= 2 stars

Starring Roy Thinnes, Ian Hendry, Lynn Loring
Directed by Robert Parrish

Synopsis

A space agency discovers a parallel Earth orbiting the other side of the sun.

The Good

• Somehwat amusing, dated special effects, done with miniatures, recalling Thunderbirds Are Go or early James Bond movies.
• The nature of the mysterious planet is slowly revealed in subtle, psychodramatic ways like reversed type, occasionally reminiscent of The Prisoner.

The Bad

• Slow. First half features the unnecessary machinations getting the astronauts space-bound. I nearly gave up before getting to all the bigger ideas are loaded into the second half.
• Some dreamy space sequences seem inspired by 2001: A Space Odyssey — but are hardly as timelessly convincing.

Conclusion

Great premise, but lacking in all else, most notably execution. Remake material.

IMDB: Journey to the Far Side of the Sun
Wikipedia: Journey to the Far Side of the Sun
Rotten Tomatoes: Journey to the Far Side of the Sun

= 2 stars

Starring Josh Brolin, Naomi Watts, Anthony Hopkins
Directed by Woody Allen

Synopsis

Alfie (Anthony Hopkins) divorces Helena (Gemma Jones) while their daughter Sally (Naomi Watts) faces her own marital problems with writer Roy (John Brolin). Hilarity ensues.

Good

• Amusing casting: Lucy Punch as a ditsy love interest, Anthony Hopkins, Naomi Watts, and Freida Pinto. All do the best they can with Allen’s meandering material.

Bad

• Nearly everything has been done better in earlier Allen works: old men ineptly lusting after younger women, a brain-dead call girl, fortune tellers, a grumpy writer, and the London location.
• Hoped the tall dark stranger was death himself who’d arrive to put some of these stock Allen characters out of their misery.
• States from the start that it is about nothing, but it’s worse as it eats up time better spent cleaning the litter box.

Conclusion

Pointless variations on the same old Allen themes, further informing my opinion that Allen should take a year or two off between films. Skip it.

IMDB: You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger
Wikipedia: You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger
Rotten Tomatoes: You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger

= 2 stars

Starring Aaron Eckhart, Ramon Rodriguez, Bridget Moynahan
Directed by Jonathan Liebesman

Synopsis

Aliens invade earth and lay waste to Los Angeles. Hilarity ensues.

The Good

• Okay visual feel: a gritty, in-your-face mix of Battlestar Galactica (title cards appear in a similar font) and Black Hawk Down.
• War Of The Worlds from the military point of view.

The Bad

• Logical inconguities pile on, from ill-equipped ground units, delaying air support for three hours when it’s clear the fast-moving aliens will wipe out everything by then, a veterinarian dissecting an alien without fear of otherworldly germs, and Earth being the only planet in the known universe with liquid water (ever heard of melting ice?), and if so, why invade the coasts? Just drop a tube in the middle of the Pacific and have at it. Lastly, there’s the obligatory alien “control point” which must exist in order to end the film and create a hero out of our hapless main character.
• Big mistake having the marine unit happen upon civilian kids, as a cardinal rule in this type of flick: kids can’t die — taking away much of the danger.
• The biggest offense: unremarkable characters spouting progressively cheesy dialogue to where you don’t care about their fate — let alone Los Angeles itself. And the final scene sets up a sequel (Take Back Los Angeles) I don’t want to see.

Conclusion

Despite an initially compelling urgency, simmers down to a disappointing update of an alien invasion B-movie. While the special effects have definitely improved, other things — all bad — remain sadly the same. Skip it.

IMDB: Battle Los Angeles
Wikipedia: Battle Los Angeles
Rotten Tomatoes: Battle Los Angeles

= 2 stars

Starring Robert De Niro, Drew Barrymore, Kate Beckinsale
Directed by Kirk Jones

Synopsis

Widower Frank Goode (Robert De Niro), feeling estranged from his four adult children scattered across the country, decides to pay each a surprise visit.

The Good

• De Niro does the best he can with this About Schmidt–like turn as a retired, out of touch, well-meaning rural American type. Still, this is a long, long way from Travis Bickle.
• Has something to say about the fracturing of the typical American family, each member distracted from “what really matters” in their own way.
• Gets better at the very end as the family deals with one son’s less-than-ideal situation.

The Bad

• Predictably maudlin / heavy-handed direction, lingering on certain scenes in the wrong way, forced emotion (one scene featuring child actors = bathroom break), and way too many scenes of telephone lines — Frank made the casing of those wires — we get it already.
• Weak characters: Frank is exposed as a sad hypocrite, expecting honesty from his kids, yet lies to his doctor and puts his own life in danger. He also pushes his kids to be better when he himself admits he had no ambition when he was their age. The kids are wholly generic, each providing their own variation on dad’s pattern of hiding things and feeling guilty while doing so.

Conclusion

Over the credits plays a recent, competent, yet entirely forgettable Paul McCartney song — summing up just about everything contained within the preceding film. The writers are getting at something here, but the whole run-of-the-mill enterprise left me feeling decidedly un-fine.

IMDB: Everybody’s Fine
Wikipedia: Everybody’s Fine
Rotten Tomatoes: Everybody’s Fine

= 2 stars

Starring Woody Allen, Diane Keaton, Tony Roberts
Directed by Herbert Ross

Synopsis

Lonely, neurotic film critic Allan (Woody Allen) takes dating advice from married friends Dick (Tony Roberts) and Linda (Diane Keaton)… and an imaginary mentor, Humphrey Bogart.

The Good

• Filmed in San Francisco, a welcome change of pace from Allen’s usual Manhattan.
• Early, awkward yet endearing chemistry between a young Keaton and Allen.
• One funny slapstick scene where Allen fails to impress a potential date.

