Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

Title: Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
Dir: Gore Verbinski
Rating: ***1/2 out of 5 stars



Despite being the weakest film of the trilogy, At World's End is still a satisfying end to the Pirates of the Caribbean saga. True to the trilogy, the plot has far too much going on at once. And some of my favorite characters were downgraded (e.g., Davy Jones, Norrington). On the other hand, the film brings back the delightful Capt. Barbosa and Cutler Beckett, and ends with one hell of a battle-at-sea.

In this installment, Beckett and the East India Trading Company are wiping the seas clean of pirates with some reluctant help from Davy Jones, who must obey because Beckett now has possession his heart. So a call is made for pirate leaders from across the world (known as the Breathren Court) to convene and declare war against the EIT Co. Meanwhile, Will, Elizabeth, and the Black Pearl crew travel to the underworld (aka Davy Jones' locker) to bring back Jack Sparrow, who was eaten by the Kraken in the previous film.

And that covers the first 20 minutes of the movie. From there on, we get one gigantic clusterfuck of a story. Basically, every character has their own motive and they all keep fucking each other over. It becomes difficult to keep up with. Sparrow wants to immortalize himself, Will wants to free his father from Jones, Barbosa wants to free a sea goddess from her human prison (hoowhaaa??), and so on and so forth. This stuff makes Spider-Man 3 look simple.

Anyway, it's an enjoyable movie whether or not you catch all the details. It wraps the saga up nicely, even if it over-complicates it at times (one word: Calypso). Barbosa is even better than before and I really like all the pirates from across the world joining together to preserve their way of life. And the ending is bolder than I expected - it won't please everyone, but I liked it. I just wish the writers would have heeded the advice, "Less is more."

Read More

Shrek the Third

Title: Shrek the Third (2007)
Dir: Chris Miller, Raman Hui
Rating: **1/2 out of 5 stars



Yet another big disappointment this year. I loved Shrek and Shrek 2, and this time around some of my favorite people joined the voice cast - Amy Sedaris, John Krasinski, Eric Idle, Cheri O'Teri, Seth Rogen, and Amy Poehler. And yet it sucked! I feared the worst when the original director left to make the Narnia films. Unfortunately, my fears were justified.

In this installment, Fiona's father falls ill, making Shrek his successor for Far Far Away's throne. Not eager to take on this role, Shrek sets out to find a proper heir - namely, a kid named Arthur (voice of Justin Timerlake). But the kid is reluctant to take on the royal responsibility, so Shrek, Donkey, and Puss in Boots must persuade him. Meanwhile, the jilted Prince Charming (from the second film) employs the help of other disgruntled fairytale characters in a devious plot to steal the throne and kill the would-be heirs.

Shrek the Third lacks the charm and originality of its predecessors. It simply rehashes many of the old gags or resorts to juvenile fart jokes. Where are the subtle pop culture references? Where are the "did he just say that?"innuendos that only we adults pick up on? The movie is watchable, and occasionally funny, but on the whole it felt...recycled. So disappointing.

Read More

28 Weeks Later

Title: 28 Weeks Later (2007)
Dir: Juan Carlos Fresnadillo
Rating: **** out of 5 stars



This is the third sequel I've seen so far this year, and it's the first to not let me down. It is not as tense and original as its predecessor, but it is an intelligent, scary thriller worth respecting.

Weeks, as its simplistic title suggests, takes place twenty-eight weeks after the London outbreak from the first film. The rage infection is now seemingly under control by the United States military stationed in England, who begin allowing residents back into quarantined safe zones. But when two children leave the safe zone, they set off a chain of events that results in a military code red - maintain the quarantine with deadly force. Now, the kids and a small group of survivors must escape the city before the infected - or the military - get to them.

While it didn't impact me as much as 28 Days Later, this movie is pretty intense. A few scenes in particular are damn scary. And not just in a gory horror movie way, but also on a morally disturbing level (kinda like watching the news).

There is also some great character drama, particularly with the children's father (Robert Carlyle), a widower who bears a great deal of guilt for a horrific act from his past. Carlyle is nothing like I expected in this film, and that's a very good thing. Jeremy Renner is also fantastic as an AWOL sniper who abandons his post in order to rescue uninfected civilians. I hope to see Renner in more movies like this, and fewer movies like SWAT.

Please do not dismiss this sequel because of its concept or title. Or even if you didn't like Days. This one is definitely worth seeing - it opens with a conceptual punch in the face, and never lets go. I too rolled my eyes when I first heard this was being made, but Weeks changed my mind. Now I say, bring on 28 Months Later!

Read More

The Ex

Title: The Ex (2007)
Dir: Jesse Peretz
Rating: ** out of 5 stars



What a disappointment! I had high hopes considering The Ex stars the leads of two comedy series I absolutely love (Scrubs and Arrested Development). Plus, it has Amy Poehler and Fred Armisen! But alas, the movie is pretty lame.

The plot goes as follows: After being fired from his latest job, Tom (Zach Braff) goes to work for his father-in-law (Charles Grodin - yes, he's still alive). He ends up working under one of his wife's old flames - a wheelchair-bound fella named Chip (Jason Bateman). Tom soon realizes that Chip is still romantically interested in his wife, and is actually trying to sabotage Tom. But of course, nobody believes him and he just looks like a huge asshole.

Predictable plotline aside, this film's problem is that it's just not funny. Bateman's sliminess is occasionally amusing, but Braff is particularly unlikable in this. The Ex is not unwatchable, which is why I gave it 2 stars. I do not hate it, but I really did not like it either. I was especially let down because of my love for Braff and Bateman. What a wasted collaboration.

