Review | The Movie Rat

Rewind Review: Hot Tub Time Machine

Posted on March 9, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

As those who know me, and if such a person exists, cyberstalk me, know I created this blog after writing on another site, which shall remain nameless, for a while. The point is, I have material sitting around waiting to be re-used on occasion I will re-post them here. Some of those articles or reviews may have been extemporaneous at the time but are slightly random now, hence the new title and little intro, regardless enjoy!

Hot Tub Time Machine (2010)

When you set out to see a movie called Hot Tub Time Machine you have to, absolutely no exceptions, expect to be in for a very stupid experience. Not that a film being stupid is inherently bad. The same holds true for an intelligent film. Quality and intellectual stimulation are not mutually exclusive. What remains to be seen when dealing with such a film is if it’s a funny kind of stupid or just stupid. More often than not, unfortunately it ends up being the latter.

One of the examples of this stupidity that just misses the mark is the character of the Repair Man played by Chevy Chase. Now I am not one of those people who disowned Chase after the 1980s, the problem in fact isn’t his performance but his character. Granted there are jokes made to the effect that his dialogue is vague and not very helpful but ultimately his repeated appearance becomes a hinderance to the story. Instead of watching to see if these characters can replicate the past they are now in we get distracted by his repeatedly reminding us of his existence. The more he appears without answering questions about how to get back to the present the more questions you ask yourself about his character and thinking about such things in a film like this is the death knell for said work.

The fact of the matter is with a plot like this the film has to be extraordinarily funny and it just isn’t. You will laugh out loud on occasion but there isn’t a constantly great peal of laughter throughout. Funny but not very funny just doesn’t cut it. When it comes to comedy that’s what it boils down to and when you’ve had time to consider all these other things clearly the film wasn’t always doing its job.

The era traveled to is also treated with a bit of ambivalence in the end product. Clearly the intention is to mock and spoof the 1980s, which has been done and it’s fine. More than most decades it’s an easy target, however, aside from the red scare that the time travelers incur none of it seems real or funny and even that is more like a parody than anything else. Aside from the age of the characters there was nothing that made it have to be set in the ’80s and costume aside you didn’t see the decade’s influence in the rest of the tale. There are just so much more jokes from the reality of that era that could have been mined as it did plenty of times to make jokes about things that happened after 1986.

What was refreshing was to see a new spin on time travel and the butterfly effect, including what I interpreted to be a sarcastic comment about the film of the same name, handling both concepts in a comedy allowed for a comedic and different approach to conceptions which are always looked upon with reverence and awe.

The quality of dialogue in this film is inconsistent. Even when things work they at times go too far. The “Great White Buffalo” line is clearly designed as an inside joke that one of the characters isn’t supposed to get and with repetition we realize we’ll know the gist but not the story behind how that started it just comes up too often. Similarly while the dialogue about the carving in a desk drawer that makes them realize they’ve gone back in time is funny Lou can see the drawer is clean and needn’t ask about each accusation he carved about Adam and whether it is present.

At the start of the film we get a very good start to differentiating these characters but their development from thereon in is stunted and this isn’t a funny enough film to survive with such superficial characterization.   Hot Tub Time Machine is a film with a title and concept that immediately makes one think that “It’s so crazy it just might work” but it doesn’t.

4/10

Rewind Review: The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

Posted on March 7, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

The Imaginarium of Dr. Panassus is a vexing and perplexing film. It is most definitely imaginative. It’s most definitely Terry Gilliam; however, a lot of the positives that can be said about it end there as unfortunate as that is.

It is rare when simulacrum, in the form of real life events, can have a true impact on a film. The untimely death of Heath Ledger did affect this film, however, as shocking as it sounds to say it, perhaps not in a negative way. No disrespect intended, as Heath Ledger did a fine job in this film. As a matter of fact he had this critic quite convinced that he was one type of character then he ended up being another entirely. Think of it this way, however, had Ledger’s character not been played by other actors, Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell there would’ve been very little which was noteworthy about the film.

