Marg: Batman & Robin (Naturally!)

Based on the absolute thrill of seeing Batman Forever for the first time, I could not delay in seeing the epic Batman & Robin. It did not disappoint - you know, except as a film.

So... it really is as bad as everyone always said it was. Did you watch the trailer? The movie is just... more of that! The terrible acting? Bingo! The bizarre sets? You betcha! The horrible even for 1997 special effects? Yes sir! The crotch shots? You just wait! 

It doesn't even have as good a poster has Batman Forever.

Joel Schumacher pointedly, directly, obviously intended for there to be an undercurrent of sexual tension between Robin and Batman - or rather, not even sexual tension as in the first of his films in the franchise, but actually a realized relationship between the pair who bicker like a married couple throughout the movie, but who love each other still. This is not a criticism, I wish that it could have been more than implication - if Batman has a Robin, and that Robin is a young attractive guy who lives with him, and they like to share secrets and wear matching outfits and serve their community - well, it isn't wrong to want to see them as being in a more-than-friends relationship. They sound like a couple to me, and it's pretty naive to assume that they aren't. But Schumacher, even though he clearly interpreted that relationship the same way I do, he wasn't allowed to say Batman and Robin have been dating since about 3 days after the last movie ended. So instead, he acted out by putting in even more crotch, nipple, and butt shots than last time! 

This video repeats pointlessly, but the first two shots are legit.

George Clooney took over from doughy Val Kilmer, finally giving Batman the jawline he deserves. But whoa, what a terrible job he does in the movie! This is a future Oscar winner, but he doesn't even change his voice to sound more Batmanish! Listen, he's third here in the "I'm Batman" supercut - He's not even trying!

   

Clooney seemed to adopt some of Kilmer's wardrobe from the previous film, even sporting an oversized turtleneck as Bruce Wayne.

Just going for a stroll with Val's turleneck.

Chris O'Donnell returns as Robin, and he's still young and cool... But you know, he was 27 when this thing came out. I'm not 27 yet and I am certainly no longer young and cool. I wouldn't be even if I did say things like cowabunga!

There is someone undoubtedly younger AND cooler on the scene in Batman and Robin though - it's Alicia Silverstone in the movie that demolished her career! She plays Alfred's niece, who according to the deleted scene "Alfred's Lost Love" isn't his niece at all, but his ex-girlfriend's daughter. His ex-girlfriend shown as a photo of the old lady from Titanic, so somehow Cher Horowitz's mother is a 90 year old woman. Alfred's "niece" is also Batgirl, for some reason? And as I said she is younger (but who knows how young, because she goes to "Oxbridge" but dresses like a schoolgirl) and also cooler, because in one too-long scene she street races, as you do.

Also, her "uncle" made her this costume.

It is also crucial to note, that because Batgirl is a teenager(?) in 1997, she is a master hacker. That's why when she had to hack into a password protected laser disc (1997!) of Alfred's, her first password choice is "Alfred". Later, she and Robin have a hacking race to reroute some satellites - it's all very Angelina Jolie and Sick Boy.

The villains in Batman & Robin are some of the worst I have ever seen committed to film. Uma Thurman in particular just shines at bad acting as the chemically seductive Poison Ivy. Before she is attacked with her own plant-and-animal based experiments which transform her into a poisonous evil-doer, she was a nerdy dishevelled scientist - just like The Riddler was... they might be the same person now that I think of it - both get transformed into green suit wearing red heads. Anyway! Uma's version of nerdy was just pointing her finger sharply and repeatedly. It was very distracting. Her version of the slinky and dangerous Poison Ivy was wildly inconsistent - she seemed unable or unwilling to hold the same inflection of speech scene by scene. An amateur move by an actress who should've done better.

Those gloves look like green dog boners.

As I noted in my The Dark Knight Rises review, the character of Bane, whom I had never even heard of before, made a great impact on me ("What a lovely, lovely voice") - I had to be warned going into Batman & Robin that this simply wasn't the Bane that I knew and loved. Nothing could have prepared me for what in the blue hell this was:

No.

The worst bit is that apparently Bane is supposed to be one of Batman's more brilliant matches, but instead, there was that guy, doofin' up the joint. 

I think that the Mr. Freeze character, played by the terrifically terrible Arnold Schwarzenegger was probably the most entertaining role to write - almost all of his dialogue is inane one liners all vaguely cold-themed. Someone clearly just wrote down all that they could think of, and used them in the script even when they didn't make any sort of sense to the plot. Or even if they didn't make any sort of sense for anything ever, like "What killed the dinosaurs? The Ice Age!!!" - no, Mr. Freeze, not even true. 

