Category Archives: Comedy

Up in the Air-2009

Up in the Air-2009

Director Jason Reitman

Starring George Clooney

Scott’s Review #573

Reviewed December 30, 2016

Grade: A

Up in the Air is a fantastic film, but for some odd reason, around its 2009 theatrical release, it was categorized as a romantic comedy. While there is a bit of romance involved, the film is a dark romantic drama.

The content is perfect for this period in history, with the terrible economy and the unemployment rate rising sky-high.

The acting by the principals is excellent and is worth watching, but do not expect a happy, uplifting film.

George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a corporate “downsizer”, who travels the country firing employees from companies that hire him. Ryan has no qualms about what he does and enjoys traveling around the country.

He mentors a young employee, Natalie (Anna Kendrick), who is more sympathetic to the people whose lives she changes.

Ryan meets another frequent flyer, businesswoman Alex (Vera Farmiga), and they begin an affair. He becomes a more sympathetic character as he develops real feelings for Alex, but will Alex return the affections?

The tone of the film is sarcastic and sardonic, and Clooney is dynamic in the lead role, carrying the film. He is charismatic and energetic, performing his work duties in an emotionless way.

We slowly get to know him better and realize, through Alex, that he does have a heart. Alex is a more mysterious character, and Farmiga is equally as engaging in the role.

When a big reveal is learned about Alex, the audience does not see it coming.

As the years go by, I hope that Up in the Air is remembered for being a film that was released at the perfect time, given the difficulties many were going through.

I love how the film carries smart dialogue, with the characters questioning each other’s motivations and becoming intertwined.

Jason Reitman and the screenwriter craft an exceptional film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Jason Reitman, Best Actor-George Clooney, Best Supporting Actress-Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick, Best Adapted Screenplay

Toy Story 3-2010

Toy Story 3-2010

Director Lee Unkrich

Starring Tom Hanks, Tim Allen

Scott’s Review #562

Reviewed December 26, 2016

Grade: B+

It’s not easy for sequels to succeed in the creativity or originality categories, but surprisingly, Toy Story 3 (2010) is a fresh, imaginative, fun film.

The characters are charming, interesting, and heartwarming, and the film avoids a sappy result.

Pixar has another hit.

Andy, now grown up and headed off to college, sees no reason to keep any of his childhood toys, now irrelevant and headed for the scrap box.

At least that is what Woody, Buzz Lightyear, and friends fear will happen as the dreaded day approaches.

They must scheme to avoid their fate.

Many interesting new toys are introduced to this franchise with unique personalities, giving a fresh approach while not forgetting the past.

I adore how Toy Story 3 has many dynamic themes (loneliness, abandonment, togetherness) that play very well together with a nice message.

On a deeper level, the film reflects the modern era.

People are so easily thrown out, forgotten, and abandoned, whether through a job, relationship, etc., so that makes this film a sad reality if one chooses to look at it that way, which most won’t.

Great movie for kids and adults alike with a meaningful, relevant message. The film is not a sugar-coated affair and offers a cold reality while remaining accessible.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Animated Feature Film (won), Best Original Song-“We Belong Together” (won), Best Sound Editing

The Kids Are All Right-2010

The Kids Are All Right-2010

Director Lisa Cholodenko

Starring Annette Bening, Julianne Moore

Scott’s Review #560

Reviewed December 24, 2016

Grade: A

The Kids Are All Right is a fantastic film!

In my opinion, the film is one of the best of the year 2010 and was rewarded with a deserving Best Picture nomination.

Annette Bening and Mark Ruffalo were also honored with acting nominations. Bening gives the best performance in the film.

Continuing the trend of more exposure to LGBT issues, The Kids Are All Right tells of a same-sex-centered family dealing with real issues.

Though not dark, the film is not light or played strictly for laughs. It is a family drama that shows how same-sex family units face problems like everyone else, and how they deal with them, never forgetting how much they love each other.

The writing is intelligent, deeply layered, and rich. The acting is superb, and the characters are complex.

The best scene is one where the entire family is eating dinner- suddenly the camera focuses on one person and goes into slow motion; the other voices become muffled and distant, and painful emotion is portrayed on one of the characters’ faces as a revelation comes to the surface.

Brilliant.

Even the seemingly unimportant dialogue throughout the film is smart, as it shows the bond of the family that cannot ultimately be broken.

The Kids Are All Right (2010) is a worthwhile and compelling film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actress-Annette Bening, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Ruffalo, Best Original Screenplay

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Feature, Best Director-Lisa Cholodenko, Best Female Lead-Annette Bening, Best Supporting Male-Mark Ruffalo, Best Screenplay (won)

The Band Wagon-1953

The Band Wagon-1953

Director Vincente Minnelli

Starring Fred Astaire, Cyd Charisse

Scott’s Review #549

Reviewed December 15, 2016

Grade: B

The Band Wagon, made in 1953, is a second-tier MGM (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) production- and by that, I mean it is not as stellar as other musicals of its time.

It lacks the majestic appeal of similar musicals like An American in Paris and Singin’ in the Rain.

Directed by Vincente Minnelli- a legendary music director of the 1950s, and starring Fred Astaire, The Band Wagon tells the story of a washed-up movie star trying to revive his career on Broadway.

He meets opposition from his co-star and prima ballerina, Gabrielle, played by Cyd Charisse, ironically, an actress who appeared in Singin’ in the Rain.

The Band Wagon is a fun movie, but it is not nearly as good as the film mentioned above. Instead, it is a pale imitator. While other musicals of similar style can be watched numerous times, The Band Wagon is a one-and-done affair.

The story starts slowly but gets much better towards the end.

The film has a few memorable musical numbers, notably “That’s Entertainment.”

Oscar Nominations: Best Story and Screenplay, Best Scoring of a Musical Picture, Best Costume Design, Color

A Wedding-1978

A Wedding-1978

Director Robert Altman

Starring Desi Arnaz, Jr., Carol Burnett, Geraldine Chapman

Scott’s Review #539

Reviewed December 17, 2016

Grade: A

A Wedding (1978) is an obscure, brilliant gem penned and directed by Robert Altman, a film genius and one of my most adored directors.

