Transformers 3

A deeply philosophical movie with a surprise ending!

Oh, wait, this is a Micheal Bay film, what was I thinking? I'd like to go on a rant about how disappointed I was with Transformers 3, but I'm so used to Michael Bay movies that I went into the movie ready to enjoy how terrible it would inevitably be.

First of all, the tone of the movie was disjointed. Coming of age comedy movie? Action adventure movie? R-rated murderous robot movie? Budding romance during Armageddon movie? Movies can have multiple themes, but they must be handled deftly to work. Bay is anything but deft.

Secondly, the physics of the movie were all screwed up. With fantasy and sci-fi movies, in order to aid the audience's suspension of disbelief, the movie must be grounded in reality on all points that are not fantasy or sci-fi. For instance, and this is sad, but we all have images in our head of what happens when a skyscraper is toppled. Until 9/11, we never knew exactly, but now we do. So the protagonists survive a building that should have disintegrated. But even if the building fell as it did and didn't fall apart, the heroes inside survived a fall that was like 40 stories high. It's doesn't matter if you are in the same room at the bottom of the fall. You're squished.

Honestly, as the movie went along in the first half and the plot was building, I was kind of getting into it. Then when the action hit, the movie got stupid. By 3/4 of the way I was continuously exclaiming, "Oh, come on!!!!!!!!" Luckily for me, my wife agreed with me, and thusly my life was spared (she didn't kill me for talking during the movie).

Michael Bay, why do I continue to watch your movies? Oh, yeah, it makes for a good rant. See you next time when it's free.

Dorian Gray

Trying out a slightly different format for this. No point scale, FTW!

I've always found the story of Dorian Gray to be interesting. A guy gets a painting that is so perfect that it actually takes all of his wounds or deformities or diseases upon itself, keeping him young and perfect. The story is a deeper look into a man's soul, when that man has no fear of consequences.

Despite it's two-star rating, I decided to give it a whirl. Netflix fan ratings are surprisingly close to my own ratings, to such an extent that I said to my wife, "Let's see why this is two-stars." I knew it was going to be disappointing.

But sometimes the point system is wrong. And for a brief time, the movie opened slowly, like a giant clam with a fistful of meat as a reward for patience. The setup was slow but building. The movie took time to introduce its characters and have them illustrate their philosophies of life.

Then the philosophical portion of the movie ended. The end of the movie became separated from the roots planted at the beginning. Dorian Gray started living his life of debauchery, and the movie strove to show us every painstaking moment (and bare breast) of his decline. After awhile, it was easy to understand the two-star ranking. Yes, Hollywood, we get it, now stop glamorizing his soulless lifestyle. Unfortunately, the story built around philosophical poniards had its plot wander away into gratuitous booby display. Then it went a tiny bit homosexual for a few seconds.

Then the end sort of came, but with no plot. The teacher of the bad philosophy that Dorian lived by has a daughter who becomes Dorian's target, the final conquest of this evil man. Okay, sounds good, but the war of philosophy was lacking. The secret of the painting was revealed too late in the movie to do the philosophical conflict any good. Then for some inexplicable reason, the soulless Gray has a change of heart and has to stab his painting that is on fire. Perhaps he despaired of life. We were never told why.

Then the movie ended. Creepily.

Sigh.

Hollywood, please do better. In your quest to make money, please try following deep philosophical arguments through to the end. You'll be surprised at the result, especially if the characters receive logical consequences for their actions. We're watching you, Hollywood. We know when you indulge in the visual debauchery without advancing the character-erosion plotline. Please try not to limit your audience by showing so much filth. We understand enough. The war of philosophies needed more illustration on both sides, and you did not succeed in showing that part.

Edit: Curious, I reread the story. I guess he really does stab the painting and die in the process, and the painting reverts back to the original, untarnished image. The movie doesn't go into the reasons why. Is it a heroic act to save his friends? Is it a selfish act to end his life?

Movie Review: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Whew: that's a long movie title.

I'm not a huge Jim Carrey fan, so when this movie came out in 2004, I skipped it. Recently a friend recommended it to me, so I decided to stream it on Netflix. Here we go.

