Definitely, Maybe (2008)

Rated PG-13 for sexual content, including some frank dialogue, language and smoking.

112 Minutes

Directed and Written By: Adam Brooks

I had two serious girlfriends… and then some other smattering of other women. -Will Hayes

Synopsis

A young girls parents are getting divorced and she doesn’t comprehend why.  In a desperate attempt to explain exactly how complex relationships and love truly are, and how timing is everything, her father tells her the story of how he met her mother without letting his daughter know which woman in the story was her mother.  The “love mystery” begins.

Review

It was a breath of fresh air to watch a film about relationships and life that wasn’t all about corny predictably romantic beats and happy endings.  It was a realistic journey threw the eyes of a man who’s life had changed drastically from his hopes and dreams leaving college with a collage of failed relationships.  His divorce and his daughter caught in the middle is the driving force for this reflective peek into what once was and what was lost over the years.  While some of memories are borderline dark and depressing the story itself manages to keep an upbeat positive feel that often offers a good chuckle in between romance and heartbreaks, without being awkward or forced, like a lot of films in this genre.

Another aspect of this story and characterizations that stood apart from movies of this kind was the main male role wasn’t emasculated into some wimpy guy searching for his feelings.  His most gut wrenching moments had more to do with his relationship with his daughter than anything.  It was touching in a way that was authentic and genuine.

It was also touched on, though not thoroughly explored, the dreams when you are young, of what you think life will be like, and how not just romance, but how work, politics’s, other choices change your point of view on life with time.  Life and it’s disappoints turns people into cynics and often inspires us to travel down paths we had never imagined traveling down, but what Definitely, Maybe offers is the idea that not all dreams have to be lost, even after life has changed drastically.  It’s never too late to try.

Cast

• Ryan Reynolds as William Hayes
• Abigail Breslin as Maya Hayes
• Elizabeth Banks as Emily
• Rachel Weisz as Summer Hartley
• Kevin Kline as Hampton Roth
• Isla Fisher as April Hoffman

In spite of myself I am really beginning to enjoy Ryan Reynolds and appreciate the fact that he isn’t just a pretty face, though his face is exquisite.  He seems to get a real feel for his roles and bring them to life.  His interpretation of William Hayes is no exception.  His charisma and the inert sweetness, yet still masculine man trying to explain love and heartbreak to his young daughter was both believable and entertaining.  The supporting ladies were all fantastic, though Elizabeth Banks felt a little dry at times, they pulled his love interests off very well.  Kevin Kline played a small role but it was one of the shining moments of the film.  His enigmatic portrayal of Hampton Roth, the drunk intellect, was provocative and humorous.

Ratings And Suggestions

I am not a fan of the kind of movie people refer to as “chick flicks”, and though Definitely, Maybe has the qualities to suffer that pigeon holing it is truly something more.  It is a movie about relationships and what happens after those happily ever after kisses at the end of romance movies.  It was enjoyable to see someone take a realistic perspective on a topic rarely addressed in theaters today and turn it into a movie that was delightful in it’s honesty, but also offering a sweet love story in the middle.  I recommend this movie to anyone who has been in a relationship, been in love, or had their heartbroken.  It will bring tears to your eyes at moments and it will also make you laugh.  This was a wonderful surprise.  3.5 out of 4 stars.

Batman (1989)

126 Minutes

Directed By: Tim Burton

Written By: Bob Kane and Sam Hamm

Batman… Batman… Can somebody tell me what kind of a world we live in, where a man dressed up as a *bat* gets all of my press? This town needs an enema! -The Joker

Synopsis

Batman finally meets his greatest foe, The Joker, a man who was once an average criminal, but turned homicidal murderer after falling into a giant tub of acid.  Disfigured and even crazier than before, he takes over his mob bosses syndicate and begins wicked plan of destroying Gotham and all those in it, but first he wants to rid himself of Batman, who is busy juggling normal life and the grief of his parents death with being a caped nighttime vigilante.

Review

Tim Burton completely captured the feel and darkness of Gotham City and it’s caped crusader.  His Gotham actually felt like you had jumped right into the comic and were living it.  The visuals were dark, but the off beat comedy of Burton was always alive, and the Joker was the perfect representative of Burton’s adoration of something bright amidst the darkness.  For 1989 the action sequences were pretty impressive, along with the Bat Toys, specifically the smoothest of all the Bat-mobiles.  They only went downhill after this film, and while I enjoy Christopher Nolan’s tank, there is some childlike fun I release at the site of this Bat-mobile.

