Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II

Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part II

Year: 2011

Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes

Directed By: David Yates

Rating: PG-13

Run Time: 125 Minutes

     I'm not sure if I was just really wanting to see this movie and maybe over hyped it to myself, or what the situation was.  I didn’t see it at midnight, to avoid the large crowds, but I couldn’t resist waiting to long to see it.  I think I was more impressed with the first movie, because it was true to the book.  I thought breaking this up into two movies would really give the fans what they wanted.  However I left the theatre feeling really unsatisfied and really let down.  I will talk more about that later.

     The movie really relied more of the end of the book, the part of the book that really got you excited to know what was going to happen.  The movie follows Harry, Ron and Hermione right where they left off, in their search of the remaining horocruxes.  This movie is the conclusion to the seven part books, the finale between Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort.  The movie started off really well, they jumped right into finding the remaining horocrux in the bank, then in Hogwarts, and you started to see your questions get answered.  Then all of a sudden, the battle begun, and things started to happen and I feel important details from the book were skipped that shouldn’t have been. 

     Part I was over two hours and twenty minutes long, where as Part two was just over two hours.  I really thought that this movie would in fact be longer.  Include more of the end of the book, especially parts that were read from “The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore” which happened in the book.  I also would’ve really like to see more about Albus in this movie, as the book did, but they just jumped right into the attack of Hogwarts and it was just really disappointing.  It was like they were trying to jam action into a movie that wasn’t an action genre.  I also really, really disliked the way Lord Voldemort died, it was just like this powerful evil wizard just vanished, it was really unfortunate.  I really would have liked to see a more elaborate battle between “He Who Must Not Be Named” and “The Boy Who Lived.”

     Regardless, it was still a good movie, and fans everywhere will love it.  My personal opinion just left me a little disappointed, and that could be because of the book.  When it came out, I took off work, read it all the way through that day, and couldn’t believe how incredible the ending was.  Maybe it is always that way, a book can hardly ever translate to the big screen the way your mind imagines it.  It is still worth seeing if you are a Harry Potter fan, or even if you have seen the movies and not read the books, you obviously need to finish this.  I am sure this movie will gross an insane amount of money, and it already predicted to shatter an opening day record.

     I will give this movie, just like its predecessor, 3.5 out of 5 Elder Wands.  The movie was worth the money, and great in 3D, and you should definitely go see it.  But as I said before in my Part I post, read the books, and be amazed at how a children’s book evolved into an epic adult novel. 

PS: I really feel like they could have given some of the characters justice who died in the film….

TMBro

83rd Annual Academy Awards

Well, the Oscars are over, and really no big shocker happened this year.  Colin Firth sealed up his King George VI role with an Oscar, and The King's Speech took Best Picture and Best Director.  The Fighter did well, pulling in Best Supporting Actor and Actress.  Inception won its fair share of awards including cinematography, sound editing, sound mixing and visual effects.  Overall, it was a fairly predictable Oscars, even though at the Oscar party I chose nominees that weren't the favorites.

Downside of the Oscars?  How about James Franco and Anne Hathaway.  The show is all staged and you would think that of all people, actors, would be able to make something seem like they aren't reading a script.  I mean come on, the best part of the show was when Billy Crystal came out.  Bring Billy back!

The Oscars are really a showcase for films that probably a lot of people haven't seen.  Besides a lot of the best pictures, most of the people in the world probably haven't seen 60-80% of the movies up for nominations.  Even though I saw a big chunk of the films this year, I still didn't see some of the Animated Shorts, documentaries,  foreign film, even some of the pictures that had nominees for Best Actor and Actress.  I think the overall point is to give people who watch an opportunity to get outside of their bubble of cinema, and see something unique.  Look at Slumdog Millionaire, winner in 2009.  A product of India, out of no where that stole the show and won 8 Oscars including best picture.

Point is, I know a lot of people don't watch the Oscars, but give them a shot, because you may see a nominee in the future that you never thought you would've liked.

