I have been eagerly awaiting this film’s arrival to the theaters for nearly two months now. It is finally here!…December 22, 2006. So what did I do? I went to the 1 o’clock showing, sat in the middle aisle by myself, and enjoyed every minute.
The film chronicles the formation of the Central Intelligence Agency from its’ infancy during the Second World War through the Bay of Pigs debacle. Though the broader plot is the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency, it is through the eyes of an Edward Wilson, played by Matt Damon, that the story unfolds. From secret meetings at Yale University, to London subways during the Blitzkrieg, to the sandy beaches of Guatemala Edward Wilson is present as the steady arm of American intel. Along his journey Mr. Wilson meets up with British Counter-Intelligence officers (Billy Crudup), high ranking American Generals (Robert Di Nero), F.B.I. agents (Alex Baldwin), and a slew of other shadows of the clandestine service.
I found the film thoroughly intriguing and a more honest view of what counter-intelligence must have been like fifty years ago. There are no car chases, shootouts, fancy gadgets, but rather a man using his wit and analytical reasoning to make it from one situation to another. The film also mixes in the intricacies of holding a marriage, being a father, and the loneliness of isolation in a world where trust is always in question.
First time director Robert Di Nero does a fabulous job at re-creating the times as well as using plot to drive a well put together spy movie. Matt Damon is cold as ice and plays the role so well. Angelia Jolie is on par as the daughter of privilege and the wife of a man who is never there. Alec Baldwin delivers another solid supporting role this year. Though I believe the one who stole the show was Sir Michael Gambon, as the poet/spy Dr. Fredericks. Many may not be able to sit for nearly three hours without hearing the sound of gunfire or see an excessive explosion sequence, but for those who truly enjoy the world of politics, power, and espionage this movie is perfect.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaKGCLTmqTg&mode=related&search=
Friday, December 22, 2006
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Flags of Our Fathers
This was a beautiful film…
I must first state though that it is quite hard to critically judge well made war movies. As far as acting was concerned, Ryan Phillippe did a fine job bringing the life and times of John Bradley to the silver screen. Jesse Bradford hit it right on the nose with the self severing personality that Rene Gagnon came back from Iwo Jima with. And possibly the best performance of the movie was that given by Adam Beach as the troubled Ira Hayes.
As far as directing goes, Clint Eastwood stood on the shoulders of Steven Spielberg (a producer of the film) and created yet another sterling World War Two era film.
What makes this film beautiful though?
It stays true to form. What is written in “Flags of Our Fathers” , by James Bradley, is what is depicted in the film. From the intensity of battle, to the significance of achievement and the disparity of exploitation, it is all there. Eastwood left no stone unturned and laid the story out on the table for everyone to experience. Enjoy.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiOMtdneUVc
I must first state though that it is quite hard to critically judge well made war movies. As far as acting was concerned, Ryan Phillippe did a fine job bringing the life and times of John Bradley to the silver screen. Jesse Bradford hit it right on the nose with the self severing personality that Rene Gagnon came back from Iwo Jima with. And possibly the best performance of the movie was that given by Adam Beach as the troubled Ira Hayes.
As far as directing goes, Clint Eastwood stood on the shoulders of Steven Spielberg (a producer of the film) and created yet another sterling World War Two era film.
What makes this film beautiful though?
It stays true to form. What is written in “Flags of Our Fathers” , by James Bradley, is what is depicted in the film. From the intensity of battle, to the significance of achievement and the disparity of exploitation, it is all there. Eastwood left no stone unturned and laid the story out on the table for everyone to experience. Enjoy.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiOMtdneUVc
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Apocalypto
I ended up at this movie on opening day, not by choice, but rather by someone else’s intrigue. I sat through the nearly two and a half hours of the film and came away with the opinion of “eh”
The film was supposedly about the decline and downfall of the Mayan civilization, but rarely was that theme touched or explained. I was hoping to sit through Mel Gibson’s idea and dramatization of how a great society threw itself into decay, but I came away empty handed. Mel does a clever marketing job with this film.
Regarding things other than the theme of the film I would have to say it was neither bad nor good. The script was fine, the actual plotline was alright, and the acting was adequate. But there was nothing that really roped me into the film that would make me recommend it to others.
Concerning the hype about the violence in the film I would say I have seen worse. I understand that because it was a Disney production that violence would be an issue, but nothing newsworthy.
All and all, it was entertaining but not a movie that I would watch again, nor invite others to watch themselves.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXxYbtm8l38
The film was supposedly about the decline and downfall of the Mayan civilization, but rarely was that theme touched or explained. I was hoping to sit through Mel Gibson’s idea and dramatization of how a great society threw itself into decay, but I came away empty handed. Mel does a clever marketing job with this film.
