Movie Review: Be Kind Rewind

PLOT:

In Passaic, NJ, Elroy Fletcher runs a video store in a condemned building he claims was the birthplace of Fats Waller. Fletcher goes on a Waller centennial trip, leaving his foster son Mike in charge of the store. Mike’s peculiar friend Jerry tries to sabotage a power station and nearly electrocutes himself, getting magnetized in the process. He inadvertently erases every tape in the store. Mike and Jerry hatch an plan to hide the disaster by making a homemade “Ghostbusters” to rent to a woman whom Fletcher will be phoning to check on them. Soon, with help, their homemade versions of films develop a cult following. Will this new business save the store and the building? What about Fats?

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Video store. Remember the days when we couldn’t just turn on our devices and have instant access to a vast library of films, but rather had to go to a physical location and search for the movie we wanted to see. Heaven forbid if all the copies were checked out and we would have to wait for one to be returned! *SIGH* I miss the video store. Interesting thing…this is set in modern day (I believe this was released in 2008?), which is way before the streaming wars. Netflix was still primarily a DVD by mail company (do they still do that?) and hadn’t forced Blockbuster out of business…yet. The video store in this film only features VHS, which I found interesting because most store, even the mom and pop variety, were completely on the DVD kick and exploring Blu ray at the time, if I recall. It was just a nice bit of nostalgia to see the VHS tapes on the shelves.

Fats. If you keep up with this blog, then it is fairly obvious that I am a jazz aficionado. That said, I will admit that Fats Waller is not one I’m particularly knowledgeable about. I’m not as bad as the kids in the film who when asked to name a Fats Waller song for some reason started singing Notorious B.I.G. and nursery rhymes, but I need to learn more about the man. To my knowledge, there aren’t many films on the subject of Waller, which is a shame because he does cast a huge shadow on the world of jazz. He may be a bit of a macguffin, for lack of a better term, in this film, but I can guarantee some folks went and read up and learned something about him after watching this picture.

DIY. For so many years, movie companies have had the monopoly on making movies. Today, anyone with a camera can make a movie and upload it to Youtube, Tik Tok, or wherever. Now, the idea is different in this film, at least until the end, but the same principle applies. These guys are making their own movies and putting them out there for people to see (because Jack Black’s character managed to get magnetized and erase all the tapes in the shop). At first, they do this just to keep the store in business, but as word of mouth spreads, it becomes a way to unite the community. How can you fault them for that?

What didn’t I like?

Gentrification. A secondary plot, that really doesn’t come into play fully until the last act, is the city’s desire to demolish the store and “improve” the neighborhood. Look, this is an older neighborhood and not the most aesthetically pleasing, but this is where this community lives. When cities want to “improve” these neighborhoods, all they do is kick everyone out so that they can build fancy apartments and/or overpriced stores in its stead. Nothing is put back the way it was and those that were kicked out are have to find a new home, despite having lived in the same spot for some 30, 40, 50 years. I applaud the film for touching on this topic, but the act and how the city officials were so callous and uncaring with is made me want to go in my TV screen and punch them in the face…or worse!

Close the store. In a pivotal scene from Clerks, Dante and Randall close the store to go on the roof and play hockey. While up there a string of characters consistently ask, “are you open”, despite the giant sign saying “back in an hour”. When Mike and Jerry (Mos Def and Jack Black, respectively) leave to film the “sweded” movies, I thought back to that. Now, it is shown that this store doesn’t do much business, but you never know when someone may come in, especially with the amount of time it takes to film a movie. We’re talking hours, just to make a 30 minute version of Ghostbusters. Maybe I’m reading too much into that, though.

Yes, you are the bad guy! Right as it looks like our heroes have pulled off a miracle and saved the store, enter a cameo by Sigourney Weaver as some sort of Federal copyright officer, I’m not exactly sure what her title is. She and her lackey seize all the sweded movies and take them outside to be destroyed, citing that little warning at the beginning of all videos. Depending on what side you’re on, she says something to the effect of “…and they thing we’re the bad guy” because the studios are losing thousands of dollars on these films (as if they don’t have enough money already). Copyright law is to protect intellectual property, such as black artists having their music stolen by the likes of Elvis, Lynyrd Skynrd, etc, not for movie studios to send lawyers and lackeys down at the slightest hint that they are losing money. Heaven forbid they don’t have a couple of $20 bills to light their cigars with!