Toy Story 3

Toy Story 3

Year: 2010

Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen

Directed By: Lee Unkrich

Rating: G

Run Time: 103 Minutes

     Pixar has yet to put out a movie that has not failed.  When I first heard about Toy Story 3 and Cars 2, I started to worry that maybe Pixar is running out of ideas.  To produce sequels to successful movies is always a huge risk, but Pixar seems to make it work.  Granted, Toy Story is the only Pixar movie to produce sequels; I guess we will see what happens when Cars 2 comes out.  However, Toy Story trilogy is an exception to the sequels rule.  Pixar seems to know what they are doing.

     Toy Story 3 picks up many years into the future from Toy Story 2, where Andy is grown up and going off to college.  Woody, Buzz and the gang are all trying to be played with again, and kept in Andy's heart.  Of course Andy's mom does her usual thing and messes up, and take the toys to a day care center.  The toys try to escape and get home, and I will not go further then that when I talk about this movie.  The movie is actually really, really good.  Ever since the initial Toy Story came out, I challenge someone to tell me they didn't want that Buzz Lightyear action figure.  This movie really tugs at your heart strings and makes you think about what happened to all your old toys when you were a kid.  All in all, this was a great way to end (hopefully) the series.

     It is hard to not like this movie, however I will say that it has no business being in the Best Picture category.  Yes it was a great movie, but in no way did it really involve any acting or directing skill in my opinion.  Talking into a microphone and directing animated characters is not really a best picture type film.  That is why there is a category for Best Animated Film.  Although, I do think that it is a sham that Despicable Me didn't get an Oscar nod.  I do think this will win best Animated, and has full right to be nominated for other things, but not best picture!  Don't get me wrong, I love Tom Hanks and Time Allen, but come on, if I was an actor, I would be insulted that a film that required no actual on-screen acting won best picture, even a director.  It is a lot different when you can just make the animated characters do whatever you want, and you don't have to work with actual people.  But hey, if it wins, great, better then some of the other nominations this year.

     I will give this movie 4.5 out of 5 Spanish Buzz Lightyear's.  I feel like I have made my claim to how good this movie was, one of the best of the year for sure.  I guess if you haven't figured it out, I really think if you can watch a movie over and over again, it is a good movie.  In my collection, if you as a movie are lucky enough to get purchased in a special edition case, well then you were probably a really good movie!  But still, shouldn't be up for best picture; sorry if you guys disagree!

TMBro

The Fighter

The Fighter

Year: 2010

Starring: Mark Walhberg, Christian Bale, Amy Adams

Directed By: David O. Russell

Rating: R

Run Time: 115 Minutes

     Boxing is a lost art in the sporting world.  In the past in American history, boxing has brought our nation together.  From Rocky to Cinderella Man, the sport has turned primarily in to a Central American phenomenon, and really has no relevance in America anymore.  However, boxing always seems to produce great movies.  This movie is particularly great not only because it was a boxing movie, but because it was based on true events.  It is always a great movie when it is based on true inspiring events in our history.
    Mark Wahlberg portrays real life boxer Mikey Ward during a time when his brother, Dicky is being filmed for HBO.  This movie is about how the family went through their struggles with Micky's career, Dicky's drug problem and arrests, and Micky's rise to become a champion.  The great thing about this movie is that you can really be connected with the characters.  You get involved with the family struggles, and the troubles throughout the movie, and you get inspired during the boxing scenes.  On the rare occasion does a movie grab you like this one does, and you get so emotionally involved with it.
     Christian Bale was unbelievable in this movie.  If he does not win best Supporting actor, I would be shocked and really upset, unless Geoffery Rush steals the gold man.  When you first watch this movie, you think Christian Bale is over doing it.  You are watching and get a little annoyed with his character.  Christian Bale is notorious for adding a dropping weight for his roles (must be a wreck on his body) but he looked like a crack addicted.  He had the sunk in cheeks, and the make up for him was great.  He played the character with such brilliance that some would say he over-acted.  But then at the end of the movie, you see a clip with the real Micky Ward and Dicky Eklund, and you see how great of a job Christian Bale did in his portrayal of Dicky Eklund.  Christian Bale whole heartedly deserves the Best Supporting Actor for this film.
     I will give this movie 5 out of 5 TKO's.  This movie was great.  Mark Wahlberg's performance was great, Amy Adams could win supporting actress for her role, Christian Bale was amazing, plus the story was great.  I would be okay if this movie won best picture because it really had everything a movie could have.  Even though someone people will look at it purely as a boxing movie and shouldn't be a  contender, I will reply to them saying, Rocky, 1976.  Great movie, don't skip it.

