Couples Retreat

Hud and I watched this last night while wrapping presents (clarification: while *I* was wrapping presents) and it actually wasn't too bad. It was kind of funny and not too stupid. The characters were a little stereotypical, but heck, stereotypes are funny.

It also made me roll my eyes to see that, out of the four couples, all of the women were smokin' hot and all of the men were fat slobs. But I laughed (if not constantly or uproariously--though this is not to say there were not corny moments) and so did Hud, and the movie stayed light and fun and sweet. (I will never forgive White Men Can't Jump for veering off into depressing drama territory, but this one didn't do that.)

Did anyone else wonder if maybe they used the set from Gilligan's Island during the search for Eden East?

The Expendables

Gunfire, mercenaries, predictability, blah blah blah. Hud picked it. I'm mostly just posting about it so I'll remember I shouldn't bother watching it again.

I think this was Hud's revenge for some of the movies I've made him sit through.

Fight Club

I'd seen this movie years ago, so I already knew the story; but I read the book a few weeks ago, which gave me a craving to see Brad Pitt's muscles and hear the cool Pixies soundtrack again.

Here's something I don't remember noticing the other time I watched it: the Tyler Durden subliminal messages. He flickers into the picture for just a few frames every now and then (including perhaps one specific part of him at the end).

The movie ends a little bit differently from the book. I guess the book's ending is just a little bit more rational or realistic, but I'm not sure which ending I prefer.

But I can tell you that in general I prefer the movie, because man, that Brad Pitt sure is hot stuff.

Legend

Back when I first heard about this movie I thought I would really like it. (Tom Cruise! Unicorns!) But in the intervening years, my interest has dwindled. Tom Cruise turned out to be short and weird, and unicorns are just too much trouble. But apparently my interest has not dwindled enough to keep me from forcing myself to sit through this movie.

So. It was not as bad as I expected, but I did find myself wishing I'd watched it when I was 12. I think I would have LOVED it back then. Now . . . I found I didn't pay too much attention to it. And, while Mia Sara looks absolutely perfect as a fairytale princess, I couldn't get past the idea that Tom Cruise looked like a frat boy in a tunic. But I did get lots of ironing done.

Ladder 49

I'm not sure why I force myself to watch movies that I don't really care to see, but this movie was recommended to me by Billy the Fireman. I kind of felt obligated to watch it. But I've had it out from netflix for a month now, if that tells you anything.

And now I know why it took me so long to bother with it. It's just not my thing. It's like a Lifetime Original Movie with a crappy, Disneyfied soundtrack. I believe Billy when he says this movie is pretty realistic, and he's still my hero and all, but I think I may be a little bit skeptical of his next movie recommendation.

Ramona and Beezus

Would you believe I watched this movie without my kids? I really kind of do have an excuse. They watched it while I was at work this weekend, and it's due back at the library tomorrow (um, make that today) and Beverly Cleary's Ramona books were among my favorites when I was little, so I just couldn't pass it up.

The movie was really cute, but I do have one complaint. Can they not find an actor to play a dad in this sort of movie who is in any way believable? The whole way through, Mr. Quimby (John Corbett) acted like it was the first time he'd ever met his family. At least Ramona (Joey King) and Beezus (Selena Gomez) were absolutely perfect. Once again I've been impressed by Selena Gomez. She's great!

Splice

Genetic experimentation gone wrong brings a whole new meaning to the phrase
"getting some tail."

White Oleander

What a downer. It's probably not the best choice if you've just found out first-hand that Polansky's wrecker service will totally screw you by charging $524.95 to move your vehicle four miles after it has been rendered useless by someone who drives like an idiot and you're trying to focus on all the good things in life. And it won't be a favorite of your husband's when his top two requests are gunfire and nudity. In fact, you may find that he has disappeared before half of the movie is over, and soon afterwards you may hear him snoring loudly.

But what a good movie! There are a lot of big names attached to this movie, which could mean a sucky flop, but each character was excellent. And the story is great. (It's about a teenaged girl named Astrid whose artist mother has been sent to prison for poisoning her ex-boyfriend, leaving Astrid to bounce between horrifying foster homes . . . what do you mean, that doesn't sound great?) I kind of sort of want to read the book now, except that my wish list is tooooo long and I'm being very picky about what I add to it.

This movie is not corny, sappy, overdone, or a tear-jerker. It is just the opposite of all those things: original, undiluted, subtle . . . and I didn't cry or feel like the movie thought I was supposed to. Two thumbs up, and a middle finger for Polansky.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I

I saw this movie Saturday afternoon but wasn't quite sure how I felt about it, so I didn't blog about it right away. One thing I was immediately certain about, though: I won't be taking the kids to a movie again until my memory of it has faded enough that I go back to thinking it's a good idea. One asked questions loudly, one kept telling me she needed to pee (girl, get it straight! I'm not leaving Harry Potter to go to the bathroom! Oh, yes, Mother of the Year once again) and the third farted throughout the entire thing. Didn't even try to hide it.

