Well, it isn't the usual Judd Apatow comedy that America seems to be used to now, but Cop Out worked. Tracy Morgan is funny as always and Bruce Willis is funny as he can be in a comedy film. Even though the script isn't a work of magic, as seen in The Hangover, it does provide plenty of moments that will have your side cramping. Cop Out is stupid, goofy fun.
The plot of Cop Out is well hidden by the trailers and not what was is expected. Jimmy (Bruce Willis) and Paul (Tracy Morgan) have been partners on the police force for 9 years and they not exactly conventional detectives. They tend to do things not by the book, and usually in a comical way. After the opening, Jimmy and Paul are suspended off the force for 30 days following the opening scenes. Unfortunately for Jimmy, his daughters wedding is in six weeks and he needs to come up with $48,000 to pay for it. Her step-dad is offering but being his daughters dad, Jimmy insists that he pay for it. He has no money so he comes up with a plan to sell an extremely rare baseball card that he has with an extremely high selling price. He finds a guy to sell it to only when he is the store, Dave (Seann William Scott and another guy come into rob the store. They end up tasering Jimmy and getting away with his baseball card. Jim and Paul begin their hilarious pursuit to get the card back in order to be able to pay for his daughters wedding. Along the way they become entangled up in a story that I'm convinced the writers even know what was happening. There's an 11 year old car thief, a pretty girl that can only speak Spanish and all the Mexicans guys with guns that showed for the auditions. Rashida Jones also has a small role in the film as Paul's wife. He's convinced that she's cheating on him. Right away, no the plot isn't exactly completely believable. Yes, there's a lot of things in in that would never happen, but with a comedy like this, who cares? The script isn't perfectly well written but it is Funny. Yes, that funny with a capital F. Willis and Morgan are hilarious. There's nothing worse than when in a film, there is a reference to another film that the actor in the film you're watching has been in. Take in this film, in which there is a reference to Die Hard and Willis says that he's never seen the film. God, why do they have to do things like that? Funny cop films have been done before, at this point hasn't everything but Cop Out manages to do what comedy films set out to do. Make you laugh. This isn't a smart film, absolutely zero intelligence, but it's funny. It succeeds in what it sets out to do.
Not that this is saying much, but Cop Out is funniest film of this year to date. Not a lot of the humor falls flat, it's at least chuckle worthy. Willis and Morgan are great together on screen in a film that should have you laughing throughout. If you feel like a comedy night out or in the mood for some laughs, Cop Out would be perfect. Hopefully everyone thinks it's as funny as my theater did. If not, I'm sorry. Not really.
Final Verdict: B-
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Alice In Wonderland
One of Disney's most infamous, and perhaps controversial, stories of all time finally comes to life on the big screen in a big, real life motion picture. While the story written for the screen loses most of the material that made it controversial to begin with, it still comes with a lot of problems. Maybe it's because I don't really know the story of Alice In Wonderland (it's actually called the Underworld) or maybe it's because of another reason, but this film definitely suffered from its quite lackluster script.
In a film that seriously might have more CGI than Avatar, Tim Burton and Johnny Depp come to together again to do what they do best, make something weird. I tend to like their collaborations but this time was much different. Alice In Wonderland is about, who else, but Alice. In the film she is portrayed by Mia Wasikowska. She was very miscast. She doesn't bring much to the part and missed the mark on the way that Alice is supposed to be. The way that I remember (loosely) the story from my childhood is not like anything that is portrayed in this film adaptation. It's hard to explain how Mia Wasikowska missed the hard (isn't that what I'm here for though?) but it just is. She didn't capture the original Alice. The feeling of the character just isn't there. In a world where the only believable thing is Alice, she is unbelievable. The story in the film goes like this. Alice falls down a hole into the Underworld, or Wonderland. There she meets all of the characters from the story. The twins, the cat, the mouse and everybody else. They tell her that this time scroll shows that Alice will be the one to slay this dragon like creature to restore power to the White Queen (played by Anne Hathaway) and to take it away from the Red Queen (played by Helena Bonham Carter). Along the way she meets the Mad Hatter (played by Johnny Depp) who used to be the hatter for the White Queen back when she ruled the land. Only everything has gone to crap since then because the Red Queen rules now. The film follows the quest of Alice, the Mad Hatter (I'm not sure that's actually his name) and all of the other characters in their quest to get Alice the only sword that can slay the dragon so that she can. Yes, as best as I remember it, that is not really the original story. Don't misread me, I'm not ragging on this film because it doesn't follow the original story. Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter give strong performances and Anne Hathaway is good too, but other than that, the film doesn't offer much. At all. The humor falls mostly flat and it's just too poorly written. Obviously this story would have to rely a lot of CGI, which went well but the script was not convincing that this was all real, like it's supposed to be. The film looks awesome visually, and if you've seen Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow, yes with Johnny Depp, if you watch at the beginning when Alice first walks into Wonderland, the tree of the dead is clearly visible in the background. At least the actors could do their best with the script. Usually I have to think about a film before I write a review. The pros, cons, its grade and everything but this film came easily to me. Watching it, I knew the only things the film offered was the acting. Yes, Tim Burton is good always as the director but, to me, direction doesn't mean a whole lot to a film. In extreme cases, it can be really good or really bad but usually it's just there - it's fine.