TMBro

Shout Out to Amy Adams for another great role, a local girl from Castle Rock, Colorado.

The Kids Are All Right

The Kids Are All Right

Year: 2010

Starring: Annette Bening, Julianna Moore, Mark Ruffalo

Directed By: Lisa Cholodenko

Rating: R

Run Time: 106 Minutes

     This review will be quick.  In terms of Best Picture nominations, I am not 100% sure why this movie is even up for any nomination.  The movie was good but nothing spectacular.  I feel like this movie is up for the nomination solely because it was controversial in nature, however I did not view it in such a way therefore I saw nothing special about it, and nothing that hasn't been done before.  The only thing I can understand is the acting that Annette Bening did, but at the same time, she was pretty much the same as any role I have ever seen her in.

     This movie is about a family, two kids raised by two mothers.  Yep you guessed it, they are lesbians.  When the daughter turns 18, she gets in contact with the sperm donor their mothers used.  Mark Ruffalo portrays the donor.  The kids decide to meet him, and the movie goes from there about how they try to incorporate him into the family..  There are certain instances that happen and this movie has a very similar feel to say Little Miss Sunshine.  I would give you more about the movie but it would give too much away.  In short, the movie was good and makes you see a side of life that some of us won't normally see.

     In no way do I think this movie has any business being a part of the contenders for best picture.  It was done well, but it seems this year, they gave the nomination to 10 movies, and really they could have made due with 5 nominations.  There was nothing special like I said before, and really if it hadn't been nominated, I probably wouldn't have seen it.  The only thing that really would have drawn me to this is Mark Ruffalo because I like his work.  Other than that, really this movie was nothing special.

     I will give this movie 2 out of 5 natural grown vegetables (see the movie and you will get the reference.)  Aside it being a controversial topic, this movie was nothing more then something that gets done every year.  Maybe if I were strongly against the gay community would I have more of an opinion about this movie, but the fact is I have no problem with homosexuals or their choice to raise a child.  Therefore in my personal opinion, this is nothing special about this movie; nothing really stood out to me about it and I will say it has no business being nominated for best picture.  

TMBro

The Social Network

The Social Network

Year: 2010

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Justin Timberlake

Directed By: David Fincher

Rating: PG-13

Run Time: 120 Minutes

     First and foremost, I am not a fan of facebook, the actual page.  I liked it better back when it was limited to just school email addresses.  However, that is neither here nor there, since this blog is about movies and not about my personal feelings toward a website that is actually a great networking site.  I was never really interested in seeing this film until I watched the Golden Globes and saw how many awards it received and the hype it was receiving from people around.  I told myself to wait until it got on Blu-Ray, and that is what I did. Truth be told, I was more excited to see Justin Timberlake in this movie then anything, because I have come to enjoy him as an actor.

     This movie revolves around the creation of Facebook by Mark Zuckerberg and all the situations that lead him to create Facebook and all the people that we involved in the process.  The way this film is done goes back and forth between the future and the past.  Jesse Eisenberg portrays Mark Zuckerberg, and he is in two different court hearings being sued for his creation of Facebook.  It is an interesting story about how a genius can create something and turn it into a billion dollar company.  It was actually a very enjoyable movie and I liked it.  Jesse Eisenberg was great in this role and before this movie, I really thought that he was like Michael Cera and couldn't really pull off another role, but I was pleasantly surprised.  Justin Timberlake was also very good in this role.  He played Sean Parker who was the co-creator of Napster.  Justin Timberlake is a surprisingly very good actor as well.  Great all around supporting cast as well.  Not to mention the music was done by the front man of Nine Inch Nails, Trent Reznor.