But about the movie. Of course I've been excited about seeing it for years (no more so than the other HP movies, but still, excited), so the fact that it did not disappoint me speaks volumes. And it's a little bit unfair of me to complain that it was so dark and depressing, and that there wasn't much lighthearted humor in it--after all, that's the way the book was. And there's no point in whining about the parts that were left out; just as with all of the other HP movies, there's just no way to fit in every detail.

But there were two parts I am going to complain about. First, there were significant changes made to the scene where Harry and Hagrid escape to the Burrow on Hagrid's flying motorcycle; the way Harry betrayed himself was changed, and their crash was much less crash-y than in the book. Second, Harry (as Polyjuice Potion Runcorn) did NOT steal the eyeball. That kind of upset me. Those were not the only two changes, but those were the only two I disagreed with.

After only two significant missteps, you would think I would have a favorable opinion of the movie overall, but it left me with such a somber and serious feeling. Of course it's a must-see movie for any Harry Potter fan, of course they did a good job with it and it's an exciting movie, but I didn't love it. It's not my favorite. (It didn't help that Cedric Diggory doesn't show up in this one at all.)

The Corpse Bride

I prefer The Nightmare Before Christmas. Especially the music.

Panic Room

I kind of meant for this to be one of my Fright Month movies, but I couldn't manage to squeeze it in October. As it turns out, it was more of a thriller than a scary movie, anyway. It was unfortunately predictable, too. There were a couple of tense moments, and it's not like it was boring, but there just wasn't much to it. I prefer thrillers that keep me guessing and wondering and questioning, and there wasn't much of that here. At least now I've seen it and I can mark it off my list.

Fright Month: Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Fright month ends, not with a bang or even a ghostly wail, but with a chuckle. I don't think this movie is supposed to be a comedy, but most of it sure passes for one in my book. Except for the scenes where I felt sorry for the monster.

My favorite part was when the old blind hermit taught Frankenstein how to drink wine and smoke cigars. The monster kept grunting, "Mmmmm, gooooood," which made me giggle. Then when he met up with Doctor Pretorius, the monster almost reminded me of Herman from an episode of The Munsters.

Looks like a remake is coming out next year. I wonder if it will actually be scary?

Her hair is buick. Wish I could get mine to do that.

Fright Month: Frankenstein (1931)

Yet another non-scary scary movie. I'd never seen this movie before, but I knew all of those bits and pieces that have been embedded in our cultural history--Dr. Frankenstein creates a monster out of old body parts and brings it to life, shouting "It's alive!" with his trusty hunchback (not Igor, but Fritz) at his side, and terror ensues.

I read the book just over a year ago, so I already knew that the original story differed quite a bit from those tidbits mentioned above. But I was hoping the movie would impart some thrills and chills, especially since not many of my other Fright Month flicks did.

Too bad my hopes were dashed. I found nothing creepy or frightening in this movie. But even though it was lacking in tension, it was still an interesting and entertaining film. Probably one that everyone should watch at least once. I mean, it's a classic, right? But now that I've seen it once, I'll probably be stopping there.

I must admit that, though it may not have scared me at all, this movie did create quite an iconic image of Frankenstein's monster. This is exactly the way everyone pictures it.

Fright Month: The Broken

I'm not as freaked out as I was during the last part of Session 9, but here's another creepy one. Gina McVey sees a girl driving by on the streets of London, which wouldn't be a problem at all except for the fact that the girl looks exactly like Gina. She follows her double, and things get weird. I like weird. (And surreal, and mind-bending, as the netflix synopsis describes this movie.)

If you pay attention to a few small details, what should have been a big surprise at the end isn't so surprising. But I will be kind and not tell you what those details were, because if you're looking for them  you're sure to notice them. And being surprised is always more fun, isn't it?

During the first little bit of the movie nothing is very scary except for the music. In fact, it seemed a bit silly with tense, dramatic music and no reason for it. But I suppose they were setting the tone. And, as long as I'm complaining, I'll mention that I could have done without the sister-in-law-in-the-shower scene, which was a bit over the top in an otherwise subtly tense movie. But overall, I give this one a couple of thumbs up.

I am left wondering . . . why? And glad in the knowledge that my kitchen is directly on the other side of my bathroom mirror. There's nothing scary in my kitchen.

Fright Month: Session 9

Fright attained.

You already know that abandoned insane asylums creep me out. Of course that's the setting for this movie. A five-man construction crew is hired to clean the place up, and then . . .

. . . things start to happen.

The first 40 minutes were a bit slow. The next half hour started getting interesting. But the last thirty minutes? Oh my goodness. Let's just say I'm trying to keep my back to the wall.

I may be sleeping with the lights on tonight.

Fright Month: Children of the Corn

I'm having trouble finding a scary movie. I was just sure this one would give me nightmares and maybe even put me off eating corn for the rest of my life, but no. I'm not scared to look behind me. I'm not even any more frightened of my kids than usual. I did jump a time or two during the movie, but not significantly.

