Martin's Musings

It could have been God awful, but thankfully, Rocky Balboa redeems itself as a worthwhile movie and a nice send-off for the beloved character.

Basically, that’s because the movie has a lot of heart — actually, that’s all it has. And to that end, there is a lot of sad-sack Rocky bemoaning the past — both his boxing heyday and his late wife, Adrian — and there are quick shots of the people who’ve crossed his path (old opponents like Clubber Lang and Drago, old trainers, etc.) and trips to places of significance. Continue reading →

Can Dreamgirls really live up to the hype? I mean, you can’t shake a stick these days without seeing a story (like the one I wrote about Jennifer Hudson) or seeing a commercial or hearing a song or something related to the movie. But the good news is that the hype is justified: Dreamgirls is one of the best times you will have at the movies this year.

A big, slick, well-orchestrated Hollywood machine (and that’s really the only word you can use for it), Dreamgirls tells the story of a 1960s Supremes-like girl group and how their rise to great fame takes its toll on the girls’ friendship. Unless you’ve been under a rock, you know that the movie is based on a Broadway show, and that Beyonce plays the Diana Ross role (and though she tries to deny it, there’s no escaping the comparison), Jamie Foxx is the villainous Berry Gordy-type, and Eddie Murphy is the James Brown-esque soul singer who the girls initially attach their fortunes to. The film is substantial and not lightweight, with a strong statement about what really makes a star.

Not surprisingly, while the acting across the board is good, the film belongs to the women. Hudson’s performance of “And I Am Telling You I’m Not Going” is already the stuff of legend, and for good reason. It’s a fierce, powerful performance — both vocally and visually — and like the words Hudson’s character is singing, Hudson is daring you not to love her. When she finished, a guy behind me said, “She turned it out!” and most folks burst into applause. The sound system where I saw the movie was less-than-optimal, but Hudson’s performance here is so towering that it overcame the technical issues. She’ll earn the Oscar for that scene alone. And Beyonce’s “Listen” turned me into a serious fan. The song was written for the film, and she just blows the roof off with her passionate performance of it.

To be honest, though, the film and show do a real disservice to both women, especially Hudson. She has a few good songs (I also really like “Love You I Do,” another song written just for the movie), but after her big number halfway through, Hudson basically disappears. Suddenly the movie is all about Beyonce and Hudson is stuck in the background, right when she’s upstaged everyone else on screen. Beyonce, too, is basically nice to look at and she generally holds her own acting-wise, but her only really good moment comes near the end when she’s belting that song. I wish the show/movie’s creators had seized the momentum of Hudson’s performance better and gave Beyonce more chances to blow us away. Instead, both get these huge showstopping moments that make the rest of their performance seem less impressive.

But no matter. As a whole, Dreamgirls is a great, wholly entertaining movie. I was tapping my feet, holding back applause, and smiling through most of the film. When the lights came up, I started to make plans to see it again as soon as I could, in a theater with better sound. Right now, I can’t wait. Dreamgirls gets an A–.

—
Update, 12/31: I’ve now seen this movie twice and I don’t know if it was the better presentation quality or that I knew what to expect, but I have to say, unsurprisingly, I enjoyed Dreamgirls much more the second time. Jennifer Hudson’s performance came off much better to me — it didn’t seem as lacking in the second half — and even Beyonce was impressive throughout. This second time I appreciated stuff I didn’t appreciate as much the first time, like Eddie Murphy’s performance; it’s also really good. Yes, the movie is a bit lopsided, with all the good music in the first half and all the serious drama in the second, but it doesn’t drag, and this time I felt more invested in the plot so it came off as a better movie. And let me just say this: if you’re going to see Dreamgirls, see it the way it’s meant to be seen, on a big screen with big, clear sound. It makes all the difference. I’d see it again. And again. I really like this movie.

On the way home after seeing The Pursuit of Happyness, I was trying to come up with a better, more appropriate title for the movie.

You see, not only does the title — with that too-obvious misspelling — not really fit, but it’s also kind of a misnomer because the movie isn’t really all that happy.

