movie review: Grandma 3/5 *Can See*

 

Synopsis:
Teenage granddaughter (Julia Garner) is pregnant, needs money by end of day for an abortion, goes to grandma (Lily Tomlin) for help. Grandma is broke. They go on a self-discovery road trip to find the money.

 

You know, when these self-discovery movies get it right, you feel like you’ve been hit in the chest as you exit the cinema. With this movie, it’s like a “meh”.
It’s not great. Lots of cliches which they get away with due to the fast pace of the movie and because of how Tomlin is able to draw you into her character. Note I didn’t say draw you into the story. Because I didn’t feel like I cared what was happening at all. I didn’t care that they were on a time crunch to raise money for the abortion, I couldn’t give two shits about the granddaughter. I was only interested in how Tomlin’s character and past unfolded as the movie progressed. It’s an interesting character alright, lesbian, published poet, feisty grandma with a colourful past (<- all I can say without spoiling too much). At the end of the movie, I was like “meh”. I wanted to like it but it falls short.

Julia Garner, the granddaughter, is ok, not the best actress but she’s a PYT and that works. I keep getting distracted by how deathly pale her skin is though. In certain scenes when she’s shot in the bright sunlight, she almost blends into the light.

White as a sheet!

Perfect for the next vampire role

Some known names in the movie that I feel are wasted:

–   John Cho as the coffee shop owner.
Really, they could have gotten ANY generic actor to play that role. It was SO tedious.

– Marcia Gay Harden as the mother.
She has very little screen time and the character is just not very fleshed out. Full of tired cliches. (I’m angry at my mother, so I grew up angry, angry at my daughter, pushed her away, angry in my work, work work work.)

Tell me this is not the cliched career bitch profile

 

Sam Elliott! How marvellous is he?! I can’t say I know a lot of his filmography but he’s got such presence and he ate up all the scenes he was in. Soooo sexy, much like the other 70-ish dreamboat Patrick Stewart!

Sam Elliott as Karl

 

Overall: watchable, and again, Tomlin is very enjoyable to watch. Her performance feels so effortless. But I doubt you’ll get any lasting takeaways from the movie.

7/10 – Can See

movie review: Prometheus – 3/5 *Can See*

Too many plot holes, unresolved plot lines, unnecessary ones and overall, too bendy, whirly for its own good.

.
It’s like Ridley Scott wanted to make a straight-up action flick but Damon Lindelof wanted it to be a “deep” movie. The result: a sort of philosophical creationalism tale against a backdrop of bang bang, shoot shoot, fight fight sequences.

.
Charlize Theron is super hot. There’s just no ifs and buts about it. She doesn’t get to do much though. One of the earlier scenes in the movie, where she’s doing push-ups is reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver’s similar scene in the original Alien movie and I guess it’s meant to be a homage. But that’s about as bad-ass as Theron’s allowed to get. Her role in the movie consists mainly of walking around looking authoritative sexy and bossy and not much else.

.
ps. With regards to Mr Weyland, why do all old men always seem to have random sprouts of hair on their otherwise bald head? (Yoda anyone?)

.
And the opening sequence with the alien drinking the black blood. What the hell is that supposed to do for the movie plot-wise?

.
I went into the movie wanting to like it – great director, great writers, fantastic A-list actors and a kick-ass teaser trailer. It’s still a decent, above average movie that doesn’t fall into too many sci-fi cliches but I was disappointed with the end product.

.
On a positive note, Michael Fassbender is excellent as David and Noomi Rapace is really kick-ass. I have a problem of dissociating name actors from their roles and as a testament to her ability to blend with her characters, I actually did not recognise her until the credits were rolling and her name came up!

.
I felt like it could really have been a killer movie if they’d pushed it a bit more. Either more action or more philosophical. Movie feels like it’s trying to cover all bases and just comes up short.
.
.
Overall:  decent, can see, good as a date movie, but you’ll be left with more questions than answers.