I love most of his movies, and A Wedding is no exception. The creative way that Altman weaves intersecting storylines and dialogue, thereby creating a real-life tone, gives immense realism to his films.

In A Wedding, he takes a basic life event and turns it into a well-nuanced, fascinating, comical, yet dramatic story.

He is known for having enormous casts (in A Wedding, there are 48 principals!), but every character serves a purpose.

The viewer will feel like a fly on the wall at a real wedding.

Altman’s actors primarily improvise their dialogue, speaking at the same time, which lends a realistic edge. I adore this quality.

The film is a satire- people either love or loathe attending weddings, and Altman’s film caters to the latter. He creates a setting, from the ceremony to the reception, riddled with awkward moments and social gaffes.

In pure satirical soap-opera fashion, two wealthy families gather at a lavish estate for the ceremony to begin. Hilarity ensues when the corpse of the matriarch of one family lies in her bed, nobody realizing she is dead.

Other hi-jinks, such as the revelation of a nude, life-size portrait of the bride, the caterer falling ill, and a tornado wreaking havoc.

Slowly, the families reveal secrets as alcohol flows and the characters become entangled in perilous situations.

Altman does it again, creating a masterpiece based on real-life situations most can relate to.

Piranha 3D-2010

Piranha 3D-2010

Director Alexandre Aja

Starring Elisabeth Shue

Scott’s Review #529

70108986

Reviewed November 29, 2016

Grade: C-

2010’s Piranha 3D is a tongue-in-cheek horror comedy that saves itself from being complete drivel with a sense of humor.

Remarkably, it stars some decent talents: Richard Dreyfuss, Ving Rhames, and Elisabeth Shue.

The film is pure fluff, not high art in the least, with no message or purpose.

The film is terrible, but kind of fun at the same time. It’s camp and shouldn’t be taken seriously at all.

The plot is simplistic and standard horror fare. A school of piranhas is unleashed after an underwater earthquake, kills a fisherman, and ravages a college vacation party on a lake.

The college kids come to Lake Victoria to party and lounge on the beach, and typically are dressed precariously. They are unceremoniously ripped to shreds by the angry and hungry killer fish.

Shue and Rhames must have hit rough times and have required a paycheck to star in this. They play a Sheriff and Deputy, laughably unbelievable, as they try to protect the beach-goers from a grisly fate.

Dreyfuss plays a ridiculous and unnecessary role as the aforementioned fisherman.

On a serious (and sour) note, the objectification of women is shocking in this day and age. Haven’t we seen enough stereotypes in one lifetime?

A few cool kills and humor, but Piranha 3D (2010) is a dumb, popcorn horror film.

Despicable Me-2010

Despicable Me-2010

Directors: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud

Starring Steve Carell, Jason Segel

Scott’s Review #526

70115629

Reviewed November 25, 2016

Grade: B-

My immediate reaction upon seeing Despicable Me (2010) is that it’s a cute film, just custom-made for the masses- children and families alike.

This is fine, but I was honestly hoping for something a bit edgier or with more substance, though I still enjoyed it.

The film is a fun, family-style affair for all ages with a nice story.

It follows a villain named Gru, who competes with other super-villains and hatches a plan to shrink and steal the moon.

He is reformed through three orphans (Margo, Edith, and Agnes) he first uses in his plan, but later comes to love and eventually adopts.

The orphans predictably reform Gru and bring out the nice man within him.

They change his life for the better.

Nothing is wrong with this film, nor is there anything tremendous about it. I know some people loved it.

To me, Despicable Me (2010) was decent, but I wanted a bit more and perhaps a more complex or interesting plot; that is just my taste talking.

You Again-2010

You Again-2010

Director Andy Fickman

Starring Kristen Bell, Jamie Lee Curtis, Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #510

70127239

Reviewed November 4, 2016

Grade: C

If not for the cast (Jamie Lee Curtis, Betty White, and Sigourney Weaver), You Again (2010) would have been a bad experience and a dimwitted, by-the-numbers comedy.

But the talent involved has helped matters greatly.

This is not meant to give the film much credit.

As it is, it is not a great film, and quite silly and dumb, but the cast successfully turns it into a light, fun, dumb movie instead of solely drivel. With a less likable cast, this would undoubtedly have been the case.

Bell is not my favorite actress, but alas, she seems to be getting star turns in these types of films.

The premise is basic and tried and true- a twenty-eight-year-old “beautiful” woman (Kristen Bell) who was an ugly duckling in high school returns to her hometown for her brother’s wedding, and his fiancé turns out to be her high school nemesis.

It is a standard Hollywood comedy cliché, with typical gags and a “we have seen this before” story.

A gripe: Kristen Bell is a cute, all-American girl-next-door, but I would be remiss not to point out that she is not the beauty they make her out to be.

Thanks to the aforementioned cast and the wit that Curtis and Weaver bring to their rivalry (as mothers of the respective fiancés and Bell’s character- they were high school rivals a generation before), You Again (2010) does get some meager credit.

Not much, but some.

Solitary Man-2009

Solitary Man-2009

Director Brian Koppelman, David Levien

Starring Michael Douglas

Scott’s Review #508

70117589

Reviewed November 3, 2016

Grade: B-

Solitary Man (2009) is an indie drama that has good points and bad.

Michael Douglas stars as a one-time successful, but womanizing, car dealership owner who hits rough times and loses everything.

Michael Douglas’s performance is very good and believable as a cad who hits a difficult stretch in his life.

As an actor, Douglas still possesses his good looks and charm despite being an older leading man by this time; he plays 60 very well.

The film centers around him, and wisely so, despite containing other notable actors. His character of Ben Kalman has swagger and is narcissistic, but yet lovable at the same time and this is unmistakably due to Douglas’s talents.

Annoyingly, the supporting characters played by Susan Sarandon, Danny Devito, and Jesse Eisenberg are quite one-note and not interesting, which is a shame in light of their immense talents.

The story is okay, but nothing fantastic.