In fact, it’s kind of a drag.

Happyness tells the true-life story of Chris Gardner, who, determined to raise his five-year-old son on his own, struggles to make ends meet by selling an overpriced piece of medical equipment while taking part in an upaid internship at Dean Witter.

At one point, Gardner has no money to his name and is forced to stay with his son overnight in the men’s room of a subway station. But this is an inspirational story, so it’s not giving anything away to say things work out in the end. It’s just that that part of the story is at the very end, and it takes a long time to get there. Continue reading →

While I can’t say Blood Diamond rocked my world, I was impressed once again by Leonardo DiCaprio. Man, between this film and The Departed, it’s like the guy has grown up and found a really cool on-screen persona. It’s mostly all in the facial hair, but his face now just shows more age and edge. (And I still think he looks like he could be Eric Dane‘s younger brother.) Here he plays a diamond smuggler, and while he’s really not a very good guy, or even the film’s hero, you have to root for him. Sure, that’s because he’s Leonardo DiCaprio, but still, you want him to succeed. I guess therein lies one of the film’s problems, that you are rooting for the wrong guy, but it’s more than that. Jennifer Connelly’s character — the reporter with a heart of gold who gives DiCaprio’s character a conscience — is a too-convenient love interest. And it’s too long (nearly 2.5 hours). All told, the parts don’t add up to a compelling whole. But Leo’s pretty good. Not run-out-and-see-this-movie good, but good in that he makes the film worthwhile if you do see it. I give Blood Diamond a B-.

“Imagination is more important than knowledge.”
— Albert Einstein

On the surface, The History Boys is about a group of British high school students trying to get into Cambridge and Oxford universities (aka: Oxbridge). But it’s also about the value of book smarts vs creative/free thought, and about an inspiring teacher with unconventional methods (including a penchant for quoting random film/music/poetry), and a teacher with a habit of fondling his students while giving them rides home aboard his motorbike, the value of education in the real world, and much more. Think Dead Poets Society with British accents and a gay subtext. The theatrical version of The History Boys won a record six Tony Awards in May (including Best Play), and it’s no wonder — this is a really interesting and enjoyable story, with great performances across the board, plenty of quotable lines, and a great message. (If you don’t know, the film’s cast and director are the exact same ones as the Broadway play.) No doubt you may overlook this movie when so many more-hyped films are at the multiplex these days, but if you’re looking for something less-than-mainstream, give The History Boys a try. I give it a strong B+. (And yes, I realize this review doesn’t even come close to justifying why I liked the movie so much, but I suppose I’m just at a loss for words — ironically enough.)

I’ve always thought that if we took a holiday … just some time to celebrate … just one day out of life, that it would be so nice. Apparently, that’s what Cameron Diaz and Kate Winslet thought, and so we have the movie The Holiday. Simply, this is a Chick Flick, with a capital C and F, and aside from the attractive leading ladies, there’s really not much redeeming about it for those with a bit more testosterone. You get all the holiday movie/chick flick cliches, including the scene where Cameron Diaz slips on the ice while wearing high heels, and the scene where she sings along (badly) to rock music. Hell, even Jack Black seems to have been neutered. Sure, Jude Law is as charming as ever, and it’s nice to see Kate Winslet lighten up for a change, and the movie isn’t sooo bad per se, but I probably could have skipped it. (And for the record, the “chick” I saw this with wasn’t exactly raving about it either.) The Holiday gets a B- from me.

First, the good news: This review will not be as long as the movie I’m reviewing.

Now, the bad news: I’m reviewing The Good Shepherd. And it’s not the great Oscar-contender I was hoping for. Instead, it’s a Very Serious Movie that is very long (i.e.: more than two-and-a-half hours long) and not really all that entertaining.

Matt Damon plays Edward Wilson, who is recruited to join the OSS (the precursor to the CIA) while still at Yale and a member of the secret society Skull and Bones. The film jumps back and forth in time to show how Edward’s committment to but uneasy feelings about the organization affect him and his family. No one can be trusted, loyalties aren’t what they seem, and paranoia is a must.