Final verdict:

What did I think of Be Kind Rewind? At the end of the credits, there is a website address to see all the sweded videos from the film. If you search Youtube, there are a ton of sweded films, which is surprising because this was a modest hit at best. Not many people know about it’s existence. Personally, I dig it, but I like movies and jazz, so this is right up my alley. If you go into this with high expectations, you will be seriously disappointed. There is an independent comedy feel to this film that really makes it work and seeing the community unite to save the video store is sure to warm your heart. I highly recommend this to you and yours!

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Steel Magnolias

PLOT:

Pivoting around the lively Truvy Jones’ Louisiana beauty parlour, a tightly-knit band of friends, confront griefs, loss, life’s unforeseen tragedies and heartaches with what they do best: gossiping and sharing. The spirited diabetic and bride-to-be, Shelby; her always supportive mother, M’Lynn; Truvy’s gawky assistant, Annelle; the city’s curmudgeon, Ouiser; and the town’s former first lady, Clairee, are the warm Southern belles who know how to survive life’s challenges with their unwavering friendship. But when Shelby decides to conceive, things will turn upside down

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Sightseeing. Having attended college in the small town where this was filmed, I always enjoy seeing the familiar surroundings and marvel at how much they changed to make this fictional representation. For me, it is also a joy to see many professors and people from the city playing background roles. When this was made, I was still 5-6 years away from enrolling, so some of the folks were a bit younger than when I first met them. If you’ve ever had a movie filmed in your town, then you know the feeling, especially if you’re from a small town that never gets any publicity save for the occasional sports story or coverage of a festival.

You’ll laugh, you’ll cry. I am heartless and pretty much devoid of all emotion. However, I can see how people would run the gamut of the spectrum watching this picture. There are numerous quotable lines (its a battle between Dolly Parton and Olympia Dukakis for the true comic relief) and the heartbreak that goes down in latter half of the film is enough to melt even the iciest of hearts. Not many films are able to pull off this mixture of emotions as most veer heavily toward one and when they attempt to try the other it falls flat. I give mad props to this picture for being able to pull this feat off. I wonder if the ladies this was based on (the original play is based on a true story) were actually like this.

Cast. Julia Roberts. Shirley MacLaine. Sally Field. Olympia Dukakis. Dolly Parton. Daryl Hannah, What a cast! Now, when I say that, keep in mind this was made in 1989, so Roberts was still an up and comer (Pretty Woman would be released the following year), Daryl Hannah is a few years removed from Splash, Dolly is still known more for her music than anything else, and Sally Field is still in shock that people like her. Having said that, it is amazing how well these women gel. From what I heard from locals that were around, they were often times seen eating (and drinking) together, which explains the comradery. It was a natural thing. I wonder if the ladies in the remake even bothered to talk to each other off-screen.

What didn’t I like?

Cause of death. In the first scene with all the ladies in the beauty shop, Julia Roberts’ character has an attack, for lack of a better term, that lets the audience know she is diabetic. Sally Field’s character is quick to point out how severe her condition is every chance she gets (I’ll get to her shortly). In the film’s denouement moment, if you will, Roberts collapses on her back porch, leaving her baby crying. Eventually her husband comes home and finds her. We don’t know how long she was out there or how long the kid was crying, but the refrigerator was open and food was cooking on the stove, so it couldn’t have been that long. This is followed up with the gut wrenching montage and scene in the hospital. I’ll leave it at that. Now, to my knowledge, one cannot die from type I diabetes if they are doing what they need to do. As far as we can tell, she was doing what she needed to do, just a little more stressed than she should have been. If you were seeing this for the first time, you wouldn’t know that she rejected the kidney her mother donated to her and that was the cause. This is glossed over in the film, sadly.

(Not a) Man’s world. Obviously, this is a film focused on the women. However, I have to take issue with how the men are portrayed. Not a single one of them is in a shining light type of situation. Shelby’s dad is a bit of an eccentric. Truvy’s husband lays around the house feeling sorry for himself because he can’t get work. The bartender that Annelle hooks up with is just whipped, shall we say. Perhaps Shelby’s husband comes out the best, but he’s such a non-character. Other than the moment he comes home and finds her, you wouldn’t even know he was there, save for the wedding (and his aunt’s cake making skills). Should any of the men in the film been promoted to more of a principal role? No, but they could have been giving something more respectable. Imagine if this was made current year and the roles were reversed. People would be raising hell because of how these characters were written.

