This movie, as expected, was hilarious. It definitely wasn't what I was expecting, even though I had been warned by various film blogs who'd seen advanced screenings that it was no "Hangover for girls." I have to admit though, I wish that that's what they would have done. While the movie was certainly full of laughs, they attempted to have a serious story line about how pathetic Kristin Wiig's character Annie was, and quite frankly, it was boring.

This is my main complaint about the film, and then we'll get into the good stuff. The addition of the serious sub plot concerning Annie's so-sad-single life is one that is exhausting and frankly, it's also a cheap one. It's too easy to comment on a single woman in her thirties who is struggling with wanting to settle down with "the one." I mean...yawwwn! Plus, this movie was LONG...125 minutes LONG. These scenes, while always interspersed with humor, took away from the pacing of the film. The energy gained from the scenes that were hysterical was quickly lost after we switch to sad Kristen Wiig. The one upside to these pacing issues is the fact that we got to see Wiig really act. We all know she can play a slew of funny, quirky characters from watching her on SNL, but she was able to really perform in a way that made us realize that she's even more talented that we would have guessed.

Another thing I really didn't like was the opening scene where Wiig and Jon Hamm are getting it on. I thought it was a pretty cheap way to get us immediately attentive as to what's going on in the story and otherwise not really necessary. Wiig and her friend Annie Mumolo wrote the film, and it was pretty obvious that this was their first feature. The plot was all over the place, but the humor...oh the humor, it was very well developed. Paul Feig (also known as Tim from Heavyweights ;) ) who also directed great titles like Knocked Up and a few episodes of Arrested Development and Freaks and Geeks (also produced by Appatow), has great comedic timing and really understands what makes audiences laugh.

While the writing and directing definitely deserve credit, the casting was also exquisite. Kristin Wiig, Maya Rudolph, and Melissa McCarthy were simply amazing. Wiig played a combination of all of her SNL characters I believe, while Maya Rudolph played a more straight laced character.  However, she played this part as only Maya Rudolph can. While her role was often times setting up jokes for Wiig, whom she had excellent chemistry with, she definitely had a large amount of subtle hilariousness. There's one scene in particular where she wasn't being her goofy self, but her quiet, realistic portrayal of a terribly mortifying situation was one of my favorite scenes ever.

If Bridesmaids had been The Hangover for Girls, Melissa McCarthy would have easily been the Zak Galifianakis of this movie. I mean, where the heck did she come from? Like the Hangover, out of nowhere comes this chubby brunette that, like Galifianakis, I had no idea existed but was instantly intrigued by and ready to start a facebook campaign demanding an SNL hosting gig in the near future. I mean, she was hilarious. There was no line she delivered that I didn't laugh out loud at. She fit right in with comedy veterans like Wiig and Rudolph. After I got home and imdb'd her I realized she didn't actually come from left field, and that she has in fact been around and doing some way legit stuff (such as Gilmore Girls Mike and Molly) for quite some time now but I've never personally seen her in anything. Cudos to casting director for finding that gem.

The cast in general was really great. All of the other bridesmaids did a really great job. And of course, the ever beautiful Jon Hamm was fantastic and played the douchebag you love to hate exquisitely. As for the role of Wiig's other love interest, Officer Rhodes, Chris O'Dowd did an adorable job but I couldn't help thinking during the movie that I wished it was John Krasinski up there instead, or Jason Sudekis. I didn't think he did anything spectacular with the role, but he was cute none-the-less.

I went and saw this film twice with two different people last weekend and I noticed that in both screenings, then men were laughing much more noticeably than the women. Perhaps it's because it was full of the gross, boyish humor you'd expect from anything attached to Judd Appatow's name. And let me tell you, it was some gross, boyish humor that was hysterical. If you don't like lots of poop and vomit jokes, this is not the movie for you. My enrollment in cotillion lessons that tried to teach me how to be a "proper lady" and shake me of my tom-boy ways as a pre-teen did nothing to break me of my disgusting sense of humor. You'll just never be able to convince me that a good poop joke isn't funny. Never. Sorry. Never mind, I'm not going to apologize for that. :)

This movie is definitely worth a watch. I have to say I initially didn't think I liked it as much as I was going to because of how off the pacing was, but I find myself ready to see it again just to laugh at all of the ridiculousness.  I'm not sure that it's worth the money to see it on the big screen since it wasn't by any means visually or audibly exceptional. I doubt I'll shell out another 7-10 bucks, but I'm quite certain I'll own a copy of the blu-ray as soon as it comes out!

