I love movies, plain and simple. I try to keep up on the most current ones, or at least the bigger releases. My reviews are based on a 4 star rating system.
-Matt V.
%MJVPOSTS%
Search Results for: MJV
Invictus
July 9, 2010 by
MJV already gave Invictus a mini-review in his Best of 2009/Pre Academy Awards Analysis, but having just watched I thought I’d give the movie a full treatment. Â While Invictus doesn’t quite live up to the heights to which it aspires, it contains some genuinely inspired performances and a storyline that ranks among the best of what the greatest sports movies have to offer. Â It is an engaging, if sometimes muddled, tale of a scrappy underdog rugby team pulling together to win the highest prize the sport has to offer: Â the World Cup trophy. Â Directed by the great Clint Eastwood, one of Hollywood’s most storied personalities, the film is as much about Rugby as it is about prejudice, hatred, and the healing of a nation–a task that few directors would be willing to tackle, and despite the movie’s flaws, Eastwood is to be commended for embarking on a project with such a massive, yet still deeply intimate, scope.
Immediately following his election as president of South Africa, Mandela, impeccably played by Morgan Freeman, one of the greatest actors of this or any generation, seeks out a way to unite the country in a way that has never been done before.  While apartheid has officially been abolished, his country still carries the deep scars that decades of government-sanctioned segregation have wreaked on the populace.  Knowing that legal changes cannot alter hearts and minds, Mandela engages in a political calculation of deeply human proportion:  he entreats François Pienaar (a muscled-up, heavily accented Matt Damon ), captain of the Springboks, the South African rugby team, to do nothing less than win the world cup.  What follows is predictable but engaging nonetheless:  The Springboks and their captain rise to the challenge, bond over tough training regimens and shared victories, face a series of ever-more-difficult rugby teams until finally reaching the championship match against the New Zealand Allblacks.  If you can guess the outcome, I’ll give you a hot cup of jack squat for predicting the most obvious of sports movie endings.
"Soccer is gentleman's game played by hooligans. Rugby is a hooligan's game played by gentlemen."
But Invictus, despite being entirely about a rugby team, isn’t really a movie about sports. Â Eastwood instead wisely keeps the focus on Mandela and the political ramifications of his election and the cabinet-level implications of his personal interest in the tournament. He also includes several scenes that could have easily ended up in a DVD “Extras” menu, such as Mandela’s security guards discussing protective procedures and rules of engagement. Â A bold move to be sure, as the movie does tend to drag on and even lose focus from time to time. Â But Eastwood isn’t catering to a Michael Bay audience here. Â He knows that the social ramifications of Mandela’s election, which affect every individual in South Africa even up to staff of the president, are the true soul of Invictus. Â One of the most poignant scenes, which certainly would have been shed were the film in the hands of a lesser director, takes place not on the rugby field or presidential office, but inside Mandela’s actual cell when Pienaar and his team tour the prison. Â And by adding these layers to the movie, Eastwood creates a tapestry that is far richer than just a story about a rugby team.
That Morgan Freeman did not win Best Actor at the Academy Awards is probably a tragedy, though having not seen Crazy Heart I can’t make that claim with all certainty. But his performance as Nelson Mandela was absolutely stunning. Â The way he inhabited every bit of Mandela’s character was mesmerizing: Â his gait, his speech and vocal patterns, his interactions with friends and colleagues…it is the stuff of acting legend. Â Stanislavski himself would be hard pressed to find a greater master of method acting.
As a certified octogenarian, Clint Eastwood has officially retired from acting in order to focus on contributing as much as he can to the world through his directoral skills for as long as he is physically able. Â I have no doubt he was keenly aware that the inconsistent pacing and occasional meandering would keep Invictus from achieving greatness. Â But the result is a film that, while not as commercially viable as some other sports films, does an excellent job of showing what it takes to shed the chains of hatred and embrace a brighter, glorious future.
Rating:[Rating:4/5]
Avatar contest winner!
June 20, 2010 by
Congratulations to Angela and Maia Walter, who won our Avatar DVD/Blu-ray giveaway! Â The two of them submitted only one entry, and theirs was chosen by my wife (all the names were put in a box, mixed up, and my wife picked one at random without looking) shortly after the contest ended tonight.