Mother knows best. Many ladies I know complain about how overbearing their mothers are. In some cases, I have seen this up close and personal. Sally Field’s character, while well-meaning, fits that mold to a ‘T’. Maybe it is because I am not a mother, but surely she could just let her daughter live her life, rather than criticize and hover over her. That being said, she did come through for her when it came to donating a kidney and being a grandmother, so there is that. I don’t know, I guess because my mom was more encouraging this characterization is foreign to me.

Final verdict:

What did I think of Steel Magnolias? First off, I am a little biased as this is a film/story/play you cannot get away from when you attend college in this town. I think the theater department did it twice during my time there, if I am not mistaken. The amount of love and care that was put into this film from the script, to the authentic hometown feel (yes, that Christmas festival is real…just WAY bigger now). I may be a little biased, but there are few major problems with this picture. Sure, it is a bit of a chick flick, but everything can’t be a super macho, pecs out, guns blazing, blood gushing action film. I very highly recommend this very well made entertaining film. After you finish, think about making a trek to Natchotiches, La and seeing the houses up close and personal. Much of it is unchanged!

5 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Stranger than Fiction

 

PLOT:

Everybody knows that your life is a story. But what if a story was your life? Harold Crick (Will Ferrell) is your average I.R.S. Agent: monotonous, boring, and repetitive. But one day this all changes when Harold begins to hear an author inside of his head narrating his life. The narrator it is extraordinarily accurate, and Harold recognizes the voice as an esteemed author he saw on television. But when the narration reveals that he is going to die, Harold must find the author of the story, and ultimately his life, to convince her to change the ending of the story before it is too late

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Will power. Will Ferrell is primarily known as a manchild, physical type comedian. It is a rare sight for him to do a more adult-type role, let alone a serious one. Yet, here we are watching him shine and wondering could he have a career outside of comedy, or was this just a one time thing. We may never know, but one thing is for certain, he shows he is more than just a comedic buffoon. Come to think of it, I don’t believe he even cracks a smile until the end. Who would of thought this was to come from Ferrell?

Narration. Emma Thompson’s deadpan, matter of fact delivery of the narration fits her arc in the story. Not to spoil anything, but she narrates as if she is writing a story and Ferrell is the main character. There is just something about a proper British person narrating that makes everything, no matter how dire, better. Then again, I wonder what this would have sounded like with Samuel L. Jackson doing the narration. Can you imagine the amount of time he would have said “mother f—er”? Actually, it does pose the question, who would narrate if we were in Ferrell’s shoes?

Connection. Raise your hand if you think Ferrell is a sexy leading man? No one? How about the image of him hooking up with Maggie Gyllenhaal? A little more believable, but still a longshot. Well, that is what happens, but it isn’t done right off the bat. As a matter of fact, she hates him for coming in and serving her with an audit (she’s one of those government is evil types, btw). As the movie progresses, she does soften up. While I could have done with more development of that angle, it isn’t the main plot, but their connection was done organically and should be appreciated.

What didn’t I like?

Queen. I have been seeing commercials for Queen Latifah starring a TV reboot of The Equalizer the past couple of weeks. Never watched the original show, so I’m curious how she’ll compare to Denzel. I don’t see her in that kind of role, if I’m being honest. Still, she may surprise. The same kind of thing can be said for her role as Emma Thompson’s assistant in this film. This is a role the Queen should have had when she was first trying to break into acting, but at this later point in her career (let’s not forget she was nominated for an Oscar a few years prior) why is she playing a role where she is barely on screen, let alone does anything memorable. For me, I just think they could have grabbed someone off the street to do the same thing (and probably paid them much less).

Relationship. I already talked about Ferrell’s relationship with Maggie Gyllenhaal’s character, but what about the other people in the film. For the most part, he is a loner and a creature of habit (such a wonderful life!!!), but he does seem to have the one friend, Dave, who seems to live in an apartment designed by the people who created The Jetsons, or at least that vision of the future. In his attempt to figure out what is with the voices in his head, he is referred to Dustin Hoffman’s character, I forget his name at the moment. I have a slight issue with this in that is seems as if they would go on to be friends, but in reality they just seem to be doctor/patient. Why is this an issue? Well, the fact that he is opening up to someone when he has so very few people in his life. Perhaps I am just reading too much into it, though.