The Bad

• The hopeless-romantic Casablanca references don’t work that well, because said film is a masterpiece on so many levels — while this sex-romp is unquestionably not. While Allen’s intelligent-yet-sex-crazed contradictions are vaguely comparable to Bogart’s hero / cad persona — Allen’s comedy style doesn’t match up in any way. At worst, Allen devalues Casablanca’s iconic ending, equating a political choice for greater good with a self-centered extramarital affair.
• Haphazard direction and meandering plot.
• Most of the jokes and situations come off as sketches looking for a punchline, and are better explored in Allen’s later work.

Conclusion

Only interesting for some glimmers of conceptual ideas Allen would more capably explore in future films, most notably the genesis of the Allen-Keaton partnership. Other than that, skip it.

= 2 stars

Starring Julianne Nicholson, John Krasinski, Timothy Hutton
Directed by John Krasinski

Synopsis

Graduate student (Julianne Nicholson) interviews various men under the guise of research to better understand a recent breakup.

The Good

• Some amusing aspects, namely the men do all the talking and the few women present are pushed to the sidelines.
• Julianne Nicholson (who was amazing in Flannel Pajamas), please find some material worthy of your talents. Also notable is Dominic Cooper, playing a total slimeball who really wants to be harshly interviewed. I hoped he would take things to Neil LaBute-land.

The Bad

• The various, often aimless anecdotes wander to odd places (memories of a father who worked in a men’s restroom) yet ultimately fail to provide a larger, coherent picture.
• Yeah, men can be jerks, but this subject is never made to feel worthy of our time.
• The climactic confession of the former lover, featuring Krasinski, didn’t produce as much shock as I had hoped for.

Conclusion

Occasionally entertaining, but largely meandering and ultimately rather pointless. If you really want to watch a film where men are darkly exposed as jerks and it feels cathartic, check out some early Neil LaBute (In The Company Of Men, Your Friends And Neighbors).

IMDB: Brief Interviews With Hideous Men
Wikipedia: Brief Interviews with Hideous Men
Rotten Tomatoes: Brief Interviews With Hideous Men

= 2 stars

Starring Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche, William H. Macy
Directed by Gus Van Sant

Synopsis

Office worker Marion (Anne Heche) steals 400 grand from work, and hastily books it out of town. She decides to spend the night at the Bates Motel, run by the nervous Norman Bates (Vince Vaughn).

The Good

• The second half following the iconic shower scene slightly improves on the Hitchcock original, largely due to William H. Macy as an inquisitive cop and Julianne Moore as Marion’s sister.
• Some modern improvements: the shower scene and subsequent wrapping of the body is more visceral, and when Norman Bates ogles someone through a peep hole, it’s quite clear he’s pleasuring himself. The spooky Bates mansion interior is updated to Silence Of The Lambs standards. Also better are technically trickier camera shots like the opening long shot over Phoenix through an open window, and some amusing quick cuts to bizarre things during the scary sequences.
• Impressive attention to detail; this is a shot-by-shot recreation — I actually watched some parts side-by-side with the original, and the timing usually lines up. Camera angles, dialogue, even the final flash of something creepy overlaid over Bates’ face, are kept intact.

The Bad

• Vaughn lacks Perkins’ twitchy, contradictory mannerisms, and the original performance soon proves impossible to duplicate. Like Brando as Don Corleone, it’s difficult imagine anyone else playing Norman Bates, or perhaps I’ve seen Vaughn in one too many dorktastic comedy.
• Like a cover band with note-perfect renditions, homage is often surpassed by pointlessness. Many scenes, although technically identical, lack the tense bite of the original. It’s a puzzle to pin down exactly why; acting (which can’t help but seem like mimicry), distracting color, lack of originality, or feeling that people wouldn’t behave this way in 1998.
• Ultimately prefer the black and white creepiness of the original, the color often proves distracting, most notably the pools of red blood flowing down a drain.

Conclusion

Despite an impressive attention to detail and nice performances by Macy and Moore in the second half, I never found a good answer to the basic question: why. A director can recreate shots, timing and dialogue, but Perkins’ original performance proves that once-in-a-lifetime magic convergence that cannot be remade. Skip it.

IMDB: Psycho (1998)
Wikipedia: Psycho (1998)
Rotten Tomatoes: Psycho (1998) 33%

= 2 stars

Starring Sandra Bullock, Jeremy Northam, Dennis Miller
Directed by Irwin Winkler

Synopsis

Nerdy, isolated programmer Angela Bennett (Sandra Bullock) happens upon some odd computer files linked to a far-reaching conspiracy.

The Good

• Some amusement in the dated technology of fifteen years ago: Bennett uses a Power Mac, floppies and a dial-up modem, plus the “gee whiz” factor of ordering pizza and making travel reservations online is seriously reduced. Bennett’s then-antisocial behavior (computer on the beach, addicted to online chat rooms) is now mainstream.
• Some effective tension during a first date on the boat, and Angela snooping around in the fake Angela’s cubicle waiting for a 1995 era Mac to save a file.
• A few personally amusing scenes in San Francisco, specifically the booth-happy (and presently defunct) MacWorld.

The Bad

• Stupid plot. Most unbelievable is uber-nerd Bennett physically fighting off a hit man, surviving a boat car wreck, and knowing how to cause a car crash — with the far-reaching conspirators are surprisingly unable to catch one wimpy computer nerdette. Second, after an identity switch, nobody can vouch for her real identity. So she basically does everything on line and never leaves her home? Maybe this will make more sense in 2050. Then there are the little, silly details, like everyone chasing after one disk that could be infinitely copied, and a viruses making computer screens go all funny (most operate stealthily with no awareness of a Hollywood camera).
• Mostly Bennett running from a conspiracy which is never really explained.

Conclusion

Some of the then-implausible stuff regarding the pervasiveness of the Internet and reliance on computers — is actually more believable today. But the confused identity is basically the same situation as North By Northwest, a much more entertaining ride with much less technological gee-gaws.