Of course, it didn't help that Hud was scoffing throughout the entire thing. But even I had to laugh when he made fun of the main character, Burt, by saying, "You're getting your [butt] kicked by corn."

At the end of the movie when the car was full of cornstalks but the viewer was supposed to be lulled into thinking it's all over, it suddenly hit me: I know Steven King's stories well enough to know there was probably one more surprise lurking. Sure, I was right, but it was a pretty weak one.

Chalk another one up for my "it was a disappointment but at least now I've seen it" list.

Fright Month: Nosferatu (1922)

This was kind of a misfire as far as fright is concerned. I think the main problem was the music. Sometimes the soaring orchestral score added to the atmosphere; more frequently it lent an almost unacceptably comedic air to the movie. Some of the music was really beautiful, but most of the time it didn't do a thing towards upping the creepiness factor.

There were at least three songs I totally recognized, and it's driving me crazy because I can't figure out what they were. I tried looking online for information regarding the score, but all I could find is that this movie has had a variety of scores, and the one I heard is most likely not the original.

A far cry from Edward Cullen, eh?

Maybe I'm uncultured, but I think this is the first silent film I've ever watched. It's got some serious over-actors (I was wishing that something would wipe that beatific smile off Jonathon Harker's face, and was quite pleased when the phantom stagecoach driver did the trick), though I suppose that, without the benefit of speech, some overly-dramatic body language was of necessity. As were, it seems, crazy eyebrows (see Renfield).

Citizens of 1922 must have been some seriously slow readers. Those title cards were onscreen for far longer than necessary.

I wonder why they changed Mina's name to Nina?

Easy Virtue

How not to get my husband to watch a movie: when he asks what it's about, tell him, "I think it's about an American girl in the 1800s who marries an Englishman and they have problems and smoke a lot." Of course, as it turns out, it's actually set in the 20th century (maybe the 1920s or 30s?), but I don't think that would have made a difference to Hud.

At least it was far more light-hearted than I expected. I thought this movie was going to be all serious and dramatic and angst-ridden. I figured it was much in the same vein as last night's The Age of Innocence, but I couldn't have been more wrong. The couples switcheroo at the end was entirely predictable, but that is acceptable in a movie that Mandy warned I should go into with very, very low expectations.

By the way, I'm not doing so well in carrying out Fright Month, am I. In case you were especially worried about that, let me reassure you that I plan to get on with the scary stuff next week.

The Age of Innocence

At wine book club tonight, our meeting was a multimedia extravaganza. After finishing our bottle of wine discussion on the book, we watched the movie adaptation. It's pretty rare that I get to watch a movie when the book is so fresh on my mind.

Well, of course I mentally catalogued all of the differences between the book and the movie. They left out a few minor characters (most notably Medora Manson and Mr. Welland) and changed a few names (Dallas became Theodore in one instance and Townsend in another, and two different Fannys became Annies), but there were only two major ideas that were left out. I mention both in my review of the book--the first was May Archer's unspoken monologue, the second was Dallas Archer's observation about the nature of communication in his parents' generation. But overall, the movie was very faithful to the book and was an excellent adaptation.

One thing that bothered me a little bit about the movie was the narrator. First of all, that there was one. It was a little awkward. However, the movie would have had to leave out so much without that device. Second of all, the narrator was an older-sounding woman who was never introduced. Who the heck was she, and how did she know all this stuff she was telling us? This was especially odd since the entire book was written from Newland Archer's point of view. It would have made much more sense to me if he had been the narrator.

Not surprisingly, I found the book better than the movie, although the movie was also quite good. If you have to choose between the two, I say read the book. If you can only spare two hours and nineteen minutes, the movie will do.

Fright Month: The Amityville Horror (2005)

In honor of Halloween, I have lined up a few scary movies for this month. We're off to a chilling start with the newest version of The Amityville Horror.

I read the book by Jay Anson probably fifteen years ago. Of course, it's been so long that I barely remember it, but I do have a vague memory of feeling fairly doubtful that it was actually a true story. Although the original DeFeo murders undisputedly happened, this movie did nothing to dispel the idea that the paranormal activity that the Lutz family were supposed to have experienced might have been drug-induced, or a ploy to make a buck, or a combination of the two. But I have to admit that is one creepy-looking house! It's as if it has evil eyes.

I think the movie changed quite a few things as compared to the story told in the book. The father of the family took much more of a Jack Torrance turn in the film, and I don't remember all of the business about torturing Native Americans hundreds of years ago.

At least the movie was pretty creepy, unlike Paranormal Activity. I mean, I'm not expecting to see dead people reflected in my bathroom mirror, and I never did spill my wine, but the movie carried quite a bit of tension.

