Movie Review: Zombieland (2009) December 6, 2009
Posted by pacejmiller in Movie Reviews.Tags: Abigail Breslin, comedy, Emma Stone, horror, Jesse Eisenberg, Ruben Fleischer, Woody Harrelson, Zombieland, zombies
6 comments
If I had to sum up the zombie comedy Zombieland in five words, it would be “Pretty good but not great”.
Directed by Ruben Fleischer (no previous work worthy of noting), it has a premise we’ve seen a few times before – the country (America) being overtaken by zombies and an unlikely hero trying to survive against all odds. That’s about as much as I want to give away. As with most films, try and avoid the previews if you can. Plenty of great scenes, lines and jokes were unnecessarily ruined by the previews I had the misfortune of coming across. If I hadn’t seen them in advance I probably would have liked the film more.
What sets Zombieland apart from other zombie movies of late is that it is more comedy than horror, and what sets it apart from other zombie comedies is that it is actually pretty funny. It’s definitely more Shaun of the Dead than 28 Days Later, but the laughs aren’t as silly or outrageous – not quite, anyway. Much of the humour stems from the quirky character traits of, and the witty banter between, the two leads, played by Jesse Eisenberg (from Adventureland, who seems forever destined to battle Michael Cera for all the goofy, awkward boy roles) and Woody Harrelson (last seen by me in 2012, the movie not the year). Rounding out the main quartet are Emma Stone (Jules from Superbad) and Abigail Breslin (My Sister’s Keeper, Little Miss Sunshine), who both put in solid performances without stealing the show.
Zombieland knows exactly what kind of movie it is trying to be. Extremely gory (no shortage of over-the-top blood and guts), tongue-in-cheek, and nonchalant about the fact that the whole country (and probably world) has been overrun by zombies who just want to eat human flesh. And yet, Zombieland does have charm and it does have heart, though it never steps over the line into melodrama as that would mean caring too much – and that would just be too uncool for a movie like this.
That said, Zombieland is far from perfect. There are a number of slower bits strewn throughout the film, far more than there should be. And while it is funny, not all the jokes hit the mark, and sometimes it even risks trying too hard to be amusing. And of course, though it is technically a comedy/horror, the film is not particularly frightening. The zombies are there more for the laughs than the chills, and you never get the sense that there is any real danger.
Weighing up all the pros and cons, I’d probably say Zombieland is a 3-star movie that is worth watching, but to be honest I wanted it to be much more than just a sweet, mildly enjoyable film. However, there is a special surprise in Zombieland that is worth a whole half-star by itself – hands down the most unexpected, insane, hilarious cameo I’ve seen in…possibly ever! Accordingly…
3.5 stars out of 5!
Movie Review: Up (2009) November 30, 2009
Posted by pacejmiller in Movie Reviews.Tags: animated film, animation, Carl Fredericksen, Disney, dogs, Finding Nemo, Pixar, Russell, Toy Story, Up, Up movie
7 comments
I’m not usually a big fan of animated films. There have been a few very good ones (such as Toy Story, Shrek and Ratatouille), plenty of terrible ones (such as Shark Tale, Astro Boy and the worst of them all, Resident Evil: Degeneration), and a whole lot of average or overrated ones (in my opinion just about everything else, such as Finding Nemo and Happy Feet).
Accordingly, I approached the latest Pixar/Disney venture, Up, with plenty of scepticism. I’m not going to discuss the plot – the poster is about as much background as you need. Anyway, I ended up loving it.
For starters, Up is one of the funniest animated films I’ve ever seen. It has that Toy Story quirkiness to it, that matter-of-fact approach to completely random and outrageous situations. There are plenty of WTF? moments, but the execution is so sweet and cute that you can’t help but be captivated, regardless of how crazy it may all seem.
There’s also the wonderful characters – extremely unique characters. Can you imagine any other film carried by a grumpy old man and a fat little Asian kid (plus a whole bunch of dogs) from start to finish? Incredible.