All the entrants of our Avatar contest, along with the prize itself.
Thank you to all 16 individuals who entered the contest! To everyone who suggested movies for us to review, we’ll try our best to accommodate your ideas. Â :) Â And thanks to all our readers for a great first year of Walking Taco movie and TV reviews. Â Here’s to many more!
-TacoGrande, MJV, and Movieseal
2010 Academy Awards Live Coverage
March 6, 2010 by
Join us on Sunday, 7pm Central, as MJV hosts a liveblog of the 2010 Academy Awards!
<a href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=d2d0856c96″ mce_href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=d2d0856c96″ >Walking Taco covers the Academy Awards…Live!</a>
The Crazies
March 3, 2010 by
It’s rare that audiences get treated to good horror movies. Luckily, a filmmaker or two comes around to deliver one. Off the top of my head only a few flicks of the last year even come to mind. “Drag Me to Hell” was a return to form for Sam Raimi fans, and while it’s arguably a straight-up comedy, “Zombieland” was a solid dose of fun. “The Crazies” hits screens as a remake of a George A. Romero film from 1973 that most (including me) haven’t seen. So taken on its own terms, this 2010 film works adequately at what it’s setting out to do.
The film opens during a little league baseball game. A rigid old man, formerly the town drunk, walks onto the field with a rifle in hand. Timothy Olyphant, the bland star of “Live Free or Die Hard” and “Hitman,” and the bright spot of “A Perfect Getaway” and “The Girl Next Door,” plays small-town officer David Dutton. He confronts the man only to find himself staring down the barrel of the gun before having to make a split-second decision. He discharges his sidearm and takes the old man’s life. From here on out, the town becomes stricken with multiple obscure cases involving individuals going mad and attempting/committing murder. Dutton and his trusted deputy soon discover something has gone terribly wrong with the town’s water supply, turning its inhabitants into vicious killers before becoming zombie-like monsters. Eventually the whole area becomes quarantined by the U.S. army, and Dutton must fight to protect his wife and unborn child.
Of the many recent zombie films, “The Crazies” fits right in. I know many horror buffs claim that this isn’t exactly a “zombie” film because the infected people have some form of human consciousness–but come on, they get an infection, start attacking people, and turn into the perfect visual aid of a zombie. So if I continue to refer to them as such you’ll just have to deal with it. While I wouldn’t say this movie ranks quite as high as “28 Weeks Later” or the 2004 “Dawn of the Dead,” it’s a close call. Director Breck Eisner (of the forgettable 2005 “Sahara’) knows how to instill some raging intensity in a scene. Granted, most of the sequences here have a certain familiarity and standardization to them especially within the genre, but he isn’t simply selling truckloads of gore. Sure, there is some of that, but he never forgets that the horror rests not ultimately with the zombies, but with human versus human confrontation. The most interesting aspect of “The Crazies” is the fact that there is some form of humanity left in these monsters. They have thoughts and memories, but with a damaged mind–driven to murder. M. Night Shyamalan should have waited and taken notes from this film when developing the atrocious “The Happening.” “The Crazies” also features a few memorable scenes, making it more than disposable horror, and ones concerning ‘the living dead.’ The tone of the movie never falters, and it also never loses sight of moral questions and dilemmas, providing the right commentary to give reason for the movie. It’s still not a spectacular movie, or the horror film to reinvent the genre, but with solid performances across the board, excellent cinematography and unnerving tension the whole way through, “The Crazies” makes a standard zombie affair quite entertaining.
[Rating:3.5/5]
-MJV & the Movies
Avatar
December 20, 2009 by
‘King of the World’ James Cameron rises back from the depths of the sea after his “Titanic” success twelve years ago to deliver one of the most epic films of all time with “Avatar.”
Let’s get the main two questions out of the way: Is it a good movie? Heck yes. Is it a game-changing film that will transform movies forever? Well, possibly. But can any film really do that? On a technical level, movies can always advance special effects and what can be accomplished as far as the limits of imagination and reality go. And to its credit, Cameron’s imagination graces every expensive frame of this movie to an unbelievably believable effect.