I'm not sure why I was thinking this would be the original version--maybe because I don't remember ever hearing that there was a remake--but I was kind of disappointed when I opened the netflix envelope and found that this movie was released in 2005. At first I was thinking I might want to watch the original too, but now that I've watched the 2005 version I'm thinking I probably won't bother. Unless you tell me it's necessary.

Best parts: the scenes of Ryan Reynolds without a shirt. MMmmmmm.

Hit Girl is in this one too!

Labyrinth

I don't have much to say about this movie, except that it is firmly rooted in the 80s. If the totally last-century soundtrack hadn't clued me in, I would have known merely because of David Bowie's utter fabulosity.

I'm sure if I'd seen this movie in 1986 I would have loved it. I don't know if I'm too old for it now, or if I'm just spoiled by today's movies, but I wasn't especially impressed. Even Hud's memory of the movie was much better than the actual experience of watching it.

You Don't Mess with the Zohan

I can't believe I stayed up late to watch this movie. In fact, I can't believe I watched this movie at all. I don't know, maybe Bill Bryson was right and I don't have a sense of humor, but I probably only laughed four times during this movie. One of those times was when the Phantom cracked eggs into a glass and fuzzy chicks came out.

If you're smart, you don't mess with watching the Zohan.

Letters to Juliet

This movie was just gag-me sappy. And yet, against my will, I loved it right from the very first song (Colbie Caillat singing "You Got Me," one which I hadn't heard previously, but I was so proud that I recognized Caillat's voice. I had to download it because it's just impossibly happy.) Too bad that was the only good song. Most of the rest of the soundtrack consisted of pop Italian love songs and Disney-fied orchestral pieces, though I think I recognized Caillat in another song or two.

I'm sure my approval of this movie was largely due to its setting in Italy, which is just too perfect, but even for a predictable chick flick I really enjoyed it. The presence of handsome Christopher Egan didn't hurt either.

Bottle Shock

This is a fun little movie, especially if you like wine. Even if you think you don't like wine*, if you're someone who always roots for the underdog this could be the movie for you. It's the true story of a 1976 California vs. France wine competition.

Being my usual cynical self, I couldn't help but wonder how slanted this movie was. It showed all of the American characters as down-to-earth and likeable; perhaps flawed, but in a way that comes closer to making you want to hang out with them as opposed to judging and rejecting them. In contrast, the French are all portrayed as know-it-all snobs.

I'd say it's probably impossible to drink this movie without concurrently watching a bottle of wine.

* I believe there is a little wine-drinker in all of us. Some of you just don't know it yet. 

You Again

Two scoops of crazy and a side order of cuckoo cachoo.

I really didn't care anything about seeing this movie, but I don't pass up a chance at Girls' Night Out, as infrequently as it comes around when you have three kids and work every weekend. Especially when it begins with that margarita I earned and ends with a glass of wine and chocolate cake. Mmmmm. Allow me to reflect on the bliss a moment.

OK, back to the movie. It was actually pretty cute. I'd kind of thought I might end up falling asleep (these things happen when I sit still in the dark), but I managed to stay awake the entire time with no trouble. It made me laugh quite a bit too, but I have a theory about that. Movies are much more funny when you are surrounded by other people who are also laughing. I'm not sure how well it would hold up to my usual late-night movie-watching at home.

I'm not sure this movie is a must-see-in-the-theater movie, but it's worth watching just to see Betty White say, "Don't get up in my grill, sister." Especially if you can manage to get a few of the amenities my GNO experience came with.

Youth in Revolt

Hm. Quirky.

Terminator Salvation

We've had this DVD for months, and I just now got around to watching it. I wouldn't have even watched it tonight (after I got home from work, no less!) except that my husband fired it up, and how can I resist watching an un-watched movie?

I'd seen bits and pieces of the movie before, but never enough to get a good idea of what was happening. Speaking of which, this is not a good Ironing Movie. You really can't take your eyes off it very much. If you try this, you will Miss Things and your husband will become Very Annoyed. If I am not careful, one of these days he's going to break out the duct tape to seal my mouth shut during movie-watching time.

But that wasn't my point. What I meant to say was this: I pretty easily figured out the Big Thing. (Oh yeah, because there is a Big Thing to figure out in this movie). But I think this had more to do with the fact that I'd seen parts of it before than due to my super-excellent skills of observation and intuition. I don't think it was especially predictable. Anyway, it might have been kinda fun to be blown away by the Big Thing, but I wasn't. It was more of a Yeah, so? I already knew that Thing.

This probably is a Must-See Movie if you are a boy (there is much blowing up of large and flammable objects) or if you are a fan of the other Terminator movies. I would rank it as better than the first and third, but not as good as T2. There was one thing I didn't like much about it, though--it mostly takes place in a dirty, gritty dystopia (being the only one of the four movies that occurs mostly after Judgment Day). Dirt, grit and dystopia are three things which, especially when found in combination, can be somewhat depressing for me.