If you had four minutes and you watched that (you should, it's great), you'll see Vivica A. Fox's one and only scene in the whole movie, playing a bimbo who for some reason wants to bone Mr. Freeze. Poison Ivy also wants to bone him. And he has a hot deadish wife. I wonder if that was all part of Schwarzenegger's contract?

For a guy who has a cyro-frozen wife and strong criminal desires, Mr. Freeze is having the time of his life. In spite of his situation (he really loves that wife), he constantly cracks wise throughout the movie, and enjoys a hearty chuckle. In one bizarre scene, he even attempts to lead is chilly minions in a sing along while wearing fuzzy slippers.

Mr. Freeze, by the way, is a doctor. I don't know why he isn't called Dr. Freeze. I feel like they really missed out there. He needs diamonds to stay cold because of this time he fell in a cold pond. Why diamonds, you say? Well diamonds are really cold, didn't you know that? Yeah, way cold, super cold. That's science. 

Wait a second, how are you going to light that cigar?

Obviously he wants to steal some diamond (a cold, cold diamond) and Batman needs to stop him, and Poison Ivy is around using poison-pheromones to convince Batman and Robin that they want to have sex with a woman, and Robin wears some rubber lips, and Batgirl tries to be cute and it doesn't work, and Alfred gets sick and scares me by taking off his glasses, and gets better, and Poison Ivy jealously kills Freeze's deadish wife, and Batman saves the day, and that's the plot of Batman & Robin in no particular order. At the end, Mr. Freeze is allowed to share a cell with Poison Ivy even though that is clearly a disgusting violation of every code of ethics because he is obviously going to destroy her. It's pretty gross.

It's a genuinely terrible film. At one point Batman & Robin surf though the sky on bits of rocket. And for the climax, the team changes into ice themed suits even though they didn't have time for that. And then Robin changes back. At one point Poison Ivy says "Come join me. My garden needs tending" and surely she is talking about her pubes.

It's a nuanced film.

Much like on the DVD of Batman Forever, there is a selection of excellent music videos included with Batman & Robin. The first:

This is R. Kelly with Gotham City. It is painfully clear that R. Kelly has never seen or read or heard of anything Batman related in his entire life. The lyrics indicate the opposite of anything that Gotham City has ever been described as. Also, nice hat. ALSO, I don't recall ever hearing this during the movie.

And the second, exactly as I am showing you here:

Yes, Jewel's Foolish Games. This video and song have even less to do with the movie. I didn't hear it in any scene or at least the first part of the credits. The music video contains no clips from Batman & Robin. She does look a little cold. I think Joel Schumacher just likes this song.

-Marg

@acuteinsomnia 

Marg: Batman Forever (of all things!)

I have such a lady-boner for The Dark Knight Rises and The Avengers that I wanted you to know with confidence that I am not a tramp for just any ol' superhero movie suddenly. In earlier reviews, I touched on the fact that I had seen very few comic book films before - but I had seen Tim Burton's Batman and Batman Returns. I had not seen Batman Forever... that is until last night.

I like Robin in this.

For some, this film is nostalgic, but it was brand new for me. And more ridiculous than I ever suspected. I am not entirely sure what anyone was thinking in 1995 when the Batman franchise was spiced up with a new director, new lead actor, and an even firmer commitment to wackiness - apparently it had something to do with Burton's Batmans not being family orientated enough. Regardless, what occurred was something super campy - seemingly to the screaming delight of everyone involved.

Joel Schumacher took over the franchise with some wild changes to the gothy aesthetic of previous two films - it would be like if Adam Shankman took over from Christopher Nolan, now. That isn't to say that 1989 and 1992 editions weren't campy... after all, they included a human penguin and this version of the Joker:

Why so ser... oh wait.

But compared to Schumacher's version of the Gotham universe, Burton's is down right gritty. Collectively it was as if everyone on the set simply forgot the definition of subtlety, from the writers to the actors to the costume designer. It is so baffling as to be entertaining, for the most part. Not good, mind, but entertaining.

Val Kilmer took over from Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne/Batman. Keaton was an interesting choice in the first place, because he is Mr. Mom.

"Jack's going to have to start from the bottom up"

 But I guess Kilmer seemed like a nice choice in 1995. I mean, he was in Willow, after all. And had a sweet moustache in Tombstone. If the ability to grow facial hair and saving babies with a dwarf doesn't qualify you to play the Dark Knight of Gotham, than what will?

In this, Batman looks like an angry girl.

Even in the mid-nineties, though not as shockingly bloated as he is today, good ol' Val was in the early stages of Fat Head syndrome, and his marshmallow-soft face was, while just sweet in a turtleneck, decidedly un-Batman-like.