I felt as though I had seen films like this many times before- the quirky edge and the attempted dark humor with laughs and some melodrama mixed in was forgettable.

However, as a character study, the movie succeeds.

Solitary Man (2009) is recommended for Michael Douglas’s performance only.

April Fool’s Day-1986

April Fool’s Day-1986

Director Fred Walton

Starring Thomas F. Wilson, Deborah Foreman

Scott’s Review #498

Reviewed October 24, 2016

Grade: B-

Emerging at the tail end of the late 1970s and early 1980s slasher film craze that defined that period in cinema (for better or worse), April Fool’s Day (1986) capitalized on the “holiday theme” marketing tool that had propelled Halloween (1978) and Black Christmas (1974) to superstar status.

Unfortunately, this film is not a traditional horror flick; it has plenty of comic elements but also contains the standard slasher characteristics, thereby making it a blockbuster failure.

It does not know what its identity truly is.

From a storytelling perspective, the film has one great twist, but otherwise suffers from mediocre writing and unmemorable characters nobody cares about.

We are treated to an ensemble of actors, most of whom are unknown, except for horror maven Amy Steel (Friday the 13th Part 2), who portrays Kit, arguably the most relatable of the female characters.

A clever facet, woven by director Fred Walton, is the casting of eight principals in April Fool’s Day, all with similar amounts of screen time, rather than one obvious “final girl” surrounded by minor characters, who we know will be offed.

The setup is all too familiar in the slasher genre- the group of college-aged kids escapes mundane life for a spring break weekend getaway at their wealthy classmates’, Muffy St. John’s, island estate.

Conveniently, her family is away- leaving the friends to have the run of the mansion, with a dinner party as part of the plan.

Even more convenient is that the ferry the group takes does not run on weekends, so once they are dropped off at the island, they stay until Monday.

This sense of foreshadowing sets the anticipated peril and dread in motion.

We also sense that there is something very off with Muffy- despite being everyone’s friend. When Muffy finds a jack-in-the-box in her attic and recalls a childhood memory, we know this is the setup for the mystery.

Is she mentally unstable? Is someone out to get Muffy for a childhood prank or an event that once occurred?

Since it is April Fool’s Day weekend, the groups spend most of the film playing pranks and amateurish jokes on each other (a whoopee cushion, an exploding cigar), mixed with a dash of intrigue- someone is leaving trails of history as part of the jokes.

One girl had an abortion, so the prankster left an audiotape of a baby crying. In another room, heroin paraphernalia is left for someone with a former drug habit.

Slowly, one by one, the college kids disappear, but is it just a hoax? Or is the hoax just a hoax?

The final twenty minutes or so are really the main reason to watch this film.

As Kit and boyfriend Rob are the last remaining “alive,” there is suddenly a startling twist that changes the entire dynamic of the film- in one moment, everything the audience thinks of the story is turned upside down.

This is wise writing, but it comes too late in the game.

Sadly, some parts of the film are downright silly, and most of the characters are of the stock variety- the flirtatious blonde, the obnoxious jocks, the stuck-up preppy, which ruins the creative twist that is aforementioned.

With glimpses of genius and a striving for something more clever than the standard run-of-the-mill 1980s horror film, April Fool’s Day (1986) has some potential but ultimately leaves something missing.

Show Me Love-1998

Show Me Love-1998

Director Lukas Moodysson

Starring Alexandra Dahlstrom, Rebecca Liljeberg

Scott’s Review #496

60000454

Reviewed October 22, 2016

Grade: B

Throughout the latter part of the 1990s, films with a more LGBT perspective (then referred to as the gay and lesbian genre) were being released more readily.

It was not until the 2000s that mainstream offerings on the subject (Monster, 2003, Brokeback Mountain, 2006) hit the big screen to wide acclaim.

Show Me Love (1998) is a Swedish coming-of-age story about two high school girls, who are opposites in terms of social acceptance, who find love.

Interestingly, the film was directed by a male, Lukas Moodysson.

Show Me Love originally had a different title, a crude reference to the town the film is set in, in western Sweden. Still, when the film was considered for Academy Award contention (it did not make the cut), filmmakers were advised to modify the film’s title to include any shot.

The film contains a grainy look- using handheld cameras in parts and, of course, is in the Swedish language.

Agnes is sullen, introverted, and brooding. Known throughout the high school hallways as the angry, weird lesbian, she has few friends, and the ones who are kind to her, she shuns away.

Elin, by contrast, is popular, lively, and charming- everybody loves her.

However, Elin is restless in the tiny Swedish town where she lives and yearns for excitement. When Agnes develops a crush on Elin, she confesses it all to her computer but to no one else.

The film is nicely put together and, given the year 1998, is quite brave. Today, many years have passed, and progress within the LGBT community has been made; a film like Show Me, Love is a more common occurrence.

Director Moodysson does not go for anything gratuitous or steamy but rather spins a sweet coming-of-age tale, not only of teen love and hormones but also of outcasts and feelings of loneliness.

It’s a film that most can relate to in some way.

The actresses portraying the leads (Dahlstrom and Liljeberg) are fantastic in their roles, playing them with conviction and believability.

Despite being opposites, we buy their attraction and chemistry. Nothing is forced or dishonest.

My favorite scenes are the awkward 16th birthday party for Agnes, thrown by her well-meaning yet clueless parents. When nobody except a disabled girl shows up, Agnes viciously insults her, causing her to leave.

The family sits in the living room, eating the food that was planned for anticipated guests. It’s a poignant, rather sweet moment. Despite Agnes’s unpopularity at school, she has a very strong, loyal family unit- that is nice to see.

Later, Elin and her sister attend the party, but more as an excuse to avoid another one. Finally, Elin and Agnes share a kiss, but is it a mean dare or is it authentic?

A clever aspect of the film is how Moodysson distinguishes between Elin’s and Agnes’s sexualities. Agnes is gay, open, and out. Elin is very different and has boys interested in her.

The girls could not be more different, and this adds a layer of complexity, as each is at a different stage in self-discovery. This feature also makes Show Me Love very honest in its storytelling.