Bonus: Kyle Reese is played by Anton Yelchin, the same actor who was Charlie Bartlett. I KNEW I recognized him from somewhere!

OSS 117: Lost in Rio

This movie made me laugh. It's possible that the wine helped, but I think I would have laughed anyway. On the other hand, I'm sure it's not for everyone. Whenever I got to giggling, Hud would give me the "are you crazy?" look and ask what was so funny. The first few times I tried explaining it to him and his response was always something like, "I know. What's so funny about that?" Sigh.

It's pretty much a cross between a James Bond movie and Get Smart, except in French. The main character is a French super-spy who is, of course, quite  handsome and debonair (can you imagine any other kind of French super-spy?) but is also incredibly chauvinistic. He's the kind of person I might want to slap in real life (and he does get slapped), but I had no trouble laughing at him in a movie. Even so, the ladies love him (and, apparently, some of the men do too).

One thing that amazed me about this movie was how everything looked absolutely vintage--of course the clothes, cars, furniture and actors (no anachronistic Mark Ruffalos here), but even down to the colors and camera angles. When I ordered this from netflix I was sure it was a newer movie, but while watching I had to look it up to make sure it wasn't filmed in the 60s. (It wasn't. It's from 2009.)

This is actually a sequel to a 2006 movie called OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies. That one's on my list too.

The Joneses

Well, this is certainly not one of those movies they call a "romp." It's a rather bitter social satire which is actually somewhat depressing. I mean, nothing like a tear-jerker (not even for you softies out there), but the slight uptick in the last 30 seconds wasn't near enough to leave me with a happy fun feeling. In fact, the sudden turnaround to a "happy ending" was more annoying than anything else. I almost didn't want it to end happily. The depressing direction it had been headed just made more sense.

I think I figured out the premise within the first thirteen minutes, which was another slight disappointment; I could have lived with a bit more suspense. I was kind of looking for someone to flip out and go on a murderous rampage (not that I'm a fan of slasher movies, but that just seemed like an obvious conclusion). The movie did have a marked turning point at one hour in, which is when everything begins to fall apart for the Joneses and becomes almost American Beauty-esque, but no homicides in this one.

Now that I've spent the entire time bashing the movie, I must say it wasn't a total waste of time. I wouldn't put it on my "Must See Movies" list, but it's not a bad movie. And it has a decent soundtrack.

The Jacket

OK, so . . . I've seen this movie before. I didn't realize it until I was about 30 minutes into it, but yep, been there done that.

This time it's actually fine by me, though, because it's a pretty good movie. It's kind of like one part The Butterfly Effect and two parts The Time Traveler's Wife mixed in with, oh, I don't know, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and a faint whiff of The Fugitive. Not a bad combination.

Man, Adrien Brody has a big schnozz. It's almost as big as that of my ex-brother-in-law, which could quite possibly be used as an umbrella for Rhode Island. And once again Keira Knightley's huge chin got on my nerves. It's a good thing those two didn't have a baby, because it would have had a nutcracker for a face.

If for nothing else, watch this movie just to see the most recent James Bond play a very convincing crazy man. You will be amazed.

Date Night

I kind of expected constant funnies from this movie. I mean, come on, it's Steve Carell and Tina Fey! But while it definitely had some good laughs about it ("I'm going to go home and fart in a shoebox"), there was too much Other Stuff that got in the way. There were times when this movie almost fell into the trap of taking itself too seriously. Like when it tried to be all sweet and heartwarming, or during action sequences with barely any dialog. Funny people need dialog!

OK, well maybe the action sequences weren't all bad. This movie may have the best car chase scene since The Blues Brothers. And Carell and Fey weren't the only funny ones. I was a fan of the cab driver, and of James Franco as sleeveless tattooed white trash who doesn't want to sell stolen wheelchairs for the rest of his life.

So maybe I didn't hee-haw constantly but I still had fun.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

This movie should come with a warning label: DO NOT WATCH WITH A COMIC BOOK FAN UNLESS THEY ARE THE (NON-EXISTENT) TYPE WHO LIKES TO PAUSE THE MOVIE AND ANSWER 'STUPID' QUESTIONS. My husband is not that type of comic book fan. (Did you guess that?) I'm not sure, but he may regret that he chose this movie.

I've never been into comic books, but I have seen all of the X-Men movies. I actually kind of have fond memories of X-Men: The Last Stand because Hud and I went to the theater to see it two weeks before our third child was born. I'm still waiting for the sequel to that one (and if you noticed the chess piece moving at the end, you're probably waiting for the sequel too). According to imdb, I'll just have to keep waiting for it, because they're working on a sequel to this one instead.

This movie seemed darker and less bubble-gum than the original X-Men movie. I also thought it seemed more comic-book-y (I based this opinion on Gambit attacking by tossing a deck of cards like belt-fed Chinese throwing stars) but Hud disagreed. And since he knows comic books far better than I do, I will have to defer to him.