IMDB: The Net
Wikipedia: The Net
Rotten Tomatoes: The Net 30%

= 2 stars

Starring Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, Leslie Mann
Directed by Judd Apatow

Synopsis

Famous and wealthy George (Adam Sandler) learns he has a fatal illness, and after some soul-searching, hires young aspiring comic Ira (Seth Rogen) ass joke-writer an assistant, eventually enlisting him on a quest to reunite with an old flame (Leslie Mann).

The Good

• The back-stabbing competitiveness between young, horny comedian roommates Rogen, Schwartzman, and Jonah Hill jockeying for a big break provides some early laughs. Schwartzman plays a teacher in an unfunny kiddie sitcom who makes sure everyone knows how much he’s getting paid… and laid.
• Sad-sack comedian George (Adam Sandler) could be a parody of Sandler’s own career.

The Bad

• Not enough funny. Most of the stand up material is vulgar; crudely sexual, with some bodily functions thrown in for good measure. Perhaps this is what passes for humor these days; no thanks.
• Way too long. Kept waiting for Leslie Mann to show up, and while looking at my watch realized this movie runs nearly two and a half hours, and feels even longer.
• Nearly every okay scene alternates with a bad one — not necessary to see George (Adam Sandler) jamming with paid musicians, bantering with Eminem, or making fun of a doctor with a German accent. Needed an editor, or someone to reign in an over-indulgent director.
• Tries to tackle the serious subjects of death, life purpose, and love, but ultimately, neither the script nor direction are capable of handling such drama in a satisfying manner. The biggest cop-out is the handling of George’s illness, supposedly the driver of this whole enterprise.

Conclusion

A movie with this title should, at the very least, be somewhat funny. It wasn’t, and I regret wasting so much time waiting for those few laughs that became farther and farther between. So maybe it was supposed to be a drama; well, it didn’t work there, either.

I don’t know what happened to the Apatow machine but here, it’s gone off the rails and ended up in the weeds. Skip it.

IMDB: Funny People
Wikipedia: Funny People
Rotten Tomatoes: Funny People 68%

= 2 stars

Starring Jeff Daniels, Lauren Graham, Lou Taylor Pucci
Directed by John Hindman

Synopsis

Arlen Faber (Jeff Daniels), world-famous author of the best-seller spiritual book Me And God, is also a cranky recluse. He’s coaxed out of his shell by new-age bookstore owner Kris (Lou Taylor Pucci) and single-mother chiropractor Elizabeth (Lauren Graham).

The Good

• There’s always something amusing / inspiring about middle-aged folks awkwardly struggling to get back into that dating thing.
• Set in Philadelphia, but sports many all-too familiar trends in California: self-help, new-agey bookstores, chiropractors, and vegetarianism.

The Bad

• Uncomfortably antiseptic. Clean-cut, outwardly normal Arlen mutters under his breath, but his anger hardly feels justified — living off book royalties, his life is yuppie-comfortable. An early scene has him meditating in a very nice home while bitching about a mailman, ignoring piles of fan mail, and a record skipping while he throws his back out — and the world’s smallest violin plays somewhere. I guess I prefer reclusive authors to be more quirky-strange as played by Phillip Seymour-Hoffman or Nicholas Cage.
• Despite a neat start, the plot fizzles. The deep, dark secret that makes Faber such a pill, is much less than expected, and none of the characters go where they need to dramatically.
• Kat Dennings and Olivia Thirlby: completely wasted.

Conclusion

Not funny, quirky, nor touching enough, despite the presence of chiropractors, The Answer Man has no backbone. Skip it.

IMDB: The Answer Man
Wikipedia: The Answer Man
Rotten Tomatoes: The Answer Man

= 2 stars

Starring Lillian Gish, Mae Marsh, Henry B. Walthall
Directed by D.W. Griffith

Synopsis

Follow the lives of two families on opposing sides of the catastrophic American civil war.

The Good

• Despite being silent, black and white, and with poor picture quality, much still manages to punch through: some surprisingly epic war scenes featuring a staggering number of genuine actors (no CGI in 1915).
• Lillian Gish’s pure, crystalline acting. In the absence of sound a different sort of acting is required where facial expressions and hand gestures do double duty. Gish makes use of both, gazing in infatuation at a lover or dramatically flailing about against a door when in peril.

The Bad

• The second half deals with Reconstruction and is extremely racist by today’s standards, as the Southerners fear being overrun by “crazed Negroes,” giving rise to dark, paranoid fantasies: a white woman forced to marry a mullato statesman.The newly-formed Klan arrives to valiantly protect the white interest.
• An epic three hours. While captivated for the first half before Lincoln’s assassination, I nearly gave up during the second.

Conclusion

Watching The Birth Of A Nation was often an exercise in tolerance — not because of lack of sound — but due to a plodding second half that sinks into subject matter at worst offensive and at best, uninteresting by today’s standards. There’s probably a better Lillian Gish movie I should have rented instead.

IMDB: The Birth Of A Nation
Wikipedia: The Birth Of A Nation
Rotten Tomatoes: The Birth Of A Nation

= 2 stars the first time, subtract one star for each subsequent viewing

Starring Drew Barrymore, Piper Perabo, Andy Garcia
Directed by Raja Gosnell

Synopsis

Chloe (Drew Barrymore), a spoiled, pampered Beverly Hills chihuahua, ends up abandoned in Mexico and has to work her way back home, learning some valuable life lessons along the way.

The Good

• If you love dogs, one hook is already in you. The dogs are cute, and the CGI animations used to anthropomorphisize them are moderately amusing. Think Babe gone Disney-fied bananas.

The Bad

• My wife loves this movie to excess. Due to its availability on Netflix Watch Instantly, it has played in our household nearly ten times over. I now must leave the room and watch French New Wave elsewhere. This is some addictive stuff.
• I think there are some humans in here somewhere, smiling because of the easy paycheck.