7/10 – Can See

.
+ + + spoilers below + + +
.
.

spoiler rants:
– the big alien stone head = Olmec head? haha. And what is the point of it? Lindelof likes big things (ref: giant foot in Lost)
– Cliches abound:
(i) Dumb & Dumber, the 2 scientists that get left behind are going to die.
(ii) Theron & Elba sure to hit the sack
(iii) David turns out to be dual personality, evil Android
(iv) Old man Weyland is Vickers’ father
(v) some bloody person will end up not making it on the ship in time and will have to be rescued via a life-threatening action sequence
– I swear, in some quiet calm-before-the-storm scenes, the background music sounds an awful lot like the Star Trek intro

movie review: My Week With Marilyn – 3.5/5 *should see*

I have not seen any of the 2012 Oscar-nominated movies but I have seen clips from most of them. In clips I’ve seen of Michelle Williams’ Marilyn, I was totally fascinated with how well Williams is able to imitate the way Monroe gesticulates, walks, talks, winks and her coquettish come-ons. Based on this, I was so sure Williams would win the Oscar for Best Actress.

I think she didn’t win because (1) Meryl Streep is overdue (2) The movie is good but not great. There were too many plot points. It was like the movie was trying to cram in every big name who had anything to do with the Monroe movie ‘The Prince and the Showgirl’.

There were tangents into Vivian Leigh’s insecurities, Sybil Thorndike’s motherly ways, Milton Greene’s own involvement with Marilyn, Arthur Miller’s relationship with Marilyn, Laurence Olivier’s insecurities… what a long list! It was a bit too much and in the limited 90 minutes, rather impossible to fully develop these characters.

The star of the show is of course Michelle Williams. She is absolutely delightful as Marilyn and you cannot take your eyes off her when she is on-screen.

I haven’t talked about the men in the movie: Kenneth Branagh (as Laurence Olivier) and Eddie Redmayne (as Colin Clark). They were fine, good, all good, but they were really only backdrops to the main attraction of Michelle Williams.

Kenneth Branagh (left), Eddie Redmayne (right, Marilyn's boy-toy)

 

A  fun, shallow film about a little bit of the captivation that was Marilyn Monroe. Good for a date movie, not too much to think about.

Verdict: Should Watch  <- mainly for Michelle Williams  3.5/5

ps. Hermione (Emma Watson) has a bit part in the movie. Wonder of all the Harry Potter actors, who will have the most longevity.

movie review: Life in a Day – 4/5 *must see*

‘Life in a Day’ is an undertaking by well-established producers Ridley and Tony Scott, who through YouTube, solicited people from all around the world to take videos of their life on 24 July 2010. They would then take those submissions and create a movie out of it. ‘Life in a Day’ premiered on YouTube on 24 July 2011.

When the film starts, I don’t really know what I’m seeing. I feel like I’m watching a bunch of disjointed videos being spliced together to fill 90 minutes of my time.  The opening images are mostly a bunch of “artsy” “gritty” shots of “real” life. “Oh boy” I thought to myself. If ‘Life in a Day’ is going to be just a big-scale art project, this film is going to get real tedious, real quickly. And then, at about nine minutes in, I start to feel differently. I start to see a logic in the madness.

I’m truly shocked at how powerful this film is. I was expecting a little bit of fluff, maybe some voyeuristic glimpse into other people’s lives. What I got was a removing and oftentimes emotional overview of mankind. It’s like I experienced a kind of “awakening”. It’s almost beyond comprehension that a movie without a proper plot or storyline can affect people the way it did. There were many moments where I felt real empathy for the real people in the film and I could almost taste the sadness/ bitterness/ joy they were going through. I won’t spoil it for you but sufficed to say, there are some images that will stay with you forever.

I’ve read that some critics bash the lack of a unifying/ central storyline to the movie. Whilst that is sort of true, I almost feel like it doesn’t matter, because using what material they had, the filmmakers created lightning in a bottle, sprung from just a seed of an idea.

.

Quality of the videos is oftentimes grainy, probably because most submissions were done with a flip cam or even mobile phones. But this does little to detract from the movie or your appreciation of the stories. Very very app use of the soundtrack to tie many seemingly unrelated videos together, especially near the end of the movie when jarring images of opulence and violence are placed side by side. This film belongs to all of humanity, because there is a little bit of all of us in it. All the credit must go into the film’s editors without which, this would just be a 90 minute extended home video. Yes, something great did happen here.

Verdict: Truly genius idea and exceptional execution. A must watch 4/5

movie: X-Men First Class – 2/5 *see if nothing better to do*

I don’t understand why X-Men received all the positive critical reviews it did. The whole movie for me felt clunky, overdrawn and just plain boring. I kept checking my watch to see how far into the movie we’d gone and yawning throughout most of the second half.

After the big successes of the X-Men movies starring Patrick Stewart, I am sorely disappointed at this new reboot. The storyline is confusing at best, what with the Cuba missile crisis fighting for attention with Xavier recruiting mutants and the mutants coming to terms with their abilities.

