NO MORE PRETENTIOUS REVIEWS this is the real deal.

Oct 15

THE AVENGERS (2012)

This is just a pre-cursory review. But for ages comic fans everywhere have been wondering if this could actually happen. All these stars, this movie, just the scale of this is beyond extravagant. So, that being said, and with the preview that we’ve gotten, this movie is going to kick some major, major, MAJOR box-office ass. But also, from what I can tell, RDJ might steal the show. Or Jeremy Renner as Hawk-Eye. I’m waiting.

(Source: hermione, via jameskirkdoesntlivehereanymore)

YOU WILL MEET A TALL DARK STRANGER
Director: Woody Allen
Cast: Antonio Banderas, Josh Brolin, Anthony Hopkins, Gemma Jones, Frieda Pinto, Lucy Punch, Naomi Watts
-
Like all things Woody Allen, this is light, humourous, fun, heartwarming and a whole bunch of emotional and positive adjectives. It’s fun to watch, it’s a comical, and honestly I couldn’t think of a better way to spend an afternoon than with this film.
Unlike most films with ridiculously amazing casts, this film actually makes it understandable, gives each of them a good amount of plot and story, and doesn’t try to showcase every actor just for the sake of having their faces on screen. Woody Allen does it the proper way - he tells us exactly what’s up, and makes sure that from the start of the film, we understand who is who and don’t spend a good half hour trying to figure it all out in our heads (I’m looking at you, Valentine’s Day).
That being said, he has managed to take several subjects, which could be rather dramatic, and turn them into something we don’t want to cringe while watching. It’s bewitching, and entirely has a feel of goodness to it, despite the fact that some of the characters really need to take a look into their lives and try to not mess it up. The film is realistic, it reflects people, a lifestyle and a reality that many could be facing. Yet, in face of all that, it remains a pleasure to watch.
-
Bottom Line: A. really go see it. Rent it, sip some tea while you do so. You won’t regret it.
Aug 21

YOU WILL MEET A TALL DARK STRANGER

Director: Woody Allen

Cast: Antonio Banderas, Josh Brolin, Anthony Hopkins, Gemma Jones, Frieda Pinto, Lucy Punch, Naomi Watts

-

Like all things Woody Allen, this is light, humourous, fun, heartwarming and a whole bunch of emotional and positive adjectives. It’s fun to watch, it’s a comical, and honestly I couldn’t think of a better way to spend an afternoon than with this film.

Unlike most films with ridiculously amazing casts, this film actually makes it understandable, gives each of them a good amount of plot and story, and doesn’t try to showcase every actor just for the sake of having their faces on screen. Woody Allen does it the proper way - he tells us exactly what’s up, and makes sure that from the start of the film, we understand who is who and don’t spend a good half hour trying to figure it all out in our heads (I’m looking at you, Valentine’s Day).

That being said, he has managed to take several subjects, which could be rather dramatic, and turn them into something we don’t want to cringe while watching. It’s bewitching, and entirely has a feel of goodness to it, despite the fact that some of the characters really need to take a look into their lives and try to not mess it up. The film is realistic, it reflects people, a lifestyle and a reality that many could be facing. Yet, in face of all that, it remains a pleasure to watch.

-

Bottom Line: A. really go see it. Rent it, sip some tea while you do so. You won’t regret it.

HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER’S STONE
Director: Christopher Columbus
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Alan Rickman, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane
- 
The start of the Harry Potter franchise was promising, although no one could have foreseen what a worldwide phenomenon it would become. I credit the success of the films almost entirely to the books, but as a film adaptation goes - and the first one at that - PH was definitely magical.
It would be poor judgement to look at the main characters and simply state that their acting could have been better - the kids were 8 - they were plucked from obscurity, and what matters isn’t that they weren’t little Dakota Fannings - what matters is that they were cast properly. The first film gave us the magic we all dreamed of, everything was unbelievably accurate. From the Hogwarts Express, to the scar on Harry’s head to the robes, the crests, EVERYTHING, was simply amazing. 100% true to the book, and that is what captivated audiences, Christopher Columbus, the cast, the crew, Jo, managed to create the wizarding world, they managed to create what would later on become the base for the other 7 films.
I find that the focus should remain on that. The 3 main actors did the best they could, and they were taught and surrounded by the best of the best. Nothing will ever come close to such brilliant British talent all coming together for one film - nothing. Dan, Rupert and Emma will prove later on to have learned, and learned well from the unique opportunity that they were given. The point of the Philosopher’s Stone was to bring the series to life, to put it visually on a large screen in a capacity and scope that would make it believable, that really would be as magical as Jo described it, and that was done.
You can’t deny that the film is wonderfully cast, the trio in particular, and they they acted their little hearts out the best they could to bring the story to life. The first Harry Potter film may not have been the best, but it set the pace, and the world loved it.
-
Bottom Line: B. It’s the beginning of a legend, that means something.
Aug 16

HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER’S STONE

Director: Christopher Columbus

Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Alan Rickman, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane

The start of the Harry Potter franchise was promising, although no one could have foreseen what a worldwide phenomenon it would become. I credit the success of the films almost entirely to the books, but as a film adaptation goes - and the first one at that - PH was definitely magical.