Clenching your jaw doesn't make it more manly, Turtles.

The usually reserved Tommy Lee Jones did his best Jack Nicholson as the Joker impression while playing one of the main villains of Batman Forever, Harvey Two-Face Dent... or rather, Harvey Two-Face as they kept calling him in the movie, as if Two-Face were his surname. It cannot be denied that Jones obviously had an absolute ball while not giving one solitary fuck about the quality of film he was participating in. No, not one fuck! And he's gleeful about it.

Acid dyed my hair pink!

Jim Carrey was at the height of his wacky-comedies career, and brings everything you'd expect to the table. I remember when I was a kid, my mother saying that she couldn't stand Carrey's Fire Marshall Bill character... this might have been why we never watched Batman Forever... he uses the same inflections repeatedly. But to be fair, his Riddler character is just a mash up of all his other characters, different scene by scene.

Nicole Kidman plays Dr. Dogname Meridian, an extremely horny criminal psychologist who wants to bone Batman... so... bad. It is a wonderfully wooden performance by Kidman, who tries to just breath all of her lines, and who is clearly having trouble feigning attraction for Val Kilmer - their lack of chemistry is the cherry on top of some awkward scenes where Bruce Wayne decides it must be love. 

We're very uncomfortable.

Someone not having any sort of difficulty with their Batman related chemistry is Chris O'Donnell's Robin aka Dick Grayson because the world is cruel. Oh they are so into each other it is the best! Twenty-five year old O'Donnell assumes the role originally created for a minor, but instead of trying to explain that away, Batman Forever just convolutes the whole situation. He's constantly referred to as "young" with no specific age given, he's told that he should go to college, but for some reason after his family dies he is brought by Commissioner Gordon (who in this film only has two jobs - delivering orphans and manning the bat signal insufficiently) to be taken care of by Bruce Wayne, "once social services is done with him". Very little of that matters, I suppose. All you really need to know is that Dick is cool (he wears an earring), and wild (he rides a motorcycle), and he and Bruce Wayne become very committed to each other.

Even before I saw the film, I remember that just historically, the costumes in the Schumacher Batmans were supposed to be quite kinky. I wasn't disappointed:

Mercy!

 I decided that while I could go into the plot line of Batman Forever, literally everything that happens in the movie can be found in its theatrical trailer:

And no, not jut the best parts... everything! 

Actually, the best parts of my Batman Forever watching experience were found on the DVD extras. Two things spring to mind, specifically the scene starting at around 2:55, after Bruce Wayne discovers in a cave that he need not blame himself for the death of his parents:

What the... they paid money for that thing!

And of course the next best thing on the DVD extras is this:

Word on the street is that Batman and Robin was somehow an even worse movie than Batman Forever. Suddenly, I can't even wait. 

-Marg

@acuteinsomnia

Marg: Too hot to write, watch these trailers

It's just been crickets around here - mostly because I don't have a desk so my laptop has to sit on my actual lap to write and basically, that is murder in this heat.

There are some reviews that you should be eagerly awaiting, however. Here is our latest installment of Skinny Chai-approved movie trailers so you know what to watch out for!

Film: Celeste and Jesse Forever

Release Date: August 3rd (so you can watch it now! But it doesn't appear to be playing here in Fredericton)

Why: Because I like to torture myself with end-of-relationship movies, and it will undoubtedly make me cry (and maybe the trailer already did once because I was feeling really sad and needed some midol) - but also because I really like Rashida Jones and think it's awesome that she wrote this movie. 

Film: Nobody Walks

Release Date: September 6th

Why: Oh my god, because of everything! It looks smart, and more mature than co-screenwriter Lena Dunham's other stuff. And also, Jim Halpert get away from that young lady! This won't go well for you! 

Film: Sleepwalk with Me

Release Date: August 24th

Why: It looks really funny and pretty touching for one. For two, it's got a great cast dotted with some of the best stand-ups around. Also, while I don't sleepwalk, my sleep behaviour does get real weird when I am anxious, so I can relate. 

Marg @acuteinsomnia 

Marg: The Dark Knight Rises

I have been struggling with how to begin this review since Tuesday night. A very real act of horror will always be associated with the Dark Knight Rises, and it would be insensitive not to touch on that. I will only do so briefly, just to say that it's all incredibly sad. I want to address the film on it's own merits separate from that unpredictable tragedy.

The Dark Knight Rises is also difficult to write about because of the risk of spoilers and also because it is so hard to articulate all my feelings about it - and I have so many feelings! But, for instance, when asked my feelings directly after the movie I said "I... eihj.. um...."

