Classic Review: HEAT

Movie: Heat
MPAA Rating: R for violence and language
Running Time: 170 minutes
Stars: Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, Val Kilmer
Writer/Director: Michael Mann

I remember going to see this in the theaters when I was 8 years old. Now what could an 8 year old possibly gain from seeing a film like this, you might ask. Well, I'll be honest, this came out the same year as "Batman Forever" and the fact that Val Kilmer, who played the Caped Crusader in that film, was in this one made me wanna watch it. So, my mom took my scrawny butt to sit through what I didn't know was a 3 hour epic. I cannot remember if I behaved or not or anything about seeing it on the big screen, but I would always remember the movie through the years.

You're probably wondering, what does this have to do with anything and why after such a long time away from writing reviews am I writing about a film that came out 15 years ago? Well, the answer is, because I felt like it. Well, that and a friend of mine said I should write a review about one of my all-time favorites and he suggested this one. So, I sat down with my freshly opened Blu-ray copy of the movie as well as a soda and lunch and plowed into one of the greatest crime dramas to ever hit any screen.

The basic plot of the film follows the separate lives of two men who at first seem like completely total opposites, one is a thief (DeNiro) who's life motto is to not get too attached to something just in case he has to leave it behind if he feels the "heat" coming for him. The other, is a hard-nosed cop whose home life is becoming extremely strained as his obsession with catching the aforementioned thief grows to a head.

Much has been said about this "first on-screen pairing" of the two acting giants (which is a billion times better than their dreadful second, *COUGH* Righteous Kill *COUGH*), but very little that I know of, is actually said about the other performances. I mean, I'm not dogging Pacino or DeNiro because they are both in extremely fine form in this. But the other actors, they all deliver great performances too. Then again, if you're acting with these two, you'd definitely have to step up your A-game. The writing and directing by Michael Mann (whose "Collateral" and "Public Enemies" are also top-notch crime dramas) is simply incredible and makes you forget that he made that 2006 atrocity "Miami Vice". The dialogue is snappy and well-written and the story progresses at a great pace. The movie is pretty light on action but when there is, you actually feel like you are there. This is most evident during the bank robbery scene midway into the film. For the 15-20 minutes that that scene lasts, you barely take a breath once. You don't even blink. Not only is the scene visually stimulating, but the sound design and mixing is top notch. Then again, I've noticed that a lot about Mann's films.

In closing, "Heat" is one of those movies that while you're watching it, doesn't ever cause you to check your watch or look at the running time on the player. In fact, its 170 minute running time is not even a deterrent, it's a positive. It's so perfectly filmed, so perfectly paced and edited, so perfectly written, acted and directed. The final product is simply that: perfect.

Apologies

Hello everyone,

Wow, I haven't written a movie review in months it looks like. Don't worry, I haven't given up on it exactly....just haven't really had the motivation to do so. Very soon I will get back to doing this, but for now.....stay tuned!

Review: NEW MOON

Movie: New Moon
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for action and some violence
Running Time: 130 minutes
Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner
Writer: Melissa Rosenberg
Director: Chris Weitz

Love is a complicated emotion. It can make us feel great or it can make us feel like utter crap. The latter is what Bella Swan feels when her 'beloved' Edward leaves her after an accident with his family, in this the first sequel to last year's phenomenon "Twilight".

I shall not bother with explaining the story, because you're either a fan of Twilight or you're not, and you're gonna be seeing it or avoiding it like the plague, with or without my opinion.

I shall preface by saying that, I consider myself a medium fan of the series. I've read 3 of the books and am 3/4 of the way done with the fourth. I've seen the first film more times than any straight man in his right mind should have and I was anticipating "New Moon" as if it was the latest movie from the Coen brothers. I've gotten flack from everybody about liking the series, and you know what, who cares? I like what I like, you like what you like. Now with that out of the way, I will begin my opinion on the film itself.

The acting in the film goes from bad to pretty good varying on the actor, but most of this film's audience won't be paying attention to that, but Lautner's 8-pack (Christ dude, give me some tips on growing those!). The movie itself actually has much more of a mainstream studio look to it thanks to Weitz, than the indie look that Catherine Hardwicke had on the first film. It serves the film well, as the special effects have also been improved thankfully (although the body glitter, seriously?!). One of the negatives I have about this is, many people who have not read the books will probably be confused by some of the film. A lot of things are not made clear from the outset or are never explained at all. For someone who's read the book, I did not have a problem with it but I can understand if many others do not get it. It is obvious that this was made for the fans and for the fans only. Some other negatives include the lack of chemistry between Stewart and Pattinson, there are several shots where he looks like he's gonna vomit just kissing her. Doesn't make for a very convincing scene, especially when he's trying to show the internal agony he's going through to not kill her. A highlight would definitely have to be the well put together soundtrack for the film. Although at times it seems that we're watching a bunch of music videos strewn together to make a feature film, the songs are great and the score works well too.

