The Movie Rat

Mini-Review: Benji

Posted on December 16, 2015 by bernardovillela

It’s a method I generally try to avoid, but perhaps the best way to discuss Benji is via comparative analysis. After I had seen Benji what occurred to me is that there was some structural similarity to 9.79*, and that being that it is mainly a chronology of events (this one far more linear) but there is a late-in-the-game monkeywrench thrown into the mix. I will not expose details to preserve surprise, but the late revelation here only has one side telling the story period, not just on camera. Furthermore, the revelation, in my mind didn’t really shift the legal burden of blame.

Regardless, for the most part, this is an effectively rendered tale for the most part that reveals a mostly unknown personage now. The film does well to just present its case and not comment upon it. The only other issue it suffers from is that there is a slight lack of ebb and flow. There is a definitive rise-and-fall, but its crescendo and decrescendo. The rigidly linear nature of this tale hinders its efficacy some.

7/10

Rewind Review: Aliens in the Attic

Posted on December 15, 2015 by bernardovillela

If you skipped the movies this weekend and only glanced at the box-office figures you might’ve thought it was a rather dismal weekend. Financially speaking that is the case but one must always keep in mind that the box office is not always a true barometer.

The top ten films combined to just barely top $106 Million over the weekend when just a few weeks ago Harry Potter was nearly at the mark within two days. That is not to say this weekend was devoid of quality. Wallowing lowly in 5th place is an overlooked, under-advertised, and under-appreciated film which is a great time for all just waiting to happen; and one that you should catch before it makes a premature exit from multiplexes.

Aliens in the Attic fully lives up to the vibe I picked up from it when I first saw a trailer for it some time back. It seemed like a displaced ’80s film which had been updated for a modern audience. What I mean is that the film is relevant to today’s youth as the extended family that fight off an invasion of miniature aliens in their vacation home make jokes about how the mind control devices are like video game systems, yet the feel of the film is from a different time.

Those elements which hearken back to yesteryear being mainly: an irreverent, at times goofy, comedy where kids are protagonists, a fantastical world that only the kids have access to while the parents are clueless in more ways than one, a relatively anonymous lead cast, an alien who befriends kids and not necessarily politically correct jokes like “Oh no, it’s the po-po” and “He got hit in the nards” (the latter very reminiscent of the ’80s classic Monster Squad).

From the very start of the film the tone is set that the film will be consistently funny and not only funny but fun. So much so that you just go along for the ride and certain questions about dubious plot points or rationale on the aliens’ parts don’t take up too much of your attention.

The CG, as one would hope was the case in a film where certain key characters are computer animated is pretty good and never shows glaring weakness. The cast despite some seemingly strange choices is quite good. Most notably the young core of the film (Carter Jenkins, Austin Butler, Ashley Boettcher and the Young twins) also deserving of praise are SNL alums Kevin Nealon, who plays a clueless dad in the Chevy Chase mold, and Tim Meadows who brings his wry wit to the sheriff’s role. SNL’s best generation have had overall less than stellar film turns but this two-for is one of the best showings by that class in a while.

The film benefits most from its fine, sharp writing. The writing excels in practically every sense – comedy, one-liners and pace. Despite having quite a diverse cast of characters, none of which have much time devoted to them alone, we definitely get a sense of character from all involved – even the aliens.

The most one can truly ask of a film is to be entertained and Aliens in the Attic does so in spades. It’s pretty much non-stop engagement and enjoyment and there is something for everyone in the family and it’s most definitely worth checking out.

The IMDb user rating is currently a 4.6 which in my estimation is much too low, and it’s a serious contender for most underrated title of the year. It’s not perfect of course, nothing is, but it’s one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve had in while and I was rather amazed by that so I will give it a 9/10 – a truly good film which was just a minute detail or so away from greatness but still a wholly satisfying and extremely enjoyable experience.

Rewind Review: 2012

Posted on December 14, 2015 by bernardovillela

So here it is another end-of-the-world-spectacular. Roland Emmerich was recently quoted as denying his penchant for destroying the world even though this is the third time he’s done so as a director and plans on doing so again. The apocalyptic film as a subgenre is tired enough as it is without it also becoming tired from the same director.