I know, I know. I hate to admit it, but I went and saw Something Borrowed last week. Romantic comedies frustrate the crud out of me...I think they're just a cheap way to make a lot of money without really trying to do anything new or creative with this incredible medium we have in film.  I crept into the theater all stealth-like in hopes that no one I knew would see me in the lobby of the Alamo Drafthouse. I saw the trailer months ago, and there was just something about it that was intriguing to me. I confessed this cinema-blunder to my fellow radio-television-film grad friend Carrie and she told me she kind of wanted to see it too. Instant relief...

With that being said, what's possibly even more embarrassing is that I actually liked the film. No, I didn't love it...I didn't think it had a unique or creative story line or anything. I could predict every single plot turn. I didn't think that the directing or mis-en-scene was particularly fabulous, but it was engaging and entertaining. The plot moved along nicely. If there's any way to ensure I like a film, it's to make sure the plot doesn't drag. When you don't have a great story, you had better have great casting. And luckily this film's casting directors Sari Knight and Mandy Sherman did a great job.

Let's start with Ginnifer Goodwin. She is just so precious, and I think the fact that she starred in this film was one of the main reasons I wanted to see it. Also John Krasinski. Oh, John Krasinski. He played his typical type-cast John Krasinski role, but he just does it so well that I haven't yet tired of it. I think he should start playing some more challenging roles now though, lest he be caught in Amy Adams' blunder and not be believable as any other sort of character. He was really funny and really endearing. Kate Hudson played Kate Hudson. She does it well, but I just don't like her very much. I want to, but she is just annoying. One of the other major stars was Collin Egglesfield whom I've known about since his All My Children days. Yes I watched that show, and yes I'm devastated it's cancelled...even if I don't watch it any more. On a side note, I always feel this odd internal sense of pride whenever I realize an actor/actresses is about to get super famous after I had been watching them for years on soap operas. Take Josh Duhmal for instance...I was totally in love with him before Fergie was ever around and way before he ever started doing some-what legit stuff. And Kelly Rippa...Holla! She will always be Hayley in my heart.

Ok, soap box done...pun intended. :) As you might know, this film is based off of a book. I haven't read it myself but my friends told me that it stayed true pretty closely until the end. There was one scene that was particularly annoying that occurred between Krasinski and Goodwin's characters, and apparently it never happened in the novel. Also, if I never see another Heineken bottle I'll be completely fine. There was so much product placement for this brand that I never want to drink that beverage out of sheer annoyance!

I don't really have anything else to say about this film. It's your standard run of the mill rom-com.  I wouldn't spend $7-$10 to see in in a theater, but it's worth a watch at some point. The reason why it was successful in my opinion, is that it was cast really well. I enjoyed watching these people play these characters. There was a lot of chemistry and I appreciated the people who made the film's recognition of this.

It's been a while since I've sat down and watched a new doc, and I thought that the subject material for My Flesh and Blood was incredibly intriguing. The film follows super mom Susan Todd who has 13 children, 11 of whom are adopted, 9 of whom have special needs. Even though the film boasts some impressive awards, I was worried that the director would apply some lazy film making. Let's face it, with a film description like that, you're automatically curious. I have to say though, the director Jonathan Karsh did an amazing job telling the story through the excellent employment of visual effects and sound.

This film was made in 2003 and unfortunately it's very obvious. The quality was a bit distracting for me...I felt like the color wasn't the best and whatever it is they shot with just didn't yield a professional result. There were no formal interviews or anything...all of the characters spoke to the camera in their natural settings. I think that this was necessary because we could still hear all of the constant noise from the 9 or 10 other people in the background. We were brought into their world of chaos and lack of peace and quiet really effectively. They just weren't exactly shooting on Canon's new line of dslrs. :) However Karsh used a very interesting technique to switch between the different acts. He used video of the kids doing things like swimming or playing...scenes where they were obviously happy and having a good time, but he slowed it down to make it look really beautiful. In contrast, he added some slow, eerie music behind this visual which gave you the sense of an impending sadness. It was a creepy score that made you appreciate their happiness despite their disability, yet it was like you couldn't stop your heart from aching for them. It was a really intriguing technique that was incredibly successful.

