The Men Who Stare At Goats

Quite possibly the most random film I have ever seen.

Even after a hard session of concentration and a taking a while to think things through after seeing it, I still failed to understand the message of the film. From time to time the plot simply made no sense and I had trouble following it. However, this didn't stop me enjoying it one bit. The film is full of witty humor and the occasional cheap laugh. George Clooney was impressive as always and in hindsight I must say that it was his acting that made the film for me.

Ewan McGregor failed to impress me, but then again, this may highly be up to my narrow-mindedness, which only allows me to see him through his role in Moulin Rouge. I was constantly waiting for him to break out in song and dance.

All in all, the film disappointed me, but then again my hopes were incredibly high and thus failure was imminent. Do not get me wrong, however, this film is still great great entertainment.

The Other Man

It's a very heavy film with a dark plot and an ingenious twist.

I would not say it is a particularly good film, apart from the twist, which I do not want to spoil for you and thus will not elaborate on. I have grown fond of Liam Neeson's acting lately and in my eyes, he delivers once again. Antonio Banderas puts in a decent effort and I can imagine the role of a slick dreamer who wives cheat on their husbands on was interesting to play for him.

The bottom line, however, is this - it drags a lot and builds up to the twist after which there is an anticlimax and everybody is richer for the experience. You need to be in a very specific mood to watch this, otherwise it will be nothing more than average.

Whip it

Whip it is a film that I have trouble placing in a category. And I am not talking about genres here, because there is no problem there - this is clearly a perfect example of the notorious vomit genre. The sort of film that is a result of two men in their middle thirties, a whole lot of alcohol and a schmoke or two.

I do not want to be harsh towards the actors and actresses involved because all of us need to eat, right! I am, however, slightly disappointed in Ellen Page, I LOVED her in Juno and do think she can be a brilliant actress, dare I say she already isn't. But I do fail to see the reasoning behind this part selection. Honey, I am sure there are far better films out there that bring out what you are really made of.

I am under no illusion that this film was directed at and by someone still learning to walk. However, with Drew Barrymore finding her feet as a director I ponder whether there are such things as "a born actress" or "a born director." There should be because sometimes, people should simply stay either in front or behind the camera and not wander around somewhere they do not belong.

Turning back to what category I would put this film in and the winner is.... awful.

The Blind Side

Firstly, very similar the the last film I saw, Adam. As in, its not particularly good, but the story is breathtaking. Well, not so much as for Adam as for this. A truly remarkable story of Michael Oher, a big boy with a bigger heart who carries everything he has in life - a spare shirt - in a plastic bag wherever he goes. Taken in by a wealthy white family, he needs to figure out the new life he is given - admission to a predominantly white private school based on his believed excellence in sport.

Secondly, the person who did the casting should be shot. That for two main reasons. a) he/she is brilliant in selecting people who so well match the real people seen in the photographs in the credits. b) for selecting Kathy Bates as miss Sue. She is perfect for the role, but I just can't stand the actress! I am sorry and am sure she is a lovely person in real life, but can't stand her on screen.

As for the rest of the cast - how is Sandra Bullock still getting roles? Who can I write to about this? I'm sure there are others out there who would quite happily have seen Megan Fox play Leigh Anna Tuohy.

The story is amazing and I would encourage all to see it. It tells me once again that the true stars in our civilization are those men and women that nobody knows about. The regular everyday normal guy and gal that have a heart as big as an elephant.

A truly inspirational "based on a true story" film, in fact, the best I have seen. That argument not being based on the films side of things, but the story side of things. That's my opinion and I am sticking with it.

Adam

Before I start writing this I have to come clean. My friends... I love chick-flicks. Big time. But not the kind that makes the girls in my house whine about how they all "want a boyfriend" (now they only do it because they know it irritates me, but whatever). I like chick-flicks with a twist. Here's a few examples to know what I'm talking about: Spread, The Ugly Truth, 500 Days of Summer.