Conclusion

Tolerable the first time around, my brain feels like it’s melting on each subsequent, undeserved viewing. Aye-yai-yai chihuahua.

IMDB: Beverly Hills Chihuahua
Wikipedia: Beverly Hills Chihuahua

= 2 stars

Starring Jennifer Aniston, Steve Zahn, Woody Harrelson
Directed by Steven Belber

Synopsis

Uber-loser motel worker Mike (Steve Zahn) becomes infatuated with traveling saleswoman Sue (Jennifer Aniston), a complete mismatch. Hilarity ensues.

The Good

• Harrelson is moderately amusing as sell-out ex-punk rocker.

The Bad

• Beyond moronic, stream-of-consciousness plot. The first warning sign is Sue cornering Mike in a hotel laundry room, for no reason whatsoever — nothing her character did before that implied such a reaction. Soon we’re following a nonsense chain of events with un-relateable characters and their inexplicable motivations.
• Reaches for the heartstrings and misses. Mike serenades Sue outside her window; good. Song choice for that particular moment (Feel Like Making Love), very bad. Also terribly wrong is the film’s groan-inducing catchphrase: “Can I Touch Your Butt?” That might have made a better song.
• Spouse said “I could have written this.” Which she never says.

Conclusion

Aniston, what happened? So great in The Good Girl and Friends With Money, but after this and The Break-Up, I’m skipping Love Happens. Skip it.

IMDB: Management
Wikipedia: Management

= 2 stars

Starring Amy Adams, Matthew Goode, Adam Scott
Directed by Anand Tucker

Synopsis

Materialistic New Yorker Anna (Amy Adams) travels to Dublin, Ireland to surprise her doctor boyfriend with a marriage proposal. Unfortunately, a storm strands her on the Dingle Peninsula, home of jaded innkeeper Declan (Matthew Goode).

The Good

• Some breathtaking scenery; rolling hills, lochs, sea cliffs, and ancient castles.

The Bad

• Snooty city girl Anna (Adams) is weakly one-note, her sole talent the selection of inappropriate shoes. Meanwhile, Goode excels at invisibility. Little chemistry and no reason to care if these characters evolve, and Anna’s eventual realization regarding her micromanaged life feels both obligatory and unbelievable.
• Tragically predictable, all romantic comedy cliches apply, even down to tiny plot points. Based on the set-up above, you know Anna will miss her train, grow to enjoy being forced into close quarters with Declan, and fall into a mud puddle.
• Amazingly, worse than the similarly safely foreign-but-not-too-exotic Made Of Honor.
• Dublin, romance, Once.

Conclusion

For three years out of every four, we skip February 29. Skip this one entirely.

IMDB: Leap Year
Wikipedia: Leap Year
Rotten Tomatoes: Leap Year

= 2 stars

Staring Nia Vardalos, Richard Dreyfuss, Alexis Georgoulis
Directed by Donald Petrie

Synopsis

Greek-American tour guide Georgia (Nia Vardalos) is at the breaking point, when a saboteur co-worker assigns her a particularly unruly group of tourists. Hilarity ensues.

The Good

• Gets deserved mileage from postcard-worthy Greece, sunny blue skies over dusty ruins. And keeping with the tourism theme, there are some cynical observations of traveling abroad, where brains seem to shut down as soon as soon as one steps off the plane.
• Vardalos displays some quirky My Big Fat Greek Wedding charm as an awkward, reluctant romantic.

The Bad

• Groan as the writers attempt and fail to recreate the endearing, self-mocking tone of My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The initial dumb-tourist material soon wears thin, and jokes get more low-brow and pointless (a bus driver named “Poopie Kakas,” a perverted hotel desk clerk, and a misunderstood T-shirt), soon sinking into lack of imagination / made for television level.
• The thin plot soon falls apart, and there’s a serious lack of guts in the last half-hour or so, where one character misses their opportunity for a touching exit.

Conclusion

Any American hoping for a funny follow up to My Big Fat Greek Wedding will likely be disappointed, because here, the joke’s on you. Skip it.

IMDB: My Life In Ruins
Wikipedia: My Life In Ruins
Rotten Tomatoes: My Life In Ruins 9%

= 2 stars

Starring Isla Fisher, Hugh Dancy, Krysten Ritter
Directed by P.J. Hogan

Synopsis

Manhattan shopaholic Rebecca (Ilsa Fischer), saddled with credit card debt, loses her job. Hilarity ensues.

The Good

• One funny, slapstick scene with Rebecca sneaking into a fashion magazine office by hiding in a coat-rack.

The Bad

• The timely statement about gross materialism is obscured by fluff: a BFF’s wedding, Rebecca’s new career, and an awkward romance with Hugh Grant / Colin Firth stand-in Luke. Everything must work out, so several, wholly predictable endings occur for every needless plot thread. Boring.
• Bride Wars, The Devil Wears Prada, Bridget Jone’s Diary in a blender.
• Fischer is best at wacky physical comedy; this ain’t it.

Conclusion

With the continuing financial crisis forcing many to suck it up and get frugal, this movie represents a missed opportunity to milk some laughs out of gross materialism and reluctant change. Instead, we get a miscast, limp mix of romantic comedies with hardly a laugh in sight. Someone deserves a refund.

IMDB: Confessions Of A Shopaholic
Wikipedia: Confessions Of A Shopaholic
Rotten Tomatoes: Confessions Of A Shopaholic 23%

= 2 stars

Starring Paul Dano, Zooey Deschanel, John Goodman
Directed by Matt Aselton

Synopsis

Mattress salesman Brian (Paul Dano) is in the process of adopting a Chinese baby when he falls for Harriett “Happy” Lolly (Zooey Deschanel).