"New Moon" is not gonna be winning awards any time soon (ones that count anyway) but for being a sequel and also being part of one of the most divisive series' of all-time, it is actually a very decent viewing experience (waits while all of the hecklers throw their taunts and insults). I expect to lose a lot of respect for the grade I'm gonna give it but you know what, you can't say anything about the series unless you've actually seen it. Chances are I'll agree with many of the things you say, but it doesn't mean I can't enjoy it for whatever merits I see in it.

And with that, I give the film a solid 3.5/5 stars.

Mini Review: 2012

2012
MPAA Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 158 minutes
Stars: John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor
Director: Roland Emmerich

WARNING: There might be some slight spoilers in the following review.

In a recent interview, Roland Emmerich said that this would be his final disaster movie (following "Independence Day" and "The Day After Tomorrow") and that he wanted to make one that would be the end all of the genre and packed everything into it. He has accomplished that, but the final product suffers greatly from it. There are far too many subplots with many unimportant characters that we just don't care about and it's almost an hour into the film before the actual destruction of Earth occurs. There are also many scenes or entire character arcs that could have been taken out to make a slimmer, less convoluted story and film. The acting from Cusack is very phoned in and uninterested. He looks tired and bewildered the entire time. Most of the acting from everyone else is actually decent (especially the extended cameo by Woody Harrelson) including Ejiofor and Oliver Platt. The script is contrived and features unnecessary bits of humor. The only real scenes in the movie to carry interest are the ones of world being destroyed. After that, you follow along with the characters just to see who will die next and if they'll make it. But do you care about it, not really. Emmerich knows how to make a decent disaster movie, the fact that this one is such a head shaker is disheartening. My opinion, catch it once in theaters at a cheap morning matinee and go about your day, because you'll forget everything once the credits start rolling and the God-awful Adam Lambert theme song starts playing.

1.5 out of 5 stars.

Mini Review: DISNEY'S A CHRISTMAS CAROL

Disney's A Christmas Carol
MPAA Rating: PG
Running Time: 96 minutes
Stars: Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman
Director: Robert Zemeckis

In what must be the thousandth adaptation of Charles Dickens' classic story, Jim Carrey plays the role of Scrooge AND the three ghosts of Christmas that show Scrooge his life in flashbacks, etc. Zemeckis does a decent job adapting this story, but his motion capture films have always suffered and continue to do so with this one. The acting is actually the best part of the entire movie and probably one of the only things I can recommend seeing the movie for. The animation itself is serviceable as is the 3D, although I wish they had strayed away from making things pop out at the screen and used it more for aesthetics and depth of field separation. If you have any intentions of seeing the film, catch it in IMAX 3D, because once it hits DVD and Blu-ray you'll be stuck with a 2-D version or a lame blue and red glasses 3D version of the film which will most likely annoy, rather than entertain. Also, if you have easily scared children, try to avoid taking them to see this because there are some really dark elements to the story and some frightening scenes.

2.5 out of 5 stars (the acting and the story are the best things about the film)

Mini Review: BLACK DYNAMITE

Black Dynamite
MPAA Rating: R
Running Time: 90 minutes
Stars: Michael Jai White, Arsenio Hall
Director: Scott Sanders

Blaxpoitation movies have always floated on the line of the serious and the satirical, but have never ventured full on into the latter territory. Until now, that is. Michael Jai White stars in and co-wrote this hilarious spoof/satire of the blaxpoitation genre of the 70s. Unlike most movies labeled "spoof", this one is actually hilarious from beginning to end (especially if you've seen at least one or two blaxpoitation movies in your life). Not much can be said about the acting and filmmaking itself as any mistakes and errors or over-the-top acting is purely intentional and make the film what it is, a fun action comedy. Do yourself a favor and once this movie hits DVD or if it's playing at a theater near you, seek it out and enjoy one of the best comedies of the year. 4 out of 5 stars

Review: PARANORMAL ACTIVITY

Movie: Paranormal Activity
MPAA Rating: R for language
Running Time: 90 minutes (a guesstimate, because IMDb has the running time listed at 99 minutes and the film itself is much shorter than that)
Stars: Micah Sloat, Katie Featherston
Writer/Director: Oren Peli

My review for this much-buzzed about movie is gonna be quite short, because, if you're at all interested in seeing the movie chances are you've either seen it or know all there is to know about it. Plus, I have zero intentions on giving a plot synopsis based on the fact that I think anyone who sees this movie should know very little about the film to get the full effect (that's not gonna happen now though with the aforementioned hype). I will say though that the film is definitely one of the better horror films I've seen in the last 5-10 years (those who know me, know that I'm not that big on horror to begin with) and the low budget aesthetic that the small cast and crew work with is extremely effective in conveying sheer terror not only on the characters but in the poor saps in the audience. I very rarely get scared or shaken up after watching a movie, but I will admit that I got creeped out watching "Paranormal Activity". There are parts that seem a little hokey, and will cause unintentional laughs but those are pushed aside midway into the movie. The things I loved most about the movie aside from the low budget thrills, would have to be the lack of gore and bad acting. It goes to show that gore when used well is fine but is not always needed (and sure isn't scary). All I will say is that if you've been looking for a good creepy movie to see with your significant other or on a date, THIS is the movie you take them too. Go see this as soon as humanly possible, you will not regret it.

3.5/5 stars.