This film was not nearly as bad as I had feared when I went into it but it also wasn’t good. Firstly, the Mayan prophecy which is the launch point for the creation of this film is merely referenced and doesn’t really factor into the plot aside from the fact that the film more or less says it’s correct. This film also sets up many disparate story lines at the start that don’t really balance that well. All the storylines that go on connect in the end but you’re left wondering for too long what the relation is and some aren’t as focused upon or necessary. All it is doing is unnecessarily prolonging a film in which you already know what the climax is. The only real mystery is the denouement which ends up being disppointing and not the jolly event the film wants you to see it as.

It reminded me a bit of War of the Worlds but what works in War of the Worlds, meaning any version of that film, is that there is an enemy. You can’t fight a natural catastrophe and trying to prevent it doesn’t make for very compelling cinema which is why there was so little focus on precautionary measures and things just went to hell very quickly.

Suspension of disbelief in a tale like this becomes very difficult during one cliffhanging section, just one. I am quite open to trying to go with the flow but there was one narrow escape that was just too hard to swallow.

There’s also a fine line between showing the totality of the chaos and just being sensationalistic and this film crosses that line several times and by so much that some of it is just downright offensive- the USS John F. Kennedy tumbling off the crest of a tidal wave and crushing the White House, a crack in the Sistene Chapel’s roof and the statue of Christ the Redeemer breaking and falling off its perch above Rio.

The best part of the film is Woody Harrelson and he gets killed off halfway through. Cusack and Peet are fine but they never really had to stretch and be all that impressive. Danny Glover playing the President of the United States is woefully miscast. When playing a fictitious president you’ve either reached that level as an actor or people just buy it and I didn’t buy this one and never heard anyone questioning Morgan Freeman in Deep Impact. Oliver Platt’s character never really made sense because he was fighting to take over a world that was going to end anyway. It’s just another case of a gifted actor in a bad project- something so common with him I now cringe upon seeing him.

The effects for the most part are really believable, nothing mind-blowing but nothing glaringly terrible either. The editing is not good in terms of content. Upon reflection I still can’t see the need of the film to have been that long and it did feel long this wasn’t a Spielbergian two-and-a-half hours either.

The dialogue at times was quite trite, forced and at times just dumb. The film is only serviceable for its action. So if you’re an adrenaline junkie you’ll probably get a kick out of it. Fans of cinema need not apply.

5/10

Rewind Review: The Nutcracker in 3D

Posted on December 13, 2015 by bernardovillela

The Nutcracker in 3D as conceptualized by Andrey Konchaloskiy is a rather strange beast indeed. It’s the kind of film that is impossible to stop watching because despite all that you might have to say against it there is some element of charm, ambition, and brashness that keeps your eyes glued to the screen. Perhaps it is a symptom of the era of filmmaking we are currently living in, there are far too many “play it safe” moves made in film today from sequels, to remakes and generic storytelling. Now granted The Nutcracker has been told over and over again, however, none of them ever quite like this and that’s what you end up taking away from this film, like it or not, is a bold attempt at doing something truly unique and different.

What makes this story, or this retelling thereof, so unique? It is the spin placed on everything in this tale. It becomes a historical mishmash in which suddenly Albert Einstein is the children’s uncle, there is talk of Freudian psychology and of course the Rat King and his Kingdom are none other than the Nazis. Yet flying in this face of this seemingly are exotic flying machines and other-worldly motorcycles. Just to have the audacity to go and mix things that ought not necessarily mix is one thing but it goes further.

To use Tchaikovsky’s music extensively is to be expected and nearly mandatory. Whether or not your interpretation involves any form of dance or not his music has become much more synonymous with this story than E.T.A. Hoffman’s writing ever was. However, to add lyrics to his music is a decision that is dubious at best. Hearing that it is Tim Rice writing those lyrics gives you some hope but sadly they are some of the poorest most trite I’ve heard him compose and furthermore they rarely really work. It’s difficult to shoehorn lyrics into a symphonic score and this proves it. What makes the musical experience of this film even more frustrating is that there are parts in which you see songs that do kind of work and you wonder why all can’t but what makes it more frustrating is it needn’t be. There’s just something about this story, told as it is, that doesn’t make it conducive to music.