What brought this on? Here is the big question. Why is Ferrell hearing the narration? Is there some magical totem that he stumbled upon when riding the bus? Did he steal some voodoo priestess’ seat? Is it just random dumb luck? This is something that was never explained but it is mention that Thompson’s character has done the same thing to, I believe the number was 16, others makes me question if people just randomly go about hearing voices in their head from her shortly before they die. It is a small compliant, but one I wish they would have given an explanation for, even if it was some cheesy revelation during the credits.

Final verdict:

What did I ultimately think of Stranger Than Fiction? This is a surprisingly competent movie, which something you don’t often say of films starring Will Ferrell. Again, Ferrell’s turn as a serious actor is the most impressive part of this film. The story keeps you hooked wondering what is going to happen next. Maggie Gyllenhaal makes for a cute love interest, but that whole subplot would not be missed if it was removed. All in all, this was a decent film and I highly recommend it for a viewing or two.

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Blast from the Past

PLOT:

Adam Weber is the child of an eccentric inventor and his wife. Following a bomb scare in the 1960s that locked the Webers in their bomb shelter for 35 years, Adam Weber must venture out into Los Angeles and obtain food and supplies for his family. He meets Eve, who reluctantly agrees to help him out.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Man out of time. This is the second time Brendan Fraser has played a character from another time, well he seems like it in this case due to being raised in a bomb shelter. The other time being Encino Man. I need to track that down and watch it again. It has been forever and a day. Anyway, Fraser completely owns the naivete of a 35 yr old man who has never seen anything but the bomb shelter he was born and raised in, taking the term “living a sheltered life” to new heights. For everyone else, it is just life as normal, but for Fraser, he is seeing everything for the first time and he brilliantly conveys that to the audience through an excitable mix of actions and facial expressions that he just naturally pulls off.

It was the 90s. I believe I was finishing high school or in the first half of college when this came out. In other words, I was still hitting up the club and bars most weekends, including one that resembles the Club 40s that they go to in search of a wife for Fraser’s character. In other reviews, and posts, that I have made on this blog, it is obvious that I am a fan of the 30s-50s era. However, I was the right age in the 90s to really appreciate the music, attitude, fashions, etc. Alicia Silverstone’s wardrobe isn’t as over the top as in Clueless. Mostly because she’s not a rich princess, but rather a struggling individual in her late 20s/early 30s. Having said that, the stuff she wears isn’t exactly 90s per se, save for the shoes, but the vibe is there. The modern (for the time) song used on the soundtrack really take me back, particularly to the retro swing era. Can we bring that back, please?!?

Little lady from Pasadena. Going back to Silverstone. When we first meet her, she talks about how guys like her character for her legs, butt, and hair. To which Fraser responds that he likes her eyes. I happen to agree with him, she does have great eyes. Her character is probably the only one that has any growth in the film. Sure, Fraser’s character evolves a bit, but she goes from being a cold bitch to the loving girlfriend you can bring home to mom. Not just any mom, a mom from the 50s!!!

What didn’t I like?

See the difference. When the Webers go underground in…I believe ’61…they lived in a nice suburb. As the years progressed, the suburb was bulldozed for a malt shop, which turned into a rock bar, then a biker bar, and finally a cult church of some sort in a skid row part of town. All the while, no one bothered to investigate the bomb shelter, but rather just paved right over it. Luckily, they were able to get out and back to the surface. That isn’t my criticism, though, but rather how the neighborhood went to hell in a handbasket. Given the tone of this movie, the worse we see is a porn shop and a tranny prostitute, but the impression I got is that this a bad part of town. I can only imagine what kind of horror these people would witness had they come up in present year. They’d probably go running back in and never come back up. Hell, sometimes I wish I could go down and do the same!

Call the cops. Near the film’s end, Silverstone’s character calls social services because she thinks Fraser is a threat. The night before he came clean about where he is from and asked her to come with him. In her defense, it would sound crazy if some guy you’ve only known for a few days asks you to go live underground with him, still there were other things that should have raised the proverbial red flag long before that. I don’t know, I have never understood that scene, especially when she rushed to call social services, but didn’t want them to call the cops. Did she want to be “safe from him” or not?

