Monday, June 4, 2007

Lets all go to the movies with Tony

By Tony Rezac

Since I have been gone I have seen some new movies, not very many. Some were released when I was still back at home but never got around to seeing. If you need help deciding on a flick, this might help you.

****=Great, must see
***=Good, recommended
**=Take it or leave it
*=Don't waste your time

Pans Labyrinth:
When I found out this movie was entirely in Spanish with sub-titles I was very skeptical. But, I decided to stick it out, and am I glad that I did. This movie is Alice in Wonderland with some Saving Private Ryan and a dash of Lord of the Rings all mixed up with about the same amount of drugs that Rauol Duke took in "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." In an age of cookie cutter flicks and remakes of movies that sucked to begin with, this is a truly original and well made flick that will make you wish for more than one or two truly good movies a year. While it would be more appealing if there were an English option I feel it would take away from the experience. If you don't have the patience for 2 hours of reading you wouldn't enjoy the movie anyway.
Horrible, truly awful. The first 20 minutes the movie really has potential to take off and be a good action/adventure flick. It has John Malkovich as the evil king and Jeremy Irons as the long lost "last Dragon Rider" who must train Eragon, who is to be his replacement. Then all of a sudden, Jeremy Irons is dead and John Malkovich is replaced by some 2 bit Lord of the Rings reject. Don't let the beginning fool you, this is one of the worst movies ever made.
(not even going to honor it with a rating. If you see it I will slap you)

Night at the Museum:
This is your typical Ben Stiller flick, a guy who can't control the situation no matter what, gets thrown into a situation that no one can control. Luke Wilson also makes an appearance as the crazy friend who tries to change the world. Not a bad movie, just a movie. It’s hard to judge any Stiller flick after Zoolander and my personal favorite Heavyweights. It has its moments though. It would be much more enjoyable if Dick Van Dyke had a bigger role as the night security guard. **

Hilarious and absurd, I'm sure you've all seen it.

Casino Royale:
This one I've been wrestling with since I saw it about a month ago. When I see a Bond movie I expect to see a few things: snazzy gadgets that will never be plausible, things blowing up for no reason, sweet cars and hot chic’s. There were no gadgets at all, 2 explosions I can think of, and did anyone else catch him driving a Ford Focus early in the movie? The Bond girl was played by a true beauty but he fell in love with her? This movie didn't follow the tried and true Bond formula that has worked for over 30 years. While this movie is a very well made spy movie, it lacked many things to make it a truly good bond flick.
** 1/2

Tenacious D in "The Pic of Destiny":
As I stated in my previous post, this movie is great. The dialogue is lame and childish, but Jack Blacks lyrics are inspired and hilarious. The D, as they refer to themselves, actually are gifted musicians and song writers.


the Dutchie said...

coming from a guy who loves kicking back to your run of the mill 80's horror flick for the pure enjoyment of it's ridiculousness, these are some pretty good reviews.

the bond movie threw me for a loop as well. the thing that turned me off to that movie was that bond turned into some sort of super hero. I never knew bond could long jump 40 feet and land on the run.

I have heard too many positive reviews of Pans Labyrinth to have not seen it yet. i must do so soon.

Daymonster said...

I thought casino royale was really good. I have not enjoyed the bond movies since goldeneye so I was pleased with the new style and the kind of prequel feel.

Other than that I thought they were great reviews, watch out Gene Shalit.

brex said...

You're absolutly right about Eragon, I wasted a good 20 mintues on that movie. I swaped it for Sin City which is much better and uniquely entertaining. I will have to see Pans Labyrinth soon...

haasertime said...

I really liked the premise of Bond not having gadgets and the whole thing being more realistic. But the plot and flow of the movie just kinda sucked.

soup said...

When I rented Pan's I was really worried that it would be some artsy flick that critics love exclusively because it is artsy and foreign. I was pleasantly surprised with the action and violence. A bit dark and depressing, but overall it was a great film.

I saw Eragon…you have permission to punch me in the face the next time you see me. If I would have read the book (which was written by a 16 year old) you could open an umbrella in my ass.

Bond started out well, but the hold em scene? It was better than the previous three…which is like being better than a quadriplegic at treading water.

I love the D, but I was not impressed with their TV stuff. I like weird humor, but it gets a little out there. I’ll see it eventually. Heck if it gets three stars from Rezac … I’ll get right on it!

tfrezac2002 said...

I never said that I didn't enjoy Casino Royale, I did. It just didn't fit the mold of a Bond movie. I'm one for tradition, change frightens me and for that reason alone I didn't give it a better rating. I wish all other Bond movies had taken their production value as seriously, if they had we never would have been stuck "Diamonds are Forever" or "Moonraker".