The performances show the kind of inconsistency that marks this film. There are those who leave you scratching your head and those that make it worth it. Amongst the head-scratchers is Nathan Lane. Why he was needed to barely sing in in one of the worst accents I’ve ever heard is beyond me. In the middle of the road is Frances de la Tour as the Rat Queen, her over-the-top insanity does grow on you as the tone of this film makes itself known. Making the film stay afloat are Elle Fanning as Mary and Charlie Rowe as The Prince, who is all too frequently absent because as the Nutcracker he is replaced by the voice of Shirley Henderson, who is incapable of sounding like anything other than Moaning Myrtle frrom the Harry Potter films. Her inability to mimic a boy’s voice not only brings this casting decision in question but made those portions of the film hard to bear.

What must be pointed out is that in terms of practicality this film is fantastic meaning in as many places where it could get shot practically it is. The rat-people wore prosthetics, there were many sets built and extras. The only things which were computer generated was what absolutely had to be which was nice to see.
The CGI when used is very effective because it is given more of chance to thrive by being surrounded by mostly real elements, making blending easier. To continue the art direction theme the costuming was also great at being both historically accurate but creative where they were allowed to be which is a nice and rare mix.

It is not only the technical that works in this film, that is merely the most consistent element. As odd as the story is, even being rife with Nazi-symbolism, it does find an odd consistency in symbols and narrative flow such that production concerns and decisions in casting can be temporarily ignored and the story can hit you.

Perhaps the best example of this a scene where Max (Aaron Michael Drozin), the younger brother, discovers that despite being recruited by the Rat King (John Turturro) he doesn’t want to destroy toys anymore. He lets out one of the better and realistic cries you’re likely to hear. It’s like something out of Disney’s Robin Hood in its authenticity.

As for the 3D it falls this far down in the pecking order because it truly is one of the more ineffectual jobs I’ve seen since it came back in vogue. There is little to no value added due to the fact that it’s in 3D. The image is clearer and sharper than many but the trade off is that there isn’t a tremendous amount of depth outward or inward added.

It’s a film that always has a sense of humor about it despite that you can call some of its decisions into question. It is a film that absolutely screams to be seen because it refuses to conform and it is likely to leave very few on the fence and that’s the most we can ask for, and the best kind of movie whether you like it or not, and for that I thank the makers of The Nutcracker in 3D.

5/10

Rewind Review – Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel

Posted on December 12, 2015 by bernardovillela

2007’s Alvin and the Chipmunks was one of the more surprising films of that year. This one, however, falls miserably flat in many ways. The main reason is that the plot is overly contrived. Of course, this isn’t War and Peace, however, have a contest in which a school’s music program can be saved, altruistic intention aside, and a situation where Alvin has to be in two places at once then combine that with the Chipettes not liking them, due to lies, and it all became a bit much.

Plot aside most of the actors who appeared live didn’t do this film any favors. In this part Jason Lee is only serviceable for being thrashed and when he does get injured it is funny even if he isn’t. Lee, however, isn’t there a lot. Who is there a lot as the stay-at-home loser is Zachary Levi who is a spectacular failure at trying to be over-the-top funny. The only saving grace is Wendy Malick as the school principal who is a closet Chipmunk fan and David Cross as the devious producer. The voice talents are great and it’s a shame there is only so much they can do.

All the students at the high school also seemed terribly old. Which begs the question: It’s a kids movie so where are the kids? It’s just the Chipmunks kids can relate to. Wouldn’t a great story instead be of a kid being able to have them live with him/her? This way there is much more identification from the audiences instead of just watching them frolic about a world of adult doofuses.

It was surprising to learn through the credits that the Chipettes have their own creator, which is surprising since their personalities are analogous to their male counterparts. It would’ve been nice if the film worked to differentiate them a bit but alas no. To this film’s credit the Chipettes did catch on to the lies they are being fed quicker than expected but still a little bit too late. Yet their introduction was good and their participation in this sequel is by no means what held it back.

