Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Directed by Michael Bay

Written by Ehren Kruger, Roberto Orci, and Alex Kurtzman

Starring Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, and John Turturro

I have always been some what of a defender of Michael Bay. The man has always demonstrated a great talent for the technical side of film making, as well as a defined style and clear vision for his films. He knows exactly who his audience is and he knows exactly what to give them. Michael Bay caters to the popcorn movie going crowd, which is mostly composed of fifteen year old boys.  To be perfectly honest I kind of respect him for it. 

A Michael Bay film always includes the following elements; people running in slow motion, many explosions, very tan women with heavy make up and great hair, quick cuts, action scenes that are hard to follow, the use of exaggerated orange and blue lighting, a huge respect for the American military along with scenes to show why, and the implied deaths of many innocent civilians during a car chase. 

Long story short,  I knew what I was getting into when I went to this film. I knew that I would be indulging the fifteen year old inside of me and for awhile I was able too. The story is a little haphazard, but it really takes back seat to the action and special effects anyway. The characters don't really do anything but run from place to place but that's fine. It is a popcorn movie and I was entertained.

Then, the movie started taking these odd turns into some pretty offensive areas. There are inappropriate sexual reference here and there and initially I was able to shrug them off. I was in a theater with a bunch of kids and I rationed and hoped that it was over the heads of the younger ones. However, they kept on coming and eventually I couldn't ignore it anymore. Between the beginning and end of this film I saw two dogs humping one another, a robot hump the leg of Megan Fox, somebody commenting about Megan Fox's head in their lap, an upshot under a skirt, (Megan Fox was not involved) and somebody talking about a "cherry being popped." Let me just say that I don't think that any film should have a robot call somebody a p---y, if a toy of said robot is being sold to kids.

I'm a 27 year old man and I'm pretty liberal. I'm not a big fan of the rating system because I think it's arbitrary.  However, this was the first time I wished they actually enforced the PG-13 rating at the door. I don't think anybody under the age of 13 should be able to see this film because of the sexual humor and sexual language. In a perfect world nobody under the age of 13 should be able to understand the sexual humor anyway, but we don't live in a perfect world. 

That being said the sexual humor and language was not the most offensive thing about this film. I'm not sure if Michael Bay is a racist but if I only had this film to go on he would certainly meet the criteria. There are two robots in this film who are known as The Twins and they are meant to be comic relief. The problem is that they have African American voices, gold teeth, and are portrayed as ignorant. The voice is one thing but coupling that with an African American stereotype and making it clear that they can't read is something else all together. It was simply offensive, to say the least.

That's not to say that I wasn't impressed with the special effects and some of the action scenes. There is a fight in the forest between Optimus Prime and the Decepticons that is pretty fun. But, I can't recommend the film solely based on that scene. There were times in which I really enjoyed the film but at the end of the day I didn't feel comfortable with it at all. The little kid in me was excited to see one of his childhood heroes on the big screen but the adult was too offended by the film to enjoy it at all.

Michael Bay might be a talented film maker who knows exactly what to give his audience but that doesn't mean he is excused from being responsible. I have no problem with him making a fun but shallow popcorn film, that what I wanted. I do have a problem with him being irresponsible.

Year One

Directed by Harold Ramis

Written by Harold Ramis and Gene Stupnitsky

Starring Jack Black, Michael Cera, and David Cross

Year One is a pretty big let down. With Harold Ramis directing, Judd Apatow producing, and with Jack Black and Michael Cera starring I expected a silly but smart comedy. I didn't get that by any means. What I got was a witless comedy so lame that it felt like a Liesle Nielson spoof movie directed by a Wayans Brother. 

The story follows Zed (Jack Black) and Oh (Michael Cera) a hunter and gather from an "ancient tribe." After sampling from the Bibilical tree of the Knowledge of good and evil they are banished from the tribe and have to strike out on their own. They tour the landscape having random encounters with Biblical characters until they end up in Sodom. From here there is a plot point involving the "Chosen One" but it's really just a chance to make more jokes. 

There are big problems with the jokes. The first problem is that the jokes telegraph themselves from a mile away. The second problem is that they are all juvenile humor. There are characters who fart...alot. There is a scene in which a character drinks urine. There are genital jokes galore. 