Wolverine is my favorite of the X-Men, but only because under all of that silly facial hair he's still Hugh Jackman. Well, also because he spends a good bit of the movie shirtless or in that nice tight wife-beater you see in the picture. Just look at those shoulders! Oops, I'm drooling.

This movie is for comic book fans. Or Hugh Jackman fans who can manage to block out icky facial hair.

Valentine's Day

Do you ever judge a movie by its previews? I don't mean by its own trailers--I mean by those they show at the beginning of the DVD. Let's see. Valentine's Day showed previews for Dr. Zhivago and Gone With the Wind, but I was not fooled into thinking this would be an epic love story. And then . . . a preview for Sex and the City 2. Uh oh. But wait . . . there's more! An advertisement for The Bachelor: The Video Game! It was not looking good. Just who is in this movie's demographic anyway? Besides, um, not me?

Well, fortunately it wasn't quite as bad as I was expecting from the previews. It was actually pretty cute. Or at least it wasn't completely stupid. It certainly had its annoyingly inane parts, but happily they were outnumbered by the parts that made me smile. I was actually even surprised by two little parts that I might even dare to call heartwarming. The rest of it was predictable, but sweet. Except for the stupid annoying narrator. Best part: the clips during the end credits.

I can't help but wonder if Patrick Dempsey works juggling into all of his movies. OK, so maybe this was only the second time I've seen him juggling, but it may also be only the second time I've seen Patrick Dempsey in a movie. It wasn't anything as impressive as plates this time, but it was still way more impressive than anything I could have done.

Caché (Hidden)

I am stalking Bride of the Screen God's movies. I'd not heard of this one until I read her review of it about a month ago. I think what made me decide to watch it was her mention of the "WTF ending." It was kind of like a challenge--would I be able to figure out what was going on?

Apparently, the answer to that question is . . . no. I was still sitting there waiting for an explanation when all of a sudden the credits were rolling. I think I have figured out who sent the tapes--my guess is that it was two of the characters in collusion with one another, neither of whom was Majid; the two in question are shown having a conversation in the very last scene--but I'm distinctly uncertain. My explanation is mere hypothesis. Even if I'm right about the "who," I'm not sure I understand the "why," especially for one of the two.

It's funny, because although there were many long moments where nothing much happened in the movie, every bit was imbued with suspense. Nothing was happening, but I felt continually sure something was about to, and this kept me on the edge of my seat. There was one unexpected Holy Crap moment, tempered by disbelief (would it really go that quickly?) but the rest of the film was surprisingly devoid of startling events.

I'd never noticed it before, but it's funny how much Angry Juliette Binoche looks like my sister when she flips out. Not like I'd mistake one for the other, but their mannerisms are very similar. You wouldn't want to experience it.

Dorian Gray

Is it bad that I pick movies based on the cute boys who are in them? Ben Barnes is not hard to look at. Except when he is raptly gazing about London with such an expression of naive innocence that he seems to be putting on an act. (Which he is, of course, but we are not supposed to be reminded of this fact while watching a movie.)

But Ben Barnes is not the only reason I watched this movie. We're back to that compulsion of watching every available film adaptation of the books I read.

It's difficult to avoid comparing the movie to the excellent book. Where the book was more nuanced and subtle, the movie was more creepified and overt. The book was intriguing and thought-provoking, but the movie took the book's concept and created what might almost be called a horror movie (or at least a thriller) out of it. The basic story is the same, and I even recognized a couple of direct quotes from the book, but overall the movie is given that distinct Hollywood sheen.

Not that this is entirely a bad thing. The movie made use of aspects of the medium that are not available in print, and this is as it should be. If a movie has nothing to add, why even make it in the first place? Anyway, as book-to-movie adaptations go, they did a fairly good job with this one; and, when I attempt to look at the movie as its own entity, I think it makes a perfectly entertaining and enjoyable way to spend an evening. Especially if you get to drink a glass of wine while watching.

Clash of the Titans (2010)

My opinion of this movie: it's pretty weak. I mean, sure, the special effects are better than those in the original version--especially with Pegasus--but the sorry effects of the original wouldn't take much to exceed. Plus, they re-used the monster from Cloverfield for the Kraken.

This movie wanted to be a cross between The 300 and The Lord of the Rings, but any attempted comic relief (like from the hunters, Lenny and Squiggy), just sucked all necessary dignity right out of it. Although I must admit that I enjoyed Bubo the Golden Owl's little cameo, there were far too many times when I shook my head and disbelievingly lamented that it was just so corny.

I'm not sure how I feel about an ancient Greek with a buzz cut. Sam Worthington looked like an anachronistic marine in a girly little skirt. But at least he's cute.

Maybe I would have been more impressed if I'd seen it on the big screen, or if I had turned the sound up really, really loud. I'm sure I would have liked it more if my expectations hadn't been so high. I thought surely the great old story put together with awesome new graphics would make an amazing movie. But . . . it didn't. I've seen worse movies, but this was not the movie I hoped it would be.