The Good

• A few interestingly composed scenes, namely ripples on a pool clouding a reflection, a mushroom-hunting expedition concentrating on the tops of leafless trees, and Deschanel shrinking against a wall as she is ignored by Brian’s family meeting the baby for the first time.
• Mostly saw this one for Dano (There Will Be Blood) and second Deschanel, and both suffer amicably through the sub-par material, playing an awkward couple too inept to get beyond the second date. Goodman is mildly amusing as a blunt-talking hypochondriac with chronic back pain that means he must be driven around lying horizontally in the back of a station wagon.

The Bad

• Way too many characters and threads unexplored (a murderous bum, Brian’s brothers, Harriett’s mother), and then there’s just random crap that is more frustrating than funny or quirky (Deschanel walking around her dad’s apartment wearing a swimsuit? Why does a twin bed cost $14,000? That icky massage parlor? Goat stew?). Too many strange ideas.
• Unfortunately, although this flick came out before, I watched it after seeing the amazing 500 Days Of Summer (also starring Deschanel) which is better in just about every department. Gigantic is 500 Days Of Bummer.

Conclusion

Interesting looking but very muddled movie; strange to a fault. Case in point: Absolutely no idea why it’s called Gigantic.

IMDB: Gigantic
Wikipedia: Gigantic
Rotten Tomatoes: Gigantic 38%

= 2 stars

Directed by Robert Baca, Josh Rizzo

Synopsis

Documentary delving into the fanaticism surrounding products made by that ubiquitous technology company: Apple.

The Good

• Some amusing anecdotes from former Apple evangelist Guy Kawasaki: worrying about Apple’s future if some “dickhead” succeeds Steve Jobs, and in Silicon Valley, everyone secretly wants someone else’s job (all the VCs long to be entrepreneurs).
• Another entertaining interview — because he’s so different from the blind followers — is former Apple engineer Jim Reekes. He’s visibly annoyed at the Apple cult, saying a Macintosh computer is just a tool, and he doesn’t have a relationship with his lawn mower. He goest further to opine that computer engineers become retarded from writing so much code, and should instead get girlfriends and lives.

The Bad

• Other than Andy Hertzfeld and Guy Kawasaki, the interviews are C, D, or F list Mac celebrities I had never heard of, like a Mac-loving film editor, a rabid collector who stores Macs in his attic, and the third Apple founder who has now become a footnote in Mac history. No Jobs, Ive, or Wozniak interviews here.
• The interview footage is filled in with still photographs taken from the Internet and text written in the distinctive Apple font, leading to the feeling this is just someone’s home movies padded in order to make a documentary film.

Conclusion

Even as a die hard Mac fan who sports more iPods than necessary, plus an iPhone and iPad, and bleeds rainbow colors, I found this flick a hard slog. I’d recommend reading a Mac book like Revolution In The Valley or watching Pirates of Silicon Valley before this one. Skip it.

IMDB: Welcome To Macintosh
Wikipedia: Welcome To Macintosh
Rotten Tomatoes: Welcome To Macintosh

= 2 stars

Starring Jim Carrey, Zooey Deschanel, Bradley Cooper

Directed by Peyton Reed

Synopsis

Divorced, lonely Carl (Jim Carrey) leads an isolated life until he attends a self-help seminar where he is instructed to say “yes” to everything in order to invite and live a more fulfilling life. Hilarity ensues.

The Good

• Obligatory romantic interest Allison’s (Zooey Deschanel) cute wardrobe.
• Other than that, seriously, drawing a blank here.

The Bad

• Rests entirely on a stupid premise: say “yes” to everything and you’ll live a more exciting, fulfilled life. But only a moron would take such a sentiment as literally as Carl does.
• Filled with random situations and characters that just aren’t funny, which soon feels like a shot-gun approach due to lack of good ideas and jokes. Especially lame are a suicidal ledge-jumper, a perverted oldster neighbor, Allison’s photography-while-jogging hobby, and Carl’s awkward British boss.
• Carrey’s physical comedy just looks awkward, mostly because of his age. Another part of the problem: Carl is half grounded in reality (he has a normal day job, a few friends, has romantic relationships) whereas Carrey’s best characters are almost completely removed from reality.
• Deschanel is better than this stock comedy material. When Allison falls for Carl, I didn’t believe it for a second.
• Head-slappingly stupid ending. Shades of Jonestown.

Conclusion

Too easy: Just say “no.”

IMDB: Yes Man

Wikipedia: Yes Man

Rotten Tomatoes: Yes Man

= 2 stars

Starring Gwyneth Paltrow, Daniel Craig
Directed by Christine Jeffs

Synopsis

Aspiring poet Sylvia Plath (Gwyneth Paltrow), studying abroad at Cambridge, meets the great poet Ted Hughes (Daniel Craig) and embarks on a passionate romance.

The Good

• Paltrow is passionate, brooding, and eventually paranoid while Craig (far away from Bond) lends a dusky manliness to the whole affair (pun intended), while receding to the background of their marriage. Paltrow’s actual mother Blythe Danner has an all-too brief apperance as Plath’s mother, Aurelia.
• Some truly dark and borderline Fincher-like direction, in particular when Plath and Hughes move to the most depressing first-floor apartment ever, with no sunlight to speak of. There’s a grim visual power in moments where Plath stares deeply into a weak hall light, or recalls a childhood drowning in a rocking rowboat that dips below waves covering the horizon.

The Bad

• Although Paltrow elegantly deteriorates as the film goes on, overall, she’s too luminous for the role.
• This treatment of a compelling story fails for one big reason: There is little presentation of Plath’s poetry. We aren’t shown why her life is worth this examination, and in the end it’s hard to be sympathetic for her eventual fate.

Conclusion

Doesn’t do justice to Plath. Film takes the feeling of “not worth enduring” to itself instead. Skip it.