If I were a rich man. In an early scene down in the bomb shelter, Christopher Walken, who is Fraser’s dad, tells him that he bought some stock, but because the world has apparently been wiped out, they are no good. Fraser takes them and that is the last we hear of them until the final act. AT & T, Polaroid, and IBM stocks in the late 90s with the added interest from their purchase in ’58 made for billions upon billions. If this was present day, only the AT & T stock would still be worth something. My issue with all this is this coupled with the selling of baseball cards and the money he gets from his mother is how Fraser survives on the surface, but why is it the stocks weren’t even an afterthought until it was convenient? Sure, it makes for a feel good ending, but I just didn’t feel satisfied with how they were conveniently discovered and how Silverstone discovered that Fraser was telling the truth (after she scared him off and tried to have him committed).

Final verdict:

What did I think of Blast from the Past? This is one of those films that I first saw late at night in my dorm room, if I recall. The mixture of modern and retro really appealed to me then, and it still does now. The music is great, but the plot and comedy leave a little to be desired. Fraser is great and, while Silverstone is great to look at, she comes off as a wooden for most of the film. That being said, this is still an entertaining film. Is it the best thing ever? No, but often times the movies that people watch over and over aren’t. I highly recommend this one!

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: The Holiday

PLOT:

In London, Iris Simpkins writes a wedding column in a newspaper and nurtures an unrequited love for her colleague Jasper Bloom. Near Christmas, she is informed that Jasper is engaged to marry another colleague, and her life turns upside down. In Los Angeles, the movie-trailers maker Amanda Woods has just split with her unfaithful boyfriend Ethan and wants to forget him. Through a house exchange website, Amanda impulsively swaps her mansion for Iris’ cottage in Surrey for the holidays. While in Surrey, Amanda meets Iris’ brother and book editor Graham and they fall in love with each other. Meanwhile, Iris meets her new next door neighbor the ninety year old screenplay writer Arthur, who helps her retrieve her self-esteem, and the film composer Miles, with whom she falls in love.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Kiss me, Kate. Full disclosure, I love Kate Winslet! Most of her movies aren’t my cup of tea, but they are worth it to see this vision of loveliness appear on screen. What I like about her in this film is that she plays a character that is meant to be just average, in comparison to Cameron Diaz. Even their houses are opposites. Kate lives in a small cottage, while Diaz is in a giant mansion. Back to Winslet’s portrayal, though. As the movie progresses, and with the help of a couple of new friends, she gains confidence. As her confidence grows, her looks begin to change. She never goes full glam, but she does blossom, if you will, from the shy violet at the film’s beginning to the bright sunflower at film’s end. She may very well be the most developed character of the film in doing so, as well.

Chemistry. This film is often compared to, or at least mention in the same breath as, Love, Actually. Why is that? Well, they are both about love around the holidays. The difference is the cast’s chemistry. Not to take anything away from the former, but Winslet, Diaz, Jude Law, and Jack Black have a tremendous amount of chemistry. Surprising, really. Well, not so much with the Kate and Jude, but more how Diaz and Black fit so well together with their on screen counterparts. I’ll get to Jack Black shortly, but Cameron Diaz and Jude Law was a fantasy matchup at the time this was released. They instantly hit it off and you can see the sparks flying. Throw in other developments about his character that are sprinkled in as the film progresses and it seems as if she falls for him even harder. Watching the two of them, one has to wonder if there were any real life sparks. Hmmm…

You don’t know Jack. We all know Jack Black as the schlubby, funny guy. The over the top, comic relief in all of his films. Even the few seconds that he is on screen in Mars Attacks has him being a character, if you will. While he has been the lead in a few films, no one thinks of Black as a leading man, let alone one in a rom-com, right? Apparently, the director did, and she wrote this role with him in mind, specifically. There are two things about this character that I love. First, he is a film composer, a profession that we don’t often get in movies. It seems that everyone is either a writer, businessman, or have some profession where they make enough money to live in a big house. Second, no offense to the Jude Laws of the world, but there are more guys that look like Jack Black. Seeing him get the girl was a win. These days, there is a seeming non-stop conversation about representation, but no one mentions that chubby, average guys being represented. Maybe its something that should be brought to mind? Black kills it in the role, oozing charm, wit, and toning down his humor. It make you think that he could be cast in this type of role from time to time, if he wanted.