Shutter Island

Now, this is my kind of movie. I think I would have to call my favorite genre "psychological thriller." Even the ones that suck (Final Analysis, anyone?) are pretty great. Throw together some thrills, chills, twists and a few crazy people, and you've got yourself a good flick.

I just wish they had been a bit more ambiguous with the ending. I mean, normally ambiguity makes me want to tear out my hair, but in this case I think I would have preferred to be left wondering.

Wondering what, you ask? Well, of course, the big question. Is he or isn't he? If you've watched it, you know what I'm talking about. If you haven't, what's wrong with you? Go watch the dang movie!

When you're finished, come back and discuss this statement with me: Mark Ruffalo is too This Century. Seeing him supposedly in 1954 is somehow anachronistic.

For the record, the only thing I can think of that would be creepier than a mystery in a mental institution is . . . a mystery in an abandoned mental institution. Like maybe this one. That looks like a place from my nightmares. 

I'm Not Scared

I read the book by the same name earlier this year, and finally got around to following my usual compulsion to watch the movie adaptation of every book I've read. This movie is in Italian with English subtitles, and it followed the book incredibly closely. This is not completely surprising as the book's author helped write the screenplay.

I was quite impressed by the acting done by all the children. What that means is that I was never distracted from the story by unrealistic or overblown portrayals. I was even more impressed when I discovered, by way of wikipedia, that the children were "local citizens with no filming or acting experience." It was pretty obvious that none of them had ever been on a Disney Channel TV show, anyway.

This movie strangely reminded me of an Italian Stand By Me (albeit with a very different soundtrack). That story didn't come to mind at all as I read the book, which is, I guess, why I found it strange that the movie made me think of it. More about the soundtrack: it was a string quartet, very beautifully done, and often very reminiscent of Pachelbel's Canon in D.

The ending of the film was slightly less ambiguous than the end of the book, but just barely.

Charlie Bartlett

For the first half hour of this movie I was re-wishing that old wish. I wish I had a system for keeping track of what induces me to put a movie on my netflix queue.

Then it hit me. Susan Gardner was Norah from Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist! Netflix must have recommended it to me because of her. I have decided that Kat Dennings is my new favorite actress. Unfortunately, in perusing her imdb filmography, I don't see anything else she's been in (yet) that I'm interested in seeing. But she's young, so there's still time.

Let's just hope Kat takes a better route than Amy Smart. I really liked Smart when I saw her in that silly Ratrace movie, but I was pretty disappointed with her turn in Crank. Maybe Kat will be able to stick with good roles. Fingers crossed!

Anyway, enough about Kat Dennings--the movie itself was really cute. Just as with Speak, I was so impressed by how real each of the characters seemed. With the possible exception of the school superintendent, I think every person in this movie was fully realized without being an over-exaggeration. I cared about them and related to them and was interested in them. They even made me laugh, too, but without sacrificing any of their real-ness. Even the premise of the movie--you might be tempted to consider it unrealistic, but the way it unfolds, you have to admit it could happen.

If Anton Yelchin (who played Charlie) had been in the Nick and Norah movie in place of Michael Cera, I think that movie just might have been perfect. And speaking of perfect, I can't think of a single thing to knock about this movie! (No doubt my husband could have, but he didn't watch it with me.)

Duplicity

This movie tries to be the love child of 2001's Ocean's Eleven and 1999's The Thomas Crown Affair. (By the way, did you know both of those were remakes of movies from the 60s?) I must admit it succeeds fairly well. It's pretty much just what the poster claims: "a cool, sexy caper" which heaps deception upon deception.

This movie's weakness is in the unoriginality of its premise. In fact, I was afraid this might be another case where I'd seen the movie before and had just forgotten, but the Corporate Giant Bum Fight on the tarmac at the beginning allayed my fears on that matter. And I give it props for the ending, which was a welcome surprise in that it wasn't exactly what I expected.

What is it about Paul Giamatti that makes me think of Edward Norton turned into a little gnome?

Kick-Ass

This is why I watch movies. Every now and then I stopped to wonder why I was laughing at all of this murder and mayhem, but I think my ability to be humored rather than horrified had much to do with the absolutely cartoonish quality of the movie. It was so obviously not real, but I was having too much fun to bother being annoyed by improbabilites.

This movie rocks. Don't let your kids watch it, don't let my mom watch it, don't expect to learn much from it, but don't miss it.

Reel Culture: My Additions

None of the movies in Reel Culture were released after 1991 because, as the author claims, "later movies are not really 'classic'--yet." But here are some pre-1991 movies that I think belonged in this book.

1. Star Wars (1977). Sure, everyone knows it, but everyone also knows The Wizard of Oz and Raiders of the Lost Ark, and both of those made the book.

2. Grease (1978). One of the few movie musicals I could watch endlessly, unlike, say, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.

