Reviews

I will admit I am pretty bias. I love the comic. Its wonderful. This is a terrible rehash of some of the comics most amazing moments. It hurts to watch them unfold in what has been made to look like a CW style melodrama. Sharto Copley is usually great, he seems uncomfortable in this role. They have reduced Christian Walker into a cop cliché. The acting is all around bad. I really dread what might become of some of the other more memorable moments. I was very excited this show was being made, this is a huge letdown. I hope it gets better, but I implore you to check out the comic whether you like this show or hate it, you'll see that this show does no justice to how great the comic can be.

11th time is a charm as they say.

Now I'm not putting down the other ten Star Trek "movies", they're good. A few of them are really good. But I was always bothered by the fact that, while they were more of a production than the TV episodes, they seem to have been produced with restraint. Perhaps it was an effort to maintain the feel of the beloved TV show, or perhaps the studio just didn't have enough faith in Star Trek to amplify the budget. Regardless, I see Star Treks 1-10 as films that missed the point of exactly what they were. When you make a movie based on a popular TV show, step up the game! Make it a true event.

Finally, Star Trek got the budget it deserves and the treatment it deserves. This movie is a fun ride. I wasn't around for the original TV series (but was a TNG fan), and can completely understand that some fans will be upset with some of the drastic changes to the plot, but if you consider Star Trek's problematic grip its always had on a mainstream audience, you'll have to accept them. The formula behind Trek was perfectly fine for its fans. This movie just trims some of the scientific and political fat while relying on all the great characters and humor to create a refreshing view of everything else Star Trek always had that most people took for granted.

Now the cast of this movie lacks the charisma of the original, but then they did have 30 years to perfect that. Also, Star Trek was generally a mystery show, and this film is undeniably an action movie with very little mystery included. I wonder if the next project will be truer to those roots, or if they will stick to what works for the box office. I'll be very interested to see how they do in the future. (really not meant as a pun, but I guess it works)

Monsters Vs. Aliens has some really funny moments, but by the time you get to see them on the big screen you've already seen them plenty of times on the small one. So there's not too much left to offer by buying a ticket. I thought the 3D was OK. They have a couple of moments specifically designed around flexing the 3d capabilities, but again nothing mind-blowing.

The story revolves around the gigantic Susan (Reese Witherspoon) while pushing all the more interesting characters out of the spotlight. Susan is someone we've all seen in movies before. The victim of an unfortunate mishap leading her down a path she would rather not go down. So the plot follows the same course from there, feels pretty routine. Focusing more on the three other monsters would have made this a better movie. They're much more interesting and only get a small handful of moments to shine throughout the picture.

That was probably the biggest letdown. Having some great comedic potential in the characters voiced by Hugh Laurie, and Will Arnett take a back seat ride. No complaints about Seth Rogen's B.O.B. though, he was great. Kiefer Sutherland was surprisingly good as the General. I underestimated his vocal range.

Finally they made a big deal about Stephen Colbert playing the President, and there wasn't enough of him. All of his funny moments, except for the scene after some of the credits, saturated the coming attractions and commercials. I would have liked to see more of his character.

Overall, its enjoyable. I like to see elements of classic old genres (like the classic monster movies of the 50's and 60's) brought to life in modern day CGI. I just thought this movie had more up its sleeve than it was showing me.

Really blatant attempt to ride his coat tails here I think. He's been hammering out hit after hit, and this movie sneaks in there, with two stars from some of his previous work (Using the same cast is an Apatow trademark), and tries to steal some of his box office power.

I was expecting something with A Lot of laughs. It has Laughs, not a lot though. Not to say it doesn't have jokes throughout. They're just not that funny. Not a single big laugh out loud moment either. The humor is mostly built on a foundation of awkward moments, admittedly my least favorite of styles of humor.

They waste some comedic gold in this movie. J.K. Simmons, Jane Curtin, Andy Samburg, I feel like they just didn't need such big names for small low-impact parts. Jon Favreau holds up well though.

Jason Segel is good in it, but doesn't have the great material he got to write for himself in Forgetting Sarah Marshall.

Paul Rudd I expected better from, but again I would say its more the scripts fault. I kept thinking he was great in .... well those Apatow movies, but he was always a great Co-Star! I wondered why didn't he get a starring role in one of his films. I thought this was the one until I sat through the credits thinking,"This was not the movie I thought I'd be seeing. Who actually made this!?" One more parallel can be made. Its really close to the same sequence of events to The 40 Year-Old Virgin. Just instead of sex, substitute friendship. If you've seen both movies, think about it.

