Athersgeo's Film Reviews
Aug. 25th, 2005 10:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
athersgeoHoooboy. I've been catching up with my ever expanding pile of DVDs (never take me into a store that sells the dang things, I'm practically BOUND to come out with at least one - I have a stack of films still shrinkwrapped that I haven't yet gotten to watch!), and got a few film reviews to get off my chest.
I'll start off with the one I watched tonight, "Coach Carter".
OK. It's a sports movie. It's an American HS sports movie. It's a true story - and I think it's more true than not, by way of a change, they even resisted the temptation to change the ending of the final game, which I'm impressed by! If sports and/or non-comedy HS movies aren't your bag, this is not for you. If, on the other hand, you like your movies to be uplifting and you're in anyway shape or form a fan of Samuel L Jackson, this is a must see movie.
It's based on the life of Coach Ken Carter who achieved a certain degree of fame (not to mention notoriety) for insisting that all the players on his basketball teams (in Richmond, CA) achieved better than the bare minimum required by the state in their accademic classes. The film centres on (I'm going to take a guess at this) the Varsity team and highlights what went on during the 1999 season.
Now, on face value, it's your average "rags to riches" story, but it's got some neat twists. For starters, Carter's son decides he's going to switch from his expensive private school, St Francis, to the rather less sterling Richmond High so that he can play for his dad. For another, when Carter takes his stand on the accademics and locks the basketball team out of the gym (!), he receives absolutely no support from the school board, the parents and many of the other teachers who all tell him "They're going to fail; we only graduate 50% of each class" and shrug their shoulders. And then there's that final game. The team eventually DO recover and improve their grade averages and get back to playing, and make the State championships where they draw St Francis (hands up everyone who saw THAT coming? *grin*). Now, if this were typical Hollywood, the "riches" in this story would be Richmond beating St Francis and going on to lift the State championship. They *lose* to St Francis.
That bears repeating: They *lose* to St Francis.
The real riches in this story is in the fact that six of the team went on to higher education, all on college scholarships. Not bad for kids who were assumed to fail.
That's the bare bones. Interweaving with this basic story are several subplots that work on a greater or lesser extent. There's Cruz who quits the team, sees them start to achieve, rejoins the team, quits on the lockout and then rejoins again after seeing his cousin shot right in front of him on a drug deal gone wrong. There's Kenyon whose girlfriend, Kyra, is going to be having a baby...
If you're getting from this that I liked and enjoyed this movie, you'd be right. On a purely inspirational level, it's an amazing story. Who'd think that parents would be against something that forces their kids to achieve accademically? Who'd think someone would risk their job for kids he keeps being told will fail? Samuel L Jackson is as good as ever and the actors playing the basketball players look the part. The basketball scenes are wonderfully shot, too. I think my one complaint would be the soundtrack, which is chock full of hiphop and music that I can basically only describe as "noise". It's entirely appropriate for the setting and characters, I just find it grating as it's really NOT my scene.
All in all, this movie is a feelgood movie (you watch it, you end up feeling good) and it's definitely something that I could watch again.
Unfortunately, the next DVD in my list is one that actually left me baffled.
I like Josh Hartnett. I thought he was superb in "O" and excellent in "Blackhawk Down", heck, I even liked "40 Days and 40 Nights" because of him - and I really don't generally go for grossout humour and endless sex jokes. "Wicker Park", however, is...well, frankly, it's difficult to see how on earth it got made.
Take three unlikeable characters. Throw in one reasonably likeable but entirely weird one. Mix together with some kookie ideas about story telling (this film is VERY non-linear - to the extent that you get to see most scenes from two points of view and two different times in the movie and it jumps back and forward in time), and you've probably got "Wicker Park". It's marketed as a thriller, but frankly, I've had more thrilling bowls of cornflakes. It's marketed as romantic, but it's about as romantic as a going on a date to see a Keanu Reeves action movie (and having DONE that once, I can assure you there is NOTHING romantic about it).
Hartnett's character's an obsessive borderline stalker (frankly, if I'd been the girl he falls in love with, I'd have run the other way, fast). Hartnett's friend (Matthew Lillard) is a blowhard idiot. Rose Byrne plays the girl who's madly in love with Hartnett but is dating Lillard (and who actively wrecked Hartnett's original relationship with his stalking victim)...about the only character with an ounce of sympathy is Diane Kruger's - and she's an idiot for not running far and fast away from Hartnett for stalking her!