The character interpretations were right on.  There was time spent developing each, making them fully fleshed and their interactions that much more tangible.  The final scene when Batman climbs the cathedral, which visually is absolutely outstanding, his connection to Vicki conflicted with his need to find justice in punishing the Joker for his parents murders contains an immeasurable amount of tension and empathy.  It ends the film very symmetrically.

Cast

• Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman
• Jack Nicholson as The Joker/Jack Napier
• Kim Basinger as Vicki Vale
• Robert Wuhl as Alexander Knox
• Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent
• Jack Palance as Boss Grissom
• Jerry Hall as Alicia Grissom
• Michael Gough as Alfred Pennyworth
• Pat Hingle as Commissioner James Gordon

When you look back and actually read the lines the Joker has in this film, it’s not sensational writing, but Nicholson’s performance made each and every delivery of those lines into something more.  The Joker was larger than life, but Nicholson’s interpretation walked that fine line between being a cartoon and something completely different.  He was sadistic and homicidal, but also charismatic and hilarious.  Nicholson’s Joker is one of the best character interpretations ever onscreen.  However, I wouldn’t dare compare his Joker to Ledger’s.  Each carry a genius that is very separate from one another, and the likeness only remains in the name.

Michael Keaton as Batman on the other hand is still my favorite Batman.  Who would have thought Mr. Mom would be the best choice for the dark and brooding Bruce Wayne/action super hero Batman?  He played the role just the way Batman should be.  Calm, cool, and with the true spirit of Batman making him the perfect emblem of Gotham’s fight against crime.

The rest of the cast was great, but this show belonged to The Joker and Batman.  After you watch it, it’s easy to say you’ll be quoting the Joker for days on end.

Wait till they get a load of me!(followed by maniacal laughter) -The Joker

Ratings and Suggestions

I was lucky enough to catch this film in the theatre as a kid, and I can tell you there weren’t too many movies that were as exciting, fun, and smart as Burton’s Batman, and that still holds up today.  Watching it after ten years have passed I still find myself enjoying it with the same excitement as I did in my youth.  This is a movie for everyone and more important and movie that is lasting in it’s creation.  Even with the new Batman’s out there today, they are very unique, but they both share one important quality: the focus on the psyche of our hero.  The character’s are all very real.  This one belongs in your DVD collection.  Four out of Four stars.

Strange Wilderness (2008)

Rated R for non-stop language, drug use, crude and sexual humor.

87 Minutes

Directed By: Fred Wolf

Written By: Fred Wolf and Peter Gaulke

Bears are a proud people, although they’re not people per-say. They’re animals. Bears derive their name from a football team in Chicago. Bears have been known to attack man, although the fact is that fewer people have been killed by bears than in all of World World I and World War II combined. Brown bears bloves fishing. Brown… Brown bears bloves… God, why am I having so much trouble saying brown… -Peter (doing voice over)

Synopsis

Peter Gaulkes father passes away and leaves his legacy the wilderness show, “Strange WIlderness” to his son to host.  His son, who is an under-achieving pot-head, really admired his father, and decides to respect his wishes and continue the show.  Unfortunately Peter falls short in every capacity with his obvious ignorance to animals and his admiration for partying.  The two intermingle too often and the show is endanger of being canceled.  To save it, they go on the greatest wilderness adventure of all time, in search of BIG FOOT.

Review

With a hilarious cast and Happy Madison productions backing it up Strange Wilderness appeared to be a movie that would be overflowing with the funny.  It wasn’t.  In fact it was desperately boring, and now I feel lesser for having wasted my time viewing it.  Steve Zahn  has a great knack for playing a stoner with a dry sense of humor, which suited him fine for this role, but as the lead character reminiscing about this tale, he comes off as too stupid to put a sensible thought together.  His outrageous idea’s and behavior in regards to the Wilderness show he hosts goes past being over the top and funny and into the realm of too offensive to even have one blink of sanity.  To believe the preposterous story isn’t even possible.  Even in the universe created by the director and writer.

