One for the Money

I was invited to go see a midnight screening of One for the Money by a friend for free, so I couldn't pass up the opportunity. I wanted to see it anyway, but not having to dish out $12 for a ticket was icing on the cake and probably is affecting my opinion on the movie because I actually enjoyed it. 

That said, One for the Money, an adaption of Janet Evanovich's book of the same name, stars Katherine Heigl (Life as We Know It) as an inexperienced bail-bondsman and Jason O'Mara (Terra Nova) as the wanted cop from her romantic past she is chasing. It is a light and enjoyable movie, though often cliche'd at times, that combines a decent amount of comedy and crime-solving. 

The highlights of the movie weren't actually the story or the stars, which for me weren't unbearable, but the wacky side-characters that Heigl interacts with. Debbie Reynolds shines as Plum's eccentric grandmother, especially during a scene at the family dinner table where she plays with her granddaughter's gun. Sherri Shepard and Ryan Michelle Bathe are fantastic as Lula and Jackie, respectively, a pair of criminal informant prostitutes. They definitely stole the show for me. I only wish the movie featured them more. 

One for the Money is definitely not a critic's movie, so if you are looking for a potential award winner, look elsewhere. I know my tastes can be questionable at times, but this movie is definitely a guilty pleasure, and nothing more than that. If you can get past Heigl's weak attempt at a Jersey accent ("Why you messin' with my tasty cakes!"), this movie can be worth checking out -- but only if you know what to expect.

(more like a 2.5/5 but i'm feeling generous.)

Read more!

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Who needs the rapture when you could see the newest Pirates of the Caribbean movie? I just died and went to heaven, says I!! Now that we have that fanboying moment out of the way, let's carry on with the review.

On Stranger Tides brings us back once again into the life of Jack Sparrow (there should be a captain in there somewhere), the pirate we all fell in love with eight years ago. As promised at the end of last we met, Sparrow is after the fountain of youth. Along the way, Sparrow is reacquainted with Barbossa, Gibbs, a lover scorned - Angelica, the menacing pirate legend - Blackbeard, and even zombies and mermaids.

On Stranger Tides is, by no means, a perfect movie but does wash away any bitter aftertaste you (emphasis on you, because I loved them) may have had towards the franchise after Dead Man's Chest and At World's End. I felt that that On Stranger Tides returned to form by unfolding as an adventure-quest story, much like Curse of the Black Pearl, rather than a plot of rescue, betrayal, and backstabbing like the sequels before it did. Marshall, the new director at the helm, even pays homage to Black Pearl by including a sword fighting sequence reminiscent of the first duel between Sparrow and Turner in the blacksmith shop. The film was also shot beautifully and the soundtrack is as stunning as ever. The Hans Zimmer's familiar score is even enhanced with relevant Spanish guitar by Rodrigo y Gabriela .

What doesn't work for the film is the introduction, of what i am assuming, a replacement couple for Elizabeth Swan and Will Turner. Quite frankly, I didn't care for sub-plot romance between the Syrena the mermaid and Philip the missionary. They didn't have as large a presence as Turner and Swan did, so it seemed more like an after-thought than anything else. That said, I thought the mermaids were really cool and the scene where they attacked the pirates was pretty intense. I will admit though, I did laugh at the shot of one of the mermaids revealing what appeared to be vampire-like fangs.

Another thing that bothered me was the lack of exploration of some of the lore introduced. Where did Blackbeard's voodoo powers come from? Why is his sword able to control his ship? I feel like this lack of storytelling is a result of the writers' need to introduce as many characters as possible and have them all have their own motives. Maybe it will all be explored in the next pirates film, as hinted at by the scene at the end of the credits. I just feel like if they shortened the beginning of the film and worked some script magic, they could have at least explored some of it during the meaty 137-minute runtime.

Either way, as you may have expected, I fully and wholeheartedly enjoyed the film - and will probably see it several more times. When it comes down to it, I'm a pirate fanboy at heart, and the franchise can do no wrong in my eyes. Objectively speaking of course, I suggest you set your sails and course your heading for the nearest theater. You just might be surprised.




Are you truly surprised at my final verdict?

Read more!

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

"You are Jack Sparrow"
"There should be a Captain in there somewhere."

Let the hyperventilating begin!

I'm loving the newly revealed teaser trailer for Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. On Stranger Tides is the fourth entry into the Pirates franchise, and said to be the beginning of a new trilogy. I don't care. Give me as many Pirates movies as possible. I will see each one at least five times. Loosely based on a book by the same name, On Stranger Tides hits theaters on May 20, 2011.