Anyhow, this film intrigued me. Boy meets girl. Boy falls for girl. Girl falls for boy. Boy has Asperger's. Sorry? Yeah, wake up call miss "I want a boyfriend"! Life isn't all roses and butterflies. People see things in a whole different way and that is why Hugh Dancy's acting impressed me - he was able to convey that in a way that was clear enough to get the message across but subtle enough not to ruin it. Many of the things his character said and did made me think about our lives and how much of it is lies. Are we really becoming so superficial that amongst all the politeness our real message is lost? Are we unable to tell the people around us what we are thinking because we are too worried about what they might think of us?

Which brings me to my next point. When we say so many polite things, we run out of ways to express sincere emotion, sincere affection when we most wish to express it. On this blog, I have been saying that a lot of films are good just because they have left me with no negatives to point out. So now, when I actually saw a film that was not amazing, that was not bound to go down in film history, that was not superb, but was extremely heart-warming and a lovely watch... I simply... Do not know how to say it. Because there are these other films in the way.

This really is a good (I know, I'm sorry) film and I encourage you to watch it, unless you are the type that needs exploding cars and an average of 5 stabbing and 89 deaths per film in order for it to be "good". In which case you know nothing of cinema and should not watch anything at all... better still - don't even leave your house and chuck your TV out the window. Do that and I promise that I will be more objective with the next reviews I post.

Law Abiding Citizen

Before you start reading this, I ask that you try to take everything I say with a pinch of salt because I got a lot of love for Gerald Butler. But often as it is, we choose to ride those we love the hardest, so they achieve their full potential. Kind of the case here. Watching it I wondered why monsieur Butler chooses roles of broken men with a bit of roughness to them, someone who has lost someone close. We saw this in P.S. I Love You (loved that film by the way) and also in the Gamer. As he has that look about him which makes such roles suit him so perfectly, I can't help but wish that he did something completely different. Something to really challenge his ability as an actor. For the love of God, it's not like he would ruin his career, should he fail. Not with the kind of looks he's flashing around. Take The Ugly Truth for example... there are always that kind of films as a back-up.

Jamie Foxx? Well, let me tell you that not having seen too much of his stuff, I would have to say he did well. Nothing about his acting that left me with a bitter taste, nothing about it leaving me rallying the troops to go riot an Oscar for him. Not that it would be the kind of caliber film, that would bring home the golden men. Don't get me wrong, I do think it is a good film.

And the thing that really makes it good is the plot. Kurt Wimmer (writer) is undoubtedly bang on and F. Gary Gray (I know, awesome name, right) has done a good job directing. I love comparing the incomparable, so here it is: whilst for Avatar, the plot can be suggested to be the weakest feature - slightly lacking in creativity and choosing raw muscle over wit in trying to hammer home the message - this is completely the opposite. I love a thought provoking film and this definitely is a true-blooded member of that tribe.

However, the plot on its own can't make a film or break it, nor can any other aspect. Similarly, just the ability to put the ball in the basket doesn't make one a good basketball player. There are other aspects of the game that make you a true player, like Brandon Roy or King James. You have to be a solid all-rounder and that is what I think this film is. It is a good solid act, with some stronger aspects and some weaker ones, but just like the fore mentioned players, it will make you remember itself.

Year One

Right, I'm going to make this brief to catch up the time I lost watching the film.

It's about two hunter-gatherers (Jack Black, Michael Cera [Rather upset at him becoming part of this film after Superbad and Juno]) who go from bad to worse to weird to worse in their quest to save two good-looking members (June Diane Raphael, Juno Temple) of their tribe, who had become slaves due to Jack Black's character's clumsiness. They go through a series of biblical events leading to the place of their romances' captivity and rescue them, becoming wiser in the process. Naturally they get the girls and everyone is happy. There, now I've saved you the time you would waste watching it. You are welcome!

There is no real cinematic value to speak of here, so the only way this film would not be an utter piece of rubbish is if it was funny. Which it is not. You will understand when they are making jokes, but it will not make you laugh.

Ironically, as the main character eats the fruit of knowledge he becomes wiser, you watching it, will not. You will become more stupid. So don't.