In a film where all the music is going to be covers need we hear jokes or lines from other movies ad nauseum? All this kind of dialogue just adds to the contrivances and detracts from what is original and decent in the film.

The song choices in this particular film were better and more appropriate for the entire family. Thankfully it was the original “You Spin Me Right Round (Like a Record)” which was chosen and not the Flo Rida cover, this song is one of the standouts. It also seemed like less singing for those who can’t stand the squeakiness but are dragged to see it.

It was also good that Alvin did get his comeuppance something that didn’t seem to happen nearly enough or as effectively on TV. While the child in this critic did enjoy several parts of this film there were ultimately too many things holding it back.

4/10

Mini-Review: Christmas Star

Posted on December 11, 2015 by bernardovillela

Christmas Star (2013)

This may not have been the straw that broke the camel’s back in regards to my tolerance for Hallmark’s formula, but it was the low ebb prior to having to call one quits early. Essentially what you have in this film is an unrealistic and highly predictable scenario, inadequate performances save by one given by the youngest cast member (Kyle Harrison Breitkopf), uncomfortable staging and glacial plot movement and add to that, for the most part, really grating country music stylings. It just fails in nearly all aspects.

2/10

Mini-Review: Rare Exports

Posted on December 10, 2015 by bernardovillela

Rare Exports

There isn’t much in the way of originality coming out of American horror films these days. If you want something different you’re better off going international specifically to Europe. Rare Exports is a Finnish film that tackles the Santa Claus in horror subgenre with style, humor and intelligence much in the way the Norwiegian film Dead Snow took on the Nazi zombie subgenre.

There is a good bit of folklore re-interpreted and made to be a modern horror tale with a few intentional chuckles along the way. There is some good make-up work and some really good performances out of the cast both young and old.

The only thing that holds this film back is after a while it stops progressing its narrative and danger quotient and just sort of stagnates. It never becomes uninteresting and has a nice button at the end it just slips in the latter part of the second act into the third.

It is, however, a brisk and fun watch that you should look for on video when it comes out.

6/10

Rewind Review: A Christmas Carol

Posted on December 9, 2015 by bernardovillela

When starting out a review of A Christmas Carol, a compulsory beginning should likely read that Robert Zemeckis is incredibly talented and has made many great films that you will never be able to take away from him. Amongst this critics favorites are Back to the Future parts I and II, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump and Contact. Now that list stops before the turn of the century. In the latter part of this decade it seems he’s been on a crusade, as a director, to be at the forefront of motion-capture technology.

Three films into this phase and the animation it seems is still not ready for primetime. The animation is not the only thing that lets the film down but it is a starting point and an important one. The fluidity of motion is just not there in the dance scene and it seems like a jittery video game rendition. The appearance of the characters is inconsistent. Bob Cratchit looks simian through most of his first scene. The characters look good with pronounced highlights or in scenes with very high contrast. Otherwise the artifice of it falls into an odd no-man’s land between live action and animation that isn’t very appealing. The technology has come quite a ways from The Polar Express but it’s not yet in its most desirable state.

The story at times takes a backseat to the technology, otherwise, why would you represent the Ghost of Christmas Past as a flame? It seemed like an overly-contrived way to experiment with lighting techniques in the new technology. Also, the technology allows you to use fewer actors because once you have a reading of their face you can manipulate it in post and have them interpret numerous roles none of which look anything alike.

This, however, is a double-edged sword it can be incredibly liberating as an actor and the modern day equivalent of wearing a mask but it also means fewer actors were hired for this film to fill the roles. Another effect of the technology is that if you make a bad casting decision it could be amplified by many roles. Jim Carrey plays eight roles in this film and in two of them he was not a great fit. Unfortunately, those two were Ebenezer Scrooge, where he neither sounds all that British or all that curmudgeonly, and the Ghost of Christmas Present where he goes way over the top especially when he laughs which is almost all the time.

It seems like for every step forward this film took it took two back. For every new twist added cleverly because they could through the animation there was something extraneous like Scrooge being shot across the moonlit sky that just didn’t need to happen. I won’t even digress into his being shrunk and sliding down the rooftop except to mention it there.

