese actor with no real acting experience. Amazing. The blonde haired, Johnny Lawrence, played the part in the original. Wang is so believable that you will question the photo you see during the credits of the 2 laughing and having fun on the set. Acting is very tough business and there is nothing tougher then playing a villain. All the Chinese actors are fabulous. Dre’s love interest and concert violinist, Meiying (Wenwen Han) is beautiful and talented and you will love watching her dance to Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face”. Another nice touch is the demonstration of a unique and seldom seen type of Traditional Chinese Medicine called Fire Cupping – interesting.

Jackie Chan is Mr. Han, the new Mr. Miyagi and is much better than I expected as the Kung Fu master and spiritual advisor to Dre. He’s good because he’s content to play into his diminished (though still remarkable) physical capabilities rather than attempt to disguise them. Though predictable, on a modest but legitimate level, the movie works. I’m a big fan of kids movies that promote the notion of facing your fears. How to Train Your Dragon is a better movie conveying this important message but The Karate Kid is good fun for kids and in true Rocky style, will get everybody on their feet cheering for the underdog.

Warning: Parents, be prepared for your kids to come out of the movie theater and immediately start practicing their Kung Fu moves. Move out of the way because there will be no stopping them!

FOR "MISSION TO HAITI" click 'April 2010' in Blog Archive

Movie Review: SPLICE

If you have ever wondered what a creature would look like if you combined the DNA of an insect, bird, reptile, and human, you don’t have to wonder anymore. Splice, the Canadian movie directed by Vincenzo Natali (he directed the sci-fi nightmare, Cube) has done it for us. Natali, along with first time screenwriter Antoinette Terry Bryant, wrote an exceptionally ballsy, strange and very disturbing (although not entirely original) story about two biochemists, Clive and Elsa, played by Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley, so caught up in the “could we” they neglect to consider the “should we”. Lab partners and lovers; they have used gene-splicing to create interspecies hybrids. Their first successful endeavor produces Ginger and Fred, a pair of amorphous creatures that look like slugs that have been exposed to nuclear fall-out. They are used to produce medication that ensures the health of cattle.

Using CGI technology and the beautiful French actress, Delphine Chaneac; the special effects by Howard Berger that create Dren, the monster, are absolutely seamless. She is beautiful and very scary at the same time. Those legs! Strong performances by Chaneac and Polley (Dawn of the Dead) make this movie watchable. Ultimately, it is a cautionary tale as old as the science-fiction movie genre, but it goes places I’m fairly convinced, American audiences are not quite ready for. We’ll see what happens over the next couple of weeks.

Although some might say Splice is a cross between Species, Alien and Rosemary's Baby; it would be remiss not to put Parenthood in the mix. The movie does not need a big screen (although all science fiction/horror movies work better in a dark movie theater); you can wait for this one to come out On Demand. It clocks in at just under 2 hours but it doesn’t feel it. If you can tolerate the subject matter, it will hold your interest and I promise, you will not be bored. And for those of you who are considering bringing the kids, a heads up; there are 2 pretty explicit sex scenes (and they’re not between Elsa and Clive). Whoa!

For "MISSION TO HAITI" click April 2010 in the Blog Archive

Movie Review: Robin Hood

My obsession with film is not a mystery. When I was very young my dad bought a 16mm movie projector and I spent endless hours in the basement of our house watching old movies. One of my dad’s favorites (and so one of my favorites) was The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) with Errol Flynn, Olivia de Havilland, Basil Rathbone and Claude Raines. I’ve seen it countless times (more than I’ve seen that other movie) and the image of Robin (Flynn) smashing through the door of the palace with a buck wrapped around his neck and throwing it on the table in front of Prince John (Raines) is indelibly burned in my mind. What Robin Hood remake could top that? The director, Kevin Reynolds’s 1991, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves? It’s almost a comedy although entertaining and it did satisfy all of my rescue fantasies. Alan Rickman; how fabulous was he as the Sheriff of Nottingham. And Geraldine McEwan as Mortianna, his sorceress mother, was a nice touch. Let’s not mention Costner. Accents are not his strong suit. Ugh. It was okay but doesn’t hold a candle to the Flynn version. And director Ridley Scotts’ 2 ½ hour, 230 million dollar production is simply not what it should be and the question I’m asking myself is “why was this movie made”? Is there anyone out there dying to know why Robin Hood became Robin Hood? Maybe there is but I for one am more interested in his archery skills and watching him do his swashbuckling thing in Sherwood Forest.

