Tattoo Connection

Directed by Lee Tso-Nan.
1978. Rated R, 87 minutes.
Cast:
Jim Kelly
Sing Chen
Tao-Liang Tan
Norman Wingrove
Hsiano Liang
Bolo Yeung

A highly valuable diamond, insured by an American company, is stolen in Hong Kong. To retrieve the gem and find out who is responsible, the CIA (huh?) sends in one-man-army Lucas (Kelly). How bad a dude is Lucas? Well, he wastes no time telling us he’s been called “the black Six Million Dollar Man”. For you young’uns that don’t get the reference, google “six million dollar man” or better yet, look it up on youtube. I’m sure there are some clips, there. Anyhoo, kung-fu fighting, gratuitous female nudity (often of the full-frontal variety), hokey dialogue, more kung-fu fighting and lots of other things that make little or no sense ensue. Needless to say, I love this movie. It’s the kind of flick that just screams ridiculous from the moment it starts. Our hero, Jim Kelly just might be the coolest cat of all time. If you don’t believe me, please go watch Enter the Dragon and Black Belt Jones, now. He’s also a pretty bad actor. However, that fits this movie perfectly. Fans of cheesy martial arts flicks UNITE! This is for us! It’s so bad, it’s awesome!


MY SCORE: -10/10

Extract

Directed by Mike Judge.
2009. Rated R, 92 minutes.
Cast:
Jason Bateman
Mila Kunis
Ben Affleck
Kristen Wiig
J.K. Simmons
David Koechner
Clifton Collins Jr.
Gene Simmons

Plot: Joel (Bateman), a successful extract manufacturer, has to deal with a lawsuit by an employee severely injured on the job, a thief loose in his plant and a sexless marriage.

The Good: Joel is the kind of guy we can identify with. He’s successful, but total happiness seems just out of his reach. He gets bad advice from friends that he follows anyway. This includes ideas about his marriage, which is in trouble. In all, he’s an everyman for us to cling to. Because of this, there are some very funny bits. However, the funniest moments belong to David Koechner as Joel’s annoying neighbor. It’s a wonderfully understated performance that feels more genuine than anything else going on.

The Bad: The movie pretends to resolve things but never does. What’s clearly supposed to be a happy ending feels more like coming back to square one. In movies where that’s the point, it can work. Here, we’re supposed to think everything is all better when it isn’t, mostly because he’s still the same. The other offense is it’s only funny in places. There are too many flat sections that’ll have you checking your watch.

The Ugly: What Dean (Affleck) accidentally gives Joel.

Recommendation: It’s touted as a return to corporate America for director Mike Judge, who also directed Office Space, one of my favorites. While Extract has its moments, it pales in comparison. Character development is nil and the story never goes anywhere. I desperately wanted to like this movie more than I did, but I just couldn’t.

The Opposite View: Brian Holcomb, CinemaBlend

What the Internet Says: 6.5/10 on imdb.com (6/9/10), 63% on rottentomatoes.com, 61/100 on metacritic.com


MY SCORE: 5.5/10

Agent J Returns?

Apparently, Will Smith is all set to return to fighting aliens in Men In Black III. Since I liked both movies, I'm actually looking forward to this. Read more about it here.

Shrink

Directed by Jonas Pate.
2009. Rated R, 97 minutes.
Cast:
Kevin Spacey
Mark Webber
Keke Palmer
Saffron Burrows
Jack Huston
Pell James
Dallas Roberts
Laura Ramsey
Robin Williams
Robert Loggia
Gore Vidal
Jesse Plemons
Maggie Grace

Plot: Dr. Henry Carter (Spacey) is a psychiatrist to the stars in Hollywood. Not only do they have serious problems, but he does, as well. Chief among them is his out of control weed and alcohol habits. He seems to have met his match when he takes on the pro-bono case of troubled high school girl Jemma (Palmer).

The Good: I’m a Kevin Spacey apologist. Therefore, I’ve liked him in just about everything I’ve seen him in. Still, I think this is his best work in a few years. He’s brilliant as a man decaying in front of our eyes. We believe everything about him. The rest of the cast is excellent, also. Most notably, Keke Palmer (Akeelah and the Bee and Nickelodeon’s True Jackson, VP) is outstanding as Jemma, the troubled teen. The same goes for Robin Williams in limited time as a movie star trying to find excuses to cheat on his wife.