The film is not a masterpiece and could have ventured into more controversial territory. Could they be harmed for being lesbians, given the town they live in? Why is Agnes so sullen?

This is a stereotype (the brooding lesbian) that needs to be changed, though, given the time of the film, I will give it a slight pass. Why not make Agnes a happy, cheerful, gay girl?

How will Elin’s sister deal with Elin’s sexuality, or is it merely a phase for her?

All sorts of darker issues might have been explored, but Show Me Love (1998) is tender, sweet, and lighter fare, yet still an adventurous offering.

Joy-2015

Joy-2015

Director David O. Russell

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, Robert DeNiro

Scott’s Review #485

80064513

Reviewed September 24, 2016

Grade: B-

Joy is a safe, mainstream, female-centered 2015 film, a biopic written for current star Jennifer Lawrence. She was nominated for a Best Actress Academy Award for her role and she carries the film.

Still, despite her performance, the film is nothing special and is written in a ho-hum manner.

It is simply not very compelling and the supporting characters are not utilized as they could have been. Despite being based on a true story, the writing is lazy and the plot far-fetched.

I expected more.

The film is another collaboration between director, David O. Russell, and big stars of the time- Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, and Robert DeNiro- all used in previous Russell films.

Lawrence plays Joy, a struggling Long Island mother of two, who is divorced from her husband (who still lives in the basement of her house), with multiple family members living with her, forming a support unit.

The sense is that Joy is the breadwinner of the family.

The story is narrated by Joy’s grandmother, who she calls Mimi (Diane Ladd). Mimi always knew Joy would be a success and we see a few scenes of Joy as a child, surviving her dysfunctional family and her parent’s disputes.

DeNiro plays her womanizing father, divorced from her mother (Virginia Madsen), who lies in bed all day watching soap operas. Cooper plays opportunist, QVC executive, Neil Walker, who takes a liking to Joy and helps her achieve her dream as a successful businesswoman after she patents an idea for a new, high-powered mop.

The authenticity of the time, 1989, and through the 1990s is apparent, as we see Joy working for Eastern Airlines, a company that would fold several years later. Also authentic were the automobiles of the time and the dresses and hairstyles.

These points the film does very well. And how cute was it to see famous daytime television stars such as Susan Lucci, portraying soap opera stars, as Joy’s mother lives her life vicariously through their tangled and bizarre soap lives?

Several scenes occur on the television set as we get glimpses of the soap stories.

The film as a whole, though, feels too neat.

Predictably, Joy faces obstacles on her way to success.  Already struggling financially, she takes out a second mortgage on her house. At first, she cannot give away mops, let alone sell them.

On the brink of giving up, she finishes a meeting with execs who laugh at her product, but Walker is there to give her a break because she has a pretty face.

Predictably, things do not go well and there is a rather dull subplot about a company in Texas trying to steal Joy’s idea. When she goes and threatens them they immediately back down and obediently give in to her every whim.

This is both unrealistic and uninteresting.

I would have liked to have seen a messy back-and-forth or some court scenes, but the Texas company is portrayed as nothing but the villain.

The writing has either plot holes or contains missed opportunities altogether and many questions abound. Despite many scenes of Joy’s past we end up knowing little.

Her entire family lives with her in a suburban Long Island house- why does Joy own the house and not her mother or grandmother? Why does Joy have a rivalry with her half-sister, Peggy? Why does Joy’s father own an auto garage and still need to stay with Joy? Why is Joy’s mother mostly in bed?

Madsen as the mother is rather cartoonish and unnecessary to the plot as is Ladd- a dynamic actress given little of substance.  I did not buy DeNiro as a cad nor in love with his wealthy new girlfriend Trudy (though seeing Isabella Rossellini in the part is a win), conveniently there to be Joy’s financer.

Despite an enormously talented cast, which is fantastic to see, most of the supporting parts could have been played by any actors, as the roles are not all that challenging, and the film itself is certainly a vehicle to showcase Jennifer Lawrence, David O. Russell’s current “it” girl.

This is not a slight towards Jennifer Lawrence since she is the best part.  She successfully portrays Joy as a sympathetic, strong-willed, fair, decent human being, with enormous struggles, and a blue-collar sensibility.

Great performance, but I wish the writing and the other talents involved in the film were given better material.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Jennifer Lawrence

The Witches-1990

The Witches-1990

Director Nicolas Roeg

Starring Angelica Huston, Mai Zetterling 

Scott’s Review #483

20282991

Reviewed September 20, 2016

Grade: B-

The Witches (1990) is a G-rated family film with a slightly dark tone, handled softly, as it is targeted at children. However, it is a film that adults may love too.

I found the film entertaining, with impressive special effects and a dazzling comedic performance by Angelica Huston. Still, ultimately, The Witches has a silly quality, though admittedly not trite, that does not quite make it a success in my book.

The film is based on a Roald Dahl children’s book, with a child as the central character, similar to other Dahl novels that were adapted into films such as James and the Giant Peach and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

I cannot help but wonder whether my mediocre rating of The Witches is due to not having read the novel, even though I have read the other aforementioned novels in his collection.

Our hero in the story is Luke- a kindly, innocent young boy living in Norway with his parents and grandmother, Helga. When his folks are tragically killed, his grandmother takes him to London to begin a new life for themselves.

When Helga falls ill, they stay at a seaside resort where they stumble upon a convention of witches disguised as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

Luke and his plump friend Bruno fall victim to the witch’s plot to turn children into mice. The witch group is led by the Grand High Witch (Huston), whom the other witches fawn over with grandiose praise.

Huston is fantastic as she overacts the part she plays- this is not a bad thing, but it makes the role quite fun and energetic.

When she transforms from a glamorous woman to a shriveled monster, the transformation is interesting to watch and an impressive part of the film.

Furthermore, the way Luke and Bruno interact as mice is also cute and a positive aspect of the film.

I enjoyed the aspect that, if watched closely, reveals that numerous witches are men wearing female wigs. This successfully gives the witches a grotesque, obviously mannish quality and emits a chuckle of pleasure at the same time.