All the charm, spirit and brilliance that does exist in this story can be directly attributed to Charles Dickens and is not really amplified in any way either by the production or the players, good as some of them were. It’s also a little disingenuous to see this branded as Disney’s a A Chrismas Carol in the opening credits when Disney in 1983 created a short called Mickey’s Christmas Carol that in 26 minutes managed to be ever so much more moving and effective than this film so much so that it was nominated for an Academy Award as Best Animated Short.

A case in point about the execution of this film: the effectiveness of the closing line of the tale is completely undercut because all of a sudden it was decided that it would be a good idea to have Cratchit talk to the audience and recite verbatim the closing paragraph and then have Tiny Tim say “God bless us everyone.” The film is not so long that you couldn’t have continued watching Scrooge going around doing his good deeds and allowing that to happen naturally and visually without the “cut to the chase” treatment. It kind of lets the wind out of the sails of an experience that wasn’t all that emotionally satisfying to begin with. Don’t change the nature of the tale and the tempo at the very end just because you don’t want to run anywhere near 100 minutes.

Those who are going to see the the story for the first time will likely enjoy it. I just stress that there are other better versions out there. The only serviceable thing this adaptation does is to reintroduce the tale and maybe it will be read by many for the first time- for as literature it is a masterpiece and this film is nowhere near close.

4/10

Mini-Review: District 9

Posted on December 8, 2015 by bernardovillela

This is a film which deserves praise in several regards and is the kind of breath of fresh air that demands our attention. With that being said the originality within the tale both as sci-fi epic and as social commentary does not, in and of itself, make this film bulletproof.

The lead, Sharlto Copley, is tremendous in probably the tour-de-force turn of the year. The special effects are immaculate and couldn’t be faulted for a second. In terms of furthering the genre it did so in having the hero become the enemy of the people and in how it accomplished that feat.

Its social commentary and partially documentary style were also effective in telling its apartheid tale. Sci-fi at its best is more about humanity than beings from another planet.

However, the partial documentary style is one of the small issues with the film, and with a piece so strong small things are magnified. The first act is very heavy with the documentary angle giving much needed backstory and even a slight MacGuffin, but it vanishes and takes a very narrative approach even losing timecode stamps and caring less about where is this footage coming from in the context of the story. It took a while for the narrative switch to be noticeable but the doc approach could’ve been brought back once or twice in Act II just to tighten things up as it did drag a little.

Slow narrative pace is even harder to stomach when the jerky-handheld cinematography is a constant. The handheld is the one documentarian aspect that remains and may be a bit much for those prone to motion sickness.

The change in character and how his friends become his enemies and he must align himself with the aliens make it very much worth watching. The protagonist’s metamorphosis is realistically and compellingly rendered.

It is a unique moralistic sci-fi tale with great performances, biting and true commentary about humanity, politics and multinational corporations. It is definitely a must-see but by no means a masterpiece.

8/10

Mini-Review: Ghosts of Ole Miss

Posted on December 7, 2015 by bernardovillela

Ghosts of Ole Miss

If it were in anyway possible, it’d be interesting to examine this 30 for 30 entry in a vaccuum. The reason I say that is: as a film about the integration of Ole Miss with a unique subplot about the undefeated football team that played and was overshadowed by sociopolitical unrest on campus during that year, it’s intriguing. However, the film purports to examine the team and be a testament to the team, to memorialize the forgotten squad. While there are plenty of interviews with players about on campus events and quick chronicles of game events and results, the team becomes a subplot in a film supposedly mainly about them. The struggles of integrating the school ought not be overlooked, but when there’s little overlap between the tales aside from time and place structural balance becomes hard to find.

The film does very well to examine the cultural morass that many face, southerners in this case, that exists when you’re trying to balance pride, heritage and also acknowledging past failings and dark moments. Some of the voice over is very well-written and poetic in a way that seems unique to the south, as much as the music is lyrical and local. However, this personal connection also fights for time with the football team’s tale and the exposition of the events surrounding the integration. Ultimately, the film succeeds by giving you barely enough to get by on each angle, but it would’ve been better served by restructuring and/or delving further into each aspect.

6/10