However, the biggest problem with the jokes is that the funniest ones are in the trailer and TV spots. I have laughed at these jokes since the first time  I saw the trailer.  Jack Black and Michael Cera get a few laughs but only because they are funny people. They aren't playing any type of characters in the film they are just talking. It's like watching two people riffing with each other on the Tonight Show. It's entertaining but there's nothing to it. 

 Year One is just a series of sketches that never earned more than a slight chuckle.

The Taking Pelham 123

Directed by Tony Scott

Written by Brian Helgeland

Starring  Denzel Washington, John Travolta, and John Turturro

I don't like the word hate because it is an absolute. I feel like when I use the word hate it's like putting a period at the end of a sentence. I avoid it so much that I'm having a hard time trying to assign it to a reasonable example. 

As a result I spent a great deal of my time viewing The Taking of Pelham 123 trying to describe my feeling for it without using the word hate. In the end I settled on severely disliked. I severely disliked nearly everything about this film and I severely dislike the direction of Tony Scott. When I say I severely dislike the direction of Tony Scott I don't just mean in this film I mean in nearly every film he has ever directed. 

The guy is a hack. I haven't used that word to publicly describe an artist before but I will go on record as saying that Tony Scott is a hack. His quick cuts and alternations between slow motion and regular speed are not interesting they are chaotic, vapid, and offensive. The opening of this film is set to Jay-Z's "99 Problems" for no other reason then it sounds cool and he can set the editing to the beat of the song. If he wants to do that then he should go direct music videos.

As for the story of the film it's pretty basic. To be honest I could name any number of movies that have the same exact plot as this one. Basically a guy named Ryder played by John Travolta has taken a subway car full of people hostage and it's up to a normal guy named Garber, played by Denzel Washington to deal with him. Garber has to save all the people on the subway car while battling wits with Ryder and the bureaucrats who think they know how to better handle the situation. Of course, because Garber and Ryder have developed a relationship only Garber....man, I just bored myself in summarizing the plot. Let me make it easy on all of us by simply saying you have seen this movie before, many many times before. You can even guess, fairly early on, which hostages are going to die. 

John Travolta had me groaning out loud at his delivery of cliche' hostage movie villain lines for about 45 minutes before I became aware. Who ever designed his costume, did his make up, and cut his hair made sure we knew he was the villain from scene one. He has a weird goatee and sideburns that are straight out of Steven Segal movie in 1995. He has a thug tattoo on neck that screams bad guy. Is John Travolta having fun in this role? Without a doubt, he's like a ten year old playing the bad guy in his backyard and he has the same level of talent. 

I said that I severely disliked nearly everything in this film. The one exception would be when Garber calls his wife on the phone to tell her he is about to go meet exchange the hostages for money. She tells him that he has to do whatever he has to do but to bring home the milk. He says he won't get a gallon but he will get half a gallon. This is a nice and refreshing scene in the midst of the rest of the mess. Luckily, it's also in the preview so you don't have to spend $10 to enjoy it.

At the end of the day I was left thinking that it is financially irresponsible to let Tony Scott direct a movie in the middle of an economic crisis. This movie cost millions of dollars and it is a complete waste. 

Land of the Lost

Directed by Brad Silberling

Written by Chris Henchy and Dennis MacNicholas

Starring Will Ferrell, Danny McBride, and Anna Friel

From here on out if anybody asks me to point out an example of an uneven movie I will be able to point to Land of the Lost. It's not that the movie is bad but it's certainly not good. It's very much in the middle because it doesn't seem to be able to make a single decision concerning any direction it needs to go in.

The film is based on the old Saturday morning TV show of the same name. As the opening credits of the TV show told us a scientist named Rick Marshall is on a routine expedition with Holly and Will when there is a mighty earthquake and they are transported to the land of the lost. In the film Rick Marshall is a disgraced Quantum Paleontologist, Holly is a fellow scientist, and Will is an employe of a fireworks store. Marshall is trying hard to convince the world that time travel exists and Holly encourages him to keep going. They stop by Will's firework store/amusement park and discover that time travel is possible. 

A great deal of the film is solidly set in just being a stupid comedy. Then there is another part of the film that is a pretty good action/adventure film. As a stupid comedy it is sadly, very effective. A great number of jokes are bathroom humor jokes. Rick pours a couple gallons of dinosaur urine on himself to get away from a T-Rex. There are also many references and sight gags involving poop. That's all well and good and if I'm being honest I did chuckle at a few of them. My problem with a couple of the jokes is that they are a little beyond what the PG-13 audience should understand. There are a few sexual jokes that simply didn't belong in a film that is being marketed to "tweens." 