I’ve heard much complaining about the simplicity and cliche of his storyline. I’m at a loss to understanding the reasoning of such complaints. ‘Avatar’ presents a classic Pocahontas narrative. In 2154, the American government dispatches a high-tech military unit to ransack the planet of Pandora in an effort to obtain a valuable mineral deposit. The problem? An indigenous race of humanoid Na’vi warriors (standing over twice the size of a human) refuse to relocate and give up the forests of their planet for human greed. The plan? American scientists are utilized to understand the Na’vi and negotiate a compromise. After one of the scientists is killed in action, his twin marine brother, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington, Terminator Salvation) arrives to replace him and operate a genetically-engineered and remote-controlled avatar of a Na’vi that will infiltrate their race. The expected happens when Jake soon loses his militaristic ideals, becomes one with their race, and falls for his Na’vi counterpart, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana, Star Trek).
Call the plot cliche or predictable, but I found it to be the perfect setup for Cameron’s world. Never once does the audience not know where the story is headed, but never once do they know what this incredible director will show us next. The very world he creates rivals any other cinematic achievement in history to date. Witnessing the incredible design of the creatures inhabiting Pandora generated serious awe for me, as they felt authentic and extremely realistic. Even on the human side of things–all of the military equipment: the helicopters, weaponry, and human-operated tank-bots stand as incredible accomplishments in design. Cameron has pronounced every detail of his endless visionary world. And I haven’t even mention the 3D factor.
This is, above all things considered, the most profound and immersing use of 3D to date. It really opens up Pandora and allows you to enter its universe. I can’t stress enough the level of detail utilized in the film, and the 3D really eliminates all the barriers from receiving a truly monumental movie experience. Whether or not the movie will play as well at home remains to be seen. Even without the third-dimension factor, the visual effects still top anything Michael Bay threw at the screen this year. The motion-capture used to create the Na’vi characters works tremendously well in capturing authentic expression and emotion. You can actually see the faces of Sigourney Weaver, Sam Worthington, and Zoe Saldana under the layers of computer-animation. How this was all accomplished is way beyond me, but Cameron fails to let us down after all the hype surrounding the technology he furthered to create his vision.
James Cameron may not be a storytelling genius, but the man knows what works, and he consistently tackles all of his projects with huge success and accomplishment. ‘The Terminator,’ ‘Aliens’, ‘The Abyss,’ ‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day,’ ‘True Lies’ and ‘Titanic’ (all among my favorite films) pushed the limits of filmmaking and what could be done with their budgets. Luckily, Cameron doesn’t puke throwaway spectacle all over the screen. He delivers something special and memorable with characters you care about and themes that are universal. “Avatar” continues his streak as a filmmaking pioneer pushing the boundaries of technology to show audiences the limitless potential of the imagination. This is certainly one of the best films of 2009, and one of the great movie-going experiences of all time. Get up out of your chair, head to the multiplex, purchase a big tub of popcorn, and witness this incredible film in all its 3D glory.
[Rating:4.5/5]
The Taking of Pelham 123
November 11, 2009 by
Armed men hijack a New York City subway train, holding the passengers hostage in return for a ransom, and turning an ordinary day’s work for dispatcher Walter Garber (Denzel Washington)Â into a face-off with the mastermind (John Travolta)Â behind the crime (IMDB).
Tony Scott’s attempt at remaking 1974’s “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three” surprisingly fails, when in reality with all this talent involved, it should be sizzling. Not that there’s much you can do to improve the other classic film, but giving it a modern spin with scenery chewing actors like Denzel Washington and John Travolta should be one of the most exciting films of the year. Not to be. Scott’s infamous MTV editing that overwhelmed “Man on Fire” and “Domino” is on display here once again, the dialogue is trashy, and the director also seems to have little faith in the suspense of the story. Truthfully there isn’t much, unlike the original, and so Scott splices some ridiculous crash sequences (which really feel quite stupid) in between Travolta’s rantings.