What didn’t I like?

Holidays. The title refers more to the British term for a vacation than it does to any particular holiday, which is fine considering half the film/cast is British. That said, this is supposedly a Christmas movie and yet, there are few mentions of it being Christmas. I mean, it starts with an office Christmas party, and there mentions of it being Christmas eve and all, but the  holiday feeling doesn’t permeate. Now, this is never marketed as a Christmas movie, but you’d think there would at least be some trees or something. I think the only tree was at Jude Law’s house. A small nitpick, sure, but given this is often considered a Christmas rom-com, it should be mentioned.

Can you guess? I hate to say this, but this film is so predictable. Everything that happens is no surprise, with one exception regarding Jude Law’s character, and even that was something that could have been a multiple choice answer, All I’m saying, really, is that it would have nice to get some suspense in before everything plays out. It makes for better cinema, but that whole “will they or won’t they” that is so popular in movies of this nature, is not here because of said lack of suspense.

Get away from your problems. Not to be “that guy”, but what message is this film trying to put out there that one can just swap lives with someone halfway across the globe and everything will be fine. Granted, if you have the means to take a couple of weeks off work, then who am I to object. Still, I was always taught to face my problems. Having said that, had these women done that, then we wouldn’t have a film, but I wanted to bring that point to light, at least.

Final verdict:

What did I think of The Holiday? Well, this is a film that I should not love as much as I do. It is a saccharine laced chick flick with no real moments of eye candy (though I will never turn down a chance to look at Kate Winslet). The ascension of Jack Black as a leading man is intriguing, as is pairing him with Winslet. Diaz and Law are the beautiful people that belong together. Screen legend Eli Wallach has a small, but important, supporting role that not only ties into the film, but is nice to see him again. The plot is a little flimsy, but it works for what it is. No one is going to watch this expecting an epic love story, but viewers will be entertained. For this heartless, devoid of emotion blogger, it actually puts a smile on my face everytime I watch it. I highly recommend you check it out and/or place in your holiday film rotation

4 1/2 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Man of the House

PLOT:

When a key informant against a notorious crime boss is assassinated, the only witnesses to his murder are five lively cheerleaders from the University of Texas: Barb, Anne, Evie, Heather, and Teresa. With the girls’ lives in danger until the authorities discover the killer, the hard-headed Texas Ranger, Roland Sharp, has to go undercover and move in with them at a secret safe house, as the mysterious murderer is still at large. However, to effectively protect the teenage quintet of eyewitnesses, Sharp must first lay down the ground rules for a harmonious, and above all, safe coexistence. Will the man of the house succeed in his mission?

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Girls, girls, girls. As a red-blooded, straight male, I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge the copious amounts of beauty in the film. Yes, the big focus is on the girls, each with distinctive personalities (airhead, tomboy, studious, leader, fireball), but there are a some other female characters who don’t get the same amount of screentime, but are just as pleasant to look at and have interesting characters, as well. The partner that gets shot in the opening scenes, the daughter, and the professor/love interest are all worthy of note.

Eyes of Texas. Growing up a University of Texas fan, I thought for sure I’d have gone there, but I ended up choosing another university. Do I regret the decision? No, but I do wonder. If I’m doing the math correctly, this would have been filming while I was working on my 2nd degree. Man, I love it when movies use real universities, rather than coming up with some made up thing (that turns out to be a real name a few years later) or Yale or Harvard. Not only is UT on full display, so is the city of Austin, which is always a bonus. Being a band nerd, I have to give props for showing the band members in various ways. Although, I do have a bone to pick with not showing the playing, save for the one scene that was at a game.

Some action.All the trailers I remember watching when this film was initially released had me believing this was a straight up comedy when, in fact, it is more of an action flick with hints of comedy and some crime twists along the way. Now, when I say this is  an action flick, don’t go in expecting Die Hard or a Michael Bay level of action shots. I’m just saying that the action, which consists of car chases, shootouts, and a standoff at the Mexican border, is better than one would expect when you look at this film from the outside.

What didn’t I like?