Yes, it’s incredibly inventive but it’s the kind of tale that takes so long to unwind itself that by the time you have it all sorted, one you may not have it sorted correctly and two you start to wonder why is this story being told in the first place. Gilliam is a tremendous visual artist and the irreverence and surrealism so gleefully on display in this film is admirable and on occasion quite funny but at times things just didn’t click, in fact more often than not.

One of the bigger problems is Andrew Garfield as Anton. Yes, his character is supposed to be somewhat annoying yet he is supposed to be right and the guy we pull for but he just ends up being annoying and in what was a very good cast he ends up sticking out like a very, very sore thumb.

The film centers around a bet between Dr. Parnassus, a god-like character if not God Himself, and the Devil, played by Tom Waits. Yet towards the end the terms of that bet become very muddled. Mr. Nick, as the Devil is called in this venture, invariably changes the terms of the bet to make it more sporting as he tends to do but then it becomes near impossible to figure out what “having gotten a soul” really is and even barring all that after all is seemingly lost Mr. Nick lets Parnassus off the hook.

Obviously, things can be read into the bartering of souls and gambling with the devil and what the Imaginarium ultimately signifies in the bigger picture of things, however, when a film fails to entertain on the surface digging becomes a tiresome venture. The best thing about the aforementioned tale is that it seems destined to repeat itself when we see the characters at the very end but the film seemed to be building towards some sort of finality so that’s not nearly the coup it should be.

There was a fabulous concept in a flashback where Parnassus was with the monks about a story constantly needing to be told and that was never followed through neither were some of the more intriguing paths this film could have taken.

Sadly, instead of giving us a lot of food for thought or sharp, biting satire the emotion associated with this film is more aptly stated as flummoxed for just as the Imaginarium itself the image may be pretty but there’s not nearly enough substance behind it.

5/10

Rewind Review: Escape from Witch Mountain

Posted on March 6, 2016 by bernardovillela

It’s very hard as a moviegoer to resist the temptation to watch something on opening weekend. However, there will come weekends when there’s no new release that you care to see. So what do you do?

Well, this is where my Monday review comes in. I’ll review something I’ve seen over the weekend that I think you should see next weekend if the batch of new releases doesn’t entice you.

This weekend I watched Race to Witch Mountain, I personally judge every remake, reimagining and rehash on its own individual merits. However, my rule of thumb typically is if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Conversely if it was never really that good to begin with, why not?

The original pair of Witch Mountain films fall into the latter category. They were slow-moving, not very interesting, and couldn’t even be saved by Bette Davis, one of if not the greatest actress who ever lived.

There are many, many things that work well in Race, and those that don’t are minor and don’t detract from the overall experience.

The Pros:

Pace – The move really gets humming, and I was clutching the edge of my seat at times. At the beginning the kids are involved in a chase and you think it’s going to be a two-hour trek to Witch Mountain.

Editing – Amidst all the action the cuts are fast and well-timed; however, I was never left befuddled by what I was looking at in the frame, like in Quantum of Solace.

Dwayne Johnson – Yes, that’s right I said it The Rock. Not only has he steadily improved, and look every bit the part of ‘action hero’, he is also great with a one-liner – which is crucial for any action star. The Rock actually even emoted, some, in the dramatic farewell. Does this day something bad about actors or film? Not necessarily, considering he was always a performer he just needed to learn to transition. Of course, that doesn’t mean every wrestler, singer, rapper and reality star should do it. There needs to be some ability, talent, constant improvement and the intangible like-ability. I’d take Dwayne Johnson over Vin Diesel in a part any day.

The Young Stars – If you haven’t noticed Dakota Fanning isn’t Dakota Fanning anymore. That slot now goes to AnnaSophia Robb. You’ve probably seen her, and just haven’t put a name to her face. She was in Bridge to Terabithia, Because of Winn-Dixie, and other films, and she is excellent. It’s not easy playing a well-spoken, smart, deadpan alien and she did wonderfully, as did Alexander Ludwig, who already proved he could carry a would-be franchise in The Seeker, a film whose box-office failed its concept.

Last but certainly not least is Carla Gugino – It was good seeing her on screen again. I’ve always felt she was slightly underestimated in the ‘Spy Kids’ films.