Most of all, Up has plenty of heart. The opening sequence summarising the life of old Carl Fredericksen up to that point is one of the most bittersweet and moving I’ve seen in any film. And when he comes on board, the back story of Russell the kid is also very touching. The balance between humour and drama and action is handled brilliantly, each hitting the spot at the crucial moments.
And did I mention the amazing animation? The gorgeous blend of colours and crisp textures, coupled with the beautiful scenery and perfect character design, took the exuberance and warmth to a whole new level.
Granted, Up is not perfect – it started off wonderfully but dipped a little towards the middle before picking itself back up before the end, but on the whole it is hands down one of the best animated movies I’ve had the pleasure of watching.
4.5 stars out of 5!
Movie Review: Julie & Julia (2009) November 29, 2009
Posted by pacejmiller in Blogging, Movie Reviews.Tags: writer, Amy Adams, Meryl Streep, Blog, Julie and Julia, Julie & Julia, Julie Powell, Julia Child, Nora Ephron, cooking
add a comment
When I first saw the poster for Julie & Julia, I literally went ‘meh’. A drama with Meryl Streep and Amy Adams as the two leads? I enjoyed Doubt (which they starred in together in 2008) but this so didn’t look like my type of movie.
However, I later found out that the film was about food. And that it was based on not one, but two intertwining true stories. And most of all, the book upon which the film was based arose out of a blog! That was when the aspiring writer inside convinced me I had to watch it.
I don’t like to spoil the plot, but in this case it helps to provide a bit of background. Julia Child (Meryl Streep) is a famous American chef and author (pardon my ignorance), and Julie Powell (Amy Adams) is an average woman who attempts to cook every recipe in her cookbook in a year while chronicling her experiences in a blog. The movie somehow manages to switch seamlessly between the two women – Julia in the 1950s as she learns to cook and piece together her cookbook, and Julie in 2002 she develops her blog project into a web sensation.
So how was it?
Written and directed by Nora Ephron (who last worked on Bewitched in 2005, but also did Sleepless in Seattle), Julie & Julia is very much a relationship drama that seeks to appeal to a predominantly female audience. The main male characters, Julie and Julia’s husbands (played by Chris Messina and Stanley Tucci, respectively), are portrayed as virtual saints who are completely devoted to their wives. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it made me wish there was more tension in their lives than just burnt stews in the oven.
To be frank, it still wasn’t my type of movie. The stories of the two women were somewhat interesting. The food appeared to be absolutely divine. The performances were superb (as you would expect from Streep and Adams). Some bits were quite humorous. And yet, it didn’t do a whole lot for me. It’s not that it was bland. It’s just that I wasn’t as absorbed as I thought I would be. Maybe it’s just me.
On the other hand, the inspiring climb to success of both women was pretty cool. There’s just something about watching other writers ‘make it’ that gets me all excited.
So to sum it all up, a good movie, but not really for me.
3 stars out of 5!
Movie Review: New Moon (2009) November 23, 2009
Posted by pacejmiller in Movie Reviews.Tags: Bella Swan, Eclipse, Edward Cullen, Jacob Black, Kristen Stewart, New Moon, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Twilight, Twilight Saga, vampire
2 comments
New Moon, the second film of the Twilight Saga, is a solid sequel to a popular franchise. It will no doubt please its hardcore fan base, but there’s also enough satisfy the casual film-goer (who (1) isn’t out to savage the film for the sake of it and (2) judges it in its appropriate context). 3.5/5 stars!
I have caught Twilight fever.
Well, not really. I am more intrigued by why the Twilight Saga has captivated so many people as opposed to the story itself.
And after watching the second movie in the Saga, New Moon, I must admit I still don’t really get it. Is it the seemingly perfect love between a teenage girl and a vampire? Or is it the fact that their relationship is dangerous and forbidden? Or is it just because the vampire is (according to most sources) an incredibly hot dude? Or is it all of the above?
I don’t know the answer, but what I do know is that New Moon is actually a pretty decent movie. An average film overall, but in context, a fairly strong sequel. In my humble opinion, it’s certainly not worthy of the 1-star status it has been receiving from some critics. In any event, hardcore fans will undoubtedly lap it up and box office numbers should be strong simply from multiple repeat viewings from young girls (and from what I hear oldies too).