As far as the overall mood of them film, it was cut in a way that really made you feel so sorry for these kiddos. They live in this big family on the edge of dysfunction, but still make it work. You can tell that it's just so hard for the people who don't have disabilities to cope. I sat on the couch watching and eating my whataburger feeling like a real jerk for not having the level of selflessness this family had for one another as they ate a whole crate of ramen noodles happy to just be in each other's presence. I think I was expecting a happy go lucky movie that made me feel like there was still some hope left for humanity (joking....) but it really just made me sad. I can't put my finger on why.

In the film, one of the children of the family passes away. I'm not going to say which one, but the way the experience was cut was really brilliant. There was a lack of dialogue...you didn't know for sure what was happening, and you didn't know for sure which child passed away until after the funeral. It was an amazing scene...one of the better ones I think I've ever seen. I may or may not have cried...and let me just say that if I of all people  had infact cried, there was some fantastic film making taking place. And that my friends, is why I love film so much. The ability of a filmmaker to make you feel exactly what he or she wants you through story is an incredible, difficult thing to acheive.

I think that's all I've got. It was a solid film but I definitely had to watch Easy A (now on instant netflix!!) one more time to get me out of the funk I was in. Don't let that last sentence stop you from seeing the movie though. It was a definite testament to the amazing, selfless people who find joy in helping out those who aren't loved by other people in our society.

I realize it has once again been for-ev-er since I've updated this blog but I simply haven't had time. For this same reason, I also haven't seen very many new movies...whomp whomp! One that I first saw a few months back and has been revisited numerous times (I really should buy that blu ray...) is Easy A.

I'm going to keep this review short because, let's face it...it's not critically cinematic-lly gold. That's exactly what I loved about it though. I wasn't expecting much, and no, the cinematography and score weren't astounding or anything, but it was just an easy to watch, quirky, clever comedy. It's basically this decade's version of Mean Girls, except that the cast was much stronger.  Let's face it, as great as Mean Girls is (long live Tina Fey!!),  there's no way you can watch it without thinking, "man what happened to Lindsay Lohan? She used to be so...not...hot-mess-ish" It's crazy distracting.

Emma Stone...man I can't wait to see everything that girl does. She's hilarious. They hit the nail on the head with the casting for her part. I cannot even imagine anyone else who would have better played that role. Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson played her parents and they were, as usual, adorable. Lisa Kudrow and Amanda Bynes were in the cast and they were fine, but Thomas Hayden Church again put on another hilarious performance.

As far as the story line goes, it wasn't anything spectacular. Anyone who went to public school will be able to relate to the stress and frustration of the rumor mill. The only thing I didn't like was the role Christianity played in the plot. Amanda Bynes' character was the typical, hypocritical jerk who one minute proclaims her love for Jesus in the most corny and obnoxious way possible, but who later does everything possible to make Olive's life miserable. That bugged me a lot, but I think most people can appreciate the character in a way that doesn't reinforce any ill-conceived notions of what most Christians aspire to not be like. I hope so at least...

All seriousness aside...my favorite part of the movie was the quick paced, quick witted dialogue. It keeps you on your feet and intrigued the whole time.  Please watch the movie, if for no other reason, than to see this video on the big screen:


And if you've already watched it, don't EVEN pretend like you haven't tried making a fo-hawk with your hair in the shower...

127 hours was pretty good. Not something I'll ever see again, mind you, but something I'm glad I did see. It is a good story, but I just thought it was dreadfully slow. I mean, going in to the movie we can guess it's basically just going to be James Franco with his hand stuck under a boulder for a long time and in that sense, the film didn't disappoint.
     Going into this film, I'll admit, I was terrified. I'd heard soooo much about how terrible and how gross the scene was where Ralston cuts off his arm that I was really expecting to faint, vomit, have a seizure or something... Can we say LET DOWN? Seriously, if you puked or fainted or had to leave the theater because of that scene, you're weak. Sorry, but I was just so disappointed. I waited for a full hour and fifteen minutes in utter fear and agony, and when it was over (like 30 seconds after it started) all I could think was, "that's it??'' I found it way more gross when he drank his own pee. And yes I have seen Bear Grylls drink his own pee too, but it's still nasty.
     Other than that, I thought that the color was ridiculously over saturated. I get it Danny Boyle, you want to be "stylish," but I just found all of the over the top color correction to make everything really blue or really orange distracting. It didn't make me say "wow how beautiful" it made me say "wow how obnoxious." This mainly happens in the beginning whenever Aron's character is happy and excited to be out in nature and it's dumbed down later when he's trapped and not quite so happy any more. At that point I thought the footage was beautiful.
     I thought Franco's portrayal of Aron was fine. He did do a good job, but I don't really understand all of the Oscar buzz. I mean, let's face it...he pretty much just stood in a cave and grunted for an hour. He did occasionally talk to himself or his camera, but that was about it. If that's what defines an Oscar worthy performance, then shoot let's give it to him now. He was great for what the role called for, I just didn't think that it was anything earth shattering.
     I think my favorite part was this close up of Franco who was sleeping while ants were crawling on his face. We're zoomed in so tight and the theater screen is so big you can actually see the ant pinch his skin. It looked really cool.
     That's it folks. It was an ok film, just don't go in expecting to see a lot of action or a lot of blood. There's a good 30 seconds of it but it's really not that bad...