That’s entertainment. Cedric the Entertainer plays some kind of ex-con turned informant/preacher. I don’t think they ever clarified what his exact relationship is with Tommy Lee Jones’ character. What I do know is, while the character description I just typed sounds great for a sitcom, for this film, he just sticks out. Obviously, he’s comic relief and a contrast to Jones’ grumpy old man, but for me he was just a tad over the top. The reveal that he was an old school cheerleader was a nice touch but, how is it he can still fit into that uniform, and why does he have it so readily available in his office?

Schoolgirl crush. When the girls first meet Tommy Lee Jones, one of them remarks that “he’s kinda cute”. At first, we figure it’s just an offhand line that won’t be brought up again. Turns out that isn’t the case, as later in the film she gets depressed about Jones’ having a date with her professor. Here’s my issue with this whole situation. It is obvious the writers wanted to go somewhere with it. Where that is, I don’t know. Perhaps it ended up cut from the final script or the scenes were on the cutting room floor, but her crush and reaction feel like it should have been more, maybe even play into a betrayal? Maybe I’m just overthinking.

Cheering and coaching. Excluding a couple of scenes where they are just random cheering (practice, meeting Cedric the Entertainer’s character, etc), the only time we see the girls doing any real cheering is the one time we are at a game, and even then, I don’t think we saw them do anything. Not that this needed to be Bring It On, but shouldn’t cheerleaders, even those in witness protection, be cheering? Speaking of that, I know Jones’ character needed a cover, but assistant cheerleading coach? He could have let one of his minions handle that or come up with a better alibi like…i don’t know strength and conditioning? The fact that he’s not exactly enthusiastic about, well, anything, doesn’t help, either.

Final verdict:

What did I think of Man of the House? This is an underrated film that most people dismiss for one reason or the other. I enjoy it because it is one of the few times Tommy Lee Jones is enjoying himself, the girls are interesting characters (and easy on the eyes), and there is a good bit of action and comedy. Is this the best movie you’ll see? No, not by a longshot, but it is enjoyable and worth a viewing or two just for fun. I know its 2020, but fun is still allowed, right? I highly recommend this one.

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: American Pie Presents: Girls’ Rules

PLOT:

It’s Senior year at East Great Falls. Annie, Kayla, Michelle, and Stephanie decide to harness their girl power and band together to get what they want their last year of high school.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Continuity. This is the 9th film in the American Pie franchise. From the outside, it doesn’t resemble the other films, other than it is a sex comedy, but if you look closely, there a little Easter eggs that remind you this is in a continuation of the universe. Starting with one of the main characters Stephanie Stifler, a Tall Oaks band camp flag in someone’s room, lacrosse team, etc. The only thing missing was Jim’s dad.

Sara smile. Most of the roles I’ve seen Sara Rue in have her as a sweetheart. This was a bit of a departure for her. She’s still unbelievably likable, but also a complete nympho. No, she isn’t as bad as the quartet of girls that the film centers around, but it is obvious she has a voracious, insatiable sexual appetite. Hell, we meet her in a sex shop giving advice to two of the girls on what product to buy!!!

Let’s talk about sex. A common misconception is that only boys talk about sex. Make no mistake, females are just as dirty as the boys when it comes to the topic. If they weren’t, we wouldn’t have pornstars, right? I don’t think this film went as far as the original films. As a matter of fact, I would have liked it better if they pushed those limits a bit further, but #metoo, I suppose.

What didn’t I like?

Like. Of the four main characters, 1 is lovable, 1 is likable, 1 is deplorable, and the final one is…well, she’s a Stifler. If you’re familiar with this franchise, you know what to expect from her. That doesn’t excuse why the others aren’t immediately endearing. I’m not saying these girls need to be sugar and spice and everything nice, but the viewer doesn’t need to despise them. Aside from the “nice” girls, there is one that hacks her boyfriend’s phone, sneaks into a boy’s room at a party and takes pictures on his bed in his lacrosse uniform. Even with her “redemption” at film’s end, I couldn’t bring myself to care.

Predictable. Once all the characters, conflicts, and plotlines were setup, it is more than obvious what is going to happen. If you’re expecting a surprise, don’t get your hopes up because everything plays out the way you think it will. One can literally tell when things are going to happen, it is so predictable.

Why, just why? I was under the impression that this franchise ended with American Reunion, but I guess the studio wanted to squeeze whatever was left out of this franchise. I have to question the decision, though. No one asked for this and from what I’ve heard and read…well, that pie has gone rancid.