The shift from the van to the jungle was awkward and didn’t change over well.  Though the scene with Robert Patrick offered a few laughs, the following scenes were again not in sync with the rest of the storytelling and the jokes fell dry.  By the time their ultimate goal of big foot is reached I admit the response and attempted cover up of failed mission had me in hysterics, but only that and a few more small chuckles were all Strange Wilderness had to offer.  It never felt like a complete movie and the characters weren’t executed well by their actors.  It seems as though mediocre work was done by a mediocre script.  By the look of things the fictional characters from the movie were the ones who were responcible for the editing in the cutting room. 

Best part of the movie: Steve Zahns voice overs were hysterical.

Cast

• Steve Zahn as Peter
• Allen Covert as Fred
• Jonah Hill as Cooker
• Kevin Heffernan as Whitaker
• Ashley Scott as Cheryl
• Peter Dante as Danny Guiterrez
• Harry Hamlin as Sky Pierson
• Robert Patrick as Guy Hayden
• Blake Clark as Dick

As much as I enjoy many of these comedic actors I have to say a large portion of the ball was dropped by them.  There is no doubt the direction and the script left an inept story to tell with jokes that never really had a chance of making anyone laugh.  Jonah Hills character was just annoying, not really funny.  His accent was awkward and his addition to the group of misfits made even less sense.  All of the group was full of weirdo’s who probably would even be rejected from the strange creatures of the wilderness, and having two of those character may have worked, but since everyone was loony there was no one to ground the story of the others making them all seem completely bonkers and not necessarily in a fun way.

Ratings and Suggestions

The chaos of this story left the viewer feeling blind and bored.  There was so little substance and too much nonsense to really enjoy any of the funnier moments.  Strange Wilderness is an easy movie to forget about. While your watching it.  There may be a few moments that will appeal to someones twisted humor, as it occasionally startled my own, but the movie on a whole is just one bad joke, that I’m surprised even made it to the big screen.  Strange Wilderness earns one and a half stars of four stars because it did randomly offer a chuckle or two.

Batman Begins (2005)

Rated PG-13 for intense action violence, disturbing images and some thematic elements.

140 Minutes

Directed By: Christopher Nolan

Written By: Bob Kane and David S. Goyer

You traveled the world… Now you must journey inwards… to what you really fear… it’s inside you… there is no turning back. Your parents’ death was not your fault. Your training is nothing. The will is everything. If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely. Are you ready to begin? -Henri Ducard

Synopsis

We are taking Bruce Wayne far back, before the legend of Batman was created, before Tim Burton or Joel Schumacker touched the Batman series, and we have started fresh with Christopher Nolan’s interpretation of how Batman came to be who he was.  The story sticks to DC comics ideal about the Wayne parents being killed by a thug and Wayne manor and all it’s riches being left to a young and heart broken Bruce.  It’s also this tragedy that becomes the driving force for him to search for justice or vengeance.  It’s not clear which early on, but his journey there is far different than what audiences were used to with bat toys, explosions, over the top villains and circus like special effects. (Thanks to Schumacker) 

Review

I truly enjoyed Tim Burton’s Batman and Batman Returns.  They were each simply brilliant movies, with outstanding performances by Michael Keaton as Batman.  From there on the series trotted downhill and somehow ended in a cornucopia of disaster with Batman Returns, one of the worst films ever created.  At this point the question became; do we retire the Batman series?  From that particular creation line: YES.  Starting fresh and creating something entirely unconventional, while almost putting Batman itself into a different genre did Batman Begins spring to life.

The dark undertones, but the realism of Gotham and it’s prince Bruce Wayne fighting against real thugs and the idiosyncrasies of corrupt police and public officials gives the story something real to grasp onto.  The fact that the villains in this story were tangible, made it even more intriguing.  Bruce’s desire for justice (or vengeance) and inability to release his anger and his fear is what sends him away from all he knows to find himself lost, yet what he has been running from has been himself.  These are real human issues that weren’t lightly touched on, but delved into a very in depth way that made Bruce’s transition from what he was to what he became a very believable evolution, and suddenly our writers and director have made Batman seem plausible even in our world today.

The crossing of realism over into a comic book movie has not been entirely successful, in fact it seems to have failed miserably.  This Batman is the first movie I have found to be triumphant and opened doors for other films in it’s genre to do something more and something different.  It also widens it’s appeal to audiences.  With real three dimensional character’s to grasp onto, palpable plot schemes, but still mixing the typical Batman action and mythology together, gives it such a familiar yet vivid perspective on a well known story.

