Spring Break

OK people, I've been on spring break and a little lazy so I have not posted for a while. But I did watch some great movies over break which should serve as excellent fodder for future posts. I also visited the wonderful city of Boston but that's a whole other story. Here's what I watched:

-March 19th Hostage (In Boston)
-March 22nd Hellboy
-March 23rd James and the Giant Peach, The Whole Ten Yards
-March 24th Jeepers Creepers 2, Diary of a Mad Black Woman
-March 26th House of Sand and Fog, Millions, Taking Lives

Yes it's a short list and no I didn't watch a movie every day, but they are all movies I had not seen before which is the fun part. The best part about that list is that you can pretty much close your eye and point and you'll land on a bad movie. However, all these movies were fun to watch as well as fun to think about afterward. Especially Diary of a Mad Black Woman easily one of the most entertaining films to be craped out of someone's ass in a very long time. I plan, of course, on going into more detail about this but I really don't feel like it at the moment. I will however mention one word that describes the entire tone of the movie Hostage, and that word is: INTENSE. Bruce Willis is the man and perfect at being bald and surly. I shall make a proper post on these movies in due time but until then check out this comic me and some buddies write:http://www.openforumcomics.com.

Twelfth Ocean

The first movie I watched over winter break was Ocean's 12 and in my mind it lived up to the hype. I thought it was grand. It looked pretty thanks to the cast of hotties, excluding Julia Roberts however because she looked like a dog in this movie. Replacing her with Catherine Zeta-Jones was a very good move because she is much more pleasing to look at and doesn't look like a wounded hippo when she cries, which by the way you can see Julia Roberts looking exactly like if you see The Mexican with her and Brad Pitt. I have two main problems with Oceans 12 and I want to get those out of the way before I go any further:
1.) The French douche bag's break dancing scene- This was one of the worst things I have ever seen in a movie in my life. The character was annoying already as soon as he started talking and being French; but as soon as he became a yoga assbag and a breakdancing thief I wanted to hurt somthing.
2.) Not enough Bernie Mac- What's with having one of the funniest people alive only be in the movie for about 30 seconds. Bernie Mac is hilarious and his greatness should have been exploited more thoroughly.
Despite these faults the movie itself glowed with the radiant awesomness of the entire cast. Everyone was on point and just as dynamic as they were in the first film with a few minor changes. We get a much different angle on both Brad Pitt and Matt Damon's characters, which makes sense because this movie is primarily about them, George Clooney although awesome is exactly the same. The style of the movie is also slightly different. The film is very heavy on comedy in a different way than in the first film. There is a scene in the hotel where the actors trade dialouge to what I think is a steady cam and this effect gives a very authentic feel to the scene. It makes it seem more like an actual conversation between the characters rather than purposely rehearsed lines. With this concept in effect the comedy is delivered smoothly with a Seinfeldian air to it, which was also present in the first film to a small extent. The director Steven Soderberg, approaches this film from a much different angle than the first film. Since this movie is not structured as a regular old heist movie just like the last one he must make up for it with indy style directing and adding more "coolness" to the characters themselves as opposed to the story they are caught up in. What I mean is we see a whole different side of Matt Damon, he's much more like a willing child in this movie. He's Ready to learn and trying to be just like the big boys instead of a stubborn idiot like in the last movie. And whether or not that makes him cooler is a matter of opinion and since mine is usually the right one is say it does.
Speaking of opinions one thing that pisses me off is people that don't like this movie based solely on the fact that its not exactly like Ocean's 11. I hate that. The problem with the world is when people don't realize that by giving you a different movie from the first one Ocean's 12 has accomplished its task as a sequel. To all those douche bags that want the same old heist movie where there is the crazy twist in the end and all this money is stolen and the villain is left holding his dick in his hand while the good guy finally gets his last laugh then I point you in the direction of other films that while noteworthy in their own right still hold nothing really surprising in the way of a heist movie. Films such as The Italian Job, Matchstick Men, and The Score are all in the same category and while they are all good in their own right (I have them ranked from most "ok" to best thing ever) they still stick to the same basic heist movie formula. This is why Ocean's 12 is a great movie, it's a sequal that is not a complete retelling of the original story and it approaches the heist theme in a way that I have never seen before. Also, The music in this movie kicks ass.

Peter Pedophile

Now I know the most recent version of the Peter Pan story, the movie Peter Pan (2003) by P.J. Hogan is suppposed to be the more true telling of the story and all that crap, but to tell you the truth I just dont care. I don't care for many reasons; but the most important is because the existence of the marvelous Hook makes this version of Peter Pan seem like a remake of Pootie Tang. However, I must add that Peter Pan does have its plus sides, well only really one and it is the dude that plays Captain Hook and the father of the Darling family. He rocks, and is amazing at being a bad guy and for further proof see The Patriot or the Harry Potter movies where he plays that colossal dick Lucius Malfoy. Anyway, in viewing this most recent update of the Peter Pan story (aside from Finding Neverland which isn't really a remake but I'll get there be patient) I found myself realizing that even at a much younger age I would not have been able to identify with or even enjoy this story. The director seemed to take the focus of the story and place it mostly on Wendy; which may have been more true to the original tale but is simply not as interesting as Peter Pan himself. Wendy is boring, dumb, and whiny and nobody cares about her.
I also found the lost boys to be very uninteresting. Where I ask is the greatness of Thud, the kid from Hook that turned into a bowling ball; or where is the little kid that looked like Gary Coleman that felt up Robin Williams' face? And I know he was kind of a douche but come on we all loved Rufio with his crazy skunk hair. I'm not trying to say Peter Pan should have had all the same lost boys but at least some that were interesting. Hook had personality and personality goes a long way in movies. Especially because every character in Hook has something to contribute, in Peter Pan the lost boys are just like a bunch of pigs running around and eating their own feces--now who wants to see that? I don't.
One thing you might be saying right now is that I shouldn't be comparing these two movies and should let them stand alone. But I tell you it's not possible. If you've seen Hook then you know another Peter Pan adaptation is just gonna fall far short of anything Disney or Speilberg have done. Finding Neverland is a whole other story. The genius of this movie is that its not just the same Peter Pan story over again, yet it manages to still tell us the whole story and convey the wonder and magic that surrounds the original tale in a new and inventive way. Johnny Depp. The man is amazing and I almost have a boner just saying his name...ok not really but now that I got you thinking about him I bet you do. In adding Depp to this story not only do you get good acting but also a reason to put up with the extremely snobby British accents that come along with this era. Finding Neverland is an insightful rejuventation of the Peter Pan tale and lacks the boring child-porn-centric flare of the most recent adaptation. And it's easy to view without thinking about Hook because well, its not just a remake.
So in conclusion go see Peter Pan if you've never seen Hook, then go see Hook and never see Peter Pan again because it sucks and the director likes to touch small boys, hence all the halfnaked little boys in the movie, and then go see Finding Neverland because its awesome, then go to bed, three movies in one day is a lot. Goodnight.

(p.s. if you catch the pulp fiction reference in there you get 10 bonus points)