Top Picks

An undead romp: Zombieland

February 14, 2010
By

Overall Rating: B+
Filmmaking/Artistic: B+
Storytelling: A−
MPAA Rating: R (Zombie violence, Some language)

The pitch

What if we did Shaun of the Deadwith Woody Harrleson as the “funny guy”, and added a Napoleon Dynamite loser to it?

Overview

A well-done zombie comedy, with enough anti-zombie violence for the action fans and plenty of loser comedy.  The very funny script even makes the 90 minutes of Woody Harrleson shtick acceptable.

Review

Your Movie Monkey heard from multiple sources that this was great, and it did not disappoint.  The world has been taken over by zombies, and there are very few survivors left.  The movie focuses on one Napoleon Dynamite type loser, Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), who is trying to get to his family (in Columbus, Ohio… everyone is known by the town they’re from in this film).  He explains to us how he survives, basically he has a set of rules he lives his life by.  (Example: Rule #1, Cardio.  You’ve got to be able to outrun the Zombies.)

We get to know Columbus throughout this movie, as he becomes more alive in his quest to survive than he ever was before the invasion.  Columbus hooks up with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), who basically just loves shooting zombies.  Tallahassee has suffered a big loss, and basically doesn’t care about anything else.

It’s the script that’s really funny… constant reminders of the rules.  Nothing much actually happens in the film, but the adventures along the way are worth it.  Your Movie Monkey’s hesitancy was the idea of watching Woody Harrleson for an entire movie.  (He’s funny in small doses, but 90 minutes?)  But the writing is so good, that it’s even worth it.  A lot of fun and laughs, and not too deep, Zombieland is definitely worth a rental, if you like the genre. 

Your Movie Monkey, who can’t deal with horror films or with gangster films very well, found this one easy enough because the zombies are so clearly not real, it’s a complete fantasy.  Some may find it too violent, but those who would probably don’t need this review to help decide.

It’s rated R for some language and for violence.  Definitely not for young kids.

Fly Me to Joburg: District 9

August 22, 2009
By

Overall Rating: A−
Filmmaking/Artistic: A+
Storytelling: B
MPAA Rating: R

The pitch

Imagine that The Fly had an alien friend to guide his transformation (like the alien in Enemy Mine), and could turn into a Transformer to protect his buddies from an evil corporation, and that it was all set in South Africa for that “socially conscious” thing.  And imagine Peter Jackson lent us his name.

Overview

Although Peter Jackson’s name is attached, it’s really an unknown director shooting a very interesting mix of mockumentary and sci/fi action with moral undertones that hit close to home, especially since the film is set in Johannesberg.  Brilliantly acted, at times moving, the film occasionally seems like bits and pieces of other movies (so not quite as groundbreaking as reviews would have you belive), but overall it’s well worth seeing.  Way too violent for those who are squeamish, and definitely not appropriate for those under 14.

Review notes

A departure from typical summer fare, District 9 is an interesting take on familiar themes.  A giant spaceship began to hover over Johannesburg 20 years ago, and after a period of inaction, officials cut into it and found these aliens who were malnourished.  The aliens, who are called “prawns” due to their crustacean appearnce, were herded off into a ghetto called District 9.  But over the course of time (as would be expected with a million aliens in a ghetto) tensions rose, and the movie really begins, in mockumentary style, with the resettling of the prawns to a new (and far worse) area called District 10.

The resettlment is under the control of MNU, the archetypical evil corporation.  The main character, Wikus Van der Merwe (Sharlto Copley), is selected by his company to be in charge of the resettlement.  The prawns have “rights” (in name only), and must agree to the resettlement, but it’s a farce, because MNU can kill them if they refuse to give their permission.

During the resettling procedure, which is broadcast round the world on through CNN-esque organizations, Wikus is “infected” with an alien substance, and begins to transform into a prawn.  At which point, MNU’s nefarious schemes become quite clear, and poor Wikus becomes the target of lies as he tries to escape from MNU.

Along the way, Wikus is befriended by a fairly smart prawn named “Christopher”, who has goals of his own.

The action part of the movie unfolds along fairly standard, but still interesting lines.  But the theme of the movie that makes it so interesting is that Wikus’s evolution in thinking about the prawns.   In the beginning, as he finds an “unauthorized” prawn eggs, he laughs as they are set on fire, describing with amusement to the camera how these little ones “pop like popcorn” while being destroyed.  But he becomes more sympathetic when he himself becomes victim to the same treatment he was dishing out.

The movie is more complicated than the review indicates, but it’s well worth watching.  The obvious Apartheid metaphor is well done, always in the background but never so overpowering as to seem stilted.  The theme of the movie is universal: the inhumanity and depravity humans have inflicted on each other, once one group decides that another group is somehow “less than human”.  True, in the movie, the prawns are non-human.  But they are sentient, intelligent, and clearly have come from a place with better technology than on earth.

It’s also interesting how the space ship hovers above the city constantly throughout the movie.  It’s like the problem of racisim… it’s always there, even if you try to shove it in a corner.