     It was a great movie but in the beginning or middle I got a little confused, because initially I was unaware that it was jumping back and forth between his two suing mediations, so I was a little unhappy with the editing.  However, once I figured that out, and I am not sure if that was my fault or the movie, it was easy getting into the movie again.

     I give this movie a 3.5 out of 5 relationship status updates.  Do I think this could win best picture?  Yes.  Do I want it to?  No, but I wouldn't be upset if it did.  The acting was great but it didn't take much to act the way that they did.  To act like a smart person is not that hard when you are reading a script.  Jesse Eisenberg played his character well but I still didn't see anything that really made this movie stand out to me in relation to Best Picture or Best Actor.

TMBro

Fun Facts:  

The Winklevoss twins, are not actually twins.  Armie Hammer played them both, but Josh Pence played Tyler from the neck down, and the digital added Armie's face to give them the identical twin look. 

Actor's were also told not to meet with their real life portrayals as soon as the filming started. 

Reznor is also the name of the 4 fire blowing triceratops enemies in Super Mario World fortresses.

True Grit (2010)

True Grit (2010)

Year: 2010

Starring: Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon, Hailee Steinfeld, Josh Brolin

Directed by: Joel and Ethan Coen

Run Time: 110 Minutes

Rating: PG-13

     I have not seen the original True Grit, nor have a read the book.  In my eyes, I feel that maybe I should in order to give a quality review because I know that some people will say "Well if you haven't seen the John Wayne version, how can you compare?"  But that is the beauty of movies.  It doesn't matter if it is a remake or reboot, or a sequel that has been years in the making.  Hollywood makes movies to entertain the people of now, not the people of then.  I am biased on this movie though, I am a huge fan of Westerns, and I certainly believe it is a genre of film that has been dying for a long time.  With the few exceptions throughout the years, Westerns are a thing of the past, no pun intended.

     True Grit was a great movie.  The Coen brothers are known for their unusual style of filming, and this movie was actually a little more relaxed in comparison to their others.  This movie is based around the girl, Haille Steinfeld playing Mattie Ross,  who is seeking vengeance for her fathers murder.  She tries to find people to help her in her quest, and stumbles upon two.  Jeff Bridges who plays Rooster, and Matt Damon who plays LeBoeuf.  The movie centers around those three searching for the killer, Tom Chaney played by Josh Brolin.  The on screen chemistry is pretty decent in this movie and I understand why it is up for best picture.  There were some things that didn't sit right with me however, like Matt Damon in a Western, but this movie was still very enjoyable and is a top 5 for my best picture nominations.

     Another thing that I really enjoyed about this movie is the historical correctness that I perceived from this film.  Whether or not it is 100% accurate, I felt that it was while sitting there.  The language was also something of a change that you noticed.  There were no contractions used in the film, at least that I noticed.  The way the actors talked was probably more true to the time then today.  When you take away words like "can't" or 'I'm" you really notice it when they are speaking.  Also, many of you probably don't care much, but the guns used were authentic to the time as well.

     Couple things I disliked was Matt Damon in a western, because it is really hard to see him as a rugged person of that era.  Jeff Bridges looked like he had been living in that time period for years.  That is something that is really hard to do when you are in a western role is to make it actually seem like you are from that era.  That is why a lot of westerns fail now-a-days.  I also didn't like that Josh Brolin was in the main credits even though he appeared in the film for a very small amount of time.  The lead actress Hailee Steinfeld should have been one of the leaders in the credits considering she is in most of the movie.  If you look at the movie poster above, you will see what I mean.

     In order to give this a western theme, I am going to increase my rating system to 6.  So I give this movie a 5 out of 6 shots fired from a calvary revolver and a 4 out of 6.  Reason for two ratings: the first reflects for today in comparison to it as just another movie.  It was a really good movie and will be added to my collection.  The second rating is in comparison to other westerns.  It was good, but it was not Unforgiven, nor was it really that great in comparison to A Fistful of Dollars, but was better then say Appaloose or the more recent 3:10 to Yuma.  You should see it, it is definitely worth a watch.