Cast

• Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman
• Liam Neeson as Henri Ducard
• Michael Caine as Alfred
• Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes
• Gary Oldman as Sgt. James Gordon
• Cillian Murphy as Dr. Jonathan Crane/The Scarecrow
• Tom Wilkinson as Carmine Falcone
• Rutgar Hauer as Earl
• Ken Wantanabe as Ra’s Al Guhl
• Morgan Freeman as Fox

Christian Bale as Batman seemed like an excellent choice, and once onscreen proved to be the right actor to play this model of Bruce Wayne/Batman.  His stoic demeanor, yet brutal determination, and chiseled good looks was the perfect Bruce Wayne.  The supporting cast is full of reputable talented actors that pull of top of the line performances giving the tale even more integrity.  My only complaint about the entire movie was the casting of Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes.  She is lovely to look at, but her lack of acting ability against a script that required way more than she could give, and became even more apparent against the talents of those that surrounded her, left her weak performance exposed in the worst way.  It was no surprise she was re-cast in the sequel.

Ratings and Suggestions

Batman Begins gave the promise of a new kind of superhero film that set the bar that much higher for this genre of film.  It’s sequel, “The Dark Knight”, proved to take it to an even greater level.  While it seems nearly impossible to make a third addition just as brilliant as The Dark Knight, the anticipation and excitement for more of this kind of Batman is exuberant.  These films are something to really get excited about, and the big screen doesn’t offer this kind of appeal too often anymore.  Batman Begins appeal is pretty much for anyone and everyone should see it.  It earns 3.5 out of 4 Stars.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and some menace.

152 Minutes

Written and Directed By: Christopher Nolan

You crossed the line first, sir. You hammered them. And in their desperation they turned to a man they didn’t fully understand. Some men aren’t looking for anything logical. They can’t be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn. -Alfred

Synopsis

Christopher Nolan returns with The Dark Knight to follow what was left off from Batman Begins.  Commencing with Gotham at it’s most hopeful it’s new villain, the evil incarnate: The Joker, begins to tear the city and all it’s inhabitants apart.  Suddenly with no rules and nearly everyone a suspect of wrong doing, Bruce and Batman face choices they never had to make before.

Review

The Dark Knight certainly lived up to it’s hype with an action packed story, enigmatic and perplexing characters, and undertones that leave chills twisting down your spine.  The brilliant script and direction of Christopher Nolan shines through with a film that balances action, crime, the very nature of good and evil while still maintaining it’s comic book genre.  It blows what other comic movies have tried to do out of the water, they aren’t even in the same category.  The internal struggles of the character’s and desperation of the choices each makes is the catalyst for the story.

To put the entirety of The Dark Knight in a nutshell was the scene with the Joker in the hospital with Harvey Dent.  The verbal exchange between the two, and the exploration of the fine line between good and evil, right from wrong, and who’s good and who’s bad really sums up the entire feel for the story.  Also, a scene in the interrogation room between Batman and The Joker really draws the line that separates who and what they are by simultaneously blurring it again.

Harvey Dent’s character actually seems to be the nucleus of the story, even though it’s not really about him, our hero and foe pawn him about the board for their own personal goals, be they good or evil.  His inevitable metamorphosis becomes clear early on, and eventually leaves the dynasty open for another sequel.

The dangerous mix of real life terrorism and the fine line between who’s good and bad, and the basic wonder of interpretation in situations and basic perception was a much more in depth plot than one would surmise to get from a movie titled: Batman, but it’s there, vibrant and alive.  I saw it 24 hours ago and everything about it is still lingering in a very realistic way with me.  Plain and simple, this movie blows away anything that has been made in 2008 thus far.

Cast

• Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman
• Heath Ledger as The Joker
• Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent/ Two-Face
• Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth
• Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox
• Gary Oldman as Lt. James Gordon
• Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes
• Monique Curnen as Dec. Ramirez
• Cillian Murphy as Dr. Jonathon Crane/ The Scarecrow
• Eric Roberts as Salvatore Maroni
• Nestor Carbonell as The Mayor

I will declare it here and now: Heath Ledger should be nominated for an Oscar for his performance.  It is the best male performance of 2008 hands down.  His maniacal depiction of The Joker as a twisted sociopath with no real intention or motivation behind his actions makes him a viscious foe who craves nothing more than chaos, danger, and destruction.  The most interesting aspect of the performance was the layers behind the Joker’s seemingly mindless behavior.  Even as gruesome as the Joker was, there was something sadistically charming about him.  It was Ledger’s truly owning and living the character that made the Joker something so much more profound than a silly comic villain.  I found myself breathless during each scene he was in, and unable to move.  I can’t speak more highly of what he achieved, and to rise above the expectations I had, I literally find myself dumbfounded.  His demonic portrayal of the classic villain is staggering.