Copley, who apparently is new to acting, does a brilliant job as Wikus.  He carries the entire movie, and is incredibly believable. 

Your Movie Monkey did have a few quibbles.  First, in Hollywood Code, there is no greater evil than the corporation.  In this film, the corporation was willing to remove a man’s heart (live) for their own profit motive.  It seems universally true.  About half the crimes on Law and Order, at least when The Monkey was watching it, were driven by coroporate greed.  (And drug companies… their CEOs are always ridiculously portrayed as being willing to sacrifice innocent lives to make money.  Ridiculous!)  Even the ridiculous movie Bulworth, which has Warren Beatty pantsing around to run for political office, even doing things like rap, has an evil corporation kill him because his ideas were becoming too popular.   District 9 is no exception to the “corporations are evil” bandwagon.  It’s just, at this point, a very hackneyed theme.

Second, Wikus’s transformation into a prawn was very, very reminiscent of The Fly.  Losing fingernails, losing teeth, etc., it all felt a little familiar. 

But overall, despite a somewhat slow first half, the movie is fantastic.  It is violent, and the treatment of the prawns is very disturbing, but the theme is universal, and the action is well worth the monkey’s few complaints.

“Lost” in Space: Star Trek

May 10, 2009
By

Overall Rating: A
Filmmaking/Artistic: A+
Storytelling: A
MPAA Rating: PG-13

Overview

Clearly the best Star Trek movie ever made, this movie is a stand out, for both fans and non-fans of the original late 60′s series.  JJ Abrams, the wizard behind the TV show Lost, skillfully combines action, humor, and character development in this two hour thrill ride.

Full Review

First, the biases.  Your Movie Monkey is a fan of the original Star Trek series, and a fan of Lost, the brainchild of JJ Abrams, who directs this movie.  But Your Movie Monkey saw the film in the company of 9 other people, some of whom were not fans of neither, and all found it riveting. 

The film opens with the birth of James Kirk… but, in true JJ Abrams fashion, in a way that is both contradictory to, and consistent with, the original series.  For those other Lost fans out there, one can immediately feel the pleasant familiarity of  what you like about the TV series… the emotion mixed with action, the camera shots, everything.

This particular film depicts Kirk as a rebellious kid, who ends up joining StarFleet after a barfight with new recruits.  Brilliantly acted by Chris Pine, Kirk is a believable version of the overacted character we all know from Shatner.  Smarmy and sarcastic, possessing all of Kirk’s confidence without the distracting method acting pregnant pauses, Pine portrays a street smart fighter, overconfident with youth, yet clearly leader material.

At the academy we meet the younger versions of Dr. McCoy, Uhura, and the (in)famous green girl.  We also learn more about the backstory of Spock, as he grew up to the prejudice of being of mixed race, even on logical Vulcan.  Captain Pike (of the one-vs-two blink full body wheelchair for those of you familiar with the original series) also plays a good role in the film, and we get to know the young Sulu, Chekov, and (although not nearly as young) Scotty.

The magic of the movie is how it references the old films, but not in a corny way, while being completely unique.  The action makes the story interesting, and the “sci fi” elements are present, but not overwhelming (no takion fileds, Krieger waves, etc.)  It’s easy to follow, and yet Abrams gives us plenty of reason to be in suspense, because, for reasons Your Movie Monkey won’t give away, it is not guaranteed that any of the film’s characters will survive.  (Think Lost, but not so complicated, and no smoke monster.) 

There’s no real sense in describing the story here.  It’s not a terribly original storyline, but it doesn’t matter, because characters and action drive the movie.  Fans of action type shows will likely love it, as will fans of the original series, and pretty much movie fans everywhere.  The acting is fantastic, (Simon Pegg absolutely steals all scenes as Scotty), for the most part better than the original, and the story keeps you intrigued for the entire two hours.   Even Eric Bana is, for the most part, tolerable.  (The weakest link for sure, but it won’t be too distracting.)

Your Movie Monkey hasn’t gone into as much detail as he usually would, but thinks you should see it for yourself.

In terms of objectionable material, if they cut maybe 40 seconds, it could be PG instead of PG-13.   Some brief objectionable language, and a brief “adult situation” render this show inappropriate for kids under 13, at least IYMMHO. 

Your Movie Monkey hopes that those of you who see it will truly enjoy this nice opening to the summer action season.

Great acting.  Great

What You Didn’t See: Doubt

February 28, 2009
By

Overall Rating: A
Filmmaking/Artisitic: A-
Storytelling: A+
MPAA Rating: PG-13

Overview

The best movie Your Movie Monkey has seen in at least 6 months, Doubt leaves you talking afterward, much as Memento did, about what actually happened.  Your Movie Monkey expected a bashing of the Catholic church due to their recent scandals.  The scandals somewhat set the scene, but the movie is complex and thought provoking, without taking sides (except, of course, that the needs of the kids in a particular Catholic school should outweigh the personalities and methods of the adults who are tasked with guiding them–of that, the movie leaves no doubt).