This trailer paints the movie as less of a Dead Man's Chest or At World's End, and more like a Curse of the Black Pearl. It seems more fun and simple like the first one, with less at stake like in the sequels. Critics of the Dead Man's Chest and World's End whine about how the story became too ridiculous and complicated, and that they didn't fit in with Black Pearl. They can rot on the bottom of Davy Jone's locker for all I care. I love the sequels just as much as the original. The newest Pirates movie seems like a return to true form, and I couldn't be more excited.

I don't know what more I could ask for in a movie: Pirates, zombies, mermaids, more pirates, etc. I can't handle it, to be honest. Two notable scenes in the trailer that make me laugh every time are when Angelica (Cruz) shouts at Jack in Spanish (0:54) and when Jack screams (1:26). This trailer couldn't be any more perfect, hitting all the right notes in the process. Only thing I wish it featured more is Barbossa. He's a boss. Read more!

From Console to Silver Screen

Hollywood loves to take the games that we enjoy and turn them into a feature films. Why wouldn't they? Many video games have a cult following which equals big dollars in the eyes of studios. Unfortunately, the studios have no idea what they are doing sometimes we are presented with atrocities like Alone in the Dark (2005), or one of Uwe Boll's many other films.

I go into video game adaptions with extremely low expectations because history shows that they aren't usually good. There aren't really any great video game adaptions, except for Silent Hill (2006) and this past weekend's Prince of Persia (2010). Both of those films took what worked well in the games and translated them well to the big screen. I was particularly excited for Prince of Persia because it teams up two up my favorite Hollywood entities, Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney.

I think part of the reason that many of these adaptions don't do well is because the stories and characters are designed to work in an interactive world where you feel like you have control in what goes on, and not on the silver screen where you voyeuristically watch the plot unfold. Video games work because you become connected with your character. You live the game. With the film versions, you don't get the same character/story connection you would get otherwise.

Movies to Video Game translations also rarely work. I tend to stay away from video game adaptions of movies because they usually aren't very good. The only movie to video game adaption that I've really played was Spider-Man 2, and I liked that because it deviated from the linear plot of a film and allowed you to play in an open world with missions that tied in important plot points of the film. Most of these games don't work because they are extremely linear and carbon copies of their film.

Hollywood needs to step up their game if they are going to continue translating video games to movies and vice versa. There is a very fine line between the two, and it is extremely evident that that line is hard to translate.

Read more!

How to Train Your Dragon

Dreamworks is the David to Pixar's Goliath. In recent years, Dreamworks has been producing high quality fare; Although not on par with Pixar's repertoire (I'm a Pixar fanboy), they at least hold their own. Dreamworks usually relies on gags and pure star-power to pull people into the theatre, so it's a breath of fresh air to see the studio step out of their comfort zone. Dreamworks manages to release a film that pulls at the heart strings by showing depth and growth, traits that many of their previous films lacked (*coughbeemovieandoverthehedgecough*).

'How to Train Your Dragon' is a story about a boy, Hiccup, who doesn't quite fit in with the rest of his village of dragon-slaying vikings. All he wants is to fit in and gain his father's approval. His life is forever changed when he meets a dragon, Toothless, that challenges everything he once knew. It sounds like any other underdog story, but it is still a very well-rounded movie. Movies like this, despite their cliches, manage to become timeless because of their universal themes. That is probably why they film's source material is so popular.

One of the only things I had a problem with was the voice-acting. Although well-done for the most part, I struggled to understand why all of the adults in the village had strong, Scottish accents and all of the children had plain, American accents. Maybe it was to show the vast separation between the generations, but all it managed to accomplish was distracting me. Another thing was the voice of the main character. Although I can see why they cast Jay Baruchel as the lead, his voice lacks any emotional range. Baruchel is usually cast as the wimpy underdog, and he matches his character's personality perfectly... It was just difficult to get in sync with the character's emotions unless he was interacting with the dragon.

One of the other problems I had with the movie was the design of most of the dragons. Some of them were beautiful (ie, Toothless) and others seemed amateurish in design. Many of them looked like they were designed by students in a beginner's 3D modeling class. It created a disconnect for me between the humans and the dragons because the art direction for the two of them seem so different. It didn't help that the design of the dragons prevented them from showing as much emotion as the star dragon could. I think that is what angered me the most.

Speaking of anthropomorphic design, my favorite part about the movie was Toothless. I was so glad that they didn't give any of the dragons a voice. One of Dreamworks' trademarks is giving voices to its animal stars. This forced the designers of Toothless to rely on the dragon's facial expressions and body language, creating, in my opinion, one of their most memorable characters to-date.

Overall, the movie is one of the studio's best releases. I would recommend it to just about anybody. The pacing of the movie was exceptional and it never failed to deliver an exciting moment, up until the credits rolled. Catch this flick whenever you get the chance. You won't be disappointed. :) Read more!