The Cons:

The FBI agent – Played by Ciarán Hinds, the agent seemed like a poor-man’s attempt at Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive.

Garry Marshall – As the nutty alien scientist who helps them find the mountain Marshall seemed out of place. It was a comedic role, and it feels odd that it was.

The Syphon – The assassin sent after the kids from their home planet to thwart their mission is ultimately more of a con than a plus. It does look creepy with its helmet off, but you end up forgetting about it until it shows up to throw a monkey-wrench into the equation.

Overall: cool locations, pretty good effects and a steady level of tension through make Race to Witch Mountain worth seeing, it’s not your parents Witch Mountain or your childhood’s for that matter- and in this case that’s a good thing.

8/10

March to Disney: Old Dogs

Posted on March 3, 2016 by bernardovillela

On occasion there will be a film that gets steamrolled by the critical mass and it really shouldn’t be. On a rare occasion it will be a film that is actually quite good, more often than not it will just be a decent film that’s just very harshly thrashed about and doesn’t really deserve it. Old Dogs falls into the latter category.

Don’t misunderstand me – the film isn’t great. It’s passable and ultimately disposable entertainment but for what it was, a simple family comedy, it’s fine. Most important, considering that it’s a comedy, I laughed quite a bit. The critical reaction I am sure are coming in response to things within the tale that are cliché like getting caught in the animal enclosure, the overly-aggressive game of ultimate Frisbee, being strapped to a jet pack, playing tea, the unwilling babysitter and other conventions. However, they are put together interestingly and cut together quickly and the execution of all these things you’ve seen is above average and typically humorous.

The one part of the film that was wholly unsatisfying was when Dan (Robin Williams) was being taught how to play by a friend of Charlie’s (John Travolta). The friend is played by the late Bernie Mac which makes you wonder how long this film has been in the can. This is the most difficult and preposterous part where Williams is turned into a “human puppet” so he can play with his daughter, thankfully the mechanism breaks and Williams is allowed to take the scene over as his normal charming self.

One also need not be concerned with pacing in this film as the bulk of the story is almost immediately taken on. You witness the usual formula for Dan and Charlie at a pitch, this usually involves Charlie telling one embarrassing story about Dan and softening up the client. What is unexpected is that this story which is cut to with frenetic pace actually factors into the plot so almost immediately there is pertinent information conveyed.

This being a Disney film there is the compulsory family content aside from the silliness. In this case it was Dan trying to connect and reconnect with his kids. It was surprisingly rather effective and really what held the story together. There’s certainly nothing new under the sun in this film but it a film that achieves its modest goals and one can’t fault it for that. There is also commitment from all involved to their roles especially in the smaller roles played by Seth Green and Justin Long.

The film actually manages a few sight gags, which is rare, after Dan and Charlie take the wrong medications and while some of the CG went a bit far the mesmerized images were rather humorous as was the scenario.
Should family fare over the next few weeks prove insufficient you should give this a chance. It’s a funny little movie with something for everyone.

6/10

Rewind Review: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs

Posted on February 29, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (2009)

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is the rare film that can keep the energy, verve and humor of an animated short through the course of a feature film. It is also a prime example of the modern equivalent of irreverent humor which would be better described as “random,” which would be typified by television programming such as Family Guy and the works of Dan Schneider such as iCarly, The Amanda Show, etc. The film manages to be consistently funny in an off-the-wall kind of way, which is quite difficult.

Yet simultaneously it also managed to have the things you needed to move the story along and not just the novelty of the science. There was the love interest which was instantly established with witty dialogue which shows that Sam Sparks and Flint Lockwood are meant to be as she instantly realizes the purpose of all his wild inventions. There is of course the inevitable moment where Flint’s success breeds blindness and slight megalomania and causes him to mistreat his love, but what is refreshing is that their parting doesn’t unnecessarily extend the film. As might happen in reality the reconciliation happens nearly without words needing to be exchanged and there is no undue, overly-long apology.

The father-son dynamic is also an underpinning of this humorous and whimsical tale that doesn’t in and of itself add itself as an obstacle but rather adds texture to the tale and also serves as the device that makes Flint realize that his invention that has been causing it to rain food has gone wild.