Rick and Will, played by Will Ferrell and Danny McBride, have some really funny scenes together. The conversation comes naturally between these actors and as an audience member I could tell that they were having fun. The best jokes and moments in the film come from these two actors.

The action scenes in this film are actually very well done. They are exciting and full of suspense. The dinosaur CGI looks great and the actors are able to convincingly interact with them. There is one action scene involving a T-Rex, a catapult, and a tank of liquid nitrogen that is very well done. However, these scenes didn't fit too well with the rest of the movie. They felt out of place with the simple comedy that was in the rest of it.

 One of my biggest problems with the film is that Rick Marshall is suppose to be a disgraced scientist but because he is such an idiot it's hard to believe that he could do anything of importance. The opening of the film really bothered me because of this reason. In this scene Rick is being interviewed by NBC's Matt Lauer, who is playing himself. Rick is such a buffoon in this scene that I couldn't find any humor in his banter with Lauer. Matt Lauer is a credible journalist and the whole time I couldn't understand why he was interviewing Rick Marshall. The scene would have been much funnier had it played more like Matt Lauer's actual interview with Tom Cruise. In that infamous interview Lauer allowed Tom Cruise to make a fool out of himself. I wish this fictional scene with Rick Marshall had as many hilarious moments as that real one.

In the end Land of the Lost tries to have their cake and eat it too. They never combine the great action sequences with the stupid humor and I was not sure what movie I was watching. Had director Brad Silberling been able to combine the two films it would have been pretty entertaining. In the end it was just uneven.

  

The Hangover

Directed by Todd Phillips

Written by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore

Starring Bradley Cooper, Zack Galifianakis, and Ed Helms

In the last ten years movie goers have been exposed to some pretty outrageous gags. In 1998 audiences saw "hair gel" dangle from Cameron Diaz's ear in There's Something About Mary. Last year audience got a full view of Jason Siegel's bits and pieces in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Between those two films there aren't many things we haven't seen attempted in the name of comedy. 

The Hangover directed by Todd Phillips doesn't offer up anything new (though there is a bit of full frontal male nudity) but it does serve as an example to prove a rule that I have concerning gross out or "blue humor." I believe that if you are going to try to shock your audience into laughter than you owe it to them to have a good story, good characters, and a reason for the humor. Though we saw semen in There's Something About Mary and Jason Siegel's penis in Forgetting Sarah Marshall (that's what I meant by hair gel and bits and pieces in case there was any doubt) we also had genuine laughs coming from the characters and the stories of those two films. 

So while The Hangover has plenty of gross out humor there is also some talented actors delivering some pretty funny lines in a pretty standard  bachelor party gone awry story. The soon to be groom Doug, is treated to a night in Vegas by best friends Stu and Phil as well as Alan, his soon to be brother in law. Stu is in a relationship in which his girlfriend both cheats on him and beats him for being out of line. Phil is the alpha male of the group,  a married man, a school teacher, and is also a pretty big jerk. Alan has a great deal of  serious developmental problems but for the sake of this film is just a lovable idiot.  

The four friends kick off the night with a toast and then wake up the next morning without a single memory of the night before. All they know is that there is a tiger in the bathroom, a baby in the closet, and Doug is missing. The three remaining friends go on a journey to discover what happened to their friend by piecing together random clues. 

All the friends are pretty standard for a film about grown men acting like children but the actors fully commit to the characters, jokes, and situations. I do want to single out Justin Bartha who plays Doug. Doug needs to be such a great guy that he can bring three very different people into his circle of friendship. Doug is very charming but so is Phil. the difference is Doug is the kind of guy who is charming because he is genuine nice guy while Phil is charming because he wants things from people. Even though Phil is a jerk he is made likable by Bradley Cooper.

Director Todd Phillips also wrote and directed Old School (2003) which is about men stuck in life crisis. That film is one of my all time favorite comedies because all the jokes come from the a character and story. No matter how outrageous the humor was in that film it came from a source within the story.