It is a shockingly bad movie, especially considering that they have a huge wealth of characters to draw from, a built-in fan base that you don’t have to waste time explaining the whole concept of “mutants” to, and Bryan Singer contributing to the story!!

Most of the movie barely held my attention, although most of the action sequences were ok. However, action sequences do not a good movie make. In all honesty, the best part of the movie occurred in the first five minutes, when they first unveiled Mystique junior, but it quickly went to shit from then on.

Cast: James McAvoy as Charles Xavier. Other than the British accent, he really does not have that much else going for him. He’s definitely a competent actor but this role is ill-suited for him. Just not enough charisma nor the magnetism (pun intended) of his counterpart Michael Fassbender as Magneto.

 .
.
Sidenote: I likey Michael Fassbender a lot! Methinks he has great acting chops and great screen presence, with potential to spinoff a la Hugh Jackman.

.
.

Other casting notes: I kept seeing manifestation of characters from other movies/ shows here. I mean, didn’t Caleb Landry Jones (Banshee) remind you of Ron Weasley? Azazel = Hellboy? And what about the Captain of the American boat – Jack Nicholson anyone?

However, what I AM thankful for, is the happy absence of shameless product placement, so prevalent in music videos and movies nowadays. I’m also pretty happy with the casting of Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. She has great screen presence and steals the show in all her scenes.

But all in all, the movie is a meandering 2h action fest that doesn’t really go anywhere or tell us anything new. It feels very much like a tv pilot, trying to showcase everyone and everything. Hopefully with this pilot out of the way, we can get into some real story-telling in the I’m-sure-it’s-coming sequel.

Verdict: Bad bad movie. It’s ok for a date night movie or if you have nothing else better to do. 2/5

Beating Tetris

This is the coolest thing!
it’s currently circulating on Google+
add me! http://www.gplus.to/pearlyn

Review: tv-The Killing

.

In the series’ opening sequence of a jogging Linden, I notice immediately her slight stature and I am immediately reminded of Gillian Anderson. And OF COURSE the new homicide detective becomes her partner.
.

I was inwardly groaning and thinking “oh no, they’re going to rehash the mulder and scully thing”. The jury’s out but while there are similarities, Holder is clearly no Mulder and the dynamic between Linden and Holder is headed into a more equal partnership.

.

Series in a snapshot:
girl is killed. Linden and Holder investigate her murder. Family grieves.

Holder & Linden

.

Sounds like any other crime procedural but this series tells the story in such a fresh way, you don’t see anything coming. While there are slight reminders to 24 and flashback-type sequences, they don’t feel gimmicky and nothing feels forced or predictable. In many ways, The Killing brings to mind the slow pace of Mad Men – slowly drawing you into the story without big bangs or flashy sequences.
.

.
Very very strong acting all round. I LOVE Michelle Forbes and anything she’s in, improves by tenfold in my opinion. I won’t spoil it for you but the scene where Forbes learns of her daughter’s death is epic. It’s the kind of scene all actors crave to be a part of and it’s a scene that will stay with you long after the lights go on.
.

Billy Campbell as Darren Richmond

One gripe I do have, is the slight miscast of Billy Campbell. Billy Campbell has been stereotyped into this sort of did-he-or-didn’t-he roles (think 4400, Ted Bundy) that there’s no element of surprise there anymore. You kinda KNOW he’s either directly involved in the murder or there’re more than a few skeletons in his closet.
.

The tone and overall structure of The Killing reminds me strongly of The Lovely Bones. While I couldn’t get enough of that movie, I now have a sort of fleshed-out serialised version in this series. I’m so torn. Do I continue watching this American retelling or go straight to the Danish original which is already into its second season. I know once I go to the original, I will never be able to come back and watch the American version.
.

I haven’t been this excited about a new tv series for the longest time. 4.9/5

movie: Superman Returns – 1.5/5 *don’t see*

I finally got around to watching this 2006 movie last night. It should have just stayed in my movie queue.

I think they’ve killed the franchise this time. This is the most unattractive Lois Lane I’ve seen.
.

Teri Hatcher with 20 years on her would whoop her ass in a wet t-shirt contest and the actor playing her kid has got to be the uncutest thing on the big screen yet.
.

The story was laughable. They should have either gone for a total reboot or made it a straight off sequel. As it is, this movie was like a limbo between the two and made no sense. It felt like the original story might have been good for two movies but in order to squeeze the story into one movie, the director just made random cuts in the story.