This review might be unjustly sparse. 

The simple fact is, The Dark Knight Rises is a brilliant film. 

I wasn't expecting it. I am not a big fan of Batman Begins, and while Heath Ledger as The Joker in The Dark Knight was absolutely spectacular, the rest of the film was good but not great. So I was expecting something entertaining, but not overwhelming. But it just was so good. Overwhelmingly satisfying and entertaining and excellent. 

Whereas in the previous films of the trilogy, some casting choices fell flat *cough*katieholmes*cough* - DKR boasts one hell of a cast. I am a big Christian Bale fan, who looks a bit more The Fighter than Batman here - he seemed to put more into his performance as Bruce Wayne/Batman than he did in the last film, and the payoff is great. Other returning cast members continue to shine. Gary Oldman slips occasionally in his American accent, but is able to give more depth to Commissioner Gordon. And of course, Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth (ha, Pennyworth) is touching and at times heart-wrenching. A surprise appearance by another returning performer is also a delight.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt (my heart of hearts) joins the cast as an earnest young police officer named Blake, able to see the truth where others can't. I'd watch that guy eat a bowl of soup and be a happy girl, but he really is suitably cast for this role. 

Anne Hatheway is a god damned revelation as Selina Kyle. Nolan's characterization of Catwoman is so much more human than previous incarnations - less camp, more intelligence, less crazy-bitch-trope, more realistic will for survival. Her point of view is one to be taken seriously, Hathway's performance utterly empathic, yet still devious. When I first saw images of the Catwoman costume, it turns out I didn't know what I was looking at. It's actually a costume that makes total sense. 

Turns out Tom Hardy is a beast. Who knew? 

Bane voiced my inner-monolog for literally days after watching the film. 

Lest you think that I could ever believe any film is entirely perfect, of course there are some quite minor issues - some discord between the ages of certain actors and their character's ages, a question as to why no one thought about spreading out their body weight, and where on earth Alfred could have gotten his eternal non-youth (he never ages!). And on the subject of Alfred, I think any movie that allows Micheal Caine to seem sad is just a cruel one! Cruel, I say!

I bet he'd scream if that suit moved by itself.

There are some things to say about the politics of the film itself - again, without going into spoilery details, Gotham is a city with a wide gap between their Bruce-Wayne level elite, and their disenfranchised middle and lower classes. Much like we have seen in the real world, some of those lower classes are trying to stand up against the rule-bending, unfairly rich - the 1%, if you will. Selina Kyle and Blake both represent two sides of the same not-obscenely-rich coin - he believes that hard work and honor are the key, she has a more desperate sense of self-preservation. Neither of them desire the change that Bane brings - but much like the protestor suddenly standing in the middle of a violent riot, there are some things outside of their control. It might seem quite conservative that the silver-spoon-born Bruce Wayne is the key protagonist - but it is key to note that it isn't Bruce Wayne after all. It's Batman.      

Matthew: To Rome with Like

First off, let me apologize for my absence lately. I've been busy expanding my resume of tiny proportions. But, that's all done now so here I am!

Last summer saw the release of one of my favorite films of 2012, Woody Allen's Oscar winner Midnight in Paris. That movie hard charm, whit, it was surprising and it captured the city so  beautifully that it left it's audience swooning over Paris so much that I'm sure French tourism saw a major increase of like 1000%. Truly a great, magical little film.

Now, embarrassingly, I will admit that up until last week I had only seen three Woody Allen films. Midnight in Paris, Hannah and Her Sisters and the classic Annie Hall. So I was pretty anxious to get that total up to four with his newest release To Rome With Love. And even though it is my least favorite out of the four Woody Allen films I've seen, I'm still happy to have seen it.

The movie is based around 4 plots that never mix. 2 were wonderful, 1 was okay, and 1 was...meh. It also saw the return of Allen in his first screen role in six years. And you know how people say that his movies are always better when he's not in them, well, his plot was my favorite! Allen's story was about a retired opera director (Allen) meeting his future in-laws for the first time, and he discovers that the patriarch of the family has one of the most gorgeous baritone voices he's ever heard.. But there's a catch that I won't go into because it hilarious and will ruin the plot. This story also stars Judy Davis, Alison Pill and a bunch of Italian people.

The other plot that was just freaking hilarious was Roberto Benigni's where he played a man who suddenly became the most famous person in the country. This story was all about the sudden rise and fall of fame. Hilarious I tells ya.