Not to diminish anyone elses performances, Ledger’s was just that phenomenal.  Christian Bale again proves that a popcorn action hero can have more complexity and interest than a tough guy kicking butt.  the internal struggles that Bruce Wayne vs. Batman have with one another between one another becomes a delectable trial of pain, sorrow, and regret.  The supporting actors played by Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Caine, and especially the ever talented Aaron Eckhart bring even more legitimacy to the story taking each of their roles to the mattresses.

Ratings And Suggestions

If you are a Batman junkie, this movie is for you.  If you are an action hero or superhero junkie this movie is for you.  If you are a chick flick junkie this movie is for you.  It doesn’t matter who you are, this movie is for you.  Don’t bother to wait for it to hit DVD’s, go to your theatre this second, stand in line for an hour, buy a ticket and prepare to be blown away.  Three years seemed a long wait after Batman Begins, but now I can’t seem to muster the patience to wait five months till I can own it on DVD.  Best movie this year.  Heath Ledger’s performance as the harbinger of death and chaos is alone worth every penny and every second devoted to this film.  Four out of Four Serious Stars.

Signs (2002)

Rated PG-13 for some frightening moments.

106 Minutes

Written And Directed By: M. Night Shyamalan

I can’t be sure, but I got the distinct feeling that it wanted to harm me. -Graham Hess

Synopsis

A widower who happens to be a Reverend is passing the years by in his peaceful farmhouse with his family after his wifes tragic death.  Strange crop circles that can’t be explained appear in his cornfield, and while local pranksters are suspected the family feels something much more sinister is at large.  It turns out the instincts of the Hess’s is not far from true.  Aliens have used the crop circles to help their space ships land and allow their species to invade and attack the human race.  Will the family and the human race survive?

Review

Signs is M. Night Shymalan’s greatest masterpiece.  It takes a genre that everyone is familiar with and instead of focusing on the many years of violent alien invasions with massive explosions and escape action sequences the story is structured around faith and the human psyche in a very realistic way.  The terror Signs evokes isn’t from the actual aliens or the destruction, it comes from the everyday man situation.  The inability to act, and the desolation of solitude are the main fear factors here.  Instead of fighting the aliens Will Smith style, this is the guy at home that has no idea Will Smith is even fighting.  The common man.  The closest I’ve seen this concept enabled was in War Of The Worlds which failed miserably, and spent the majority of it’s tale running and evading threw action sequences, though it did touch on the every man feel.  Even Shyamalan wrote in a quote commenting on War Of The Worlds.  Nice tongue in cheek acknowledgement to perhaps one of his inspirations.

The film doesn’t build it’s suspense on the final result, but focuses on the countdown to it.  This does not mean it was anti-climatic, it simply means each event that occurred, each interaction between character’s was so truly captivating, the actual buildup was just as enjoyable as it’s finish.  The “signs” that lead to the finale aren’t given in a “clue” type way, or obvious at all.  They are simply written into the story in a way that will truly inspire you to watch through a second time to see what you didn’t see initially.

Of course, we can’t ignore the elephant in the room.  The main piece of critic and film aficionado topic of interest when referring to Signs.  What that involves is the aliens weakness.  I concur it is even worse than the War Of The Worlds aliens that while studying Earth for thousands of years, never bothered to check out immunities to local viruses.  The aliens weakness in Signs is just as obvious and just as mind numbing, but going back to Shyamalan’s WOTW reference I have always wondered if the weakness was actually a tribute to WOTW.  Either way, it really has little to do with the bigger picture of the plot and is pretty much irrelevant except for the last scene.  It could have just as easily been something else as equally insignificant.  If the viewer understands what the movie is saying, the aliens weakness will hardly matter upon viewing.