Overall, its lighthearted. It has its share of chuckles. But I feel like I got suckered with this movie.

Just look at that poster. The Daily Show and the Office's funnyman Steve Carell taking a nap on a pile of pancakes. God that looks funny.

You will find more laughs in a "Ernest does ANYTHING" movie than you will in this garbage. But everywhere its called a comedy, when really all you have hear is a Lifetime network made for TV movie with some star power. It even has every cliché a "struggling single parent" TV movie shouldn't have. Teenage daughter driving angst and teenage daughter dating angst. Just what I love in my whacky laugh-it-ups, overpowering melodrama.

Thats all OK though because we have Steve Carell and Dane Cook to sweeten things up, right? I can only guess that Helen Kellar cast this movie then saw (or sensed?) the resulting product and still decided to market it to people as a comedy.

Even for something that was made for TV (and this wasn't) its really bland. Every situation you've seen in this movie you've already seen it done somewhere else, and you've seen it done better too.

Why 3/10 stars. I'd say the performances are still pretty decent, but I just wish they had a better script to work with. Barely saving it from the dreaded 1/10.

Rented this on a lark.

Its a nice feeling when you walk away from a film knowing that it is one of the finest you have ever experienced. That was the case with this one.

This movie has everything it needs in all the right amounts. Action, drama, enough lightheartedness to break up overwhelming tension. And never before do I think I've seen a story where so much hangs in the balance. Truly a cause to fight and die for. And the performances don't let you forget it. All around amazing.

This film also woke me up to realize the work of Alfonso Cuaron. It perfectly demonstrates what a Director SHOULD do with a brilliant script. Film it Brilliantly. So many sequences are shot in one take. Usually I consider this method a film makers parlor trick. But he does it like a true master. Everything he shows you consecutively is framed up so well you probably won't notice its all one shot unless you really pay attention.

One of my Top Ten Movies.

Disappointed I missed it in theatres.

Just kidding. Of course that would get me to care about what transpires in this movie. To have some emotional involvement in the plot. But honestly, I can't figure out why this movie was made. Its not thrilling. Its not funny. Its not entertaining. So why would I want to watch it?

I guess Clive Owen. He can be fun. Not so much this time. There is no character development here, and therefore I don't care what happens to them. I don't necessarily like them as people. And yeah, there is this evil bank doing evil things in the movie, but I'm not even sure the writers understood what would happen if the bank...won? What terrible outcome is being fought here? by the bank, and by our heroes?

The Guggenheim shootout was about the coolest thing in the film, yet not the finale(?). Plus I hate modern art so it had a small touch of extra deliciousness in it for me. Still, wouldn't care what happened to anyone in that scene.

I was hoping to find in this movie the satisfaction that I craved from Quantum of Solace. You can see the similarities in the two plots. Clive Owen would even make a good James Bond. If the film makers just decided what kind of movie it was that they wanted to make, and how exactly it was supposed to stimulate their audience. Something could have been salvaged.

Overall I walked away from Taken with a feeling of satisfaction. The action was pleasing. It had its thrilling moments. And I always seem to be a sucker for watching Really Bad people get whats coming to them from someone operating outside society's rules. It turns out more clever than I thought it would be. If you like these things in a movie, check it out.

But beware. The road leading to this acceptable action romp paradise is one paved with Terrible writing, Campy dialog, and One-dimensional character development.

The first 45 minutes of this film are really hard to sit through. The film is called Taken. Just get to the Takin' already. The set-up is completely unnecessary and poorly, poorly executed. As an audience, we can just assume that a father would want his daughter back. We don't need the background drama that he never gets to spend time with her and has revolved EVERY ounce of his life to being in hers. The way this came across, by the way, left me feeling unclean and disturbed.

The point being there is no reason for a movie called Taken to be unbalanced like this. Everyone who bought a ticket knows exactly whats in store for them and the fun is not going to begin until we see some kidnappin' happen. They could have just as easily started the movie off with the abduction scene from the trailer and given everyone some more thrills. We know that a father is going to do what he can to get his daughter back.

Also this movie participated in a strange phenomenon I've been realizing recently. Film with a videocassette look. Scenes of the movie, particularly action scenes have a grainy distortion all over looking a lot like it would if I was watching it off of a VCR cassette that had already faithfully served me at repeatedly recording the Simpsons a few dozen times. Very distracting, and really why mess with the beautiful high definition picture of film?