3. The Blues Brothers (1980). Not sure this needs to be on the list if Animal House is there. No, I take that back. I think this one is a classic all on its own.

4. Back to the Future (1985). But definitely only the first one of the series. I was eleven when this came out, and I went to see it with my favorite cousin. I was so enthralled with every bit of this movie that I gave my mom a blow-by-blow retelling of the entire thing when I got home.

5. Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986). Maybe not as edgy as The Breakfast Club, but a funny favorite anyway. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

6. Top Gun (1986). Love the volleyball scene. This was Tom Cruise in his glory days, before I realized how short and weird he is. And I always cry when Goose dies, even though I already know he's going to.

7. Dirty Dancing (1987). Didn't every thirteen-year-old girl kind of wish she were Baby? Don't we all kind of wish that still, more than twenty years later?

8. The Princess Bride (1987). If you don't love this movie something is wrong with you. I don't care who you are.

9. Pretty Woman (1990). This would be my dream and fondest wish. You know, if I were a streetwalker.

Now here are a few post-1991 movies which I am sure are destined to stand the test of time.

1. Pulp Fiction (1994). OK, so some of it is hard to stomach, and my mom never ever needs to watch it, but I really think this movie is a masterpiece. I love the way the stories are woven together and told all out of sequence. Honorable mention in this category: Memento. Maybe not exactly a classic, and it's told in a more straightforward (or straightbackward?) way, but what a good movie! (Of course, by "good" I don't mean "feel-good.")

2. Titanic (1997). Maybe it's just the mushy romantic in me that makes me want to add this to my list. But it's such a beautiful movie. So what if I only ever want to watch the first half.

3. The Matrix (1999). Only the first one, unfortunately. There was so much promise for the sequels, but alas . . .

4. The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring (2001). Peter Jackson may have left out Tom Bombadil, but overall his movie adaptation of this book is perfection.

5. Harry Potter movies--as a group, because I don't think any single one of them excels in comparison to the others (2001 through 2011--notice I'm already including the last two installments, sight unseen. I have great faith). I am so glad the various directors have felt compelled to stay true to the beloved books. Sure, a lot has been left out, but overall they've done an excellent job with these movies.

What classics do you think have been left out? Are there any of mine you feel do not belong?

The Boys from Brazil

This was an unexpectedly good flick! You need to watch it!

I'd never heard of this movie until a guy I work with recommended it to me based on an article I was reading in National Geographic. I'll be kind and not tell you what the topic of the article was, since it would be a pretty big spoiler.

This movie was released in 1978, so don't expect one of today's slick productions, but it was a great mix of the intrigue of a James Bond movie (without Bond himself) and the mystery and suspense of a Hitchcock film. Throw in a few aging Nazis and there you have it.

The film begins with a young Nazi hunter, Barry Kohler, who is in Paraguay to gather information about a group of Nazi war criminals. One member of the group is Dr. Josef Mengele, who was known for his sadistic human experimentation during World War II. Mengele is putting a plan in motion that involves the assassination of a number of civil servants worldwide.

I fear that to tell you more will ruin the story for you, but I need you to watch this movie so you can tell me if you understand the significance of the shark tooth necklace.

Withnail and I

Netflix is evil. We have already established the fact that I will never be able to cancel my subscription, which is because of my addiction to movies just as much as because I will never reach the end of my queue. But I will never figure out how it was that I ended up choosing a "classic British art-house dark comedy." Not only had I never heard of it before, but I'm not sure I even know anyone who has heard of it before.

This is no Monty Python movie, but it did make me laugh, although I fear I may have laughed at all the wrong parts. I know I missed some things that were probably funny. (For instance, I didn't catch why the farmer's leg was wrapped up, or even what it was wrapped in). I guess I needed subtitles. My favorite part was probably with the chicken, especially when Withnail asks if it shouldn't be more bald, and then they try to stuff it in the teapot. Didn't need subtitles for that.

Though this movie is nothing like Raising Arizona, it seems to me to have that same sort of dry humor. The sort that is funnier when you're drunk, or it's 2 a.m., or you're watching it with a bunch of people who find it hilarious. Better yet, all three. I also think perhaps it's one that is funnier each time you watch it, but I don't intend to confirm that theory.

Here are a few random observations: Vernon Dursley makes a really creepy predatory gay man. (I'm not sure if that "attempted burglary" was supposed to be funny. I didn't laugh.) The actor who played Withnail also played Hugo in Henry & June, and I was no more impressed with him here, although it was interesting that he was the opposite of the wooden post he played in that movie; here he was an overly-dramatic ham. Also, I couldn't stop thinking that "I", especially when wearing his little round glasses, looked just like Harry Potter all grown up (even though this movie came out before Daniel Radcliffe was even born).

I read on wikipedia that the original ending was to be Withnail pouring a bottle of wine into Monty's shotgun and then committing suicide as he drank it. This ending was left out because it was "too dark." I'll say! That certainly would have changed the tone of the entire movie for me.