Russell Crowe is, of course, in the title role. Scott wouldn’t have it any other way. They have made many movies together (Gladiator, Body of Lies, American Gangster, A Good Year) and are friends in real life. Crowe can do accents so we can’t fault him on that front. BUT come on, Robin Hood is a fun guy and Crowe’s Robin is not having any fun and that is part of the problem. The movie is long, plodding and humorless. Robin’s adversary is a character named Godfrey played by Mark Strong (the bad guy in Sherlock Holmes). He always makes a good villain but the two are never on screen together (except for the end) and that was probably a mistake. Cate Blanchett, who is plenty beautiful and plenty talented, is not showing signs of either in this film.

The good news: The opening scene is intriguing and got my hopes up. Ridley Scott does good fight scenes (think Gladiator). The last fight scene is great as well (although much too reminiscent of storming the beaches of Normandy in Saving Private Ryan). Danny Houston (son of John and half sister to Angelika) is excellent as King Richard The Lionheart but he gets knocked off very early in the movie. The costumes are fantastic.

You can safely miss this movie or at the very least, wait for it to come out On Demand.

Movie Review: IRON MAN 2

OK, I’m back (for now) reviewing movies. I’m not gonna lie, I was anxiously awaiting the release of Iron Man 2. I loved the first one and it’s not a secret, I’m madly in with love Robert Downey Junior. And in this movie, he does not disappoint. It doesn’t hurt that he is either suited up in gorgeous David August custom clothing or in his new and improved, Iron Man getup. He is fabulous in this sequel as is the entire cast (except Johansson and I’ll talk about her later). Don Cheadle (Hotel Rwanda, Crash) replaces Terrance Howard (Crash, Iron Man) as Rhodey and although he is a lot shorter, he fills his military shoes quite nicely. Mickey Rourke, as Ivan Vanko, the crazed Russian convict scientist out for revenge, is just too bad as the bad guy. Awesome. Even without his heavily tattooed body, long, dirty hair and gold rimmed teeth, Mickey simply looks scary – and he is. You will not forget the image of him cracking his lightening whips at the Monaco Grand Prix. By the way, the cockatoo in the movie; it’s his. But the big applause goes to Sam Rockwell as Hammer, the sleazy, two-faced glory monger who finances Vanko. He must have gone to the Gary Oldman School of ‘Villainry’ (I made that word up). He is very reminiscent of some of Oldman’s bad-guy roles (Zorg in The Fifth Element and Carnegie in The Book of Eli). He is great in this and steals just about every scene he's in.

The problem with Scarlet Johansson is she can’t act. She is very beautiful and very sexy in her cat suit but her lack of acting skills comes through even when she’s playing a comic book character. In her defense, her role is ridiculous – eye candy only. To make up for it they gave her the best fight scene in the movie. Most guys could care less if Johansson can act or not. They will all be talking about her when they go home and thinking about her while in bed at night. Who would have been a better choice? Rachel McAdams (Red Eye, Mean Girls). She's smart, almost as sexy and when delivering the line, "Is it dirty enough?" after handing a martini to Stark, it would sound as clever and funny as it was meant to be. Paltrow, as Pepper Potts, is actually better this time around. It’s a meatier role.

Justin Theroux, who does more acting in his life than writing, is responsible for the screenplay (he wrote Tropic Thunder). Jon Favreau directs and also stars in the movie as Happy Hogan, Starks chauffeur, personal assistant and sparring partner. His character was only in a few of the old Iron Man comic books. I can see Favreau rummaging through them trying to find a character he wanted to play. Hogan is actually a perfect choice. As a director, he goes over the top but at the same time does a good job holding this movie, with all its subplots, together. He never takes his eye off the ball: The smart-ass, womanizing millionaire, Tony Stark.

Iron Man 2 is not Iron Man which is probably one of the best superhero movies ever made. But it is entertaining and worth the trip to the movie theater if for no other reason than to see Mickey Rourke walk on to the raceway in Monaco and pull out his whips.

p.s. The first Iron Man has one of the great philosophical and spiritual messages: Sometimes we have to lose our heart in order to find our heart. That plays out literally and figuratively in Iron Man. Iron Man 2 has none of that. BUT, we are always reminded of 2 men who completely lost their way in life and found their way back, better than ever.