 What didn't work for me was the love triangle storyline with Alec Baldwin, Jesse Eisenberg, Ellen Page and Greta Gerwig. I found this one confusing, and it wasn't really clear to me what exactly what conventions Allen was trying to use. Watch the movie, and if you get it- please let me know.  Also, I don't know about you, but I can't take Alec Baldwin seriously! Everything that comes out of his mouth sounds sarcastic and I laughed- when I wasn't supposed to!

When I left the movie I didn't have a burning desire to hop on a plane and go to Rome like I did with Midnight in Paris. I don't think the movie explored the beauty and wonder of the city. There wasn't any magic or spark. Unlike Paris, Allen could have set this movie in any location and it would of been fine. Rome was a setting, not a character, and for me that was what I was really missing.

To Rome With Love: 3 E-squsa-me-a's / 5 Hey-a you-a's

-Matthew

@thematthewjames

Chit Chat: Spidey

Matt: So I too saw Spiderman

  I have several things to write about now that I have the time

9:44 AM Marg: good, we need to make up for lost time

  what did you think?

 Matt: Sure do-

  I liked it- It wasn't amazing- but I don't know if I will ever think a superhero movie is amazing- It just isn't my genre.

9:45 AM Marg: Yeah, I didn't think "amazing" either

 Matt: however, when I was 13 I did see X-Men 3 times in theatres.

  I found out why they made this reboot so soon after the last one

 Marg: why?

9:46 AM Matt: Well, Disney bought Marvel, but Universal owns the rights to Spiderman, so as long as they always have a Spiderman project in development Disney can't take the rights away.

  and it's a huge cash cow for Universal-

9:47 AM So basically, spidey is here to stay

 Marg: so there will just always be a spider-man on the go?

 Matt: most likely-

  BUT, a movie can be "in development" for years

 Marg: like, after three movies with Andrew Garfield, they'll just reboot it again?

  weird

 Matt: It's essentially what they did with this new one.

9:48 AM But, I was trying to think of Spiderman villains last night, and I only counted 3

  But, I don't really know much about it...

 Marg: Lizard-guy, green goblin, doc oc

9:49 AM Matt: hob goblin?

 Marg: hahaha

  I think that's the green goblin... unless there are just a hell of a lot of goblins in the spider-man world

9:54 AM Matt: who knows

9:55 AM But anyway- the movie was good- surprisingly funny & clever. But when I left I didn't have the need or desire to talk about it

9:58 AM Marg: I just like Andrew Garfield quite a bit

9:59 AM Matt: He's very adorkable

10:00 AM Marg: he is

  I like his face.Matt: What if Peter Parker had gotten bit by a lady bug? Think about it. 

Marg: The Amazing Spider-Man

I've been on vacation!

And now I am back to civilization and it's too hot to think or move or type, and I would rather just be in a river please.

My fella took me out to see the new Spider-Man movie while we were away. I took him to see Moonrise Kingdom, which Matthew wrote about before and which I loved.

But Spider-Man! The Amazing one!

It was okay!

I don't know beans about Spider-Man, heads up. But aforementioned fella made me fall asleep to two of earlier incarnations some time ago. 

Mainly, I liked it much more than I liked the obviously-far-too-recent-previous Spider-Man franchise. I think Marc Webb is just a dandy director, and it was clever and entertaining. Most importantly, the leads in The Amazing Spider-Man are just so much better than the leads in 2001's Spider-Man and its sequels. 

I've genuinely liked Kristen Dunst in exactly three films - Drop Dead Gorgeous, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and a movie called Strike! which nobody else has ever seen, apparently. As a general rule of thumb however, she isn't my favourite. I have nothing against her looks, as many of her detractors do, but superficially, her voice really annoys me. And I strongly disliked her as Mary Jane in the Spider-Man films.

I hate that effin' kimono.

I dig Emma Stone a great deal, however. And her turn as Spidey's love interest Gwen Stacy is a predictable delight. Gwen got to be really involved in the action, which also impressed me.

Not a great hair-do, though.

Almost anybody could have played the titular role and I would have preferred it to Tobey Maguire. I complained about Kristen Dunst's voice above, but I am hard pressed to find any actor whose voice I despise more strongly than that total-turd Tobey Maguire's. I hate it! That anyone ever let that man do a voice over is mind boggling to me - and he is continually permitted to do so! Someone needs to intervene. As a lead actor, he is just so damn weinery!

Ugh, that guy.

Andrew Garfield on the other hand, is all kinds of wonderful. He's charismatic, and awkward, and he has a wonderful face. Again, I know beans about Spider-Man, but he made a fine Peter Parker to me.

That's my kinda face!

 The biggest issue I had with the film is that it didn't feel very "eventy" for a superhero movie. The Avengers was an event, the Dark Knight Rises sure as hell feels like an event, but it almost seemed like too small a film for its subject matter. Perhaps die-hard fans will disagree, since it's their event to have.