It would be poor judgement to look at the main characters and simply state that their acting could have been better - the kids were 8 - they were plucked from obscurity, and what matters isn’t that they weren’t little Dakota Fannings - what matters is that they were cast properly. The first film gave us the magic we all dreamed of, everything was unbelievably accurate. From the Hogwarts Express, to the scar on Harry’s head to the robes, the crests, EVERYTHING, was simply amazing. 100% true to the book, and that is what captivated audiences, Christopher Columbus, the cast, the crew, Jo, managed to create the wizarding world, they managed to create what would later on become the base for the other 7 films.

I find that the focus should remain on that. The 3 main actors did the best they could, and they were taught and surrounded by the best of the best. Nothing will ever come close to such brilliant British talent all coming together for one film - nothing. Dan, Rupert and Emma will prove later on to have learned, and learned well from the unique opportunity that they were given. The point of the Philosopher’s Stone was to bring the series to life, to put it visually on a large screen in a capacity and scope that would make it believable, that really would be as magical as Jo described it, and that was done.

You can’t deny that the film is wonderfully cast, the trio in particular, and they they acted their little hearts out the best they could to bring the story to life. The first Harry Potter film may not have been the best, but it set the pace, and the world loved it.

-

Bottom Line: B. It’s the beginning of a legend, that means something.

(via morsmordre-x)

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
Director: David Fincher
Cast: Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Julia Ormond
-
First off, this film was based on a 50 page short story, that’s pretty impressive no? Secondly, it had one of the most bizarre trailers I’ve ever seen, but for some reason the world was curious and caught onto it. Come the opening day, people swarmed to theaters and it won over audiences and critics alike. And honestly, there’s really no reason it shouldn’t.
If you’re a film lover, and I mean if you TRULY enjoy the film-going experience and what they’re all about, then you’ll understand why. This movie has it all. It has a great, original and captivating story, there’s a ridiculously talented cast who is 100% ready to carry the strange plot line on their shoulders, and a director who has a soft spot for really great scripts and a certain Brad Pitt (who has appeared in 3 of David’s films already). So there you have it, a high caliber film from the get go.
Then you actually get to the theatre and sit and watch this truly interesting and curious story unfold. Everything about the film just screams Oscar - the smart lines, the great CGI, the way it’s set in a historical background, a love story between two Hollywood A-Listers that we only get to experience in a film like this one, a great soundtrack, and a really, really good looking Brad and Cate - as if it’s really that hard for the two of them. What really works in favour of this movie is how real it all seems, and how utterly heartwarming it turns out to be. It could easily have turned into some craptastic sci-fi film with an awful Spielberg/Lucas spin on it (think War of the Worlds or something alien related), but instead, in the hands of Fincher it turned into a truly human story that brings together all beautiful elements of film to create a truly memorable film. 
It’s easy to get bored if you dismiss it, but if you are truly curious, have an open mind, and admit certain things that will never have any sound scientific background, then you’ll love this film. It was nominated for all those awards for no good reason.
-
Bottom line: B+. Case closed.
Jul 31

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON

Director: David Fincher

Cast: Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Julia Ormond

-

First off, this film was based on a 50 page short story, that’s pretty impressive no? Secondly, it had one of the most bizarre trailers I’ve ever seen, but for some reason the world was curious and caught onto it. Come the opening day, people swarmed to theaters and it won over audiences and critics alike. And honestly, there’s really no reason it shouldn’t.

If you’re a film lover, and I mean if you TRULY enjoy the film-going experience and what they’re all about, then you’ll understand why. This movie has it all. It has a great, original and captivating story, there’s a ridiculously talented cast who is 100% ready to carry the strange plot line on their shoulders, and a director who has a soft spot for really great scripts and a certain Brad Pitt (who has appeared in 3 of David’s films already). So there you have it, a high caliber film from the get go.