Unfortunately I have to argue that it doesn't deserve all the attention. Now I LOVE the Watchmen comic book. It is a piece of literature that should be treasured like most classics.

Honestly, going into it I thought this movie would result in one of two ends. Train Wreck or Eternal Glory. The Outcome. This movie is a train whose journey to eternal glory was cut short due to a lack of key locomotive parts. But not a wreck.

Seeing the story play out on screen was exciting and frustrating. Witnessing all the missing elements of the book was too much distraction, keeping me away from feeling fulfilled. Others in my group, new to the story, felt it was confusing. Not having enough emphasis on transitions between past and present. Though it does have some stunning visuals, and wild (although unnecessarily brutal) action that OD'ed on slo-mo. Personally, this movie seems like an audience pleaser. Like they took the most stirring, emotional comic book tale and numbed it down enough to give people something to clap at. This is evident when (readers of the book will notice) the stories biggest events unfold with little emotional response. Like they were glossed over. Or witnessed from the window of a passing train.

Shame. Could have been Great.

2 Things HAVE to be said. The make-up and music are the WORST in cinematic history! The music is just inappropriate and awkward for the moments they are attached to. Surgically removing your connection to the film every time a tune strikes up. But the make-up. My God the awful make-up. So many people giggled at the ridiculous faces of Richard Nixon and the elder Silk Spectre. Almost as many as those giggling at Dr. Manhattan's glowing blue... well you'll see. Everybody will see it no matter what the movie deserves. You can't fight the inevitable hype. Right now People are too excited, and they WANT this movie to be good so much they won't invest any stock in the bad reviews. Otherwise we wouldn't ever have to suffer through a Transformers 2.

I once thought Alan Moore was crazy for not wanting anyone to interpret his work into movie form. I saw From Hell, thought nothing of it. Saw the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and thought, "Yea, they should leave his stuff alone." Then V for Vendetta and I switched sides, "Maybe it can be done." Now with Watchmen, just respect the mans wishes and don't mess up his stuff. Its too intricate, and too precise for it to be diluted with someone else's interpretation.

Finally broke down and gave this film a chance. Was a big Transformers fan when I was a kid, more of the toys than the cartoon. So I saw the commercial for the sequel and decided I would finally rent this one, I am often amazed at movies with giant budgets like this one. Ultimately they seem to have no sense of themselves. They are so far gone from reality, and not even close to enjoyable. I am not talking about about far-fetched concepts like transforming alien lifeforms that just so happen to look an awful lot like cars and planes of our world. You suspend that disbelief when you buy a ticket, or rent this movie. But so much unnecessary dialog, and situations. I feel like the premise for how this concept (transforming robots locked in mortal combat)was going to be handled was ill-conceived at best. Michael Bay. I won't go into it too much. I'd be here all day. I'll just say, his visuals are absolutely stunning, but there is NOTHING holding them together. Total, total hack. I wanted to watch an action film that I could just shut my brain off and enjoy. Unfortunately I just can't force myself to be stupid enough for this film. Now G.I. Joe may fall next. (sigh) Those were the only two things I liked about the 80's.

I will never, ever forget watching this show around the age of 13. Even at the young age I remember thinking, "This is a Baywatch rip off show without the one thing that makes Baywatch tolerable. The girls in bathing suits." Nonetheless I was too small in those days to be the holder of the remote in my house. The high point of Pacific Blue was an episode in which a couple of thugged out gangsters are coming to whack someone with submachine guns ... on bikes!!! As a thirteen year old I never laughed so hard at something that was supposed to be taken seriously. Even I knew that the task of going out and acquiring Uzis (for murder) is a task that should never come before borrowing someones car for the day. That had been the defining moment of this show. Simple Crimes and situations tailor made by hack writing so they could be taken care of by the unsung hero of the crime fighting world The Bike Cop. Does not get much Dumber.

Absolute shame. I remember reading a review after "swept Away" came out that said, "Guy Ritchie couldn't direct a dog food commercial". I thought this was a bit over dramatic, he made one bad film and two great films(Snatch, and Lock, Stock) the critic is just being unkind. After seeing this one, I am (woefully) inclined to agree. This movie is a choppy, erratic, misdirected dud. I keep waiting and waiting, through some horrible performances on all accounts, for something to come about as a good old Guy Ritchie film moment to no avail. There are tons of inexplicable film making moves here. With an ode to Kill Bill animated sequence thrown in the middle.(WTF?!) I get the idea of the plot here, but it is pulled off really poorly. Skip this, rewatch Lock Stock again.