Still, there is something slightly childish or juvenile about the offering, while the film appears dark on the surface. The subject is played for laughs rather than going full steam ahead as a dark film.

Undoubtedly, this is due to the target audience that the film is going for. For instance, the hotel manager’s affair with a hotel maid seems slightly unnecessary.

The Witches (1990) is a decent offering due to respect for the creative aspects that it elicits- I just felt the story might have been done a bit more seriously.

Additionally, the ending feels slightly forced and abrupt- a Hollywood-intended ending perhaps?

Vampire Academy-2014

Vampire Academy-2014

Director Mark Waters

Starring Zoey Deutch

Scott’s Review #482

70291088

Reviewed September 18, 2016

Grade: C

Vampire Academy (2014) is a teenage intended mixture of Harry Potter meets Heathers meets Twilight. It is escapist fare and is quite light, but rather fun in an amateurish way.

I am certain the target audience is of the teenage, female persuasion, but when traveling one can be limited in film options.

Hence, on a chilly night in Norway, this film kept us occupied.

The story features a half-human-half vampire named Rose, a teenage girl, who aspires to be a guardian, and who is called back to a boarding school to uncover a hierarchical web of secrets, lies, and plots.

She is accompanied by her best friend Lissa.

Predictably, there is a romantic angle to the story as Rose has feelings for Dimitri, a fellow guardian.

The film itself is fine- it knows the demographic it is going for and young adults are sure to enjoy the compelling drama, likable leads, and attractive cast.

From a film critique standpoint, there is nothing wrong with the film, but it is a bit generic and slightly predictable- from the romantic perspective, though impressively the ending is a bit of a surprise and a whodunit.

Impressive also is Sarah Hyland (Modern Family), as nerdy classmate Natalie, who seems to be the brains and the keeper of gossip throughout the academy.

The role is against type for the young actress and she does very well.

It is tough not to compare this film to the Harry Potter series of films since many aspects of Vampire Academy mirror Harry Potter- only with a female in the driver’s seat. The mysterious teachers and characters are also reminiscent of the fantastical Harry elements.

Unfortunately, a planned sequel was scrapped due to a lack of interest, which surprised me. I would anticipate a film like this to be a hit and perhaps introduce a franchise, but not to be.

An adequate young adult film that borrows from other films and also harkens back to the days of teen-minded genres of the past, specifically the 1980’s.

Date Night-2010

Date Night-2010

Director Shawn Levy

Starring Steve Carell, Tina Fey

Scott’s Review #481

70121501

Reviewed September 17, 2016

Grade: D+

Date Night is a perfect example of mediocrity in modern filmmaking.

We have two current comedic actors here- Steve Carell and Tina Fey- circa 2010- at the top of their game.

The filmmaker’s idea is to pair these two and make an appealing romantic comedy for the masses.

The main issue with this film is that the result is generic and quite an average offering.

The entire film is incredibly plot-driven, with no character development to speak of.

If I am being too harsh, admittedly there is nice chemistry between the two leads, but it is wasted by sloppy writing.

A couple from the New Jersey burbs, Carrell and Fey portray husband and wife, Phil and Claire Foster. Saddled with two kids and their romance reaching dullsville, Phil decides to take Claire to a ritzy Manhattan restaurant.

When they arrive, they cannot get a table, so they pretend to be another couple a get one after the other couple no-shows. This leads to a tale of mistaken identity as the other couple possesses a flash drive that a mobster (Ray Liotta) wants.

This leads to a chase through Manhattan as they try to outrun and outwit their pursuers.

Wahlberg plays a hunky client of Claire’s, always shirtless, who threatens Phil and Claire’s marriage.

Several others of the current Hollywood elite- Kristen Wiig, James Franco, Mila Kunis, and Mark Ruffalo- make small and somewhat pointless appearances. Specifically, Franco and Kunis as a stoner-type bickering couple are silly and unnecessary to the story.

Carrell and Fey are quite funny as individuals and as a duo. Date Night, though, does not capitalize on or showcase their respective talents.

The film tries too hard to come up with scenario after scenario of the two on the run and encountering one problematic situation after another.

As the plot of Date Night wears on, I notice that each situation is a matter of convenience.

Conveniently, Claire has a client in town (Wahlberg), who is a security expert. They go to him for help and, predictably, his hunkiness bothers Phil and piques Claire’s interest- though, of course, we know full well Phil and Claire will end up together- that is how these mainstream films go.

In another scene. Phil and Claire can break into an office building unnoticed, trigger the alarms, conveniently find a needed file, and escape, miraculously all before the police arrive minutes later.

Very plot-driven.

The lead actors in Date Night are appealing and even charming together, but it falls flat. Still, the inane plot makes it unappealing to watch, and the slew of stars that somebody decided would be a great addition to a lukewarm film is odd.

The roles written have little bearing on the central plot, so it was apparent why they were added.

Date Night (2010) is a film we have seen time and time again with other actors in similar roles.

Easy A-2010

Easy A-2010

Director Will Gluck

Starring Emma Stone

Scott’s Review #478

70123920

Reviewed September 10, 2016

Grade: B-

Easy A (2010) is a film with some good parts and some dumb parts.

However, at the end of the day, it is forgettable, and who will remember a film like this in ten years?

The film is a teen comedy about a girl who makes up a rumor about herself to gain attention from her peers.

Emma Stone is great in this movie and shows the enormous potential of her budding film career. She reminds me a bit of Lindsay Lohan. She is likable, great at comedy, and has a fun persona.

Also deserving of credit is Lisa Kudrow, who appears in the movie.

At times, the dialogue is intelligent and witty; other times, it turns into a typical dumb comedy.

This is sad because, given the star power involved, Easy A (2010) might have been a better film than it turned out to be.

Babe-1995

Babe 1995

Director Chris Noonan

Starring James Cromwell

Scott’s Review #475

268776-1

Reviewed September 9, 2016

Grade: B

Babe (1995) is a cute, charming family film about a pig who becomes a hero while living on a farm with a family of other animals, a farmer, and his wife.

It is not a risky film from a story perspective- any doubts about a happy ending?- though there are props for some visual creativity.