Then you actually get to the theatre and sit and watch this truly interesting and curious story unfold. Everything about the film just screams Oscar - the smart lines, the great CGI, the way it’s set in a historical background, a love story between two Hollywood A-Listers that we only get to experience in a film like this one, a great soundtrack, and a really, really good looking Brad and Cate - as if it’s really that hard for the two of them. What really works in favour of this movie is how real it all seems, and how utterly heartwarming it turns out to be. It could easily have turned into some craptastic sci-fi film with an awful Spielberg/Lucas spin on it (think War of the Worlds or something alien related), but instead, in the hands of Fincher it turned into a truly human story that brings together all beautiful elements of film to create a truly memorable film. 

It’s easy to get bored if you dismiss it, but if you are truly curious, have an open mind, and admit certain things that will never have any sound scientific background, then you’ll love this film. It was nominated for all those awards for no good reason.

-

Bottom line: B+. Case closed.

(via whereismyoscar)

UNDERWORLD
Director: Len Wiseman
Cast: Kate Beckinsale, Scott Speedman, Michael Sheen, Bill Nighy
-
Normally I don’t care much for vampire films, or films about magical creatures or witches or anything like that. Unless of course, it’s Harry Potter. And because I’m such a scardey-cat, I don’t watch things that look remotely gruesome or creepy. That being said, I have no idea how the hell I came to even watch Underworld to begin with, because according to everything, I shouldn’t even have been interested in this film. What intrigued me, I’m positive, is the story-line. It may sound laughable to some of you but bear with me.
I’m a huge sucker for female ass-kickers, and if they look hot doing it, can play with the big boys and win - well, then I’m done for. And that’s what this film had. A great female ass-kicker who was part of some secret covenant who rebels and generally doesn’t give a fuck because she knows she’s good and they can’t do a damn thing to stop her. I got all that from watching the trailer.
If you follow the Underworld series, you’ll soon come to realize that it has a pretty great story line, as far a films about vampires and werewolves go. It doesn’t feel cliche, it doesn’t feel like it’s trying to hard, and there is actual, legitimate talent that goes into these films. Never mind the fact that the only reason Kate probably agreed to do this was because her husband directed it, but then came all the other wonderful actors, character actors nonetheless that gave this film the credible feel it has. 
I would almost go and say that this is somewhat of a cult favourite, because clearly it has good enough of a following to have made it to 3 separate films, and perhaps even a forth one. 
The point I’m trying to make is this: this movie is good. It’s exciting, interesting, gore-filled enough to satisfy those people that like the blood and guts of a vampire/werewolf showdown, but original enough in its approach that it doesn’t make you feel like you’re watching the same kind of film over and over again about a tired subject. I haven’t talked to a single person who didn’t enjoy this film. Guys like it for a leather-clad Kate, girls like it cuz it’s cool and Scott Speedman gives us some eye-candy before he turns into a big blue hybrid. And of course, because what would a vampire/werewolf film be without some good old fashioned angst-ridden romance?
-
Bottom Line: B+. Nothing but love for this film. It’s entertaining. A guy rises from the dead. What more do you want?
Apr 30

UNDERWORLD

Director: Len Wiseman

Cast: Kate Beckinsale, Scott Speedman, Michael Sheen, Bill Nighy

-

Normally I don’t care much for vampire films, or films about magical creatures or witches or anything like that. Unless of course, it’s Harry Potter. And because I’m such a scardey-cat, I don’t watch things that look remotely gruesome or creepy. That being said, I have no idea how the hell I came to even watch Underworld to begin with, because according to everything, I shouldn’t even have been interested in this film. What intrigued me, I’m positive, is the story-line. It may sound laughable to some of you but bear with me.

I’m a huge sucker for female ass-kickers, and if they look hot doing it, can play with the big boys and win - well, then I’m done for. And that’s what this film had. A great female ass-kicker who was part of some secret covenant who rebels and generally doesn’t give a fuck because she knows she’s good and they can’t do a damn thing to stop her. I got all that from watching the trailer.

If you follow the Underworld series, you’ll soon come to realize that it has a pretty great story line, as far a films about vampires and werewolves go. It doesn’t feel cliche, it doesn’t feel like it’s trying to hard, and there is actual, legitimate talent that goes into these films. Never mind the fact that the only reason Kate probably agreed to do this was because her husband directed it, but then came all the other wonderful actors, character actors nonetheless that gave this film the credible feel it has. 

I would almost go and say that this is somewhat of a cult favourite, because clearly it has good enough of a following to have made it to 3 separate films, and perhaps even a forth one. 

The point I’m trying to make is this: this movie is good. It’s exciting, interesting, gore-filled enough to satisfy those people that like the blood and guts of a vampire/werewolf showdown, but original enough in its approach that it doesn’t make you feel like you’re watching the same kind of film over and over again about a tired subject. I haven’t talked to a single person who didn’t enjoy this film. Guys like it for a leather-clad Kate, girls like it cuz it’s cool and Scott Speedman gives us some eye-candy before he turns into a big blue hybrid. And of course, because what would a vampire/werewolf film be without some good old fashioned angst-ridden romance?