Gains: +5

Cinematography drives this story. When dealing with getting memories erased, the fading backgrounds and blurred images and other little tricks are wonderful for showing what is happening. When events are shown so expertly, the audience can more easily follow a complicated storyline.

The timeline was confusing to follow. However, Kate Winslet's hair color changes for each different time period, so if you were paying attention, then you could keep up with the timeline shifts. I enjoyed following the hair changes.

The story was simple, yet told with complexity. The characters were more like normal people than in most movies. In fact, given the level of mild-mannered boringness or, conversely, neurotic behavior portrayed by each main character, I came to really enjoy the acting by Jim and Kate. Funny thing is, Jim played the more boring character of the two.

Losses: -4

Did we really have to see Ruffalo's butt? Ick.

This movie has quite a lot of cursing. Lots of effs and J.C.s.

In the end I didn't care for either main character. It was cool that they found each other in the end, but both were so pathetic that it became excruciating at times. I believe it is impossible for people to understand the brain workings of any person with an IQ that is 10 points different. These characters were more like 80s or 90s, and it showed in my ability to empathize with them.

Final Judgment: +2

The technical portion of the movie was fantastic, as was the acting and basic story idea. Some of the scene choices and execution of the ideas should have been left out.

Movie Review: Tangled

So many friends told me that I need to see this movie. I responded with an incredulous, "But I already saw the preview...no thanks on the whole thing." The number of fans grew and finally I began to think maybe my initial take from the preview was totally wrong. So I Netflix'd it. I'm so glad I didn't drop money on this one.

Gains: +4
The horse was hilarious. Humanizing it was a good choice. The animation quality captured my attention. It was a beautiful movie. Rapunzel's character's innocence and genuine-ness and how these characteristics carried her through the world made this a good kids movie when viewed from her perspective. The wicked mother really stood out from the normal Disney sort of bad guy. She easily could be any audience member. The mental justification she used, while slightly twisted, made sense. She wasn't just plain evil, she was just greedy. I enjoyed that.

Losses: -3
Did you hear the music? Me neither. I've blocked it from my memory. Good grief. This from the company that produced fun musical masterpieces, movie after movie. Seems they took a step back.

The hair looked great. Unfortunately, the length changed from scene to scene. I know it was a CGI movie, but hair that long would be so unwieldy, snarly, and (well) tangled that Miss Rap would not have been able to leave her house. Also, her scalp had to be made of steel to not only hold the hair but to do all of the things she did with her hair. I know it was essentially a fantasy movie, but this element bothered me.

In a world where we have a heroine princess, a king and queen, fantasy elements, a magical flower, a humanized horse, and so on, I guess it's possible to have a totally worthless male lead end up marrying into royalty. I guess. What was his point? What was attractive about him? What made him heroic enough to marry her? I know he's supposed to be rogue-ish like Han Solo. But Han took 3 movies and went through terrible times to prove his loyalty and love for Leia. He did heroic things. Plus her parents were dead and her world was obliterated. So Hollywood, please feel free to have a rogue metrosexual character, but unless he does something heroic, please do not reward him in front of my children.

Final Judgment: +1

All in all, I was right. It looked like Disney on the preview and was Disney in execution. In my opinion, the Disney brand has diminished. They are, at best, the third best CGI movie studio.

Movie Review: Toy Story 3

Toy Story 3 brings a sort of finale to the TS saga. Pixar is at it again, and I have to say that they did very well.

Gains: +4
Interestingly enough, I was surprised to hear all the exact voices I was used to. For some reason, I felt Tom or Tim would have abandoned the series by this time. With so many characters dividing up the total line total per superstar, I just figured they'd bail. It made me very happy to hear them and all the others.

The story of Toy Story 3 was tight. The writers kept the soul of the series intact while keeping it fresh as well. The story went for quite awhile without a bad guy. I kept waiting for it, but it never happened. I got creepy feelings from the bear initially, but then after awhile he seemed nice. I was actually surprised then, when he did turn out to be bad. The story was wholesome and fun and emotional, as the entire series has been so far. All in all, I was pleasantly surprised to enjoy yet another Pixar and yet another Toy Story title.

Losses: 0
There was nothing bad about this movie. That fact, by itself is a gain.

Final Judgment: +4

Keep up the great work, Pixar!