And let’s face it- the film is sweet and heartwarming with not a mean bone in its body.

The film is an inspirational one, nice for kids no doubt, and the visual effects, i.e., how they edited the animal movements with voices successfully, are well done and not tacky.

The film is predictable and harmless, and I’m not sure I agree with the Best Picture or Best Supporting Actor (for James Cromwell) nominations it garnered, but it was enjoyable all the same.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Chris Noonan, Best Supporting Actor-James Cromwell, Best Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects (won)

This Is 40-2012

This Is 40-2012

Director Judd Apatow

Starring Paul Rudd, Leslie Mann

Scott’s Review #473

70244168

Reviewed September 6, 2016

Grade: B

I must admit, I was not looking forward to seeing this movie, and my initial thought was “typical dumb comedy” that has been seen a million times before.

While This is 40 (2012) does contain those elements and is marketed toward a certain target audience, this movie is, surprisingly, smartly written and intelligent…overall.

I have not viewed Knocked Up (2007), but I understand it’s a somewhat follow-up to that film, as the two central characters are now married and traversing through a different time in their lives-adulthood.

I enjoyed Paul Rudd’s, Melissa McCarthy’s, and whoever played the oldest daughter’s, performances the most, though Rudd has become the latest actor to play the same role over and over again.

I enjoyed the rock n roll elements and the confrontation scenes as these were very cleverly written and nicely acted.

Sadly, at times the film relies on the standard bathroom humor done thousands of times before- a clear attempt at a laugh, and Jason Segal’s and Megan Fox’s characters are unnecessary to the main plot.

This Is 40 (2012) is a film that, at its heart, shows the trials and tribulations of generations of families, humorously, and done rather well.

Bernie-2011

Bernie-2011

Director Richard Linklater

Starring Jack Black, Shirley MacLaine, Matthew McConaughey

Scott’s Review #472

70189906

Reviewed August 30, 2016

Grade: C-

Bernie (2011) is a film that, surprisingly, received critical acclaim and Golden Globe and Independent Spirit Award nominations, but I was left quite disappointed.

Categorized as a dark comedy, it has a morbid premise, which isn’t the issue; I didn’t find it very good overall.

Despite being a true story of Bernie (Jack Black) marrying and murdering millionaire Marjorie Nugent (Shirley MacLaine) in Texas, the film is not compelling and is written too over-the-top.

Inexplicably, the townspeople refuse to believe Bernie’s obvious guilt.

The film has a few funny, interesting moments and is based on real events, but I didn’t feel as connected to it as I expected and, honestly, found it a bit dull.

Jack Black is impressive as the title character, but only because it is a departure from his usual slapstick film roles. I don’t get the accolades being heaped on him for his performance.

Shirley MacLaine and Matthew McConaughey are capable of the parts written for them, but they are one-note characters.

Meh.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Male Lead-Jack Black

Results-2015

Results-2015

Director Andrew Bujalski

Starring Guy Pearce, Kevin Corrigan

Scott’s Review #471

80038442

Reviewed August 29, 2016

Grade: C-

Other than one fantastic supporting performance by Kevin Corrigan, who should have been the star of this film, Results (2015) is an independent romantic comedy that lacks any real identity.

The film has trouble deciding which couple the audience is meant to root for leaving me to root for none of them, and frankly, a bit bored with the overall script.

Still, Corrigan and to some degree, Guy Pearce make it a tolerable watch.

Corrigan plays Danny, a newly wealthy average Joe type, who joins a gym presumably to achieve a supportive network of friends, as he is new in town- Austin, Texas.

He meets Trevor (Pearce), who owns a local gym and is trained by the moody Kat (Cobie Smulders).

The three individuals’ lives intersect as a triangle of sorts develops.

Kevin Corrigan, who has appeared in numerous independent films over his decades-long career, and blockbusters such as Goodfellas (1990), completely steals the show and is the main reason to tune in.

His acting is effortless as he plays a lonely, rich man looking for human connections. He is troubled but has a comic wit that shines and gives him needed vulnerability. We want him to find happiness despite being unlikable.

Speaking of unlikeable, Smulders as Kat is a frigid iceberg with attitude for miles. Why anyone, let alone two men, would be interested in her is beyond me.

Pearce is appealing as the good-natured, aspiring-to-be successful businessman named Trevor, who is buff beyond belief- to enormous credit since Pearce is no spring chicken. Otherwise, we know little about his character.

He is not in love with Kat, but suddenly seems to be.

Kat warms to Danny but then is in love with Trevor. The entire romantic entanglement is silly and no chemistry exists among them.

The casting of Giovanni Ribisi as a stoner lawyer and Anthony Michael Hall (The Breakfast Club from the 1980s) as a fitness guru are pointless.

The fitness/gym angle is cool if one, as I am, is a fan of physical fitness. It is a nice little lesson as Kat teaches Danny basic core exercises. But after too many scenes of Kat drinking kale shakes and jogging incessantly, or Trevor eating egg white omelets and body strengthening, the message is overkill.

They are fitness buffs- we get it.

The biggest fail is how the film focuses on Danny and Kat as a potential romantic couple, then suddenly shifts gears, making Kat and Trevor the main couple, with Danny on the outside looking in.

It really makes little sense, and by that point, I was rather bored anyway and the film just petered out for me.

Results (2015) has shreds of potential with better-structured story-telling, but misses good potential in many areas- underdeveloped characters and a meandering plot are a couple of major problem points.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Kevin Corrigan

Anomalisa-2015

Anomalisa-2015

Director Charlie Kaufman, Duke Johnson

Starring Tom Noonan, Jennifer Jason Leigh

Scott’s Review #469

80080269

Reviewed August 27, 2016

Grade: A-

Anomalisa (2015) is one of the most creative offerings I have seen recently.

Animation is not my forte- typically I find them much too nice, and the old “family-friendly” tags make me cringe, Anomalisa has received heaps of buzz so I decided to check it out.

I am glad I did.