-Marg

@acuteinsomnia

Matthew & Marg: Brave

Marg

So here is the straight truth as I see it - it isn't that Brave is a bad film, at all - but it isn't a Pixar film, you know? For their first female lead character, all Pixar has done is created a Disney Princess. For a studio renowned for their originality, they've just rehashed the same basic story that their parent company has been telling for the last 25 years (modern princesses, though some of the older ones fit too). That is, a mildly rebellious girl doesn't feel like living the life her parents/society have picked out for her, some magic happens, lessons are learned but said girl gets what she wants in the end anyway. It's not a bad story at all, Disney has done some wonderful and creative things with it. My critism here isn't with the story model, it's the story model being used incorrectly.

If they were owning Brave fully, and not calling it a Pixar movie, I think Merida would make an excellent addition to the Disney Princess cannon. She is a modern enough character to match the likes of other recent additions such as Tiana and Rapunzel. The only thing Brave "lacks" to fit the mould is a love interest, but I think it will be an important step forward for the Princess franchise to remove that factor anyway, if they want to move away from the very valid "the end goal is always to get a man" critisms of their past efforts.

Disney isn't calling this a Princess movie, unfortunately. It is technically a Pixar movie, and that's where the real disappointment sets in. Pixar as creators aren't flawless - Cars & Cars 2 are just the worst - but as a general rule they make great movies with wonderful characters, which makes it just a damn shame that Brave boasted their first lead female character, and even more of a shame that they didn't make the effort to give her a great original movie!

They've made 13 feature films, it's gross that this is their first female lead. And grosser still that they made a movie a) that doesn't feel like a true Pixar production and b) with a plotline that is so dependant on her being-a-girl-ness as opposed to her human-ness. As my movie going partner-in-crime Ben said "It sucks that they had to make such a big deal about it being their first female lead." I really would have prefered to see a film where it didn't matter the gender of the character, because leads of either sex should be the norm, not the exception. The little boy in Up for example, could have been a little girl and it wouldn't have intrinsically changed the point, plot, or mood of the movie. That would have been a better sort of way to introduce Pixar's first female lead, in my opinion.

All of that aside, I thought Brave was beautiful to look at (though, I gladly would have forgone the 3D), quite funny, and certainly there were worse ways to spend a rainy evening.

-Marg

@acuteinsomnia

Matthew

I liked Brave. It was nice to look at, and I have a fondness for gingers. So I liked it. But it wasn't what I was expecting.

Going into the movie I was anticipating an adventure story. Girl breaks away from what she is "supposed" to be, does something... well, brave, rescues a kingdom or something. And I guess that sort of happens, but it's really a movie about a relationship between a mother and daughter. Which is nice, but not what I was expecting.

As Marg mentioned above, it doesn't really watch like a Pixar film, this movie is all Disney. It's a story we have all seen before, and for me that was my biggest let down. The thing that makes Pixar movies so brilliant is that they tell interesting new stories. Look at Finding Nemo, Wall-E, all Toy Stories, Brave unfortunately doesn't deserve to sit on the same shelf. It's not that it's a bad movie, it just fails to do or say anything new. It really should of been promoted as a princess film, because it would fit in with that category brilliantly.

Also, what's up the resurgence of archery? First Katniss, now Merida. I'd be interested to see if there is a huge enrolment increase among girls age 12-18.

Brave: 3 Emma Thompson Voices/ 5 Gingers

-Matthew

@thematthewjames

Marg: Seeking a Friend for the End of the World

I've been writing this review in my head since Friday night, I began writing it in fact before I was finished watching the movie in question. Seeking a Friend for the End of the World is the directorial debut of screenwriter Lorene Scafaria (Nick & Nora's Infinite Playlist) and simply put, it is a lovely little film about the unavoidable apocalypse.

The premise is simple: in three weeks, an asteroid belt nicknamed Matilda is going to collide with Earth, demolishing it and causing the end of all life. No, there is no hope. Yes, they tried sending a crew into space (off-screen) - no, it didn't work. Dodge Peterson (Steve Carell) is just a regular man facing this end like the rest of humanity. There is no call for heroics, and there is nothing specifically to be done except to wait for the inevitable.

Exactly what people would do in this situation is explored with great believability by Scafaia. Dodge's wife literally runs away in the opening scene, knowing that he is not the man she wants to die with. Co-workers of his panic, some try to continue on with brave tear-stained faces, others take matters into their own hands. Dodge's friends host an End of the World Party - an event to do whatever you want to do that you've never done before. It is a world where your actions are without consequence - whether those actions be allowing your small child to chug booze or wearing everything you've never worn, or sleeping with strangers having no worries about STDs or pregnancy, or doing heroin. Anything goes, and nothing matters.