There were so many unresolved/ unnecessary plot points. Like what’s up with the stupid carnivorous dog(s)? Why did we need to know that Lex Luthor was sponging off an old widow? Lois Lane smoking???? When even James Bond has discarded this habit, Lois Lane has decided to pick it up?? Makes no sense! And she must have gotten cozy with Richard VERY quickly after Superman upped and left for him to think that Jason is his kid. Like, what…??

Kevin Spacey (as Lex Luthor) and Frank Langhella (as newspaper editor) were totally wasted in their limited roles. And have you seen a more impotent supervillain? What is up with the damned wigs and having his escape foiled by running out of gas?? REALLY??

The special effects were not much better. Superman looks plastic most of the time, like it is really just a Ken doll subbing in for him. And you can literally SEE the places where they stuffed his superhero costume to bulk him up. Ha! Unfortunately, Brandon Routh, for all his good looks, lacks charisma so you just don’t feel very emotionally involved at all.

The only reason this dismal movie (which is over 2h long!) even gets 1.5 stars is cos in many scenes you just gasp at how alike Christopher Reeve, Routh looks. 1/4 way through the movie, I was already flat out bored and reading restaurant menus. Hey, did you know that Domino’s has a new puff pastry pizza?

1.5/5 *don’t see* Crap. Casual moviegoers will find it disappointing. Hardcore superman fans will cry.

movie: Black Swan – 3.5/5 *can see*

.
Certain plot elements discussed but no spoilers
.
Natalie Portman (role of Nina Sayers) is perfect in this role. But it’s not a psychological thriller that we haven’t seen before. From the moment Nina saw her own evil reflection in the subway, it became obvious that this was going to be a me-vs-me kind of schizo thriller. So it is really fitting that Winona Ryder who stars in that other schizo drama ‘Girl Interrupted’, plays the aging faded ballerina.

.

 

 

.

.

.

.
I was kinda disappointed that Nina took so goddamn long to metamorphosise into the Black Swan. And c’mon, hands up who didn’t see the subplot coming about the mother, coach and Lily? I’m also disappointed that the story shied away from showing any actual acts of sabotage or manipulation between the ballerinas. I suppose they didn’t want to detract from the main plot but I felt that would have added something extra in explaining why Nina is so paranoid about the other dancers.

Although predictable, it is still enjoyable because the story is fast moving, there is excellent cinematography and acting from all. And you know how anal I am about acting. Portman is a joy to watch as well as the always chirpy Mila Kunis.

I’m slightly irritated about news that Portman is pregnant from Benjamin Millepied who plays the principal male dancer in the movie. It totally distracted me when he appeared in scenes and I kept watching for chemistry between the two dance leads.

I rate this movie a *Can See* 3.5/5. It’s good but way too predictable for me. And I’m not sure I like this style of shock-a-fest thriller. So far, A Single Man is still my Must See movie of the year. I don’t know who the Oscar contenders for next year are going to be but they love to reward “war” roles or “broken” roles and Portman is definitely going to get some love.

movie: Le Diner de Cons – 4/5 *should see*

What a delightful film! I was up in stitches the whole time! What a shame I would have missed this original inspiration for “Dinner for Schmucks” – if not from the publicity for the undoubtedly inferior hollywood-ised version of this masterpiece.

The premise is this: every Wed, a group of friends get together for dinner for an “idiots competition”. Everyone must bring an “idiot” and the one who brings the daftest wins! Haha, sounds good already!

The movie centres on the relationship between one such competitor Pierre Brochant and his “idiot” Francois Pignon. Contrary to what the title would lead you to believe, the movie does not revolve around the dinner. Rather, it revolves around the concept of the dinner. Most of the scenes are set in Brochant’s apartment and it is as much a story in relationships as it is a situational comedy.

Jacques Villeret is superb in his role as the “idiot”, totally un-self-conscious in his display of naivety and just pure bungling. He is a delight to watch and his every turn infuriating Brochant (Thierry Lhermitte) just makes you LOL and root for him all the more!

I enjoyed it and while the relationship of Pignon and Brochant is slightly reminiscent of Abbott and Costello, that is not a bad thing and reminds me of simpler times in films. I won’t spoil it for you but sufficed to say, the dinner is not the main focus of the story. I’ll leave you to decide if the movie holds any deeper message of morality.

4/5 *should see*!