The stop-motion film is quite adult-themed, though not the slightest bit raunchy. Rather it is an intelligent tale about loneliness and human beings connecting through this loneliness.

It is a bit of a melancholy film too, based on a 2005 play.

The central character is Michael Stone, a depressed customer service expert, who travels to Cincinnati to deliver a seminar on his expertise. Michael is riddled with anxiety and his life is rather mundane though he checks into a stylish hotel that is presumably hosting his convention.

He is a bit of a big name within his industry. Oddly, every person he encounters looks and sounds the same- that of a white man- even his wife and son. He is haunted by the memory of an old flame, Bella, who it is revealed he jilted years ago and now lives in Cincinnati.

The story gets interesting when Michael hears a woman’s voice singing, up until now all voices are male, remember, and he is desperate to find the voice.

He meets Lisa (voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh), an insecure, rather dowdy woman, with whom he becomes infatuated. A customer service representative at the hotel to witness Michael’s seminar, Lisa is instantly smitten, though wary of Michael’s intentions.

They bond and the film tells of their romance and insecurities.

The film is highly creative and unique. It is also mysterious. My first wonder was to figure out why all the characters, regardless of gender, share the same voice.

Michael is lonely and sees everyone else as monotonous or meaningless until he meets Lisa. The film is not clear what Michael sees in Lisa- perhaps her realness in a world of phoniness. She is an ordinary girl, but what is the point? I am still not sure of this.

I did not find the character Michael likable and not one to root for. He is dismissive of some characters and a bit condescending, but despite this, not a hated character either. He and Lisa as a duo are to root for.

Anomalisa has some humor too, albeit dark humor. When Michael mistakes an adult toy store for a traditional toy store and purchases a Japanese sex doll for his son, Michael’s wife hilariously wonders about some foreign substance around the doll’s mouth.

A nervous male passenger on Michael’s flight clutches Michael’s hand, even after landing safely.

The explicit sex scene between Michael and Lisa is as shocking as it is tender. I think showing this graphic edge in animation threw me for a loop since this rarely happens in animated films- perhaps incorrectly- assuming that they are for children only with their parents to endure.

Anomalisa is not true animation- felt puppets are used, giving a great, human-looking feel and making the characters more life-like.

Anomalisa (2015) is not a perfect ten but damn close for its left-of-center approach alone. A journey into the art of creativity and thought. A bit far out there for most, and perhaps the sarcasm may be lost on some, but a unique experience, nonetheless.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Charlie Kaufman and Duke Johnson, Best Supporting Female-Jennifer Jason Leigh, Best Screenplay

Trainwreck-2015

Trainwreck-2015

Director Judd Apatow

Starring Amy Schumer, Bill Hader

Scott’s Review #463

80036402

Reviewed August 13, 2016

Grade: B

Trainwreck is a raunchy 2015 comedy/romantic comedy that lends its success largely to its star.

Amy Schumer makes this film as good as it can be (after all, she wrote it) and despite the raunchy girl power themes that are currently the popular trend in films of this genre, Trainwreck has some laughs and good times thrown in, thanks to Schumer.

Judd Apatow directs, who has successfully made a gazillion of these types of films in modern times.

The film does teeter off into predictability toward the conclusion. It has its moments of fun and is not boring.

Unapologetic, sexually promiscuous, and boozy, Schumer plays a successful magazine writer (Amy) given an assignment she despises- interview a sports medicine doctor, named  Aaron (played by SNL alum, Bill Hader).

Amy hates sports and knows nothing about them, she also goes from man to man, nothing serious, and is currently dating a sexy bodybuilder named Steven (John Cena), who she thinks may be gay.

Predictably, Amy and Aaron fall in love.

In typical fashion, Trainwreck contains stereotypical characters or characters who are merely there to bounce off the main action.

SNL alum Vanessa Bayer, and Tilda Swinton are the most obvious examples, as the loyal best friend and rigid, type-A boss, respectively.

Brie Larson and Colin Quinn co-star as Amy’s family members. Both give one-note performances that are fine, but unspectacular, and one surmises that Brie Larson agreed to this role before her Oscar-winning turn in Room (2015).

Despite the comedy clichés, I had some good fun with Trainwreck.

Schumer is likable as an ordinary girl, think of her as the new Melissa McCarthy, to whom many people can relate. I am not sure Schumer and Hader had the best chemistry, but the point was that she found love with a “regular” guy, a tad dull, to counter-balance her big, loud personality.

And they do make a charming pair.

Some scenes work. When Amy encourages a naked Steven to “talk dirty to her” in the bedroom and he attributes everything to bodybuilding, the scene is funny.

When Amy and Steven banter with an angry couple at the movie theater, fall flat.

Certainly not high art, for the raunchy comedy genre, Trainwreck is a treat and entertaining to watch, in large part due to the comedic talents of Amy Schumer.

More often than not, when the masses rave about a current comedy as being “great”, I am usually disappointed. While Trainwreck (2015) is not great, it is good, with some laughs.

Otherwise, it is a rather by-the-numbers film.

Café Society-2016

Café Society-2016

Director Woody Allen

Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Steve Carell

Scott’s Review #462

80106775

Reviewed August 11, 2016

Grade: B+

Having received sub-par reviews but wanting to see this film for myself, as it is a Woody Allen film, and I have yet to see an Allen film I did not like, I traversed to my local theater to see this flick.

I was not disappointed, though others did not share my opinion.

To love Woody Allen films is to love quirky characters who are either neurotic, damaged, or, more often than not, both.

Also notable to Café Society (2016) is the stellar cast of who’s who, many in minor cameo roles, another trademark of Woody Allen films.

Marisa Tomei, Daniel Radcliffe, and television stars Anna Camp (True Blood) have tiny roles, as do stars such as Sheryl Lee (Twin Peaks) and Tony Sirico (The Sopranos).

Additionally, Woody Allen himself narrates the film- a highlight.

The main stars of Café Society are Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart, both ideally cast.

The setting (which I adored) is 1930s Hollywood, and the action traverses between California and New York City, another common bond in Allen’s films.