Full Review

As a teenager, Your Movie Monkey remembers seeing a story on 20/20 or 60 minutes or some similar show, about a priest who had dedicated his life to working with boys (troubled, if memory serves), and  who was accused of having inappropriate relationships.  The angle of the show was that the priest was very likely innocent, and at the time, YMM thought “how sad that this priest can’t have a heart for kids without being accused of something terrible”–specifically, at this tender age, YMM thought that the world was in general so self-centered that any act of selflessness was misunderstood and ascribed to sinister motives.

Your Movie Monkey believes he remembers the name of this priest from the show (although he will not publish it), because it was a priest who was later convicted of the crimes similar to those which had been described.

So what do we, as a society, do?  Ascribe every selfless motive as sinister?  Set up rules so stringent that the actual acts of service become exceedingly difficult to perform?  Doubt attempts to address this question, or at least, leave the viewer free to discuss it.

Meryl Streep plays a very strict nun who is the head of a catholic school in the 1960s.  She reports to a priest played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman.  The priest is young, and of a new tradition… a tradition more about meeting people’s needs where they live than a kind of blind adherence to rules.

An new, young, optimistic nun (Amy Adams) arrives, and is taught to be tough as nails by the head nun.  The new nun has a strange experience where a student of hers is called to the priest’s office, and comes back with a somewhat strange affect, and smelling of alcohol on his breath.  She also sees (later), the priest returning a t-shirt of the boy’s  to the boy’s locker.

That’s it.  That’s the facts.  The rest is conjecture.

The head nun suspects the priest of wrongdoing.  The priest of course denies it, but his method of denial (basically saying “I’m the preist, this doesn’t concern you”) of course doesn’t fly with her.  And what follows is exactly the world of contecture, the world of interpretation, and the world of the male-dominated catholic church.

So what does one do with little information?  Is the priest a misunderstood innocent, or a very clever liar?

It is because of the wrong doing of what is hopefully a minority in the priesthood that these questions must be asked.  How far does one go in the pursuit of the truth?  Is it ok to deceive, to accuse without evidence, to outright lie, in order to get there?  Doubt leaves these questions open.

The movie is very well acted (although Mery’s Streep’s accident changes a lot as the show goes on), and the characters are like those in Spike Lee movies, neither all good nor all bad.  The actress who played the mother of the boy had maybe 10 minutes of screentime, but those minutes were powerful.  She was nominated for an Academy Award for the role, and deserved it.

Your Movie Monkey does not want to give too much away, so he will stop here.  He fully recommends Doubt for those old enough to understand the content.  For younger children who cannot understand the crime of which the priest is accused, it should probably be avoided.

Your Movie Monkey will close his review with his favorite commentary from the movie, a sermon given by the priest upon being accused by the head nun.

A woman confesses to her priest that she is guilty of the sin of gossip.  The priest tells her that, as penance, she should take her finest pillow to the top of her building, and cut it with a knife.  She complies, taking her very best pillow to her roof on a somewhat breezy day, and cuts it, with the mess of feathers floating all around.  She then returns to her priest who tells her that as the last bit of her penance, she should gather the feathers that had spilled, return them to the pillow, and sew it up.  The woman protested, noting that the feathers had by now spread on the winds to many different places, and that gathering them all together would be impossible.

“And that,” said the priest, “is gossip.”

Travolta and Cyrus do us proud: Bolt

December 3, 2008
By

Overall Rating: A
Filmmaking/Artistic: A+
MPAA Rating: PG

Overview

Fantastic action, great humor at Hollywood’s expense, and the joy of being a dog.  Bolt has it all, and is fun for kids and adults.  Could be a little scary for kids 5 and under, but overall a great film, well worth seeing.

Full Review

Your Movie Monkey had his doubts.  John Travolta has admittedly a great, familiar voice, especially for those of us old enough to remember Vinnie Barbarino.  (For those of you for whom Welcome Back Kotter was before your time, as a young actor, Mr. Travolta had the power to make us elementary school kids use the phrase “up your nose widda rubber hose” as an insult.  Seriously.)  But as an actor, he’s hit or miss, with one strong hit for every 25 to 50 misses, it seems.  And Miley Cyrus, well, some of us are still smarting from Billy Ray. 

But Bolt came highly recommended from friends, and it certainly did not disappoint.  As promised in the previews, the story revolves around a dog named Bolt who is the star of a popular action show on television.  But as we learn from the oh-so-Hollywood director of the show, Bolt has been raised from puppyhood to think the show going on a round him is real, and that he really does have his superpowers.  (And, wonderfully, the reason for this ruse is a form of method acting: he wants to be able to get shots of a dog who really believes he is an action hero, so it will be realistic.)

Read more »

Archives

Critics
Marvel's The Avengers93%
Dark Shadows42%
Think Like a Man51%
The Hunger Games84%
The Lucky One20%
The Five-Year Engagement63%
The Pirates! Band of Misfits86%
The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel76%
Chimpanzee74%
Safe55%
Critic ratings from
Audience ratings from