Sounds like a hell of a story. If only Damon’s performance wasn’t so wooden, and everything and everyone around him wasn’t so stiff. At one point someone describes Edward as “a serious S.O.B. without a sense of humor,” and that just about sums it up. Further, Damon doesn’t ever look a day over 28, despite aging 22 years over the course of the movie. And Angelina Jolie is not just miscast, but she’s underused. The whole thing is just a bit dry, and I actually thought about walking out a couple times because I just wasn’t involved and I knew I could be enjoying myself doing something else. (Not that it’s all bad; I quite enjoyed seeing Joe Pesci on screen again.) So in summary, The Good Shepherd gets a not-so-good C from me.

When I went to see Happy Feet the other day, it reminded me of my idea that movie theaters should reserve one screening each day of new animated movies for adults only.

I’m not saying kids can’t see the movie. I’m just saying, let there be one screening every day where kids — admittedly, the movies’ target audience — aren’t getting up at inopportune times, aren’t laughing at the “wrong” places, aren’t being restless and aren’t talking, and where the parents don’t show up with their brood right as the movie starts (after the trailers) and aren’t rushing out as soon as the movie is over (before the credits have even started). Continue reading →

Cross March of the Penguins with Moulin Rouge and you get Happy Feet, a movie that’s not as good as either one, but still has its pleasures. The story of Mumbles, a penguin who doesn’t fit in with the other penguins because he can’t sing, and instead of waddling he tap dances. Like in Moulin Rouge, the characters burst out in song anachronistically — they sing everything from Queen’s “Somebody to Love” to Frank Sinatra’s “My Way,” with a Beach Boys tune, a Prince song, and others thrown in for good measure — and for a while, this is kinda fun to watch. Eventually, though, Happy Feet turns from a cute little penguin movie to an environmental call for action and the last 10 minutes or so don’t make much sense (all things considered). Still, even though the movie doesn’t reach the zany heights that the trailer promised, it’s hard to deny that Happy Feet isn’t one of the coolest looking movies of the year. The snowy landscapes, the penguins dancing — it’s all rendered in very life-like fashion, in bright colors and with plenty of sweeping wide shots so you can take it all in. I’ve been looking forward to this movie for quite some time, and while the movie didn’t quite live up to my expectations, it was an enjoyable 90 minutes. So for that, I’ll give Happy Feet a B.

Robert Kennedy was a great man, and likely would have been a great president. Alas, when he was shot on June 5, 1968 at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, shortly after winning the California primary, the world lost one of its great hopes for leadership. This is the message Bobby is trying to put across (not that I disagree with it), in a film meant to pay tribute to all that was lost on that tragic June day.

I think.

You see, Bobby is instead a rather pointless film about what was happening at the hotel the day Kennedy was shot. And in dramatizing that story, and showing the various people milling around, the film loses sight of its apparent purpose and instead becomes an ensemble piece about all these random, unrelated people, and not the man itself. In fact, perhaps writer/director Emilio Estevez should have called his movie Ambassador because it’s more a tribute to the hotel than the man. But even that’s not very good. Really, he’s made a bit of a mess with so many actors doing ther best to deliver Very Important Speeches and give Very Important Performances. And it’s just too cluttered to have much impact (one need look no further than Ashton Kutcher’s distracting, ill-fitting performance for proof).

Not that some in the ensemble don’t acquit themselves well. Sharon Stone, for one, gives a nice, understated performance. Freddy Rodriguez and Martin Sheen also do good work. And Anthony Hopkins and Laurence Fishburne imbue the film with gravitas, even if their roles are complete cliches. But Kutcher, Lindsay Lohan, Demi Moore, and others make Bobby feel like a very special, very serious, political episode of The Love Boat, or something silly like that.

I wish Bobby was actually about Bobby, and about how much he meant to people and how much we lost when we lost him. There’s evidence in a few scenes that Estevez might have done a nice job on that film if that was the direction he took. But things don’t always go as planned, and that’s why I have to give Bobby a C.