The Bad: In the tradition of “gritty” indy dramas and black comedies, it’s filled with unhappy and unlikeable people doing things that are unlikeable and keep them unhappy. There’s also the traffic jam of about a gazillion different storylines that tie together all too conveniently at the end. Then of course, this culminates in one of those conclusions where everything is instantly all better but we can’t buy it for one second. Any one of the subplots could make an intriguing movie on their own. All mashed together, like they are here, none of them feels developed enough. The most fully realized of these, the main one between Dr. Carter and his young patient, could’ve been a great variation of Half Nelson. It’s even headed in that direction. However, instead of continuing down that path and putting it’s own spin on it, it pulls up short so it can tie into all the rest of the movie in one supposedly magical moment.

The Ugly: “Break glass in case of emergency” weed.

Recommendation: The performances are top notch. There is also a thread of dark humor that runs through it. However, it crumbles under the weight of its own self-pity, rendering the phoenix rising finale laughable. In short, it’s a well acted trainwreck.

The Opposite View: Prairie Miller, NewsBlaze

What the Internet Says: 6.7/10 on imdb.com (6/11/10), 30% on rottentomatoes.com, 40/100 on metacritic.com


MY SCORE: 4.5/10

Whip It

Directed by Drew Barrymore.
2009. Rated PG-13, 111 minutes.
Cast:
Ellen Page
Alia Shawkat
Marcia Gay Harden
Kristen Wiig
Juliette Lewis
Drew Barrymore
Jimmy Fallon
Eve
Carlo Alban
Ari Graynor
Zoe Bell
Landon Pigg

Plot: Bliss (Page), a small-town Texas high-school girl who hates the pageants her mother makes her compete in, discovers a new passion when she sneaks off to nearby Austin to join a roller-derby league.

The Good: Bliss feels like a real teenager. She’s not over-stylized and ultra-snarky like Juno (also played by Ellen Page). Nor is she super-happy and carefree. Her character is very well written as is that of her mom, played with stern faced resolve by Marcia Gay Harden. First time director Drew Barrymore paces her movie well. This enables the main characters to breath and places the roller derby scenes at nice intervals. And those scenes are quite fun.

The Bad: The relationship between Bliss’ parents is done a disservice. We get hints that there is much more below the surface, but we’re never shown. Basically, this boils down Dad’s reason for existence to one heroic action. Similarly, we learn curiously little about Bliss’ teammates on The Hurl Scouts. There’s plenty of potential for great characters and they’re given great names like Maggie Mayhem (Wiig) and Rosa Sparks (Eve) but it’s never taken advantage of. At the very least, we should’ve gotten to know the aforementioned Maggie a lot better.

The Ugly: Play number three.

Recommendation: It’s kinda the best of both worlds: a chick flick/sports movie. Sure, there are some clichés from both genres present, but it’s fun and engaging. Despite its faults, this is an enjoyable ride and a solid directorial debut for Barrymore.

The Opposite View: James Berardinelli, ReelViews

What the Internet Says: 7.1/10 on imdb.com (5/17/10), 84% on rottentomatoes.com, 68/100 on metacritic.com


MY SCORE: 7/10

Citizen Kane

Directed by Orson Welles.
1941. Not Rated, 119 minutes.
Cast:
Orson Welles
Joseph Cotten
Dorothy Comingore
Ray Collins