IMDB: Sylvia
Wikipedia: Sylvia
Rotten Tomatoes: Sylvia

= 2 stars

Starring Chris Cooper, Patricia Clarkson, Pierce Brosnan
Directed by Ira Sachs

Synopsis

Set in the 1940s, Harry (Chris Cooper) contemplates doing his wife Pat (Patricia Clarkson) in, so he can be with his mistress, Kay (Rachel McAdams).

The Good

• Hitchcock elements: murder, moral meandering, and MacAdams sports a white, upturned hairdo that unquestionably mimics Vertigo.
• The pensive, intense Cooper, Clarkson, and Brosnan are all solid. McAdams seems a bit lost and out of her league, here, but three out of four ain’t bad.

The Bad

• Pace is at times laboriously slow, and the direction a bit too laid back for my tastes. You’d think all this infidelity would result in more passion or emotional intensity. At least De Palma’s brand of Hitch-mimickry has that.
• The set up had me anticpating a grand twist, surprise, or climax (in true Hitchcock style) but disappointingly, nothing of the sort awaits at the end of this ride.

Conclusion

While Cooper and Clarkson turn in great performances, almost making this thing work, the plot ultimately fails to deliver the goods. The end result was me wanting to watch Vertigo or Mad Men for the upteenth time. Oh, and my wife hated it.

IMDB: Married Life
Wikipedia: Married Life
Rotten Tomatoes: Married Life 57%

= 2 stars

Starring Ginnifer Goodwin, Jennifer Connelly, Justin Long
Directed by Ken Kwapis

Synopsis

Several couples in various states of commitment and lack thereof, search for love with mixed results. Based on a bestselling book.

The Good

• In true soap opera fashion, several couples’ relationships overlap in amusing ways: connected through roommates, co-workers, friends, or clients.
• Connelly is the best of the bunch, playing somber, uptight housewife Janine, whose husband Ben’s (Bradley Cooper) hidden habit of smoking becomes symbolic of their entire marriage — he’s attracted to the mesmerizing, voluptuous, commitment-phobic Anna Marks (Scarlet Johansson). This trio could have been the entire flick, with all other characters banished to The Jane Austen Book Club.

The Bad

• All the other high-profile actors (Drew Barrymore, Ben Affleck, Jennifer Aniston) have relatively small and inconsequential roles — Aniston in particular sleepwalks through this one.
• Inconsistent tone: starts out darkly comic, laying out blunt “rules” that men and women follow: guys behave exactly as they feel, while women dream up fantastical explanations for their mysterious behavior. The true explanation for why men don’t call: they’re not interested. But the film drifts toward the standard romantic comedy, happy ending, feeling rather forced and disingenuous.
• Justin Long, AKA the “Mac Guy” plays a know-it-all bartender — I kept expecting John Hodgman to appear, with conflicting advice. But another flaw is zero chemistry between Long’s know-it-all and a clingy, needy woman who keeps pestering him for information.

Conclusion

Sort of worth watching for Connelly — but at film’s end, I turned to my wife (romantic comedy lover who inexplicably, recently watched The Ugly Truth three times) — who gave it the thumbs down. I can therefore say with confidence to avoid this one.

IMDB: He’s Just Not That Into You
Wikipedia: He’s Just Not That Into You
Rotten Tomatoes: He’s Just Not That Into You 44%

= 2 stars

Starring Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman
Directed by Peter Berg

Synopsis

Hancock (Will Smith) is a grumpy superhero with a bad attitude, causing damage whenever he saves people and a drinking problem. Public relations man Ray (Jason Bateman) wants to help Hancock revitalize his image.

The Good

• Fun first half as Hancock’s sour attitude provides welcome, unique variation from the goody-two-shoes superhero image. One pretty funny part is Hancock donning a super-suit along with the best behavior he can muster while freeing bank hostages — he struggles to tell the cops around him “Good job.” Smith rocks as a reluctant hero.
• Top notch special effects, with a shaky camera, gritty realism.

The Bad

• Hancock’s “orgin story” goes unmentioned for quite some time, but eventually the movie gets to it — and it’s disappointing — what is revealed is quite ridiculous. Soon the film takes another turn entirely — not exactly Hancock meeting the obligatory super-villain, but something as unsatisfying as Unbreakable.

Conclusion

Hancock is a solid three-star rental during its first half, but took a swervy turn for the worse I just couldn’t swallow. Shame, because Smith wears the superhero-suit very well. Skip it.

IMDB: Hancock
Wikipedia: Hancock
Rotten Tomatoes: Hancock

= 2 stars

Starring Zachary Bennett, David Huband, Stephanie Moore
Directed by Ernie Barbarash

Synopsis

More people are trapped in a prison composed entirely of cubes, but this time we’re introduced to a pair of technicians that manage the cube and the traps within.

The Good

• Well, at least they did away with the ridiculous multidimensional hypercube thing and returned to the grimy cells and “boot dropping” of the first installment.

The Bad

• Unfortunately, as with Cube 2: Hypercube, too much is divulged about the world outside of the cube, much of which is too obvious or merely unsatisfying. The cube technicians live in a grimy world that is kind of like Brazil or The City Of Lost Children (obvious) and a superior officer named Jax shows up with two Matrix Mr. Smith types (silly). Just a dearth of imagination all around.
• The movie has a final surprise that is unfortunately dulled by some seriously ham-fisted direction, lingering much too long on a particular character and spoiling the revelation.

Conclusion

While better than Cube 2: Hypercube this flick still has too many problems to recommend. Skip it, stick with the original, and here’s hoping there are no more retarded Cube movies in the works.

IMDB: Cube Zero
Wikipedia: Cube Zero

= 2 stars

Starring Anna Faris, Colin Hanks, Emma Stone
Directed by Fred Wolf

Synopsis

Hot but dumb Playboy bunny Shelly is kicked out of the Plaboy mansion and ends up advising the lamest sorority of social misfits, Zeta Alpha Zeta.