That brings up Travolta, a talented actor and sometimes entertaining villain (Face/Off, Broken Arrow) and other times not so much (Swordfish). But what seems a perfect vehicle for him, turns out to be one of his most ham-fisted performances in quite some time. His constantly whiny bad guy, Ryder, seems to lack any shred of intelligence, and his dialogue in this thing is often unbelievably campy. While Denzel Washington has a settled in, humbled performance that doesn’t require much, Travolta is rather hilarious and doesn’t play well in generating any tense moments.
This new “Pelham” is not the wild ride and sparring match-up it should have been. I typically like Tony Scott’s work (True Romance, Crimson Tide, Enemy of the State, Spy Game) and even much of his maligned work (Man on Fire, Domino, Deja Vu). But “Pelham 123” is a ludicrous bore that has none of the suspense of the original, and wants to be a popcorn actioner when it should be an intense thriller. A major disappointment. I encourage anyone interested in this film to check out the original film first.
[Rating:2.5/5]
Paranormal Activity
November 9, 2009 by
“Paranormal Activity,” an $11,000 horror-wonder, has used its marketing and word-of-mouth among the college crowd to succeed as a $100 million hit for Paramount Pictures. While a post-Halloween review of the film may be a little late in the game, the film is still having an impressive impact at the box office and will likely add another $10-15 million to its unbelievable haul. Only unbelievable in comparison to its budget, the film really is 2009’s “Blair Witch Project,” another handheld documentary-esque horror film that kickstarted this whole shaky-cam push for the “it’s-really-happening” approach–a film that also managed to gross over $100 million.
I do appreciate a well-constructed horror film. Too often ‘horror’ as a genre fails to reach beyond the cliche-riddled approach of the slasher flick, and now the ‘torture porn’ arena that has exploded in cinemas with movies like the “Saw” canon and “Hostel.” While it may appear that the shelf life of splatter cinema is dying out (look at Saw VI’s box office), “Paranormal Activity” retrospectively plays on some of the horror genre’s greatest strengths–spirits, ghosts, demonic possession, haunted houses, and all those unearthly entities that cannot be beaten.
The story here actually centers around a seemingly “typical” American couple, Katie and Micah, terrorized by an unseen force in their house. Warnings from a local ghost-whisperer warn the pair that the spirit is no ghost, but an angry demonic presence that he cannot deal with. The couple is strapped for options, and so Micah sets up a home video camera to capture the events occuring throughout the day and night, and of course, creepy images abound and the terror increases over time.
Audiences have overall been praising this one, overhyping to unbelievable levels–or at least that’s what I read all over the internet. Anyone I’ve actually talked to about the film in person seems have only been mildly amused by the film’s proceedings. I mostly agree. While “Paranormal Activity” deserves props for its atmosphere and its accomplishments with such a small budget, the film still takes too much time between the events taking place. This is a film that really stretches out the patience of audiences not initally gripped by its very proposal of a potential demonic spirit. Doors slam, crash noises occur, lights flick on and off, and grunting noises come through a digital audio feed. By that time the film has reached beyond its halfway point, and when creepier things do happen, the pacing picks up some. But I couldn’t help but feel underwhelmed by the ordeal. The film also preys on the character’s isolation quite a bit. Of course it helps to maintain the sense of dread and confinement, but I constantly questioned why Katie and Micah simply don’t leave the house. Yes, their ghostbuster guy tells them that it won’t matter if they leave (the demon will follow them), I find it hard to believe they would put up with some the film’s later events without giving it a shot. Also, these characters seem normal other than the fact that they’re home all the time. Do they not have normal everyday jobs? Are they not around several other people? I don’t know, but if my house was haunted– first, I’d be out of there, and second, the world would know about it. These two choose to stay in this house of horror, and somehow manage to sleep at night.
Unfortunately, the film was a bit of a letdown–an admirable step in the right direction for the genre, but one that misfired for me. A lot of the hype probably had something to do with it, and the fact that the home-video style has worn out its welcome for me. The ads on TV mostly showcase audience reaction to the film rather than actual footage of the movie, and while that’s an awesome approach in marketing, I sat in a packed audience that never screamed at the screen.
[Rating:2.5/5]