Regarding things other than the theme of the film I would have to say it was neither bad nor good. The script was fine, the actual plotline was alright, and the acting was adequate. But there was nothing that really roped me into the film that would make me recommend it to others.
Concerning the hype about the violence in the film I would say I have seen worse. I understand that because it was a Disney production that violence would be an issue, but nothing newsworthy.
All and all, it was entertaining but not a movie that I would watch again, nor invite others to watch themselves.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXxYbtm8l38
Bobby
This movie was a major disappointment. Without spoiling the film I will say that it follows the lives of several people either staying at the Ambassador Hotel or involved with the 68' Kennedy Presidential campaign. Along the way you learn bits of information about the character’s lives and what has led them to the Ambassador on June 4th 1968. The film obviously ends with the shooting of Senator Kennedy, but up until then the films lacks any major substance.
The first issue I found with the film is that it sunk under the weight of the cast. With so many “big name” actors involved with the film they diverted attention away from the plot, as well as the characters they were tasked to portray. Each time a new character was introduced I had to laugh at the absurdity of having that particular actor involved with the film. It all culminated with seeing Frodor and Lindsey Lohan in a love scene, odd.
The next issue I found was the dialogue; it appeared to be forced. Many of the actors in the film did not seem to fit into the role that they were given. So much so that when many of the actors spoke I did not feel any passion for their character. The one glaring exception was that of Dwayne, a young Kennedy operative played by Nick Cannon. Mr. Cannon was able to show true passion for his character and with that his character seemed so real on an emotional level.
The final scene was moving and in my opinion was the only well written and directed scene in the entire movie.
I was expecting more and came away with so much less.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbGG8w_N4B4
The first issue I found with the film is that it sunk under the weight of the cast. With so many “big name” actors involved with the film they diverted attention away from the plot, as well as the characters they were tasked to portray. Each time a new character was introduced I had to laugh at the absurdity of having that particular actor involved with the film. It all culminated with seeing Frodor and Lindsey Lohan in a love scene, odd.
The next issue I found was the dialogue; it appeared to be forced. Many of the actors in the film did not seem to fit into the role that they were given. So much so that when many of the actors spoke I did not feel any passion for their character. The one glaring exception was that of Dwayne, a young Kennedy operative played by Nick Cannon. Mr. Cannon was able to show true passion for his character and with that his character seemed so real on an emotional level.
The final scene was moving and in my opinion was the only well written and directed scene in the entire movie.
I was expecting more and came away with so much less.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbGG8w_N4B4
Casino Royale
Having recently seen Casino Royale I must proclaim it as one of the more intelligent films that has been produced this year; let alone in the 007 series.
The writers, producers, and director have been able to weave a great story, as well as firmly lay the foundation for the character of James Bond. These same individuals also relied more heavily on plot and character development to move the story instead of long drawn out action scenes, as was the MO of previous Bond movies.
Having had doubts about Daniel Craig as the new James Bond I was pleasantly surprised with his acting ability, as well as persona as a 007 agent. He may be the best Bond yet! (people only like Sean Connery for the name, not the acting ability) Eva Green’s character Vesper is smart, sexy, and mysterious, something many of the previous Bond girls were never able to portray themselves as. Mad’s Mikkelsen performance as Le Chiffre is outstanding! It was high time the Bond series moved away from animated and cartoonish villains, Casino Royale does just that.
Casino Royale is a great movie and I look forward to future films with Daniel Craig at the helm. My hope is that with future projects the writers and directors follow that mold in which Casino Royale was created and not into a pattern of high budget unintelligent actions films, that would be a shame.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLXNummU8nQ
The writers, producers, and director have been able to weave a great story, as well as firmly lay the foundation for the character of James Bond. These same individuals also relied more heavily on plot and character development to move the story instead of long drawn out action scenes, as was the MO of previous Bond movies.
Having had doubts about Daniel Craig as the new James Bond I was pleasantly surprised with his acting ability, as well as persona as a 007 agent. He may be the best Bond yet! (people only like Sean Connery for the name, not the acting ability) Eva Green’s character Vesper is smart, sexy, and mysterious, something many of the previous Bond girls were never able to portray themselves as. Mad’s Mikkelsen performance as Le Chiffre is outstanding! It was high time the Bond series moved away from animated and cartoonish villains, Casino Royale does just that.
Casino Royale is a great movie and I look forward to future films with Daniel Craig at the helm. My hope is that with future projects the writers and directors follow that mold in which Casino Royale was created and not into a pattern of high budget unintelligent actions films, that would be a shame.
Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLXNummU8nQ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)