By the end of the film, I was vaguely hoping for them all to fall under buses or SOMETHING. The ghost of Al Capone could perhaps kick them all out of Chicago. ANYTHING. I'm sure I've seen films with less sympathetic characters, but right now, I'm struggling to recall what and when.
It's a remake of a French film, "L'Appartment", so whether the French version is any better, I wouldn't like to say. It can't conceivably be any worse.
And from the rediculous to...well...the even more rediculous but strangely entertaining...
"Hostage" stars Bruce Willis as an ex-LA SWAT negotiator who's chief of police in a sleepy Californian town after screwing up a negotiation.
Three 'kids' (I use the term loosely, since they're all upwards of 16) decide to break into a house to steal the owner's car. They, needless to state, pick the one guy in the whole town who's involved with the mob.
Into this mix is thrown a disc with the mob's figures on, the mob themselves, Willis' family (who get taken hostage to force him to work with the mob to get the disc), the rich guy's family (daughter is attracted to the lead 'kid', little boy manages to find a cell phone and call Willis!)...and it just gets progressively sillier from thereon in.
Up to the end of the climactic battle in the house, it's your average Bruce Willis guns'n'gangs'n'explosions sorta movie. And then you get this strange little coda scene where he and the rich guy rescue Willis' family from the mob...which is just plain weird - and not a little bit unnecessary. They did manage to surprise me, in that it starts out with the rich guy being in with the mob and ends with him siding with Willis and shooting all the mob members present, but frankly, it wasn't worth that surprise.
Overall, it's an average film. The bad guys (be they the kids or the mob) are utterly unsympathetic and Willis is...well...Willis. Oh, and there IS a rather gratuitous emoliation scene. I would doubt it's everyone's cup of tea, but if you like this sort of thing, it's not bad (and I've certainly seen much, much, MUCH worse!)
So there you are. That's me caught up. At least on what I've watched recently!
I'll start off with the one I watched tonight, "Coach Carter".
OK. It's a sports movie. It's an American HS sports movie. It's a true story - and I think it's more true than not, by way of a change, they even resisted the temptation to change the ending of the final game, which I'm impressed by! If sports and/or non-comedy HS movies aren't your bag, this is not for you. If, on the other hand, you like your movies to be uplifting and you're in anyway shape or form a fan of Samuel L Jackson, this is a must see movie.
It's based on the life of Coach Ken Carter who achieved a certain degree of fame (not to mention notoriety) for insisting that all the players on his basketball teams (in Richmond, CA) achieved better than the bare minimum required by the state in their accademic classes. The film centres on (I'm going to take a guess at this) the Varsity team and highlights what went on during the 1999 season.
Now, on face value, it's your average "rags to riches" story, but it's got some neat twists. For starters, Carter's son decides he's going to switch from his expensive private school, St Francis, to the rather less sterling Richmond High so that he can play for his dad. For another, when Carter takes his stand on the accademics and locks the basketball team out of the gym (!), he receives absolutely no support from the school board, the parents and many of the other teachers who all tell him "They're going to fail; we only graduate 50% of each class" and shrug their shoulders. And then there's that final game. The team eventually DO recover and improve their grade averages and get back to playing, and make the State championships where they draw St Francis (hands up everyone who saw THAT coming? *grin*). Now, if this were typical Hollywood, the "riches" in this story would be Richmond beating St Francis and going on to lift the State championship. They *lose* to St Francis.
That bears repeating: They *lose* to St Francis.
The real riches in this story is in the fact that six of the team went on to higher education, all on college scholarships. Not bad for kids who were assumed to fail.
That's the bare bones. Interweaving with this basic story are several subplots that work on a greater or lesser extent. There's Cruz who quits the team, sees them start to achieve, rejoins the team, quits on the lockout and then rejoins again after seeing his cousin shot right in front of him on a drug deal gone wrong. There's Kenyon whose girlfriend, Kyra, is going to be having a baby...