What drives Lockwood to lose perspective is pressure applied by Mayor Shelbourne, given life by Bruce Campbell in a very good role, who wants to use the machine to make Swallow Falls a tourist attraction and in the process he becomes morbidly obese. It would be a new claim to fame for the sardine fishing island which displaces ‘Baby’ Brent, the sardine mascot, who in his-mid thirties coasts on that fame and is one of the funniest characters in the film voiced by Adam Samberg of SNL fame.

While typically a voice cast should be invisible, meaning anonymous or unrecognizable in the part, the standout was someone who was distinctive and recognizable but yet managed to play a character and not a caricature. The local police officer Cal Devereaux played by Mr. T, yes that Mr. T, was one of the better characters and the funniest performance – and he didn’t even have to say “I pity the fool.” However, most of the cast was invisible as mentioned, case in point Neil Patrick Harris was Steve the monkey with the thought-translator strapped on which was just a small example of the random humor as well as Flint saying what he’s doing, vocalizing a fake score, or a face in the crowd saying something wild like “I’ve got a macaroni on my head” when that is the case.
The only thing in the film that gives you pause is that the camera man, Manny, is a walking deus ex machina. When someone capable of being a doctor and flying a makeshift plane is needed we learn that the man who has been there but unseen can do both these things. Even though it allows for one very good joke about how he was a doctor in Guatemala it was somewhat odd that he also had emergency supplies on him and then was also able to fly. In a film this irreverent it takes a lot to say “come on” but that did it.\

With the pervasiveness of 3-D it hardly ever seems worth mentioning. In this film, however, that is not the case and it in fact enhanced the experience especially the scenes within the machine-turned-meatball which were rendered much more realistic and interesting due to the fact that they were in 3-D.

All in all it is a very enjoyable experience that far surpassed this critic’s expectations and speaking as one who was unfamiliar with the tale it is likely to entertain most.

8/10

Rewind Review: Spellbound

Posted on February 20, 2016 by bernardovillela

Alfred Hitchcock’s film Spellbound is triumphant on many levels. Yet despite that it had disappeared from availability on DVD for a couple of years. As occasionally happens the Criterion Collection edition had gone out of print, but the film has now been rereleased by MGM’s Premiere Collection.

The film tells the tale of a man assumed to be Dr. Edwardes, played by Gregory Peck. It’s when it is discovered that the man is an impostor, and is wanted for questioning in Edwardes’s murder, that things really get rolling.

What sets this film apart is that its heavy use of psychoanalytic theory ultimately propels it into a different stratosphere in terms of film theory. The lynchpin of the mystery ends up being a dream had by Peck’s character. To find the killer the psychoanalysts must decode what the dream symbols mean and to create the film the cinematic, visual symbols needed to be chosen carefully especially the one the analysts fail to analyze.

This film is also a rare treat because the famous dream sequence told a little after two-thirds of the film has passed was conceptualized by Salvador Dali and it is apparent: eyes, a melted wheel, the obtuse architecture of the houses. This rare blend of genius alone should be enough to get anyone to want to watch this film.

That’s not all though. In this film you also have Gregory Peck and Ingrid Bergman, the former who is always solid but is pretty convincing in this part playing a tortured amnesiac with a guilt complex and the latter another of Hitchcock’s elegant blond ladies who is likely his most underrated leading lady, in terms of her work with Hitchcock.

This film has a very solid foundation built upon on a wonderful screenplay which is full of the fascinating nuance both of the human psyche and of situation. A scene where Bergman and the House Detective speak casually while she is trying to wait for Peck incognito at a hotel in New York is quite brilliantly constructed as is the scene where Peck and Bergman arrive at a friend’s house seeking refuge and find the police there waiting for the same friend.

The film also has an unexpected twist just when you think all is fine and dandy. The twist after resolution seemed to have been reached throws real peril back into the equation and makes you think maybe the happy ending is not destined in this story. Ultimately, I think the film is quite brilliant maybe not amongst Hitchcock’s best but certainly a cut or two above the rest in the genre. Despite his protestations in his interviews with Truffaut it is a terrific film even by his high standards.

