The Hunger Games

This was something I meant to write weeks ago, which didn't happen of course, because of my hectic life. But The Hunger Games is the phenomenon de jour, much like Twilight, but thankfully eclipsing that poorly-written, poorly-acted slosh.

I faced the book itself with a great deal of trepidation, as it came highly recommended by one of the most obnoxious people I know and it had been splashed across Facebook for weeks. I miss the days when I was less busy and was able to pick up a book and read it and then feel smug because it became  phenomena after my discovery. Gone are those days.

Much to my chagrin, I loved the books. I adored them. I finished the first two in a day apiece, though the third took a little longer. The Hunger Games is Orwell's Big Brother of 1984 meets the overwhelming self-indulgence of Huxley's Brave New World, twisted with the dark psychology of Lord of the Flies. All of my favorite, well-worded classics rolled into one twisted, but striking trilogy.

As my friend Jamie said, "You have to wonder about an author who dreams up children murdering each other."

And on to the movie:

As with all movies-made-from-books, my wariness was astronomical. The only movie I have encountered that is most of the way as good as the movie would be White Oleander. That and any movie boasting a male starlet who has the poor taste to be kept by Miley Cyrus (Liam Helmsworth) and an unknown like Jennifer Lawrence, mixed in with the odd scramble of Stanley Tucci, Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, Elizabeth Banks and Lenny Kravitz is something to be moderately cautious of.

At least it didn't have Kristen Stewart in it. Watching her mono-face another entire movie would be...well, I'd have to do something drastic.

Luckily, I was pleasantly surprised. Most of the movie was excellent, well-performed and well-timed. It stayed true to the storyline, with only one or two moderate tweaks and turned the internal dialogue that helped Katniss Everdeen explain her world in the book into an eye in the background of the Games themselves. It gave it an unexpected twist that happily added to the movie rather than distracting from it.

The actors all had excellent timing and only a few flailed with their acting -- no more than could be expected though.

My only complaint -- and unfortunately this is a major one -- is that they took the Blair Witch-reality TV take to some of the filming. Jerky, blurry, shaky. On the big screen, for someone prone to motion-sickness it was so not fun. I mean, I understand the purpose: it was to show the overwhelming emotion/action of the scenes in a way that regular filming may not have, but I feel that there could have been a better way to do it.

It is truly a movie for the big screens though.

It makes you feel like you are one of those fops from the Capitol, watching the drama of the Games unfold before you.

Three and a half out of five stars.

Horrible Bosses

These posters really sum up the bosses in this movie, which make it awesome.

Horrible Bosses is about three friends who conspire to murder their bosses — a la Strangers on a Train —when they realize that the bosses are standing in the way of their happiness. "For Nick (Jason Bateman), Kurt (Jason Sudeikis) and Dale (Charlie Day), the only thing that would make the daily grind more tolerable would be to grind their intolerable bosses (Kevin Spacey, Colin Farrell, Jennifer Aniston) into dust. Quitting is not an option, so, with the benefit of a few-too-many drinks and some dubious advice from a hustling ex-con (Jamie Foxx), the three friends devise a convoluted and seemingly foolproof plan to rid themselves of their respective employers... permanently."

First of all, just let me say that I never pictured Jennifer Aniston breaking out of her "gorgeous girl-next-door, Rachel from Friends" generic roles. Never ever ever. Not in a million years. She is fantastic as an oversexed, boundary pushing, sexually harassing female boss. Rachel is a thing of the past, you won't even recognize the Aniston in this movie.

Also in an astonishing (though somehow fitting) role is Colin Farrell as a balding, coke-snorting asshole who inherits the business and becomes the boss for no better reason than daddy didn't think he'd be dying that soon. Oops. Tool-dom, however, is not beyond Farrell's grasp and is definitely a fitting persona where his usual tough-guy pretty boy is not. The bald, however, I could have done without.

The storyline is clever but bland, full of hijinks and mishaps as the three friends (Bateman, Sudeikis and Day) contract a "murder consultant" (a heavily tatooed Foxx) who demands major moolah, is a terrible negotiator and is eventually revealed to be a media pirate rather than the cold, hard killer he presented himself as.

Smattered with choice actors in surprising roles, silly twists, and the unlikely help of a GPS customer service agent, Horrible Bosses is definitely a must-see. As one critic put it, "Overall Horrible Bosses makes more right steps than wrong ones. The film's willingness to go to some truly dark places for a laugh combined with a cast more than willing to tag along for the ride keeps everything funny if not always on target."

Yours,
The Movie-ist

No Strings Attached

With No Strings Attached there were two factors that had it striking out before we even went to see it, but the promise of "date night" with my boyfriend and deciding between it and True Grit had it the winner for the night.

Factor one: Aston Kutcher.