New Moon picks up from where Twilight left off, with teenager Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and her dreamy, ‘perfect’ vampire boyfriend Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson, aka ‘Rob Patz’) rolling in the bliss of love. Those who have read the book will know what happens next, but I was quite annoyed with how the previews effectively show you the essence of the first half-hour of the movie and then reveals the major twists and secrets of the entire film! If you’ve been lucky enough to avoid the previews then I’m sure you will find New Moon a more pleasurable experience.
There's lots of love in New Moon
Anyway, I will start with the bad. New Moon is a film that first and foremost tries to satisfy the desires of its fans, and that means romance comes before everything else. While this may be great for its target audience, the problem with this is that if you’re not into the romance then the film falls apart very quickly. Or alternatively, the movie may start to feel boring and tedious. There’s a mushiness to Bella and Edward’s relationship that only a limited section of the public can truly appreciate, and I can totally understand why viewers might be turned off by some of the painful dialogue (especially at the start) – but bear in mind that most of it is apparently reproduced verbatim from the novel. Besides, dialogue is always less excrutiating on the page than it sounds on the screen.
New Moon also assumes that you know the story (or at least the first film) quite well. There are several references to characters, abilities, relationships and specific incidents from its predecessor, and your recollection and knowledge of these things are somewhat taken for granted. With my shocking memory, it did take a while for me to remember what the heck was going on.
There are also some things that weren’t explained very well by the movie which may or may not turn out to be gaping plot holes. I’ll have to reserve judgment on that until I seek clarification from a genuine Twilight fan. And there’s of course a few unintentionally funny bits simply because the film takes the whole vampire hierarchy thing so seriously.
And now the good. At its heart, New Moon is a good story. It might not be entirely original but there is a charm to it that makes it so appealing. It’s almost entrancing. For me, a big part of the film’s allure was the development of Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), who is effectively the male lead in this one. Apart from his amazing physical transformation (which prompted him to remove his shirt at every opportunity), Jacob’s emotional growth is also well-developed. With the two lead characters (Edward and especially Bella) exhibiting selfish and unimpressive personality traits, Jacob becomes the character that viewers can empathise with the most.
Hello!
I may have said earlier that New Moon is heavy on the romance, but there was still plenty of room for action. There were a number of exciting sequences littered throughout the film, most of them involving ample amounts of CGI. I wouldn’t quite call New Moon an action film, but from what I can recall it has a lot more action than Twilight. And the final climatic scenes were done much better in the sequel than the original.
Another strength of the film was its minor characters. Again, with Bella and Edward being so serious about everything (as demonstrated by the constant heavy breathing from Kristen Stewart and the permanently pained expression on Robert Pattinson’s face), comic relief came in just the right doses from an assortment of other characters. From the members in Jacob’s clan (Chaske Spencer, Tyson Houseman, Alex Meraz, Kiowa Gordon and Bronson Pelletier) to Bella’s friends Jessica (Anna Kendrick) and Mike (in terrific performance by Michael Welch) to Bella’s dad Charlie (Billy Burke) to the rest of the Cullen gang (in particular Jackson Rathbone as Jasper), almost every one of these minor characters hit the spot in their brief moments on screen. On the other hand, unfortunately, the talents of Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning were criminally underused in their respective roles, leading to weird, comical appearances that just didn’t feel right.
At the end of the day, New Moon succeeds in what it set out to do, and that is to please its fan base. For non-hardcore fans, I think there is still enough for an enjoyable experience. There’s romance, friendship, action, suspense and a dash of timely humour. What more could you ask for in what is, essentially, a teen flick?
3.5 stars out of 5!
[PS: For the record, I have read the first book, Twilight, and watched the corresponding film. Both were okay, but neither did much for me. It just felt a little too much - too saccharine for my liking. But I could definitely see the appeal, especially to teenage girls. As a result, I skipped the remainder of the books (including New Moon), but continued to be fascinated by all the hype surrounding it. And I am looking forward to Eclipse, the next film in the series, especially as it will be directed by David Slade, director of Hard Candy and 30 Days of Night.]