9/10

Rewind Review: The Impossible

Posted on January 31, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

The Impossible

Out of all the films that will likely end up appearing in this post before it peters out, this one was the most lamentable. This past year was the first time I that I jotted down a list of films I wanted to see before the year was out in order to create my lists and awards. This was the only one left on the the outside looking in.

All that aside, be it my awards, the Oscars or anything else, the film still stands and should be seen. The film has a very smooth and even flow, such that the climactic sequence feels like it may be a prelude of false hope. On the technical end the film is a small marvel, not only in terms of effects work but also in terms of sound design and scoring. That’s before you get to the narrative and the performances. There’s a wonderful, pitch-perfect cameo, which is as much as I will say. As for the leads: Ewan McGregor’s work in one particular scene is likely the best moment of his career to date, and he’ll have many more to come, Naomi Watts is brilliant and all her accolades for the film are more than deserved. Most critical is the involvement of Tom Holland. He’s the audience’s bridge to the narrative, we divide time between his mother’s plight and father’s search, and he shoulders much of the burden and has a star-making turn that out not be drowned out in the award season buzz and should be seen.

Perhaps the best thing one can say about this film is that its impact as a piece of cinema is not immediately felt because it really is a harrowing and intimate portrait of a tragedy, and all that credit goes to director J.A. Bayona. The tonality of the film never wavers in its intent so it for the most part continues to feel like an account of an event rather than fiction. It never really feels over-dramatized or sensationalized, it’s real enough such that it’s engaging if not entertaining in the traditional sense.

9/10

Rewind Mini-Review: The King’s Speech

Posted on January 30, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

The King’s Speech

I have been reading some people either complain or just state how The King’s Speech is both rather bulletproof but also not mind-blowing. To re-iterate the above review if I had to go back would I slide this film in my Top 15, probably not, do I get the bulletproof comments? Yes.

There is even less to nitpick this film about, if you want to use that term than there is for True Grit. The only thing that slightly holds it back in my book is the intangible visceral reaction that I just didn’t quite get out of this film as opposed to others.

It’s not a daringly original film in terms of concept or structure it’s just very well executed, acted, edited, and shot. It’s the kind of Best Picture contender that while I may not have nominated I can really get behind because it is the best film that the lowest common denominator can get behind. Seriously, who can hate this film?

Before you answer consider the fact that I may need to ask you what your problem is. This is a really easy film to get into whether it blows you away or not and is a really likable kind of story. It’s a “feel good” movie without all that “feel good” movie cheese in the mix.

9/10

Rewind Review: The Tooth Fairy

Posted on January 28, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

The Tooth Fairy (2010)

The Tooth Fairy is a predictable and poorly executed family comedy which leaves everyone uncomfortable, including a majority of the cast and the audience who is asked to try and sit through it without squirming. It’s the kind of film that even if you give your intelligence or critical faculties a holiday you’d have a hard time enjoying.

The film takes a brash, arrogant athlete knocks him down to size, he rebels then embraces the changes that have come into his life then rebels again before living happily-ever-after. It’s the old template tried and true except it is not handled with any precision whatsoever.

The writing of this film seemed to borrow generously from the Big Book of Clichés in assembling the story: you have a single mother, musician kid, a fantastical world to which our protagonist is whisked away, a guide, a mentor, a moral and redemption. All that is well and good but the execution issues are what make those things fall flatter than they should. Too much of the comedy in this film is based on puns, which is one of the lower and least tolerable forms of comedy. There is also the Moment of Apparent Defeat which is written more like an Irredeemable Act, meaning had our hero acted this way in real life there’s no way anyone would have forgiven him.

Sports are often turned into a shell of what they really are and bastardized in film to no end. Ice hockey usually suffers the most because it has a bad reputation in the U.S. and is being written by writers who don’t know the game. The writer’s familiarity is something that yours truly cannot testify to but it is without question the worst depiction of the sport ever put on celluloid to those who know the game. A depiction so bad that it might be worthy of a second article, however, it is dubious whether writing about such a film a second time is justified for any reason. More confusing than the poor depiction is that both ESPN and anchor Steve Levy would agree to appear in such a project when one would assume they read the script before saying yes.