If you're getting from this that I liked and enjoyed this movie, you'd be right. On a purely inspirational level, it's an amazing story. Who'd think that parents would be against something that forces their kids to achieve accademically? Who'd think someone would risk their job for kids he keeps being told will fail? Samuel L Jackson is as good as ever and the actors playing the basketball players look the part. The basketball scenes are wonderfully shot, too. I think my one complaint would be the soundtrack, which is chock full of hiphop and music that I can basically only describe as "noise". It's entirely appropriate for the setting and characters, I just find it grating as it's really NOT my scene.
All in all, this movie is a feelgood movie (you watch it, you end up feeling good) and it's definitely something that I could watch again.
Unfortunately, the next DVD in my list is one that actually left me baffled.
I like Josh Hartnett. I thought he was superb in "O" and excellent in "Blackhawk Down", heck, I even liked "40 Days and 40 Nights" because of him - and I really don't generally go for grossout humour and endless sex jokes. "Wicker Park", however, is...well, frankly, it's difficult to see how on earth it got made.
Take three unlikeable characters. Throw in one reasonably likeable but entirely weird one. Mix together with some kookie ideas about story telling (this film is VERY non-linear - to the extent that you get to see most scenes from two points of view and two different times in the movie and it jumps back and forward in time), and you've probably got "Wicker Park". It's marketed as a thriller, but frankly, I've had more thrilling bowls of cornflakes. It's marketed as romantic, but it's about as romantic as a going on a date to see a Keanu Reeves action movie (and having DONE that once, I can assure you there is NOTHING romantic about it).
Hartnett's character's an obsessive borderline stalker (frankly, if I'd been the girl he falls in love with, I'd have run the other way, fast). Hartnett's friend (Matthew Lillard) is a blowhard idiot. Rose Byrne plays the girl who's madly in love with Hartnett but is dating Lillard (and who actively wrecked Hartnett's original relationship with his stalking victim)...about the only character with an ounce of sympathy is Diane Kruger's - and she's an idiot for not running far and fast away from Hartnett for stalking her!
By the end of the film, I was vaguely hoping for them all to fall under buses or SOMETHING. The ghost of Al Capone could perhaps kick them all out of Chicago. ANYTHING. I'm sure I've seen films with less sympathetic characters, but right now, I'm struggling to recall what and when.
It's a remake of a French film, "L'Appartment", so whether the French version is any better, I wouldn't like to say. It can't conceivably be any worse.
And from the rediculous to...well...the even more rediculous but strangely entertaining...
"Hostage" stars Bruce Willis as an ex-LA SWAT negotiator who's chief of police in a sleepy Californian town after screwing up a negotiation.
Three 'kids' (I use the term loosely, since they're all upwards of 16) decide to break into a house to steal the owner's car. They, needless to state, pick the one guy in the whole town who's involved with the mob.
Into this mix is thrown a disc with the mob's figures on, the mob themselves, Willis' family (who get taken hostage to force him to work with the mob to get the disc), the rich guy's family (daughter is attracted to the lead 'kid', little boy manages to find a cell phone and call Willis!)...and it just gets progressively sillier from thereon in.
Up to the end of the climactic battle in the house, it's your average Bruce Willis guns'n'gangs'n'explosions sorta movie. And then you get this strange little coda scene where he and the rich guy rescue Willis' family from the mob...which is just plain weird - and not a little bit unnecessary. They did manage to surprise me, in that it starts out with the rich guy being in with the mob and ends with him siding with Willis and shooting all the mob members present, but frankly, it wasn't worth that surprise.
Overall, it's an average film. The bad guys (be they the kids or the mob) are utterly unsympathetic and Willis is...well...Willis. Oh, and there IS a rather gratuitous emoliation scene. I would doubt it's everyone's cup of tea, but if you like this sort of thing, it's not bad (and I've certainly seen much, much, MUCH worse!)
So there you are. That's me caught up. At least on what I've watched recently!
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-26 08:33 pm (UTC)Samuel L. Jackson was great, I agree, as was Rick Gonzalez (Cruz). I had tears inmy eyes when Cruz talked to Carter after his cousin was shot...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-29 09:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-29 10:48 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-29 10:54 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-28 09:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-29 09:52 am (UTC)