Movie Review: Paranormal Activity (2009) November 17, 2009
Posted by pacejmiller in Movie Reviews.Tags: alternate endings, Blair Witch, Blair Witch Project, documentary, horror, Paranormal Activity, Paranormal Activity review, sequel
add a comment
Paranormal Activity is the latest ‘is it real or not?’, low-budget horror movie pieced together with supposed amateur home video footage. Think The Blair Witch Project for haunted houses.
While I liked the overall idea and it’s by no means a terrible film, Paranormal Activity didn’t really do it for me. Maybe I just wasn’t in the mood to be scared. It did have its moments, but certainly isn’t the ’scariest’ or ‘most terrifying’ movie of all time (or even the year) as it has been hyped up to be.
The footage begins when young couple Micah and Katie, living together in a fairly nice suburban house, decide to get a video camera to capture the paranormal activity they have been experiencing. There is a bit of a back story and you get to know the characters are little through footage of their daily lives, but I found these to be time fillers than any real effort to allow the audience to get to know, and perhaps even care about, these people.
Like The Blair Witch Project, the tension in Paranormal Activity is built up slowly and gradually, with the intent of blowing the audience away with a ripper of an ending. However, even at only 86 minutes, it felt like nothing was happening for a really long time. A few bumps in the night, a few eerie things here and there, but for the most part they seemed like relatively minor incidents that were met with overreaction. I understand director and writer Oren Peli’s intention to build an atmospheric film that utilises dread rather than cheap scares, but I spent much of the movie wishing something would actually happen. I will say, though, that there were a couple of pretty cool things that happened towards the end, but unfortunately the final sequences weren’t as chilling as I had hoped.**
The film’s biggest problem, from which most of its other problems stemmed, was the restrictive nature of its format. Of course, as the audience, you only get to see what has recorded by the inhabitants of the house. But that raises some very difficult obstacles. How much can you reasonably expect someone who is being terrified by demons to tape everything that happens to them? Do you go the realistic route and miss out on some of the action? Or do you come up with forced excuses to make them take the video camera everywhere and record everything? Either way, the film suffers.
To its credit, Paranormal Activity tries to reach some sort of balance between the two extremes. As the inhabitants actually set out to capture and document the haunting, a camera is set up in the bedroom and runs throughout the night, and that is when most of the creepy stuff happens. In my opinion, that was by far the cleverest idea in the film. Every time the bedroom cam is set up and the residents to go bed, I start to swell up with anticipation as the clock fast forwards to when ’stuff’ happens. Occasionally, they venture out of the bedroom in hand-held mode, but thankfully the footage is not as shaky or nauseating as it could have been.
However, what this system also means is that some scenes are left to your imagination because you can’t see what is going on – sometimes that may be more frightening, but that’s not always the case in this movie. It also means that at least one of the characters has to be a totally unreasonable prick so the camera can be kept running, but it gets to the point where it becomes a stretch. With this type of film format, you just have to take the good with the bad.
Paranormal Activity also suffers from a few other issues. This kind of film thrives on the gullibility of the audience. The more you believe it is real, the scarier it becomes. The problem is, while both leads were adequate, there were a couple of occasions where they felt unnatural. Could be the dialogue or the acting, but I wasn’t convinced I was watching authentic footage. One of the reasons why The Blair Witch Project was so successful was because it misled people into believing that the footage was real. The film was presented and marketed as authentic. 10 years later, this has become a lot more difficult to accomplish, and as a result Paranormal Activity doesn’t have quite the same impact as its predecessor.
In the end, Paranormal Activity is a film worth watching simply because it is fresh and not done very often. And to be fair, it also has some solid, atmospheric moments. That said, lower your expectations if you want to be genuinely frightened.
3 stars out of 5!
** Apparently there are at least 3 alternative endings for this film, and I don’t quite think the one released in the cinemas is the best one. See here for more details.
PS: a sequel is already in the works thanks to the success of the film, which is already the most successful independent film ever in terms of return on investment. Let’s just hope the sequel is at least watchable, unlike that dreadful sequel to Blair Witch which I still rank up there as one of the worst sequels of all time.
Stumble It!