You know that a film can't be that good when at one o'clock in the afternoon, you yawn several times while watching it. That's a big ouch. Alice In Wonderland has great CGI, isn't too long and Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter shine. I'm not saying that they should of stuck with the original story word for word, I liked the story that the film offered. Unfortunately, I think it's safe to call this the poorest written film of the year to date. If there are two things that are important in a film, it's the acting and the script. If one is great and the other is just so-so, that's manageable. If one is just completely horrible, that's going to hurt. Alice In Wonderland is missing one of the most, if the most, important aspect to a good film. A script.
Final Verdict: C-
In a film that seriously might have more CGI than Avatar, Tim Burton and Johnny Depp come to together again to do what they do best, make something weird. I tend to like their collaborations but this time was much different. Alice In Wonderland is about, who else, but Alice. In the film she is portrayed by Mia Wasikowska. She was very miscast. She doesn't bring much to the part and missed the mark on the way that Alice is supposed to be. The way that I remember (loosely) the story from my childhood is not like anything that is portrayed in this film adaptation. It's hard to explain how Mia Wasikowska missed the hard (isn't that what I'm here for though?) but it just is. She didn't capture the original Alice. The feeling of the character just isn't there. In a world where the only believable thing is Alice, she is unbelievable. The story in the film goes like this. Alice falls down a hole into the Underworld, or Wonderland. There she meets all of the characters from the story. The twins, the cat, the mouse and everybody else. They tell her that this time scroll shows that Alice will be the one to slay this dragon like creature to restore power to the White Queen (played by Anne Hathaway) and to take it away from the Red Queen (played by Helena Bonham Carter). Along the way she meets the Mad Hatter (played by Johnny Depp) who used to be the hatter for the White Queen back when she ruled the land. Only everything has gone to crap since then because the Red Queen rules now. The film follows the quest of Alice, the Mad Hatter (I'm not sure that's actually his name) and all of the other characters in their quest to get Alice the only sword that can slay the dragon so that she can. Yes, as best as I remember it, that is not really the original story. Don't misread me, I'm not ragging on this film because it doesn't follow the original story. Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter give strong performances and Anne Hathaway is good too, but other than that, the film doesn't offer much. At all. The humor falls mostly flat and it's just too poorly written. Obviously this story would have to rely a lot of CGI, which went well but the script was not convincing that this was all real, like it's supposed to be. The film looks awesome visually, and if you've seen Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow, yes with Johnny Depp, if you watch at the beginning when Alice first walks into Wonderland, the tree of the dead is clearly visible in the background. At least the actors could do their best with the script. Usually I have to think about a film before I write a review. The pros, cons, its grade and everything but this film came easily to me. Watching it, I knew the only things the film offered was the acting. Yes, Tim Burton is good always as the director but, to me, direction doesn't mean a whole lot to a film. In extreme cases, it can be really good or really bad but usually it's just there - it's fine.
You know that a film can't be that good when at one o'clock in the afternoon, you yawn several times while watching it. That's a big ouch. Alice In Wonderland has great CGI, isn't too long and Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter shine. I'm not saying that they should of stuck with the original story word for word, I liked the story that the film offered. Unfortunately, I think it's safe to call this the poorest written film of the year to date. If there are two things that are important in a film, it's the acting and the script. If one is great and the other is just so-so, that's manageable. If one is just completely horrible, that's going to hurt. Alice In Wonderland is missing one of the most, if the most, important aspect to a good film. A script.
Final Verdict: C-
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Brooklyn's Finest
Brooklyn's finest aren't great, good, fine or even okay. Brooklyn's finest are horrible. Stars like Richard Gere, Ethan Hawke and Don Cheadle could have, and should have, created such a better film. This film never created an attachment to the characters, never got off of the ground and never makes any attempt for anything.