    I thought this was a pretty solid film. Maybe it wasn't spectacular, but it was really entertaining and engaging. I didn't think there was anything stand out-ish about the camera work, but I did really like the sets and costumes a lot and I will definitely watch it again. David O. Russell did a good job over all.
      I've heard a lot of people saying that they felt it was slow, but I thought the pacing was fine. I just felt like it lacked high enough stakes...the climax wasn't climatic enough. As we could have guessed, this important part of the film is centered around one last big match between Micky (Markii Mark) and a big steroid-y, intimidating other boxer dude who he probably should have lost to, but doesn't. If he had lost the title he was just going to go back to "regular life", and he had already quit boxing and gone back to "regular life" one other time in the film and just hung out with Amy Adams' character Charlene.
     It's garnering some Oscar buzz because of Christian Bale's performance and in my opinion, he's the front runner so far. It was so nice to see Bale in such a high-energy roll. I think of him in movies like The Prestige or 3:10 to Yuma....he did great in those films but this time he was different. He had a lot of spunk and portrayed a very solid role that mirrored the actual real life person's personality very well. He had to lose a lot of weight to play Dicky as a crack addict...his transformation was very impressive. As far as other characters go, I thought that the inclusion of the tacky white trash sisters of Dicky and Micky were hilarious. Melissa Deo played the Eklund matriarch and she did an awesome job. Very nice comedic relief throughout the film. Amy Adams played Micky's love interest. She had to curse a lot and wear skimpy clothes throughout the film and it just didn't feel right. She did a good job, I don't think the problem was with her acting but I do feel like she's just been so
type cast as the sweet, innocent girl in most films she's been in that it was hard for me to feel that this character was real. I think that's unfortunate because I like Amy Adams a lot and I love that she's trying to step out of her box a little bit, I just think she may have done it a little too late in her career. Of course our leading man was Markii Mark Walberg and I thought he did an ok job. His character was very calm and reserved, so he had to be very calm and reserved. I feel that although he was portraying a role different than his norm, I love his norm and wanted to see more energy from him. I also thought he was too old for the role. His character was supposed to be 31 but he looks more like 45...or as my coworker Nicole put it...."FORTY FINE." You can't really argue with that...

 **I apologize for the poor formatting, I don't know what is going on with Blogger tonight...

I cannot believe no one else has picked up on this. 
 
Perhaps I've just seen Center Stage a few times too many (very possible) but as I was watching Black Swan I couldn't help but notice some major similarities. Of course the endings are quite different but as Black Swan was getting started I found some things pretty interesting....

• One of the main characters being an uptight, fearful of imperfection, innocent ballerina who is the most talented member of her respected company/school

• Nina in BS and Maureen in CS
• Because of the pressure to be perfect, this character is extremely skinny and has an active eating disorder  

• This character's mother is a single mom who had to give up on her own dream of being a successful ballerina.

• The character who is a somewhat rebellious ballerina that doesn't follow the rules but is extremely talented and respected as a dancer.

• Lily in BS and Eva in CS
• Both of these characters light up a cigarette in a building where they're not supposed to and are told to put it out by the Nina/Maureen character 

• The heroin having a weird love interest in a superior. This man teaches them about sex and its importance to their role portrayal on stage.
• Jody with Cooper in CS  and Nina with Thomas in BS

• The ballet directors being referred to specifically as a "prick"
• Thomas in BS and Jonathan in CS

• The first montage of the film being one of getting ballet shoes ready...Stripping them down, wearing them in with a knife, wetting the front of the foot. Then a pretty little shot of some blistery feet thanks to point-shoes.

I'm just sayin...