Final verdict:

Final thoughts on American Pie Presents: Girls’ Rules? I don’t really have much to say about this. The magic that made this franchise work originally, is either gone or from a bygone era. The filmmakers try to recapture that formula with female protagonists and I commend them for not making a big girl power thing, this thing was dead on arrival. One would be better served finding one of the earlier (superior) films.

2 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

PLOT:

Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood visits 1969 Los Angeles, where everything is changing, as TV star Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his longtime stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) make their way around an industry they hardly recognize anymore. The ninth film from the writer-director features a large ensemble cast and multiple storylines in a tribute to the final moments of Hollywood’s golden age.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

BFFs. Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio were long seen as sex symbols and heartthrobs. To my knowledge, this is the first time they have starred in a film together. All those girls who had their posters on their walls and lockers in the 90s and early 2000s must have been in heaven when they heard these guys were going to be in this together. From my point of view, not being a female who was obsessed with these guy back in the day, I appreciated the acting. I was able to believe that these were two best friends, despite one being a stunt double and the other being a big, albeing fading, star. The whole film, if not a big chunk of it, relies on their camaraderie and the audience being invested in it, which they did a pretty job of, in my opinion.

Bruce Lee. There has been some controversy over the portrayal of Bruce Lee. Obviously, director Quentin Tarantino has respect from Lee. If there is any question, look at Uma Thurman’s outfit in the Kill Bill movies and compare it to Bruce Lee’s in Game of Death and notice the homage. All that aside, this portrayal of Lee is over the top…maybe a bit too much…but fun to watch. The idea that Lee was this cocky and arrogant is the total opposite of who the man was, which makes this such a delight, not to mention the fight choreography he has with Pitt’s character. I only wish we could have seen more.

Aesthetic. Every decade has a certain look and feel. From the music and fashion to the cars and the way people speak, you can tell when you’re watching a film set in, say the ’50s as opposed to the ’80s. Tarantino has captured the aesthetic of the ’70s in such a way that it almost feels like we’re watching a flick from that era. This really should come as no surprise, though. Almost all of his films have a this touch. He just decided to use the technique for a whole film this go ’round.

What didn’t I like?

Tate-r tot. From the minute this film was announced, there seemed to be a big deal made about the inclusion of Sharon Tate and the Manson family. Not to spoil anything, but she is more of a side character than part of the main cast. When I realized this, I thought to myself, was all that hype to get people to watch? Did she have a bigger role initially and it was cut down? Did Tarantino and Margot Robbie have creative differences that led to such a small part? Maybe we’ll find out when the 50th anniversary DVD is released. Until then, all we can do is speculate.

A violent end. In the film’s climax, Tarantino chooses to change history. I won’t spoil what he does, but I will say that the scene in which he does this seems to come from out of nowhere. That is to say, the rest of the film has had a few punches here and there, but nothing that seems like it out of a John Wick film. Yet, this is what we get in this last scene as Pitt”s character (and his dog) defend the homestead, for lack of a better term, while DiCaprio’s new wife sleeps. Not for nothing, DiCaprio gets the best of one of the female intruders. Still, this whole sequence seems more in line with Inglorious Basterds or Reservoir Dogs.

Feet. Quentin Tarantino has a foot fetish. Watch any of his films, with a couple of exceptions and you will fins barefoot women (and men). To each their own, I suppose. I’m not judging the man as I can appreciate a woman in some sexy heels or sandals, myself. However, Tarantino doesn’t seem to be hiding his affinity for feet in this film. Robbie’s Sharon Tate is seen in a movie theater with her boots off and her (surprisingly dirty) bare feet on the back of the seat. One of the very first scenes we see is a beautiful blonde laying in the bed, her golden skin glowing in the sun. Does Tarantino focus on her beauty? No, he instead lingers on her toes before finally moving the camera up. Again, to each their own, but these are just a couple of the examples in this film where he just goes all in on showing his love for feet…dirty feet at that!

Final verdict.

When it all comes down to it, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a love letter to the Hollywood that Tarantino grew up with. There actually is a good story and great acting here, but I can’t help but feel this is not one his strongest films. That said, this is one of the more entertaining pictures for its runtime and doesn’t feel as if the characters are rambling off just to hear themselves talk. Do I recommend it? Yes, but you can probably wait until it comes to video or streaming, rather than rushing to see it in theaters.

4 out of 5 stars