-

Bottom Line: B+. Nothing but love for this film. It’s entertaining. A guy rises from the dead. What more do you want?

(via thebeautyofsolitude)

ADAM
Director: Max Mayer
Cast: Hugh Dancy, Rose Byrne, Peter Gallagher
-
I just saw this, and I can tell you one thing - it’s charming, beautiful, funny, and has one of those endings that you don’t expect but it’s okay, because you don’t hate the way it ended. 
Hugh Dancy, is lovely and really shows just how capable he is of different genres. He is an actor with great range, and he still manages to be sweet and funny despite the fact that there is very little physical comedy, and even less jokes and sarcasm. For those of you that don’t know, Hugh’s the centerpiece - Adam - a character who has Asperger’s Syndrome, and therefore not entirely capable of functioning in society quite like he others. He does it the way we’re supposed to - he’s upfront and honest. That being said, he tackles emotional departure so well, and yet still reserves warmth, character and love to his character.
This is an entirely touching film, and one which sparkles, truly, in a manner that is subtle, warm, and utterly human. There aren’t many films out there that are capable of doing that, and even less that feel the need to communicate that type of story. In its entirety, Adam is a film that captures human emotion, relationships, and perhaps above all - heart.
Rose Bryne does a fabulous job at walking the audience through thoughts and actions with her, understanding the character of Adam and what he’s really about. Through her, we begin to see Adam in a loving light, and cheer for them to make it in the end. But be fore warned however, this is not a romantic film, nor is it a drama. To me, this is a film about life, and about love. It doesn’t focus on the development of a romance, it focuses on love and how it develops people and relationships in general.
There is a great lesson to be learned from films such as these, they are the kind of films that touch your heart when you least expect it, and the kind of film that leaves you with an impression, a feeling, not a story or a lesson. This is the kind of film that seeks to tell a small part of an ongoing story and of human nature. This film isn’t a fairy tale, in fact it is very much rooted in reality - and perhaps therein lies its real charm. It’s believable.
If you have the time, and feel like watching a genuinely good, engaging and gem of a film, watch Adam. You won’t regret it.
Bottom Line: B+ It’ll stay with you, and you’ll laugh, cry, and smile all the way until the very end.
Apr 18

ADAM

Director: Max Mayer

Cast: Hugh Dancy, Rose Byrne, Peter Gallagher

-

I just saw this, and I can tell you one thing - it’s charming, beautiful, funny, and has one of those endings that you don’t expect but it’s okay, because you don’t hate the way it ended. 

Hugh Dancy, is lovely and really shows just how capable he is of different genres. He is an actor with great range, and he still manages to be sweet and funny despite the fact that there is very little physical comedy, and even less jokes and sarcasm. For those of you that don’t know, Hugh’s the centerpiece - Adam - a character who has Asperger’s Syndrome, and therefore not entirely capable of functioning in society quite like he others. He does it the way we’re supposed to - he’s upfront and honest. That being said, he tackles emotional departure so well, and yet still reserves warmth, character and love to his character.

This is an entirely touching film, and one which sparkles, truly, in a manner that is subtle, warm, and utterly human. There aren’t many films out there that are capable of doing that, and even less that feel the need to communicate that type of story. In its entirety, Adam is a film that captures human emotion, relationships, and perhaps above all - heart.

Rose Bryne does a fabulous job at walking the audience through thoughts and actions with her, understanding the character of Adam and what he’s really about. Through her, we begin to see Adam in a loving light, and cheer for them to make it in the end. But be fore warned however, this is not a romantic film, nor is it a drama. To me, this is a film about life, and about love. It doesn’t focus on the development of a romance, it focuses on love and how it develops people and relationships in general.

There is a great lesson to be learned from films such as these, they are the kind of films that touch your heart when you least expect it, and the kind of film that leaves you with an impression, a feeling, not a story or a lesson. This is the kind of film that seeks to tell a small part of an ongoing story and of human nature. This film isn’t a fairy tale, in fact it is very much rooted in reality - and perhaps therein lies its real charm. It’s believable.

If you have the time, and feel like watching a genuinely good, engaging and gem of a film, watch Adam. You won’t regret it.

Bottom Line: B+ It’ll stay with you, and you’ll laugh, cry, and smile all the way until the very end.