The Good

• That Anna Faris, definitely sexy and stupid.
• A few funny lines, centering around the dumb blonde routine. A house mother says this isn’t a brothel, and Shelly replies not wanting to make soup. The Z and E fall off of the Zeta sorority house sign, and Shelly says “At least you still have T and A.” Shelly directs a photo shoot, calling the model a “bad witch,” and saying “a house is going to fall on you… a sexy house.” Yeah, I laughed.

The Bad

• Shelly turns the sorority girls into bimbo clones of herself, and then backtracks when she realizes there’s more to life than being pretty and vacant. The second half is this inevitable “lesson” part, wholly predictable, and not nearly as funny as the dumb bunny.
• The sorority has too many women in it — I have no idea why Catherine McPhee is in this film, or the manly lady from Idaho. None are as funny as Faris.

Conclusion

A barely passable rental. I think Faris has the talent to carry a good movie, but this ain’t it.

IMDB: The House Bunny
Wikipedia: The House Bunny
Rotten Tomatoes: The House Bunny 39%

= 2 stars

Starring Annette Bening, Meg Ryan, Eva Mendez
Directed by Diane English

Synopsis

Wealthy Mary Haines (Meg Ryan) learns her husband is having an affair with Crystal Allen, a Sak’s perfume girl (Eva Mendez). Mary turns to her network of friends for support.

The Good

• Annette Bening provides a solid, confident, core performance, as Sylvia Fowler, Mary’s best friend who sacrificed everything for a publishing career. Meg Ryan is also better than usual as the confused wife who learns to follow her dreams. Both actresses pull the movie from complete failure.
• Has no men in it whatsoever, except for a twist near film’s end. Free of testosterone, the film begins with the promise that several talented female actresses (Debra Messing, Debbie Mazar, Bette Midler, Jada Pinkett Smith, Carrie Fisher, Cloris Leachman, Candice Bergen) will have the opportunity to shine.

The Bad

• Despite some hints at modernity (power jobs, a lesbian), what occupies the characters are stereotypically feminine things: face-lifts, manicures, fashion shows, Sak’s, bubble baths, and cheating husbands.
• My hopes were dashed at about the half-way point, when I realized none of the film’s potential would be realized. All the conflict deflates into nothingness, and not even a joint passed by Bette Midler livens things up — perhaps the director should have taken a hit. Ultimately, the aforementioned actresses are failed by the lackluster plot.

Conclusion

I saw this movie unaware of the critical drubbing it received. I don’t think it’s as terrible as many critics said, solely because of decent performances by Benning and Ryan. That said, neither is enough to prop up the surprisingly dull plot. Skip it.

IMDB: The Women
Wikipedia: The Women
Rotten Tomatoes: The Women 13%

= 2 stars

Starring Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman
Directed by George Lucas

Synopsis

Jedi Knights Qui Gon (Liam Neeson) and Obi Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) escort queen Amidala (Natlie Portman) from the planet Naboo, being played as a piece in a galactic political struggle. On the planet Tatooine, they meet a young Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd) who is strong with the Force.

The Good

• Ewan McGregor fills the role of a young Obi Wan perfectly. Much of my amusement in watching the prequels lies in his steady transformation into the Obi Wan of A New Hope. Natalie Portman fares okay, although is often stifled beneath the stultifying lines she’s asked to deliver and heavy costumes.
• Some pretty cool sequences, namely the Pod Race, and the final action-in-three-places-simultaneously ground war, space battle, and lightsaber duel between Darth Maul, Obi Wan, and Qui Gon.
• A few satisfying parallels to the original trilogy: the death of Qui Gon / Obi Wan, culminating in a similar funeral pyre that Vader eventually lies in, Anakin’s space battle foreshadows the destruction of  both Death Stars, and some of Amidala’s attitude during gun battles hints at Leia’s DIY approach.
• The gilded, ornate look of the Republic is visually inventive, populated heavily with droids having one think that the mystifying self-reliant world of the Jedi is under stress by the technological capabilities of the burgeoning Empire.
• The Sith Lord who will be the future emperor, only appears briefly and at this point, it’s not clear Senator Palpatine is in fact this person. The hint of the evil to come in future episodes is very subtle, but note that one profile shot during Qui Gon’s funeral.

The Bad

• Jar Jar Binks. He’s essentially a useless character and his bumbling persona quickly wears thin. Also awkward is Jake Lloyd as young Anakin, who with talents beyond his age, often comes across as a show-offy brat. It’s also kind of icky to realize he will eventually become Padme’s lover.
• There’s a feeling that this ride isn’t as much fun as it could be. Obi Wan and Qui Gon travel through underwater without much shock or surprise at what they’re seeing. Padme undergoes much trial and tribulation with a steely seriousness. There is none of the humor, confusion, or romance displayed by Han, Luke, and Leia in Episodes IV and V.
• Despite his scary looks and the novelty of a dual-bladed lightsaber, ultimately, Darth Maul is a pathetic villain. My biggest complaint is the lack of competitive banter during the lighsaber battles — a big part of all the other lightsaber battles — as the villain tries to convince the hero to “come to the dark side.” Instead, Qui Gon sits down in a meditation pose and Maul paces back and forth, and the tension flows out of the scene.
• There are many additions to the original trilogy that still rankle my brow. I still take great umbrage at giving a biological counterpart to The Force in the form of the Midichlorians. That physical component takes away some of the mystique, and also has me wondering why in a world with such technological prowess — and cloning technology — wouldn’t the Jedi just start cloning those people with a high Midichlorian count? Second, the “virgin birth” of Anakin is retarded. Lastly, to learn Darth Vader created C-3PO makes little sense, and also to have Artoo hanging out with Padme and Obi Wan this whole time. I can hear Luke asking “You knew Artoo? Why didn’t you tell me about that, either?”