Dodge doesn't fit into this new world. He's a quiet man, a guy who depended on having a safety net, he wishes the end of the world was not on its way, but his life-long regrets would have surfaced eventually anyway. He meets a young woman in his building who has built a life ignoring safety nets, the flighty and charismatic Penny (Keira Knightly). After an encroaching series of violent riots reach their homes, Dodge and Penny escape together, along with a dog "Sorry" who was abandoned into Dodge's care. Dodge says he knew a man with a plane, and Penny hopes to fly home to England to be with her family. In many ways, Seeking a Friend becomes a bit of a road trip movie at this point, as the pair drive off together in various vehicles meeting all sorts of people.

Steve Carell is another in a not-that-long list of comedians who just shine in dramatic roles - Seeking a Friend is devilishly hilarious in parts, it is the dramatic scenes where you see Dodge's beautifully detailed characterization. It's a subtle performance more Little Miss Sunshine than Anchorman that's for sure, and cements Carell's decision to leave his long-in-the-tooth sitcom role behind as by far the best option. Speaking of the Office, even as Michael Scott a character miles away personality-wise to Dodge, Carell had the rare ability to infuse his absurdity with a tinge of deep, unnerving sadness. It is a skill that suited him well here. 

I am worried that some critics will colour Keira Knightly's Penny as a "manic pixie dream girl". I hate the over use of this term, and find that it is used to diminish and downplay some excellent performances by actresses. Unlike the MPDG trope (which does not, in my opinion, fit many of the characters it is applied to), Penny does not exist as a character simply to improve the life of the male character. MPDGs are often accused of being a collection of quirky traits - Penny is obsessive about her vinyl collection which is easily dismissible by those hellbent on dismissing, but when she describes *why* vinyl you believe her, and you get it, and you want to go out and buy records. It is not just some quirky trait picked out of a hat. Penny is a complex person in her own right - yes, in many ways she does provide the Dodge character with the energy and adventure that he so desperately needs - but he earns that and gives back to her a selflessness and security that she especially needs in the time of catastrophe. Plus, Knightly is just delightful in this film. She's engaging and bright and she made me absolutely sob in the scene where she is finally able to call her family on a satellite phone after all other modes of communication are shut down. 

When I first saw the trailer for Seeking a Friend, I worried how the pairing of Carell and Knightly might work. There is a 23 year age difference between them - which isn't uncommon in Hollywood films, but is far more noticeable and uncomfortable than producers want to admit. In Seeking a Friend however, even though their age difference is pointed out specifically (as is the difference in their attractiveness levels), it all makes sense for their situation. It reminded me a bit of the pairing of Scarlett Johannson and Bill Murray in Lost in Translation - they made perfect sense for the isolation and bizarreness of their circumstances.

I did take some issue with the ending of Seeking a Friend. I won't go into too many details, but I will say that Dodge's initial sacrifice was so touching, that I would have been satisfied with that ending. The final cut seemed like perhaps it was a re-write, but I'm not sure. Either way, the ending was as sweet as the end of the World could be, I suppose.

There is a scene early on in the film where Dodge asks his friend (who is trying to set him up with her friend, so that he doesn't die alone) what the point is in trying to get to know somebody in the little time there is left. Ultimately what the message of the film is, I think, is that there is always someone worth getting to know, even if just for a short time. Getting to know other human beings is what being a human being is all about.

With it's excellent soundtrack, wonderful leads, and stand-out supporting roles by the likes of Gillian Jacobs, Connie Britton, Tonito Casto, Rob Cordy, Adam Brodie (who I did not recognize!), T.J. Miller, Patton Oswalt, and Martin Sheen, as well as a very clever script and impressive direction, I recommend Seeking a Friend for the End of the World very enthusiastically.

-Marg

@acuteinsomnia 

Matthew: "My Quest to Meet The Avengers" Part 1 & Chit Chat

Whenever there's a huge blockbuster movie, I'm almost always that guy who never sees it.In fact, out of the top 10 highest grossing movies of all time, I've only seen 4. The Dark Night- didn't see it; Avatar- Saw it on a plane 2 years after it was first released; Transformers- nope, not me; The Lord of the Rings- Girl you crazy! Titanic- Saw it on VHS. No, I am not one for seeing blockbusters. And you know what? I kind of feel left out. So, I've decided that things are going to change for me! This time around I will not be left in the dark- I'm going to see The Avengers in theatres if it's the last thing I do. Hell, I'm even going to order a huge ass bag of popcorn and an oversize drink (just not pop, it hurts my belly) I'm going to have the full experience! Also, if Marg liked it so much, it can't be that bad... right?