(Source: marshall-green)

17 AGAIN
Director: Burr Steers
Cast: Zac Efron, Leslie Mann, Michelle Tratchenberg, Thomas Lennon, Matthew Perry
-
Let it be said at least once; Zac Efron is much, much more than a pretty face. We are all at least somewhat familiar with the dilemma of this film, and by dilemma I mean that the studio I’m sure, was somewhere holding their breath on opening day. There are several reasons why I say this. Firstly, this came out when Zac was the hottest thing since sliced bread and Leonardo DiCaprio all rolled into the later phenomenon of Twilight. Translated: Zac Efron was the man of the hour, for several years by the time this film was released. So there was no doubt that the studio got a great leading man, the question is - could he pull it off. That is where it became dicey. That is where I became skeptical. Now let me preface this by saying that I watched all 3 High School Musicals, and couldn’t care less if people laugh at me, because those films are happiness on screen. And throughout all 3 films, I liked Zac, I wasn’t crazy over him like tweens, but I enjoyed him. That being said, I didn’t really have much to judge his talent by.
Enter 17 Again. It opened at the top of the box office, courtesy of said tweens, and people actually loved it. By people, I’m guessing it was - you guessed it - the tweens. Now here’s the thing - critics loved it too. Of course it was probably just shallow praise I thought, but I was always curious about the film and wanted to see it, just not in theaters.
Finally, I rented it, and hot damn will I tell you one thing - Zac knows his craft, and he will go far. Why am I spending so much time talking about one man in this film? Well because he’s the main actor and he carries it. The film itself is funny, heartwarming, sweet, and teaches us all a about lost lessons and forgotten loves. It’s a modern day rom com, but in a very different light. Sure it may seem strange and cougar-ish to some that a 19 year old Zac is lusting after a gorgeous Leslie Mann, who let’s face it - we don’t care much for her age cuz she’s still amazing looking. And for those that see it that way, well then they’re missing out on a fantastic bit of acting and a rather touching story. 
17 Again may border on cheesy for some, but this very scene in this photo will make you tear up - guaranteed, and it’s all thanks to Zac. I love this film, and it never fails to lift up my mood. It may not be for everyone, but it is a great comedy that deserves to be given your attention if your only reason for not seeing it is because of some preconceived notion that Efron is just being given parts because the world loves him. Wrong. This entire film teaches me, and the acting world no doubt that Zac can carry a film. He’s no Orlando Bloom [who I love, but let’s face it can’t carry a film to save his life], he is quite literally the real deal and somewhat of a gem.
Now I urge you to go watch this. Between the crazy Thomas Lennon, who pulls of the role of his best friend trapped in the body of a 12 year old nerd perfectly and a very sweet Alex Knight who plays the son, you’ll enjoy it. Screw what the critics say, this really is a fun and lovely ride.
-
Bottom Line: B. Where else are you gonna find a film about being young again, and actually somewhat believe it?
Apr 14

17 AGAIN

Director: Burr Steers

Cast: Zac Efron, Leslie Mann, Michelle Tratchenberg, Thomas Lennon, Matthew Perry

-

Let it be said at least once; Zac Efron is much, much more than a pretty face. We are all at least somewhat familiar with the dilemma of this film, and by dilemma I mean that the studio I’m sure, was somewhere holding their breath on opening day. There are several reasons why I say this. Firstly, this came out when Zac was the hottest thing since sliced bread and Leonardo DiCaprio all rolled into the later phenomenon of Twilight. Translated: Zac Efron was the man of the hour, for several years by the time this film was released. So there was no doubt that the studio got a great leading man, the question is - could he pull it off. That is where it became dicey. That is where I became skeptical. Now let me preface this by saying that I watched all 3 High School Musicals, and couldn’t care less if people laugh at me, because those films are happiness on screen. And throughout all 3 films, I liked Zac, I wasn’t crazy over him like tweens, but I enjoyed him. That being said, I didn’t really have much to judge his talent by.

Enter 17 Again. It opened at the top of the box office, courtesy of said tweens, and people actually loved it. By people, I’m guessing it was - you guessed it - the tweens. Now here’s the thing - critics loved it too. Of course it was probably just shallow praise I thought, but I was always curious about the film and wanted to see it, just not in theaters.

Finally, I rented it, and hot damn will I tell you one thing - Zac knows his craft, and he will go far. Why am I spending so much time talking about one man in this film? Well because he’s the main actor and he carries it. The film itself is funny, heartwarming, sweet, and teaches us all a about lost lessons and forgotten loves. It’s a modern day rom com, but in a very different light. Sure it may seem strange and cougar-ish to some that a 19 year old Zac is lusting after a gorgeous Leslie Mann, who let’s face it - we don’t care much for her age cuz she’s still amazing looking. And for those that see it that way, well then they’re missing out on a fantastic bit of acting and a rather touching story. 