The cast was underutilized and not put into a position where it could succeed. Dwayne Johnson, who I enjoyed in Escape to Witch Mountain and other action roles, was asked to play an occasionally goofy, arrogant jerk and his usual steadiness shares screen time with some embarrassing and unfortunate moments and readings. It’s rather unfortunate that both Billy Crystal and Julie Andrews not only were in this film but likely spent multiple days working on it. Crystal’s scene with the amnesia powder is the worst thing he’s done and is hacky – a word one thought might never be associated with him. It would be better if Julie Andrews didn’t take this part as well it’s better to not see her than see her in this. Then there is Ryan Sheckler, who really isn’t an actor but rather a skateboarder who has appeared in a handful of films. Not only is he horrible but he adds to the denigration of the sport of hockey in this film by playing a hot-dog rookie who cops the kind of attitude usually reserved for the NFL and NBA. Stephen Merchant was occasionally funny as Derek’s caseworker but more often than not he was trying too hard. Typically in a film like this the only people who escape unscathed are the kids that is true in the case of this film as well, Destiny Whitlock and Chase Ellison are both quite good especially Whitlock.

The most confusing casting question was actually, “What is Seth McFarlane doing in this film as the counterfeit fairy accessory dealer?”

This film isn’t immune from issues outside story though. The score sounds as if it was pulled from stock and had been recycled on many family films in the past.

The effects work, specifically on the popped out tooth and stretched face sequence were weak.

Those who may be forced to watch this film by their kids do note that in spite of the previous comments this film was still nowhere near as bad as expected. There are a few laughs despite the poor writing style and it is not too painful an experience.

Rewind Review: The Prince and the Pauper (2000)

Posted on January 27, 2016 by bernardovillela

Introduction

The Prince and the Pauper (2000)

The Prince and the Pauper is the kind of film/story that is hard to knock unless extreme liberties are taken with the story – if it’s modified, modernized and bastardized as Disney did with its recent Sprouse brothers’ version, which had as much to with Mark Twain’s version of the tale as the film The Lawnmower Man had to do with Stephen King’s.

The television rendition that is the topic of this article, however, is more like the version you’re used to seeing. Thus, it turns into one of those traps where you could worry more about comparison than about execution. As is not unusual twin brothers, Robert and Jonathan Timmins, were found to play Prince Edward and Thomas Canty. Their progression through the tale was subtle and quite well done. As they are at the beginning they are decent and bordering on boring seeming both to be nice polite boys, a bit too much on Tom Canty’s part, however, their role reversal brings out the best in them as actors and them as well as the cross-cutting nature of the tale really get the film moving.

The film’s pace is never an issue as it clocks in at a brisk 90 minutes; the only issue is that it might just be a tad too quick. While emotionally you don’t mind the climax being resolved too quickly, if you compare that to the denouément (where several wrongs from the tale are righted) it is rather quick. The denouement is typically not seen and was a delightful twist but it just seemed that the Lord Protector’s enmity to the false King had just been announced and then things were nearly at a head.

The character of Miles Hendon is always a great vehicle and Aidan Quinn played the role quite affably and very well indeed. However, while Jonathan Hyde is an effective enough villain he does wander a bit too close to being over the top and cartoonish at times- some cartoons being more realistic.

The scene where Miles discovers what happened while he was gone was great and nearly makes up for the fact that he is repeatedly over sarcastic in his disbelief of the Pauper’s tale that he is Prince.

This is the kind of tale you almost want more time to tell. Disney’s version in 1962, featuring one of the most spectacular performances by a child actor on celluloid, Sean Scully playing both parts, was two hours and felt about right and could have been longer. It’s a loaded tale which says a lot merely by the situations the two boys are put in they don’t need to preach the stories and pictures do it.

The cinematography is quite good and is aided in great part by the fabulous art direction and costuming which was sure to pack many of the frames full of vibrant colors. The locations, rarely mentioned, were very well scouted and all looked quite good and made for a very “authentic” feel and created great possibilities for the film’s visuals.

All in all this is a good rendition of one of the best and most repeatable stories ever written.

8/10

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31