Four words: Dude, Where's My Car? Kutcher has never been a superb actor. In fact, he usually falls annoyingly flat. Luckily, he plays the sap much better than he's ever played the dude. He's the chaser in this rom-com with some not-so-cliche moves — like presenting Portman's character, Emma, with a bouquet of carrots after she's said, "No flowers."

Factor two: The synoposis
In this comedy, Emma (Natalie Portman) and Adam (Ashton Kutcher) are life-long friends who almost ruin everything by having sex one morning. In order...  
"In this comedy, Emma (Natalie Portman) and Adam (Ashton Kutcher) are life-long friends who almost ruin everything by having sex one morning. In order to protect their friendship, they make a pact to keep their relationship strictly "no strings attached." "No strings" means no jealousy, no expectations, no fighting, no flowers, no baby voices. It means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, in whatever public place they want, as long as they don't fall in love. The questions become — Can you have sex without love getting in the way? And can their friendship survive?"

So, the whole premise of them being life-long friends is so not true. There's a montage in the beginning of them running into each other over and over again, but they're not close. They just become close on accident. It makes it better.

Emma and Adam originally met at camp, then they reunite ten years later at a frat party in college where she asks him if he wants to accompany her to "this boring family thing" the following day — which turns out to be her father's funeral. Ooops. They part ways at that point with her words of, "Adam, you're a really wonderful guy. If you're lucky, you'll never see me again."

Which has us all confused, because hey, it's Natalie Portman.

It movies to "one year ago" where they run into each other at a farmers market. Emma has just moved to town and gives Adam her number. At this point, there's some kitchy funny moments, but nothing spectacular.

No Strings became decidedly more promising in the "present day" after Kutcher's character Adam is hanging out with his former-tv-star dad (Kevin Kline) and in walks his ex-girlfriend, now dating Daddy. Minor hilarity ensued from that scene (although we already know that Dad's a character, as his introduction to us was unfortunately sweater-hairy-chested and speedo clad as he's doing Vinyasa-yoga-slash-weight-lifting) and promised more to come.

The ex-girlfriend thing incites Adam to get drunk and "call every girl on [his] phone until someone agrees to have sex with me." His Rosencranz and Guildenstern buddies back him ("That sounds like a horribly degrading and self-destructive idea and we're behind you 100%.") The next morning, Adam awakes on a strange couch stark naked with three strangers who give him a hard time until Emma walks in and he asks her, "Did I have sex with anyone in this apartment last night?"

Booty calls ensue.

Rules get laid down (no fighting, no jealousy, no baby talk, no snuggling) and they struggle to keep it "no strings attached." Inevitably, (as it's a rom-com) someone falls in love. Hearts get broken. They rediscover the truth and all ends well. Hooray.

I really really really enjoyed this movie. My boyfriend did too. Before going to see it, our conversation was thus:

Me: We could go see a movie, there's one I'd like to see.
Him: If I rephrase that it sounds like this: 'There's a chick flick I want to see but you wouldn't like it'...am I right?

Upon leaving the theater, he told me he really enjoyed it. We cracked up at several of the lines as we rehashed the movie (I'd tell you, but you should see it first or it wouldn't make sense). Aside from some blatant and a bit unnecessary (read: it didn't add or subtract from the story) pot usage and referencing, and some interesting-choice camera shots (did we really need that close-up of Kutcher's naked butt?) it was hilarious, cute, and not terribly cliche.

It's not an Oscar-winner, but its well-timed, well-played and above Kutcher's usual average and a different kind of movie for Portman. A classic date night movie, I'll certainly be watching it again...but at home rather than ponying up the $9.75 for the movie theater.

Just remember, "I've got cupcakes..."

Yours,
The Movie-ist

The Tourist

The Tourist follows the story of Frank and Elise. Elise (Angelina Jolie) is a mysterious woman followed doggedly by the police and Frank (Johnny Depp) is an erratic, fool-in-love tourist that Elis picks from a crowd. The story is mysterious, roundabout and certainly clever.

The movie opens with the police watching Elis during her morning routine at a cafe. And I really truly can't give you any more than that without giving away much of the story and you really truly must go into it without knowing more than what I've just given you.

My only complaint about this 103 minute movie is that there is only so much they can do with the plot line and so it will occasionally seem a bit lagging. Not enough that I was counting minutes, but certainly noticeable. Other than that, the movie is intriguing and beguiling and certainly worth seeing.

You could wait for the DVD and not lose anything to the story, however, but it's not a waste of money by any stretch if you do see it in theaters. Pick a rainy weekend afternoon or as an outing to break up the stress of this lovely holiday season and catch it in theaters.

To be perfectly honest, I feel like I cannot give you any more of a review than that without ruining the movie for you. Good luck and enjoy!

Morning Glory

Morning Glory was unexpected. What I expected what a cute, tidy rom-com that would have me and my fellow movie-goers warm and fuzzy at the end. What I got was just as good...perhaps better.