17 Again may border on cheesy for some, but this very scene in this photo will make you tear up - guaranteed, and it’s all thanks to Zac. I love this film, and it never fails to lift up my mood. It may not be for everyone, but it is a great comedy that deserves to be given your attention if your only reason for not seeing it is because of some preconceived notion that Efron is just being given parts because the world loves him. Wrong. This entire film teaches me, and the acting world no doubt that Zac can carry a film. He’s no Orlando Bloom [who I love, but let’s face it can’t carry a film to save his life], he is quite literally the real deal and somewhat of a gem.

Now I urge you to go watch this. Between the crazy Thomas Lennon, who pulls of the role of his best friend trapped in the body of a 12 year old nerd perfectly and a very sweet Alex Knight who plays the son, you’ll enjoy it. Screw what the critics say, this really is a fun and lovely ride.

-

Bottom Line: B. Where else are you gonna find a film about being young again, and actually somewhat believe it?

(via thatprettyrecklessgirl)

WHEN IN ROME
Director: Mark Steven Johnson
Cast: Kristen Bell, Josh Duhamel, Anjelica Houston, Will Arnett, Dax Shepard, Jon Heder, Danny DeVito
-
Yes, I saw this in theaters, and yes, I loved it. I am a huge RomCom fan, but I find that my taste rather differs form most others. For instance, 27 Dresses is not on my list of favourites. Find a film like When in Rome however, and I’m all for it.
First off, this movie doesn’t try to act like something it’s not. It doesn’t take itself too seriously, and if you don’t, and you don’t criticize the plot and say that it’s unoriginal, then you’ll love it too. This kind of film isn’t supposed to be critically acclaimed, it’s supposed to be fun, it’s supposed to make you laugh, and that’s exactly what it does.
I love Kristen Bell, and have ever since Veronica Mars, and I find her utterly adorable and hilarious and fun to watch. Pair her with tall, dark and handsome Josh Duhamel, and you’ve got yourself a wonderful little comedic couple. Plus, Danny DeVito is in this film, isn’t that reason enough?
The simple fact of the matter is, this film combines lots of what I love. Funny, dorky moments. A girl who doesn’t have all her shit together, but is doing pretty well for herself regardless, a gorgeous leading man, and a gorgeous landscape - Italy and NYC. This film is warm, lighthearted, and truly adorable. 
If you’re looking for something along that nature, this is it. It’ll lift your spirits, and you’re guaranteed to have a few laughs along the way. Don’t judge the film based on Oscar-worthy bullet points, this isn’t Easy A or Shakespeare in Love, this a a good old fashioned fun romantic comedy.
- 
Bottom Line: B+. I think I’ve said the word ‘fun’ enough times.
Apr 10

WHEN IN ROME

Director: Mark Steven Johnson

Cast: Kristen Bell, Josh Duhamel, Anjelica Houston, Will Arnett, Dax Shepard, Jon Heder, Danny DeVito

-

Yes, I saw this in theaters, and yes, I loved it. I am a huge RomCom fan, but I find that my taste rather differs form most others. For instance, 27 Dresses is not on my list of favourites. Find a film like When in Rome however, and I’m all for it.

First off, this movie doesn’t try to act like something it’s not. It doesn’t take itself too seriously, and if you don’t, and you don’t criticize the plot and say that it’s unoriginal, then you’ll love it too. This kind of film isn’t supposed to be critically acclaimed, it’s supposed to be fun, it’s supposed to make you laugh, and that’s exactly what it does.

I love Kristen Bell, and have ever since Veronica Mars, and I find her utterly adorable and hilarious and fun to watch. Pair her with tall, dark and handsome Josh Duhamel, and you’ve got yourself a wonderful little comedic couple. Plus, Danny DeVito is in this film, isn’t that reason enough?

The simple fact of the matter is, this film combines lots of what I love. Funny, dorky moments. A girl who doesn’t have all her shit together, but is doing pretty well for herself regardless, a gorgeous leading man, and a gorgeous landscape - Italy and NYC. This film is warm, lighthearted, and truly adorable. 

If you’re looking for something along that nature, this is it. It’ll lift your spirits, and you’re guaranteed to have a few laughs along the way. Don’t judge the film based on Oscar-worthy bullet points, this isn’t Easy A or Shakespeare in Love, this a a good old fashioned fun romantic comedy.

Bottom Line: B+. I think I’ve said the word ‘fun’ enough times.