One would think that the quickest way to see The Avengers before it leaves theatres would be to actually go, buy a ticket, and watch the thing. I on the other hand, have decided that before I can do this I need to know the back story. Of course I didn't see any of the movies that lead up to The Avengers, that would be crazy! So it's my pre-mission to watch all 5 pre-Avenger movies! And on top of that- I've decided to blog about my journey.

First up- I decided to watch Thor and Captain America.   

THOR

Ummmmm. Okay, this movie was kind of dumb. I'm all for fantasy- I can totally get on board with the other worlds, and the frost monsters... I'm even willing to over look the fact that the most powerful weapon in the universe is a hammer.... a hammer. The reason why I think this movie is sub par- is the script. There was very little meet on that bone. Sure- there were a few funny moments, and there was a clear narrative- but I felt like it was all really silly. Almost like it didn't take itself seriously. And that's fine, but I don't think that was the intention. Also- Natalie Portman? What? Why are you in this movie? You are an Oscar winner for God sakes!? And Anthony Hopkins! Have things really gotten that bad since Hannibal?

hahaha

So far, my excitement meter is running at about 15%.


CAPTAIN AMERICA

Okay, maybe the comic book genre isn't really for me. I found Captain America to be kind of lame. Maybe I just wasn't in the mood, but I found myself bored, and I started doing other things while watching. Plus the whole "YAY AMERICA" thing was just a bit much (but what does one expect from a movie called Captain America?!) However, I will say that the final 20mins were pretty awesome. The action was great and the sequence at the end left me wanting to know more. Overall though, boo.

Still to come 2 Iron Mans and 1 Hulk.... wish me luck!



-Matthew
@thematthewjames


Matt: I'm also going to do a piece on my quest to see the avengers
Marg: I thought you didn't want to see it? You basically swore up and down that I was crazy to love it so
Matt: I've decided that I should-  I'm going to try and see every movie before it. So far ive seen thor and caprtain america- thumbs down
Marg: I have soft spots for both of those. Mainly because I like handsome men.
Matt: haha- yes. as do i. But as movies- booo
Marg: Thor wasn't so bad, I just hated Natalie Portman. It was cheesy, but entertaining. And Captain America was much the same way except I think it had way too many false endings.

Matt: Thor was entertaining at least- i found captain america to be boring

 Marg: I've seen it 1 & 1/2 or so times, because Ben was watching it. Anyway, Avengers was better than both those movies

Matt: alright- I'm taking your word for it. I still have 2 iron mans and a hulk
Marg: don't bother with any Hulk movies. they are the WORST

Matthew: I've gotta do it! I'm hoping for a rainy Saturday

Matthew: Moonrise Kingdom

A few months ago I posted a list of summer movies that I wanted to see, and this past weekend I was able to check one of those babies off my list. Usually when I make lists of things to complete I have a tendency to vear off a little bit. And this was the case for this list as I neglected to see "Friends with Kids"; however, I'm now proud to say that I'm back on track thanks to a great little film- "Moonrise Kingdom".

This flick (I'm a bit embarrassed to say) was my first venture into the cinematic world of Wes Anderson.From what I have heard, you either love his work, or you hate it- there's very little in between. Now I can't really speak to that theory, having only seen one of his films, but if I had to choose one side to be on it would be love. - Now doesn't that sound nice? "I choose the side of love!"

"Moonrise Kingdom" is a quirky movie set in the 60's. The esthetics were really amusing to watch, the whole movie had kind of an arts and crafts feel to it- which in my opinion, complimented the 60's setting beautifully. Everyone in this star studded cast (Bruce Willis, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, Bill Murray, Edward Norton) gave wonderfully simple performances that really allowed the two leads Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward to shine.

Tang!

Summer is an exciting time for movies. While it's easy to get swept away in the big action adventure films that come out- I really hope people don't ignore the little guys. The Summer movie season has brought us many hidden gems like "Little Miss Sunshine", "500 Days of Summer" and last years "Midnight in Paris", this years induction to that list could very well be "Moonrise Kingdom". I know that MIB3 looks super awesome, and The Huntsman looks really dark and cool (I can't wait to see it) but do yourself a favor and see "Moonrise Kingdom" in theatres before it's too late!

Moonrise Kingdom: 4 Tangs/ 5 Nudes

-Matthew
@thematthewjames

P.S- I saw a trailer for a movie called "Beats of the Southern Wild" before the movie started- check it out below and tell me your thoughts!