Eisenberg plays Bobby Dorfman, a Jewish son of a working-class jeweler who has many siblings. Tired of New York, he flies to Los Angeles to obtain work with his hotshot Uncle Phil, played by Steve Carrell, who knows every celebrity.

There, he meets Vonnie (Stewart), and they fall in love, Bobby unaware of her on-and-off love affair with Phil.

The set and costume designs are to die for, and as a fan of this glamorous period in history, I find it an extraordinary visual treat.

Café Society is a prime example of a film that feels authentic to its time rather than appearing staged with actors merely dressed up in appropriate attire. This is tougher to achieve than one might imagine.

Despite contrary opinions, I enjoyed how most characters were wishy-washy and unsure of their motivations or feelings toward others.

Vonnie loves Phil, and then she warms to Bobby, who has been in love with her since their first meeting. She innocently shows him around Hollywood’s palatial mansions.

She is honest with Bobby but then makes a decision and becomes everything she once despised about Hollywood: a shallow, trophy wife.

Ironically, Bobby becomes involved with a stunning new woman named the same as his ex back in New York. This coincidence is crucial to the film’s point. He transfers his feelings to another woman, but is he pleased?

It did not bother me, though perhaps it should have, that several characters were introduced for a scene or two and then mysteriously dropped.

For instance, the novice hooker, Candy, having tried to make it as an actress and failed, has a heart of gold. However, after her awkward attempt at a tryst with Bobby, the character is never seen again.

Another characteristic of the film that I enjoyed is the natural, overlapping dialogue between the characters. It makes them more genuine and evokes my fondness for Robert Altman films, which used a similar technique with their actors.

The point of Café Society is that nobody ever gets what they want, and the film makes a point that nobody knows what they want.

Containing elements common to other Woody Allen films, Café Society (2016) is intended for fans of his lengthy work.

Sisters-2015

Sisters-2015

Director Jason Moore

Starring Tina Fey, Amy Poehler

Scott’s Review #458

80063604

Reviewed July 31, 2016

Grade: B-

Slapstick comedy is admittedly not my genre of choice, though I will watch some for light entertainment or to see just how bad (or good) current offerings are.

Nonetheless, I have tried to put myself in a mindset of low expectations for these films that are usually fluff and plot-driven.

In the case of Sisters (2015), the film is pretty much as one would expect: vulgar, crass and raunchy. Yet, due to the chemistry between the leads (Amy Poehler and Tina Fey) and a few heartfelt romantic moments, something does work. It is not as mean as one might think.

This is not to say that Sisters is a great film. Hardly. But not as bad as I feared.

Poehler and Fey play Maura and Kate Ellis, respectively, two late thirties sisters, living in other areas of the country, who return home to Orlando, Florida, when their parents (James Brolin and Dianne Wiest) sell their childhood home.

Maura and Kate have been tasked with cleaning their bedrooms in time for the sale.

The sisters have an idea to throw one final bash and invite their high school classmates, who all conveniently still live in the same town. Events go awry and the party gets way out of hand.

Mixed in with the main plot are sub-plots consisting of a romantic interest for Maura, and a rival for Kate, played by Maya Rudolph.

The best part is the chemistry between Poehler and Fey. They “have it” whether it is a Saturday Night Live sketch, hosting the Golden Globe awards, or starring in Sisters. The banter and the jokes work well because the two comics work well together and it shows on-screen.

They are believable as sisters despite looking nothing alike.

Otherwise, Sisters is a traditional vulgar comedy. One irksome recent trend (now more female-driven than in years past) is the leading ladies being classless. This must be an attempt at female empowerment or the assumption that since adult comedies were once a man’s world, female characters should be written like men.

Do we need Kate and Maura swearing like sailors, making poop jokes, and being so raunchy? Behaving like ladies would now be the exception, not the norm (Bridesmaids, 2011, set this precedent).

Not surprisingly, the supporting characters are all caricatures as is typically the case in films of this genre. The parents are a bit clueless and have kinky sex much to the girl’s chagrin.

Brinda, bitchy, judgmental, yet insecure, the Korean (big stereotype) nail technician who cannot properly pronounce English words, the new owners of the house are snobbish, uptight, and clueless, and finally, James, the guy next door, who are Mr. Fix-it and the straight man in the high-jinks. He is sugar-sweet and the male hero.

The romantic scenes between Maura and James are sweet and sentimental, nicely balancing the vulgarity and raunchiness that the rest of the film encompasses. They are a nice couple and have a rich rooting value.

Most of the action takes place at Kate and Maura’s childhood home where posters of such 1980s films as E.T. and Out of Africa, and a poster of heartthrob Tom Cruise, hang on the walls.

This, and many other references that Generation X will delight from in this film are pointed out, so that is a treat and a positive of the film.

As the party gets off to a slow start, the thirty and forty-somethings appear dull and either talk about their kids or their various maladies and suddenly, after being fed drugs, are back to their college party days, are both dumb and cute at the same time.

Sisters (2015) (hopefully) knows what it is. It is a late Saturday night, raunchy comedy affair, meant as fluff and escapist fun. It is not a masterpiece nor does it intend to be one.

Rather, a full-length SNL sketch including many alumni. It is harmless fun.

Frankenweenie-2012

Frankenweenie-2012

Director Tim Burton

Starring Catherine O’Hara, Martin Short

Scott’s Review #454

70219496

Reviewed July 23, 2016

Grade: B

Frankenweenie is a very creative Tim Burton-made, stop-motion film that received a nomination for Best Animated Feature at the 2012 Oscars.

On the dark side, it is a pleasure to watch for the thought-invoked and left-of-center approach as compared to many safe modern animated features.

The story revolves around a lonely young man who experiments on his recently deceased dog to bring him back to life.

It is a black and white film, has nice horror references (Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein) and interesting characters.

It is also heartwarming as the child’s love for the dog is evident.

The movie is easy to compare to 2012’s ParaNorman in multiple ways (lonely male teen, both dark films).

As much as I give major props to this film for the creativity involved, somehow it did not completely connect with me (I liked ParaNorman better) and I’m not sure why, but I have great respect for the creative achievements it encompasses.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film