(Source: )

FIGHT CLUB
Director: David Fincher
Cast: Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, Helena Bohem Carter
-
Fight Club is a movie everyone should see. Honestly. There is perhaps no other movie that will stick with you in should a humourous yet profound way at the same time. I have a friend who absolutely despises this movie and dismisses it as a very bad attempt at a psychological eye-opener with way too many convoluted levels. I of course beg to differ.
Fight Club is clearly more than just a story about fighting, but it does serve as the perfect metaphor. The physical fights translated to internal fights. If you don’t get this movie offhand, there’s no reason to write it off as a movie about fighting, sex and mayhem. Nor is there any reason to not watch it again. This movie is layered with multiple metaphors and psychological mind-fucks that just really get you thinking. What makes it a golden ticket, what makes it stand out from all the other movies running along the same plot line is that David Fincher happened to be able to make this interesting, to make it understandable, and to make it relatable. This entire film is a personification of organized chaos, and casting Brad Pitt and Edward Norton as Tyler is perhaps one of the most genius casting moves ever made for a film.
There is no love lost for the physical fights, and the chemical burns and the numerous scenes of loud sex, that all adds to the cult feel of the movie - which it certainly has become. Visually, it’s enticing to watch, and while some may say that it attempts to fool you, I say it’s a perfect depiction of an inner battle. The mundane life versus the person you could be if only you stepped out of your comfort zone.
Fight Club has tons of messages, and the beautiful thing is that it doesn’t glorify the blood, guts and gore. The dialogue, if you really take the time out to listen to it, take it in, and appreciate it, is quite spot on - and openly funny. Dark humour if you will.
If you’re the kind of person who enjoys a film for what it is, instead of sitting around and trying to figure it out from the get-go (which you really shouldn’t do at all with this film), then you’re in for a hell of a ride. This film comes around full circle, it makes you think, and there’s no loop hole. It’s straight up, and delivers at every turn.
Of course, we all love Fincher now for giving us the likes of The Social Network, Zodiac and the Curious Case of Benjamin Button, so the fact that Fight Club was the 3rd non-documentary movie he ever made is a real nod to the type of director he is. Someone who can bring the audience a fiercely original story, and not assume that they’re dumb.
-
Bottom Line: A. This is more than worth the watch, it may turn into your go-to film on life, and you’ll find yourself asking: What would Tyler Durden Do?
Apr 10

FIGHT CLUB

Director: David Fincher

Cast: Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, Helena Bohem Carter

-

Fight Club is a movie everyone should see. Honestly. There is perhaps no other movie that will stick with you in should a humourous yet profound way at the same time. I have a friend who absolutely despises this movie and dismisses it as a very bad attempt at a psychological eye-opener with way too many convoluted levels. I of course beg to differ.

Fight Club is clearly more than just a story about fighting, but it does serve as the perfect metaphor. The physical fights translated to internal fights. If you don’t get this movie offhand, there’s no reason to write it off as a movie about fighting, sex and mayhem. Nor is there any reason to not watch it again. This movie is layered with multiple metaphors and psychological mind-fucks that just really get you thinking. What makes it a golden ticket, what makes it stand out from all the other movies running along the same plot line is that David Fincher happened to be able to make this interesting, to make it understandable, and to make it relatable. This entire film is a personification of organized chaos, and casting Brad Pitt and Edward Norton as Tyler is perhaps one of the most genius casting moves ever made for a film.

There is no love lost for the physical fights, and the chemical burns and the numerous scenes of loud sex, that all adds to the cult feel of the movie - which it certainly has become. Visually, it’s enticing to watch, and while some may say that it attempts to fool you, I say it’s a perfect depiction of an inner battle. The mundane life versus the person you could be if only you stepped out of your comfort zone.

Fight Club has tons of messages, and the beautiful thing is that it doesn’t glorify the blood, guts and gore. The dialogue, if you really take the time out to listen to it, take it in, and appreciate it, is quite spot on - and openly funny. Dark humour if you will.

If you’re the kind of person who enjoys a film for what it is, instead of sitting around and trying to figure it out from the get-go (which you really shouldn’t do at all with this film), then you’re in for a hell of a ride. This film comes around full circle, it makes you think, and there’s no loop hole. It’s straight up, and delivers at every turn.

Of course, we all love Fincher now for giving us the likes of The Social Network, Zodiac and the Curious Case of Benjamin Button, so the fact that Fight Club was the 3rd non-documentary movie he ever made is a real nod to the type of director he is. Someone who can bring the audience a fiercely original story, and not assume that they’re dumb.

-

Bottom Line: A. This is more than worth the watch, it may turn into your go-to film on life, and you’ll find yourself asking: What would Tyler Durden Do?

(via inglourious-basterd)

Character Review: Ronald Bilius Weasley | Harry Potter
-

Every now and again, I like doing character profiles on some of my most compelling, if not favourite characters. Since I’m a huge Potterhead, what better way than to start with my favourite HP character? Ron. 