In an attempt to come up with a fitting eulogy for the famous and wealthy Charles Foster Kane (Welles), a group of reporters investigate the man’s life hoping to discover the meaning of his last, dying word – rosebud. Many believe this film to be a thinly veiled commentary on the life of William Randolph Hearst. This includes Hearst himself who then set out to destroy the movie. On the surface, it tells a great story of a man consumed by his own ego. The metaphors are just explicit enough to let you know there’s more beneath the surface. Somehow, despite its age it still feels fresh. That’s mainly because this movie pioneered techniques still in vogue today. The easiest of these to spot is the non-linear telling of the story. It jumps back and forth in time often and effortlessly without ever blatantly putting a date on the screen. The most subtle of these innovations and perhaps most effective is Welles’ use of the camera. He simply does things directors today still aren’t as proficient at implementing and directors of his era, or viewers for that matter, had never seen before. He positions the camera and moves it in such a way that doesn’t merely suggest a mood, it forcefully puts you there. He’s particularly brilliant when using low angles. To help you better understand I’ll use Michael Bay's Transformers as a reference point. In that movie there’s the now famous scene of John Turturro being “lubricated” by one of the giant robots. At that moment director Michael Bay, and/or his cinematographer basically have the camera on the ground, or close to it, looking up at the two characters. Turturro looks large and authoritative standing over the camera. Picture yourself as a small child being scolded by a parent towering over you. Behind Turturro is the robot who is substantially larger and again appears even more so with the camera below him. When he “lubricates” Turturro not only is it funny but the director suggests to you that human authority figures are meaningless in an epic battle for the universe. Well, meaningless at that particular moment. In CK there’s a scene where Kane walks across the room and slaps his wife. During that scene the camera is positioned seemingly about knee-level in the middle of the two. As he walks toward her, not only does she retreat but the camera does as well. It seems to drift to the farthest right corner of the room and lower to the floor. The effect is Kane appears to grow physically becoming more and more menacing by the second while she and you as the viewer seem to shrink and get weaker. You actually feel as if you’ve been backed into a corner. Nothing suggestive about it, Welles shoved you in that corner. That may be too technical to digest and you probably won’t notice it but you’ll feel it. Things like that are why CK will always be studied by prospering directors but that’s enough film-school. The one thing that does make it feel dated, aside from the black-and-white picture, is the dialogue will occasionally sound a little cheesy or a little too polite for what the character is actually trying to say. Other than that it does everything well and my favorite part, of course, is it gives us an ending we can interpret a number of ways.

Why Did I Get Married Too?

Directed by Tyler Perry.
2010. Rated PG-13, 121 minutes.
Cast:
Janet Jackson
Jill Scott
Tasha Smith
Malik Yoba
Richard T. Jones
Tyler Perry
Sharon Leal
Lamman Rucker
Michael Jai White
Cicely Tyson
Louis Gossett Jr.

Plot: Four couples reunite for their annual couples retreat. They’re unexpectedly joined by Sheila’s (Scott) ex-husband Mike (Jones) who hopes to win her heart back, even though she’s already remarried.

The Good: As in most of his movies, director Tyler Perry gets very strong work from his cast. Perhaps, it’s because his scripts offer ample opportunities for big, showy moments. With lots of screaming and/or crying, performers are simply encouraged to go for it. So far, that’s worked well for him. His female players, in particular, put the petal to the metal and hardly let up. The near-constant outpouring of emotion seems to foster a strong attachment from his audiences. There are also moments of real humor, mostly through the relentlessly loud mouth of Angela (Smith).

The Bad: The Janet Jackson character, Patricia, dominates the second half of the movie but is ridiculously written. For a relationship expert, she’s curiously incapable of maintaining one, though I’ll admit that seems to be part of the point. She’s also psychotic. Her behavior hardly feels warranted. In fact, she’s all she accuses her husband of being, yet she’s the one we’re supposed to feel for. It’s hard to empathize with a person whose problems, even dating back to the first movie (Why Did I Get Married?), are all of her own making. Another problem is the numerous breaks in real dialogue so that one character or another can deliver a PSA. It’s distracting in the sense that it sounds nothing like real people talking.

The Ugly: Everything leading up to and including the car crash.

Recommendation: As usual, if you’re a fan of TP then have at it. I will say that like its predecessor, it’s a cut above the rest of his catalogue. It’s still not as good as that one, not really even close, but delivers similar thrills.

The Opposite View: Michael Ordona, Los Angeles Times

What the Internet Says: 2.3/10 on imdb.com (#91 on Bottom 100 as of 6/6/10), 39% on rottentomatoes.com, 43/100 on metacritic.com


MY SCORE: 5.5/10