TMBro

The King's Speech

The King's Speech

Year: 2010

Starring: Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter

Directed By: Tom Hooper

Run Time: 118 Minutes

Rating: R

     It is Oscar season and we are now going to start seeing more an more dramas come about in order to get the nod for the 2011 Oscars.  I am going to be honest, I had not heard of this film, and probably wouldn't have gone and seen it if it hadn't been for the holiday's, but I am glad that I did.  This movie is about King George VI and his rise to King of England.  Unless you are a World War II buff, not people really knew he struggled with a terrible speech impediment.  This movie goes through he struggles and what he did to try to correct it, given that he had to speak to his people often, especially during a time of war.  I will admit that I, at first, was unsure if I liked this movie or not, it is one of those that I had to really think about for a couple days, even weeks before I realized the power of this movie.  However, I am also a World War II buff, so that really helped as well because of course you are going to be more interested when it is something you love right?

     This movie was about King George VI and how he became the King of England and over came a bad speaking stammer.  This movie starts with him in his later life, when he was the Duke of York.  His father, King George V, was to be succeeded by his older brother, Prince Edward.  When his father died, Prince Edward became King Edward VIII but was reluctant to become so.  During his 325 day reign, he caused a crisis by trying to marry and American divorcee.  Prince Edward chose to stay with the woman, and was forced to give up the throne, even though he was never official crowned.  In December 1936, King George VI took his thrown, with a country in hopes of him restoring the confidence of his people.  During the entire movie, he is trying to get over his speech problem by seeing various experts.  His wife, Duchess of York Elizabeth, finds the speech therapist Lionel Logue, who uses out of the ordinary methods yet is effective.  The entire movie is based on the relationship between King George VI and his speech therapist Lionel.  The movie ends when King George VI gave his "King to His People" address in 1939.  It is a great movie and even though it is a drama, it is filled with subtle British humor which I really enjoyed.

     Colin Firth as absolutely amazing in this movie.  I had only ever seen him in one movie prior to this, Love Actually, and really enjoyed that movie as well, yet he was not the lead roll.  The King's Speech was an amazing role for him because he had to act out a stammer, and did so amazingly.  I was happy to see him win a Golden Globe, one he totally deserved.  After seeing many of what I think are potential Oscar nominations, I believe Colin Firth should hands down win the Best Actor; Leading Role award.  Along side him in this movie, and well worthy of a supporting actor award is Geoffrey Rush, and for all of you who don't know actors, he is Barbossa in the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.  Rush played the speech therapist to the King, and was also amazing in this roll.  Helena Bonham Carter, who is usually in an odd role, actually played the roll of the King's wife, and nailed it. I wouldn't be surprised for her to get a nomination as well.

     There were some things I didn't like about this movie though.  First, I was not happy that they never really gave you an resolution to his speech problem.  Did he or didn't he get over it completely?  Secondly, although Colin Firth did very, very well, I went home and listened to the actual King George Speech from the end of the movie, and thought that Firth over did it just a bit.  I would strongly recommend to you to listen to this speech, as it is one of the better speeches in history.  However, this did not really knock down my rating much and as not that big of deal.

     I will give this movie 4 1/2 out of 5 royal stammers.   I really think that has a great chance at taking home the Best Picture Oscar.  I would honestly be surprised if it didn't take home one of the top Oscars this year.  Regardless, I very strongly recommend that you take a trip to the theatre and see this movie.  It was really a great movie.

TMBro

Oscar Season!

Okay everyone, I have taken a long vacation away from posting, yet I have not taken a vacation from seeing and watching movies.  I watched the Golden Globes tonight, and have really thought about what I am going to do next to get myself back into the posting game.  I will be posting Best Picture movie reviews for the 83rd Oscars this up coming February.

So, I again have to apologize for my lack of posting, and may have to apologize for more lack of posting due to school and work.  However, I will see all 5 Oscar nominated best pictures, when those are announced, and will post my thoughts on not only my review but who I think has the best shot in most of the categories this year.

Looking forward to a productive and movie filled 2011.  Thank you all for your continued support and keep reading!

TMBro