There’s a lot to be said about Ron I find, and sometimes it saddens me that he doesn’t get as much cred as I think he deserves. I always seem to have an affinity for the so called ‘secondary’ or ‘supporting’ characters, and most of it comes from one thought: without the support, where the hell would the main character be? As fun as it is to read about loners with no friends, it’s only when we see and read about interactions that we get to figure out the most about them, and let’s face it, without Ron, there would be no Harry.

Ron Weasley is more than just comic relief, or the ginger who is always called the runt of the giant family he comes from. Ron gives us depth, he gives us hope, he, more than any other character is the beacon of shining light that Harry needs in his life to keep him going. Independent of the golden boy, Ron is fun, he has personality, he gives selflessly and has core family values and enough love to fill up Hogwarts and then some. He is a character that people can relate to, he’s the most normal seeming of each of the main HP characters, and he possesses a courage and candor that none of the other characters really have. His bravery, chivalry and all the other stereotypical Gryffindor traits are in Ron in the truest form possible. He doesn’t set out to be the best, he doesn’t care much for coming in first, and has accepted his place within the society, his family, his school and not only makes the best of it - but thrives in it. He is unabashedly loyal, spirited, and has such a strong and grounded set of moral values that it guides both Harry and Hermione, day in and day out.

It’s easy to go on and on about him, since he is my favourite character, but that wasn’t always the case. I first warmed to him because he was clearly the funniest - he made me laugh. Rupert does a great job of portraying him in the films, and his facial expressions kill me. As the series grew, and his character, Ron became the character that was a mix of the best characteristics in his counterparts - and then some. He is almost like the underdog. And from the very first moment we encounter him, you get the feeling that his man is true, genuine, and someone who can be counted on. As he got older, and the fight became more and more apparent, it is Ron who breathes life and energy into tiresome and dreadful nights. He doesn’t try to be someone that he’s not, and has long lived by the code that if he stays true to himself and does the best he can - not only for himself but for his family, his best friend, and the love of his life - that he’ll be okay. He’ll be happy. His ultimate goal is much simpler, much more humble, grounded and at the same time - seemingly unattainable. Yet he does it all with grace, dignity, and a few funny-coloured jumpers along the way.
Apr 8

Character Review: Ronald Bilius Weasley | Harry Potter

-

Every now and again, I like doing character profiles on some of my most compelling, if not favourite characters. Since I’m a huge Potterhead, what better way than to start with my favourite HP character? Ron. 

There’s a lot to be said about Ron I find, and sometimes it saddens me that he doesn’t get as much cred as I think he deserves. I always seem to have an affinity for the so called ‘secondary’ or ‘supporting’ characters, and most of it comes from one thought: without the support, where the hell would the main character be? As fun as it is to read about loners with no friends, it’s only when we see and read about interactions that we get to figure out the most about them, and let’s face it, without Ron, there would be no Harry.

Ron Weasley is more than just comic relief, or the ginger who is always called the runt of the giant family he comes from. Ron gives us depth, he gives us hope, he, more than any other character is the beacon of shining light that Harry needs in his life to keep him going. Independent of the golden boy, Ron is fun, he has personality, he gives selflessly and has core family values and enough love to fill up Hogwarts and then some. He is a character that people can relate to, he’s the most normal seeming of each of the main HP characters, and he possesses a courage and candor that none of the other characters really have. His bravery, chivalry and all the other stereotypical Gryffindor traits are in Ron in the truest form possible. He doesn’t set out to be the best, he doesn’t care much for coming in first, and has accepted his place within the society, his family, his school and not only makes the best of it - but thrives in it. He is unabashedly loyal, spirited, and has such a strong and grounded set of moral values that it guides both Harry and Hermione, day in and day out.

It’s easy to go on and on about him, since he is my favourite character, but that wasn’t always the case. I first warmed to him because he was clearly the funniest - he made me laugh. Rupert does a great job of portraying him in the films, and his facial expressions kill me. As the series grew, and his character, Ron became the character that was a mix of the best characteristics in his counterparts - and then some. He is almost like the underdog. And from the very first moment we encounter him, you get the feeling that his man is true, genuine, and someone who can be counted on. As he got older, and the fight became more and more apparent, it is Ron who breathes life and energy into tiresome and dreadful nights. He doesn’t try to be someone that he’s not, and has long lived by the code that if he stays true to himself and does the best he can - not only for himself but for his family, his best friend, and the love of his life - that he’ll be okay. He’ll be happy. His ultimate goal is much simpler, much more humble, grounded and at the same time - seemingly unattainable. Yet he does it all with grace, dignity, and a few funny-coloured jumpers along the way.

(via starktrek)