What I like about Phillips is that he appears to approach his films as comedies. He definitely knows what is funny and how to apply it but he seems that he sets out to tell stories not jokes. He takes his characters through comedic situations and lets the comedy come from their reactions.  Also, he creates some fairly elegant and interesting camera movements. The opening shot of the three friends in the desert is a nicely composed shot. I have noticed that for a director that primarily works in comedies Phillips had found away to really put his mark on his films.

In the end I didn't love The Hangover because I have seen this story played out time and time again. It is very entertaining but frankly I was bored with the whole Bachelor Party gone wrong story. 

Away We Go

Directed by Sam Mendes

Written by Dave Eggers and Vendela Vida

Starring John Krasinski, Maya Rudolph, and Allison Janney

It seems like not a month goes by in which some small little picture is released in which all the characters have distinct personality hang ups. These quirks are usually pretty funny but would be terribly annoying if anybody were to exhibit them in actual life. Take for instance the brother's vow of silence in Little Miss Sunshine  or anything Juno says in Juno. 

In Away We Go directed by Sam Mendes each and every character has some kind of little quirk about them. However, in this case all the other characters are slightly annoyed or entertained by these quirks. From time to time the two main characters Burt and Verona played by John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph, seem to annoy the crap out of one another. However, their love helps them accept each other despite those annoyances. Early on in the film the two of them are on their way to visit Burt's parents when he receives a work related phone call. He proceeds to talk in such an annoying voice that Verona stops the car and takes a walk to get away from it. When Burt is done with his call he gets out and apologizes to her and explains that he uses that voice  because his clients all expect him to act just like them. They are all about 20 years older than him and he needs to fit in. The whole conversation is played as if they have had it before and  from time to time Verona just can't take it. When that happens she just needs to get away and take a breath of fresh air. After a few moments they get back in the car and drive on to his parent's house.

It is here that they are told that Burt's parents will be moving away a month before their first baby is born. Burt and Verona only live where they live because his parents are nearby. Upon hearing the news that they are moving Burt and Verona decide that it is time for them to move as well. They decide to go to Phoenix, Madison, and Montreal and decide whether or not they want to move to any of those cities. They choose those cities because they have either family or friends in each one. 

The friends are all as quirky and weird as Burt and Verona. Again, I bought the quirkiness because A) I have known people like each one of the characters and B) Burt and Verona react to each one of the characters. When Burt and Verona visit the home of Burt's childhood friend LN (Ellen) played by Maggie Gyllenhaal, they are very unsettled by her hippy ways. For example she refuses to push her children in a stroller because kids feel so isolated in the world why should their parents push them away. 

Each stop along the way forces Burt and Verona to define not only their relationship but also their definition of home. I saw the film with a friend who felt like Burt and Verona just became spectators at each city the visited. This is certainly true but I enjoyed the subtle realization the two of them had about one another in the face of their friends and family. At each stop they learned a little bit more about the couple and parents that they wanted to be and who they didn't want to become. Though, to be fair, director Mendes is a little too subtle in showing  growth between the two characters. I'm left to wonder if he put it their or if I just filled in the lines. 

Mendes is trying something new with this film, namely he is trying to make a comedy. His first film was American Beauty (1999) and his last film was Revolutionary Road (2008) between those two films he hasn't done anything much lighter. I'm happy to report that this film had some big laughs. In the past, when he explored the relationship between a man and a woman it has been very destructive. In this film he explores what keeps a couple together through-out all the highs and lows. 

One of the topics that this film explores is the idea that most people aren't settling into their lives until much later. I have often talked about with friends how 30 seems like the new 25, meaning people don't seem to have a handle on who they are and who they want to be until then. In the interest of full disclosure I should mention that I am 27 as I write this so this is all just a theory. However, the film does seem to confirm that theory. 

Both Burt and Verona are in this early to mid thirties. He is 33 and she is 34 and they wonder out loud to one another if they are screw ups. Bert has a very frank conversation with a friend in Montreal about the consequences of waiting until your mid-thirties to try and have children. Finally, all the characters act a little childish especially Burt who hasn't had a reason to grow up yet. In fact his image of what a father should be seems to be very similar to how a child looks at his own father. He figures that fathers need to be able to make things so he decides that he needs to learn how to cobble. 

All these characters are quirky but it is the kind of quirky that I have found in people in my life. That is why I bought it. In addition I have spent countless hours wondering what it means to be an adult. It is because of these reasons that I found Away We Go so entertaining.