Morning Glory, starring a nifty headline of big names — Harrison Ford, Diane Keaton, Rachel McAdams — follows the story of Becky Fuller (McAdams) a spunky, determined 28-year-old in the television business whose job is her life. She's beat down when she's unexpectedly fired from her job, and her oh-so-(not)- supportive mother tells her, "It was cute when you were twelve, inspiring when you were twenty, but now, at twenty-eight, it's just plain embarrassing. Give up now before it becomes just plain sad."

But Becky refuses to give up, even when making a fool of herself and manages to claw her way onto a show through sheer tenacity. Things spiral from there, she rises to the occasion, yadda yadda yadda.

It's a story of success and of finding the perfect work-life balance, a totally different storyline than the expected "my life is complete now that I've found a man." She does find a man, and a damned good one at that considering, but after the initial bloom, the relationship is shunted to the sidelines of the script and the story focuses on Becky's interactions with a cantankerous, over-the-hill news anchor (Ford). Ford plays his part to a tee as the once-illustrious, now egomaniac Mike Pomeroy ("I will not say 'fluffy.'").

Bottom line: Harrison Ford's still got it (and Diane Keaton is his perfect foil in this movie...two superstars matching egos), the story's not another syrupy-sweet rom-com but has enough spunk to tickle your enjoyment, and while the plotline waffles a bit and stays in the shallow end of the pool rather than braving the deep end, it's a cute movie to catch — and I'd even pay theater prices for it. Just maybe not an evening show, shoot for the matinee.

Yours,
The Movie-ist

Megamind

Megamind is a movie about a villain who accidentally succeeds in doing away with his arch-nemesis, Metro Man. After reveling in his glory for a while, he starts to feel something strange: he misses Metroman. Inspiration strikes with a dastardly (and bound-to-fail) plot, and Megamind creates a new arch-nemesis, Titan. However, instead of using his powers for good, Titan sets out to destroy the world, putting Megamind in the position to be good and save it (and get the girl) for the first time in his life.

I went into this movie without knowing the synopsis, which I think is better. It made the movie unpredictable for me, which was great. The downside to many superhero movies these days is the plot is usually cut and dry. Evil guy bad. Evil guy trying to rule/kill the world. Good guy destroys/prevails over evil guy. Good guy gets girl. The end.

Armed with a pretty awesome soundtrack, Megamind does the unpredictable (that is, unless you know the plot, but it's still not your average superhero movie). There are twists and turns that don't show up in many of these movies but of course, the hero gets the girl. However, it's in a really really good way.

I can't tell you or it would ruin it.


Megamind is not particularly inspired or even very deep. It doesn't address any big issues or solve any world problems. It just is what it is. Some of its twisty bits aren't very original, and it doesn't always have a lot of momentum, but it makes up for it with clever scenes and moving moments — or just plain funny ones. It never becomes unbearably slow and it does keep it's slower moments to a minimum time-wise. It won't have you rolling on the floor laughing until your sides ache (for the wrong reasons or the right ones), but it will incite more than a few chuckles.

It may not become movie of the year, but it's a fun movie and worth seeing.

The Losers (2010)

"Pretend you're this really evil guy..." actor Chris Evans (Jensen) deadpans, much to my delight.

It was a good movie, even though it was called "The Losers." Unfortunately for it — and me — it had one of those really dumb cliffhanger endings that just makes you not want to see the second one ("Push" anyone?). Where you're not really sure what happened, but it's over and they're rolling those wrap up clips during the credits.

And the bad guy is still alive. What the hell?

"The Losers" follows five, well, for lack of a better term, losers who were CIA black-ops who end up getting screwed over (and 25 children killed on top of that, talk about rubbing salt into open wounds) and left for dead. Along traipses a sultry, Lara-Croft-esque Zoe Saldana (Aisha) from god-knows-where-or-why (though we later discover) with an itchy trigger finger for the guy who betrayed the squad of losers. Classic one-liners and appropriate gunfire ensues.

What I loved was the artsy, comic-book camera cuts, angles, and shots. It took the "we're taking ourselves too seriously" completely out of the picture. The movie recognized the fact that it is made by a comic book corporation (and I think it's also based on a comic book). Instead of overly-serious, not-very-talented actors who wouldn't know a bad script if it bit them in the face, "The Losers" presents us with a decent, if not particularly deep script, demi-talented actors, and enough arty shots that the movie is taken away from the laugh-out-loud ridiculous and safely into the realm of "okay, I like this movie."

That is, until they ruin it at the end.

Luckily, the script is peppered with enough witty remarks, only a very few overblown action scenes, and a snide swipe at American government in the form of a very bad guy to almost make up for the fact that you will, in fact, have to pay more money to see if they get the bad guy or not. Doubly lucky that it's also out on DVD, so you can order it conveniently on your Netflix and pay very little to see it.

Ergo, it's worth seeing. Good for a giggle and entertaining enough to be worth the time spent watching it. Just prepare yourself for the unfortunate ending.

Yours,
The Movie-ist