Conclusion

A decade later (meaning today), I felt I could finally watch The Phantom Menace objectively — and it was a disappointment. While the gilded world of the Old Republic pre-war and pre Empire is superficially interesting, the annoying Jar Jar and young Anakin really drag things down. I seriously recommend starting with Episode II.

IMDB: The Phantom Menace
Wikipedia: The Phantom Menace
Rotten Tomatoes: The Phantom Menace

= 2 stars

Starring Larry David, Evan Rachel Wood, Patricia Clarkson
Directed by Woody Allen

Synopsis

Cynical genius Boris Yelnikoff (Larry David) avoids humanity — he considers them “zombie morons” — until he meets southerner Melodie (Evan Rachel Wood).

The Good

• Somewhat amusing set-up of an odd couple that somehow works. Boris is old, cynical, brilliant, and a stereotypical New Yorker, while Melodie is young, optimistic, stupid, and from the deep, religious south. Allen uses the situation to make some blunt comments that I’ve observed real-world evidence for, specifically, ignorance leads to optimism.
• Evan Rachel Wood nearly carries the entire film, doing the best possible with a limited character. The film’s best scenes feature just her.

The Bad

• Although David delivers Boris’ cynical one-liners off with grumpy conviction, he feels miscast. Boris is supposed to be a quantum mechanics, chess-playing genius, but nothing in David’s portrayal depicts a deep intellect.
• There really is no dramatic reason for Boris to be so old, and inevitably, when Melodie falls for him (even the most casual Allen fan could see that coming), the self-conscious creepiness of Allen’s personal life again emerges with a heavy sigh. The route the film eventually takes could be interpreted as: “Are you okay with three people or two homosexuals marrying? Well, then a man married to a woman young enough to be his granddaughter; ain’t so bad!” But it’s Allen’s continual decision to have such characters in his movies that is creepy.
• Okay, so let’s accept this odd couple for the sake of laughs. Well, Boris and Melodie’s differences don’t result is as much conflict (therefore, comedy) as expected. Soon, Melodie’s mother and father arrive in search of their wayward daughter, other odd characters appear, soon at the expense of Boris and Melodie’s relationship. By film’s end this wasn’t the movie I signed on for.
• Rehashes themes from Mighty Aphrodite and Anything Else.

Conclusion

All I got out of Whatever Works was the hope that Allen casts Evan Rachel Wood as a more dramatically substantial character (perhaps she’ll be the next Scarlett Johansson) — and offer more substantial characters to play off of. The cynical bastard thing — definitely didn’t work. Whatever.

Previous Woody Allen Movie: Vicky Cristina Barcelona

IMDB: Whatever Works
Wikipedia: Whatever Works
Rotten Tomatoes: Whatever Works 47%

= 2 stars

Starring Ewan McGregor, Colin Farrell, Sally Hawkins
Directed by Woody Allen

Synopsis

London brothers Ian (Ewan McGregor) and Terry (Colin Farrell) buy a sailboat and name it Cassandra’s Dream. Both hope to escape their working-class roots. Terry is buried by gambling debts and they decide to perform an unsavory job for their wealthy uncle Howard.

The Good

• Relaxed, glossy look plus an undulating, tense score by Phillip Glass.
• McGregor and Farrell — the latter looking quite at peace playing an average guy — do the best they can with the material.
• Has a point regarding the downside of class aspiration. Allen suggests people should strive to be happy with their station in life. This theme previously appeared in Small Time Crooks and Alice.

The Bad

• A tale of two brothers performing unspeakable acts and dealing with moral questions was much better handled in Crimes And Misdemeanors. I never got the sense that Terry was truly conflicted, and Ian seemed a bit too aloof to take seriously as criminal.
• Things soon become much too obvious once one knows the morality Allen is advocating, and the ending is almost laughably too neat and tidy. It’s soon clear that the “bad” guys will bring about their destruction — as opposed to Crimes And Misdemeanors and Match Point where the shock was in the absence of justice. This feels like a morality play and with the emphasis on play as opposed to real life.

Conclusion

Didn’t care for this one. It personally felt like a rehash of Crimes And Misdemeanors, and suffers in inevitable comparison to the superior Match Point.

Next Woody Allen Movie: Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Previous Woody Allen Movie: Anything Else

IMDB: Cassandra’s Dream
Wikipedia: Cassandra’s Dream
Rotten Tomatoes: Cassandra’s Dream

= 2 stars

Starring Jason Biggs, Christina Ricci, Stockard Channing
Directed by Woody Allen

Synopsis

Comedy writer Jerry Falk’s (Jason Biggs) relationship with ditzy Amanda Chase (Christina Ricci) is falling apart. He turns to a much older writer, David Dobel (Woody Allen) for advice.

The Good

• In Husbands And Wives, the Allen character mentions an attraction to “kamikaze women.” Enter Amanda Chase, and Jerry’s relationship with her is obviously doomed from the start. Their sexual politics reflect Allen’s wit that surely springs from personal observation of an unstable personality.
• Thankfully, Allen’s character doesn’t hook up with any of the younger women.

The Bad

• Badly cast. Biggs is passable, but seems awkward playing an Allen stand-in: his lines lack conviction, as if he’s reading them off of a card. The gruff, paranoid David Dobel role played by Allen could have easily gone to someone else. Lastly, Ricci is a little too dry to play someone so daffy and occasionally unhinged.
• As usual for this period, so much material is a rehash of earlier Allen movies: Agents, writers, moving to California, futile efforts to save a collapsing relationship, infidelity, cynical observations on just about everything, therapists, New York, etc. One could put all these elements in a blender and let a script generate itself.
  

Conclusion

Amusing, but awkwardly cast and nearly everything here, Allen has covered before. Skip it.

Next Woody Allen Movie: Cassandra’s Dream
Previous Woody Allen Movie: Hollywood Ending

IMDB: Anything Else
Wikipedia: Anything Else
Rotten Tomatoes: Anything Else 41%