Read More

The Notebook

Title: The Notebook (2004)
Dir: Nick Cassavetes
Rating: **** out of 5 stars



The Notebook is a story we've heard a hundred times - a boy and a girl from different sides of the tracks fall in love, then their families force them apart, then they ultimately reunite via the undying power of love. Well, maybe it's a girl thing, but I never get tired of hearing that story.

The film opens with a older gentlemen in a nursing home reading a story to a woman with Alzheimer's Disease. The story tells of two young lovers named Allie and Noah. Allie (Rachel McAdams) was a rich city girl and Noah (Ryan Gosling) was a poor country boy (sounds like a Garth Brooks song, don't it?). The pair fell in love against the wishes of Allie's traditional parents. After a blissful summer with Noah, Allie was forced to move away to college and lost contact with him for several years. She waited for his letters, but they never came.

Eventually Allie moved on and got engaged to a soldier (James Marsden - ever the "other man"). Then one day fate brought Noah back into her life and all the old feelings came rushing back. Their love was reignited and Allie was forced to decide between her fiance and her first love.

Gosling and McAdams are very believable in their roles (they are a real-life couple afterall). This movie is the ultimate tearjerker. I dare anyone not to squirt at least little tear by the end. I don't think it even affected me until after I turned the film off and sat for a while listening to music, and then it sunk in.

The Notebook utilizes every cliche and every plotpoint of a typical love story, but that does not make it bad. Love stories all embody the same elements, but the key to a successful one is to have passion in the storytelling. The director and the cast really bring that passion to the screen, which is why this film works. And while it may be depressing, this is a film your grandmother would love. In fact, my grandmother does love it. It's not brutally real or cynical, but it's not entirely fluff, either. It is just a good ol' fashioned love story, guaranteed to yank those heartstrings.

Read More

Spider-Man 3

Title: Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Dir: Sam Raimi
Rating: *** out of 5 stars



I had such incredibly high hopes for this movie. Spider-Man 2 was perfect, and this time around Sam and Ivan Raimi were holding the pen. What could possibly go wrong? *sigh*

The third Spidey installment is all about the evil that lies within each of us, even superheroes. Spider-Man is now a huge New York City celebrity, and the fame goes to Peter Parker's head. But he is still tortured by his Uncle Ben's death after learning the true killer - Flint Marco - is still at large. Peter inadvertently isolates his girlfriend Mary Jane, who is struggling with her own failing career. Making matters worse, Peter spends a little too much time with a beautiful model named Gwen Stacy, who has the hots for Spidey. Still with me?

Anyway, a meteor hits the earth and releases a black symbiote which is drawn to Peter's hubris and vengefulness. It takes him over and brings out his dark side. Meanwhle, Flint Marco is stealing money to save his dying daughter. While running from the cops, he has an accident that transforms his cells into sand - thus The Sandman is born. Then there's also Eddie Brock, a competing photographer who wants Peter Parker dead. Oh, and did I mention that Harry Osborne is still pissed off about his father and wants Peter dead, too?

Clearly, the plot of Spider-Man 3 is WAY too much for one film. This is the movie's biggest downfall - it forces far too many characters and plotlines into a two-hour picture. Consequently, iconic Spider-Man characters like Gwen Stacy and Eddie Brock are wasted. And it leaves the audience confused and overwhelmed. I don't think this was entirely the Raimis' fault. I know Sam was pressured to include Eddie Brock/Venom and that inclusion really tipped the scales. Venom is possibly the coolest and best known Marvel villain, and deserves far more screentime than this. He should have been saved for a separate film. It's a damn shame.

I did enjoy Topher Grace as Brock, though. While he doesn't physically match his comic book counterpart, he excels as an evil mirror image of Parker. That was a great casting choice. Grace is deliciously tongue-in-cheek. My only issues with the character are how little he was used and Sam's choice to have Venom's face retract. I know why he did it (Raimi hates covering actor's faces - found that out with SM1), but it made me uneasy. All the more reason Venom should have been left out altogether. Raimi was backed into a corner and forced to adapt a character he never wanted in the first place.

Okay, I'll step off my soap-box about Venom now. I'll quickly say that Gwen Stacy was also wasted here, as was Bryce Dallas Howard's flawless performance. She is everything Gwen should be, and truthfully, she would have made a much better MJ, too. But more on my hatred for Kirsten Dunst later...Bryce was great, and I wish she was more than a tool to make Mary Jane jealous in this movie.

Some other great performances include the ever-wonderful J.K. Simmons and Ted Raimi, though they are not quite as funny as before. Bruce Campbell, on the other hand, gives his best cameo yet. He practically steals the movie! As for the main characters, I have never been a fan of Tobey doofus Maguire or Kirsten dead-eyes Dunst. And for the first time, I really hated their characters in Spider-Man 3. They are both such complete assholes that I had to laugh a couple times.

I love the basic idea for this installment - Spidey fighting with his own darkness, as visually expressed through the iconic symbiote. The script was mostly on the right track, but sadly fell short of greatness. I hate to say it, but some of the dialogue is just terrible. And the film is just way too heavy-handed. We have characters cheating, and breaking up, and murdering, and a dying child, and everybody is crying, crying, crying! Ugh! And I will utter my final complaint in just two words: the butler.

Despite all my bitching, Spider-Man 3 had some great aspects. There are some ground-breaking special FX (particularly Sandman) and as I said, I love the moral theme of the film. And Sam Raimi still delivers on the daring visuals as always. But he broke my heart a little this time around.

Read More