Cast

• Mel Gibson as Reverend Graham Hess
• Joaquin Phoenix as Merill Hess
• Rory Culkin as Morgan Hess
• Abigal Breslin as Bo Hess
• Cherry Jones as Officer Paski
• M. Night Shyamalan as Ray Reddy

The character’s are the driving force of Signs.  Everything about the entire story is enhanced because of the three dimensional quality created involving the Hess family.  Mel Gibson gives one of his best performances playing the grieving widower raising his children alone, yet morally.  His interpretation of Rev. Hess shows a strength, but mostly a constant sadness always behind his eyes.  Even in the most frightening moments, the flicker of pure loss still lingers in his eyes.  That is simply amazing.  Joaquin Phoenix plays a secondary role to Gibson’s lead, but makes the family connection that much stronger with an actor of his talent.  His character plays key points that make an incredible difference in the points the story makes.  The two youngest siblings played by Abigal Breslin and Rory Culkin display a unique naive innocence that only youth allows to convey to point of view of a child.  The performances of the grief stricken family is heart wrenching and authentic.

Ratings And Suggestions

A lot of people find Shyamalans films to be too slow paced, and some people even use the terminology: pretentious.  I think they are neither.  There is a certain feeling of homage to Hitchcock type films.  As good? No, he offers a very different genre of film makiing than most of what’s available today and has an appeal to an audience that’s looking for something outside the box.  This appeal works for me.  His films move slow paced on the surface, but the questions they pose, the ideals they offer propose an endless amount of time after their viewing to be puzzled and debated over.  As an avid M. Night Shyamalan fan Signs was an exceptional piece of work.  It earned three and a half out of four stars.

Fools Gold (2008)

Rated PG-13 for action violence, some sexual material, brief nudity and language.

113 Minutes

Directed By: Andy Tennant

Written By: John Claffin and Daniel Zelman

Hey, boats sink! No one knows why! -Finn

Synopsis

A newly divorced couple finds themselves locked together in search of an ancient treasure lost in the 1700’s.  Along the way they must fight against another treasure salvager and outwit him.  Meanwhile, a nasty rapper, who also happens to be a murderous criminal is hot on the tale of Finn, while he is hot on the tail of his ex-wife.  Who is chasing who, and who will get to the treasure first is the question.

Review

If you are a fan of romantic adventure stories like Bird On A Wire with Mel Gibson and non other than Hudson’s mom Goldie Hawn, then this rambunctious story of love, action, adventure, and comedy is your cup of tea.  What Fools Gold lacked in the plot department it compensated in other categories that made it a fun, though nonsensical, popcorn flick.

It’s positive attributes are directly from the main character’s played by Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson.  Their overwhelming chemistry, and particularly McConaughey’s lone charisma is what carried the story and made it worthwhile.  The choices the character’s make and the situations they find themselves in are so far fetched from reality you feel like you’ve been hit by a stupidity stick, but you truly can’t help but fall for the surfer boy charm of McConaughey or the delightful delivery of Hudson.  It is the difference between a terrible movie and a fun one.

To compliment Hudson and McConaughey’s charisma is a location that is just as beautiful to look at as our leads.  The shots of the sensational Caribbean is breathtaking and really sucks the viewer into the feeling of free-spirited summer madness.  That coupled with an excellent soundtrack in the back round makes Fools Gold a superficial, yet guilty pleasure.

Cast

• Matthew McConaughey as Finn aka Benjamin Finnegan
• Kate Hudson as Tess Finnegan
• Donald Sutherland as Nigel Honeycutt
• Alexis Dziena as Gemma Honeycutt
• Ewen Bremner as Alfonz
• Ray Winstone as Moe Fitch
• Kevin Hart as Bigg Bunny
• Malcolm Jamal-Warner as Cordell

There are no incredible or outstanding performances in Fools Gold, but there were ones filled with blinding charm and fun.  Obviously, Finn and Tess have a great connection and comic timing, but their supporting crew, specifically Donald Sutherland and Alexis Dziena made for excellent comedic support, while helping the leads push the nonsensical adventure along.  The “bad guys” were a bit annoying.  They were more like bumbling fools rather than viscous criminals, which the interpretation wasn’t clear if that was their intent or not.  They were surely the low point of the movie.

Ratings and Suggestions

This is no masterpiece.  Fools Gold really isn’t even a good movie.  It doesn’t make much sense, it’s plot is virtually inconceivable tossed in the context it is, and the character’s are way over the top.  Nonetheless, I deem this movie a guilty pleasure.  Visually you can’t go wrong, and the character interactions are just plain and simply funny.  At it’s worst it becomes mindless entertainment, and on the right occasion we all need that.  It’s worth a rental, and goes down as one of those movies you don’t mind catching in pieces over and over again on cable.  Fools Gold gets 2.5 out of 4 Stars.