Just a quick note: The number of cliches in this film is almost enough to bring up vomit. Not that I was ever counting, but I bet that it would of been more than six. Richard Gere stars as Eddie, the mother of the most hated cliche in Hollywood. The retiring cop with days left on the force. My God, that cliche is more tired than the horror movie "the boyfriend is the killer" one. Ethan Hawke stars as Sal and his character is just another cliche. Not as severe as Gere's, but still. Hawke's character is the one dealing with the money problems and the religious problems. The one that is so far gone that he doesn't want any help while everyone around is trying to help him. Another quick note: I think Ethan Hawke is great and he is on the top of my favorite actors list. Next up is Don Cheadle starring as Tango. Yes, don't worry his charatcer comes with a cliche too. He's the guy who goes so deep undercover that he starts questioning who the good and bad guys are. Wesley Snipes also stars as Caz, a man that Tango (Cheadle) knows in the gang underground. The film just goes back and forth and back and forth and back and forth between the three of their story lines, all climaxing in one building. While it is true that all cliches are obvious and overdone, I can still watch a film full of them. What's nice is when a film brings something new and original (or at least a new and original feeling) to the cliches. This film makes no attempt what so ever to do that. It is cliches just in black and white. It's disappointing that especially with such a great actor like Richard Gere that this film couldn't make any less of an attempt to get the audience feeling for and attached to the characters. This is definitely one of the worst performances that I have seen Richard Gere do. He brings nothing to the character. He's a veteran cop with 22 years on the force with days left to retire, his wife is gone and he's always debating suicide. Yes, that's a cliched but great written character, however Gere brings nothing to it. It's not just him though. Hawke and Cheadle really aren't selling their characters either. The ending is nothing amazing either. The whole time I was thinking that the film could save itself with a worthwhile ending. No, it couldn't even do that. The ending might have been the worst part of the whole film. On top of the fact that their isn't one believable character in the film, it's got more cliches than a old Hollywood Western film, the ending sucks, it's also way too long. I think that it's equally as long as Shutter Island and maybe 25 minutes shorter than Avatar. When you go for a long film with nothing to sell, that makes the film even worse because at least when the film is short and sucks the misery doesn't last long. Unfortunately, here in Brooklyn it's slow and somehow drags on for 133 minutes.
It's really too bad about Brooklyn's Finest. I was expecting at least a decent film but unfortunately all you get are characters that are more hollow than a cave. The script does have some problems, but it was definitely the acting that had more problems. If Gere, Hawke and Cheadle had been able to come together and give the best performances of their career this could have been a pretty great cop drama. However, this is the three of them at some of their worst. I was not sold that this is "real life" like other cop dramas are so good at doing. Some cop films can get it right, others can't. Too bad that Brooklyn's Finest sets a new low of not being able to get it right.
Final Verdict: D-
Just a quick note: The number of cliches in this film is almost enough to bring up vomit. Not that I was ever counting, but I bet that it would of been more than six. Richard Gere stars as Eddie, the mother of the most hated cliche in Hollywood. The retiring cop with days left on the force. My God, that cliche is more tired than the horror movie "the boyfriend is the killer" one. Ethan Hawke stars as Sal and his character is just another cliche. Not as severe as Gere's, but still. Hawke's character is the one dealing with the money problems and the religious problems. The one that is so far gone that he doesn't want any help while everyone around is trying to help him. Another quick note: I think Ethan Hawke is great and he is on the top of my favorite actors list. Next up is Don Cheadle starring as Tango. Yes, don't worry his charatcer comes with a cliche too. He's the guy who goes so deep undercover that he starts questioning who the good and bad guys are. Wesley Snipes also stars as Caz, a man that Tango (Cheadle) knows in the gang underground. The film just goes back and forth and back and forth and back and forth between the three of their story lines, all climaxing in one building. While it is true that all cliches are obvious and overdone, I can still watch a film full of them. What's nice is when a film brings something new and original (or at least a new and original feeling) to the cliches. This film makes no attempt what so ever to do that. It is cliches just in black and white. It's disappointing that especially with such a great actor like Richard Gere that this film couldn't make any less of an attempt to get the audience feeling for and attached to the characters. This is definitely one of the worst performances that I have seen Richard Gere do. He brings nothing to the character. He's a veteran cop with 22 years on the force with days left to retire, his wife is gone and he's always debating suicide. Yes, that's a cliched but great written character, however Gere brings nothing to it. It's not just him though. Hawke and Cheadle really aren't selling their characters either. The ending is nothing amazing either. The whole time I was thinking that the film could save itself with a worthwhile ending. No, it couldn't even do that. The ending might have been the worst part of the whole film. On top of the fact that their isn't one believable character in the film, it's got more cliches than a old Hollywood Western film, the ending sucks, it's also way too long. I think that it's equally as long as Shutter Island and maybe 25 minutes shorter than Avatar. When you go for a long film with nothing to sell, that makes the film even worse because at least when the film is short and sucks the misery doesn't last long. Unfortunately, here in Brooklyn it's slow and somehow drags on for 133 minutes.
It's really too bad about Brooklyn's Finest. I was expecting at least a decent film but unfortunately all you get are characters that are more hollow than a cave. The script does have some problems, but it was definitely the acting that had more problems. If Gere, Hawke and Cheadle had been able to come together and give the best performances of their career this could have been a pretty great cop drama. However, this is the three of them at some of their worst. I was not sold that this is "real life" like other cop dramas are so good at doing. Some cop films can get it right, others can't. Too bad that Brooklyn's Finest sets a new low of not being able to get it right.
Final Verdict: D-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