Tin Man (2007)

Directed By: Nick Willing

Written By: Jill E. Blotevogel and Steven Long Mitchell

Adapted From The Novel: The Wizard Of Oz By L. Frank Baum

I haven’t been here before, but I know this place… -DG

Synopsis

This is not the Oz most of us remember.  In fact, it’s a creation all of it’s own, changed and altered with years past, with many different evil witches, beautiful queens, wizards, and variations of the land so richly described in L. Frank Baums original story.  This Oz has been taken by a vicious sorceress, with plans set on destroying the entire world and making it enveloped in complete blackness.  Between her sorcery and army, the resistance fights a losing battle until a girl from the Other Side comes into the O Z.  DG is naive and unknowing but becomes quickly hardened by the rough world surrounding her, though is not alone as she has found companions to aid her in her mission, which doesn’t become completely clear until you are already involved in a great amount of the side plots.  It’s a story of adventure, betrayal, love, and friendship, and doesn’t take a breath for even a moment.

Review

There was an immediate concern that this movie would be either a cheap rip off of the wonderful tale of The Wizard Of Oz, or that it would be a poor individual story that only used the basics to create it’s own Oz.  Those concerns were wiped away once DG flew into the OZ, or Outer Zone.  The story perfectly integrated a new dangerous interpretation of a beloved tale with the basics set up decades ago without becoming dependant or reliant on the original story, but also staying true to it’s basic nature.  It made it captivating and down right exciting to watch.

The main characters that were both old and new, were easy to latch on to because of the familiarity with them, but distinct enough in their own right that you weren’t constantly comparing them to the characters their likenesses were developed from.  The small beats that did allude to the original creations were cute and symbolic rather than obvious and obnoxious.

The plot and theme itself was gargantuan in size and it truly made sense to make it a three part story.  For all the character developments to flow naturally and the transpiring events to occur in an even exciting momentum, it was best done this way.   The massive scale the story incorporated set the boundaries of the story in a million different directions and allowed it to create a massive adventure that made the finale always feel near the cusp, but always just missing with even more adventure left.  The actual finale arced perfectly and left the ending triumphant and satisfying closed on this particular story.

The visual imagery of the OZ was just astounding.  The sets were enormous and made with such delicate intricacies.  The CGI used to show a massive amount of the wide shots was exploited in a creative and tasteful way that didn’t stray too far into the fantasy world and away from a feeling of reality.  It never bordered looking cheesy or cheap.  It and the soundtrack as well, gave the story and it’s adventure the third dimensional texture it needed to make this OZ into a world very much so real.

Cast

• Zoey Deschanel as DG
• Alan Cummings as Glitch
• Neal McDonough as Wyatt Cain
• Kathleen Robertson as Azkadelliah
• Raoul Trujillo as Raw
• Callum Keith Rennie as Zero
• Richard Dreyfus as The Mystic Man
• Blu Makuma as Toto/Tutor
• Anna Galvin as Lavendar Eyes
• Ted Whithall as Ahamo
• Rachael Pattee as Young DG
• Alexia Fast as Young Azkadellia

The only real complaint I have for a film of this genre is the lead actress Zoey Deschanel.  From her first line to her last I cannot comprehend her being cast other than her physical appearance.  Her acting and delivery was a basic nuisance to brilliantly paced, written, and for the most part: cast story.  Her bland reactions and inability to emote any real feeling through her performance severely crippled important moments between characters throughout the story.  Luckily the rest of the cast and the story was well enough done, that this became a minor annoyance and actually funny to laugh at in certain points, instead of ruining the entire move.  But if the rest wasn’t structured so strongly her performance was bad enough to ruin it all.  In contrast to her, the rest of the cast was flawless in their performances and made the story that much more the take in.

Ratings and Suggestions

Tin Man turned out to be a wondrous adventure into a world we are all familiar with, but on very different terms.  It was a refreshing pleasure to take in.  The level of dedication to it’s creators and all involved is evident in it’s final display.  For a made for television movie, I can honestly say I can’t think of one I enjoyed more or was better done.  Thanks to Wicked for opening the proverbial door into entertaining new ideas about stories we love, by still giving them their due credit and making something new.  The Sci-Fi Channel hit this one right out of the park.  Tin Man receives a solid three out of four stars from me.