Personal.
If I could only use one word to describe this movie, that's what it would be. This movie has, after one viewing, become a personal favorite of mine.
This documentary follows the rivalry of Steve Wiebe and Billy Mitchell, the two best Donkey Kong players in the world. Over four years, the two go back and forth to try to claim the world record score of Donkey Kong. Eventually, one of them will be named the Guiness Book World record holder.
This film follows a ragtag group of people that you can just FEEL love playing arcade games competitively. But, ther has to be one villain. There has to be one person who just ruins the whole game. You know the guy- the guy who hangs over your shoulder and makes fun of you while claiming he is the greatest of all time. That man is Billy Mitchell. At the beginning of the film, he holds the record for Donkey Kong. He is the biggest jerk I've ever seen. He's the real life incarnation of Ben Stiller's character in Dodgeball. He's either playing up this role for publicity, or he really is the most disillusioned prick in the world.
Steve, on the other hand, is the hero. He's the guy you love to root for. He's the underdog. He cares for his family more than he cares about being on top. He takes the time out to practice and travel in order to get the record. He's just a great guy.
All of the supporting "characters" are great, too. These people are real people, and the movie is rooted in real life, which makes the movie of the highest value. It actually has a story, characters, plot...everything a good movie or book has- but it's real. rareyl is life so dramatic and funny. This is such an amazing film. I can't find anything wrong with it other than it's only 80 minutes long. But it's such a great 80 minutes. i won't give away the ending, but it's great. It's a classic. i don't know how a documentary can become a classic, but it better.
96/100
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Rambo Review
It's a bird! It's plane! No, it's the ageless wonder himself, Sly Stallone!
Rambo is the fourth movie in a series that follows around sulking anti-hero and resident killing machine John Rambo. It's the first Rambo movie in 20 years, believe it or not.
This time around, Rambo is still in Vietnam, catching snakes and giving boat rides for a living, when a bunch of Christian missionaries hire him to escort them into war-torn Burma. That is the be-all and end-all of the "story." It's just an excuse to get Rambo to kill some people, really.
This movie is shallow, but enjoyable. If you like action movies, then see it in the theater. It's nowhere near the masterpeice of action Die Hard 4 was (and most certainly not as good as Stallone's other resurrection, Rocky Balboa), but it's still a decent enough return to the franchise.
We see Rambo decapitate, decimate, mow down, slaughter, and otherwise just maim and destroy, but the plot does have an interesting commentary on the sanctity of human life and what makes a human being. It's not exactly deep, but it's serviceable. Occasionally, the visual effects are really despicable, but sometimes it just floors you. The movie is visceral, brutal, and very gory. That's what I wanted and I wasn't disappointed.
really, though, this movie doesn't do anything except dievert your mind for 93 minutes. It's a very short film with ultimateyl no purpose other than to entertain. And it does that fairly well, but it also leaves a lot to be desired especially since the returns to the Rocky and Die Hard series were so great.
70/100
Rambo is the fourth movie in a series that follows around sulking anti-hero and resident killing machine John Rambo. It's the first Rambo movie in 20 years, believe it or not.
This time around, Rambo is still in Vietnam, catching snakes and giving boat rides for a living, when a bunch of Christian missionaries hire him to escort them into war-torn Burma. That is the be-all and end-all of the "story." It's just an excuse to get Rambo to kill some people, really.
This movie is shallow, but enjoyable. If you like action movies, then see it in the theater. It's nowhere near the masterpeice of action Die Hard 4 was (and most certainly not as good as Stallone's other resurrection, Rocky Balboa), but it's still a decent enough return to the franchise.
We see Rambo decapitate, decimate, mow down, slaughter, and otherwise just maim and destroy, but the plot does have an interesting commentary on the sanctity of human life and what makes a human being. It's not exactly deep, but it's serviceable. Occasionally, the visual effects are really despicable, but sometimes it just floors you. The movie is visceral, brutal, and very gory. That's what I wanted and I wasn't disappointed.
really, though, this movie doesn't do anything except dievert your mind for 93 minutes. It's a very short film with ultimateyl no purpose other than to entertain. And it does that fairly well, but it also leaves a lot to be desired especially since the returns to the Rocky and Die Hard series were so great.
70/100
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Films That Touch Me Ep. 1: Werckmeister Harmonies
I call this series of essays “On the Films That Touch Me.” I plan on exploring some of my favorite movies and why they mean so much to me. Hopefully, I can open you guys up to a world you never knew. One day I want to become a film critic. This is my passion, so now I’m going to get into it. First up is:
Werckmeister Harmonies (2000), Bela Tarr
This movie is definitely not for everybody. That is for sure. If you can find this, good luck. I got it off of Blockbuster Online, but you won’t be finding it in-store. You’re best finding it on Ebay.
So, this movie explores one of my personal favorite styles- surrealism. The film is in black and white. It revolves around a young, optimistic man in a bleak, boring town in France. He works alongside his family and takes care of an older man who has trouble getting around. His otherwise boring and average world is changed when the circus comes to town.
But this isn’t the average circus. This circus has a whale. That’s right- a huge, dead, stinking whale carcass. It’s kept in a huge trailer that appears to be the only thing actually in the circus. Everybody shows up to see the whale. However, rumors begin to spread that there is a man who possesses the powers to see the future. He rouses crowds and creates riots and debauchery amongst the townspeople.
Our protagonist is such an optimistic and lively young lad. He has a lot to look forward to. The whale and all the excitement mesmerize him, but his neighbors don’t feel the same. One of his neighbors blackmails the older man he takes care of in order to get townspeople to petition against the circus. You never see any of this destruction for most of the movie, and an eerie sense pervades you that something dreadful will go down.
The uniqueness of this rather long (about 2 hours and 20 minutes) film is the length of the shots. The film is made on 32 single takes. That means you have 32 scenes, each roughly 4 or 5 minutes long without a cut. Compare that to say, Transformers or The Bourne Identity, in which you have hundreds of cuts and camera angle changes. Werckmeister just focuses the camera on the people and what they feel. It’s so simple, so beautiful, and completely profound.
This movie almost brought me to tears. It really did. Eventually, you find out that the rioter does, in fact, exist. He consumes the town, and we do see the riots. People run through the town, starting fires and breaking into stores. We see one particular scene in which the rioters break into a nursing home. It’s so heartbreaking.
Anybody who knows a little of European history knows the horrible violence and dread that has caused so much war and pestilence over the years. Europe is a much different place than the United States. They have suffered so much more as a continent, and now as a more unified entity, than we have ever imagined would occur to us. This movie really lets you feel how it might have felt in Bosnia and Serbia, or in WWII Poland.
And of course our protagonist is devastated. His old confidant, whom he has tried to convince to see the whale, finally goes to visit the animal. The square is empty, the townspeople gone. There is nothing left except the whale. The cold, empty, void in the creatures eyes…it is chilling to my soul.
You may not get this movie. It’s poetry on celluloid. I didn’t know what to expect, but Bela Tarr is really a genius. If you are a fan of poetry, allegory, and surrealism, see it. See it now.
98/100
Werckmeister Harmonies (2000), Bela Tarr
This movie is definitely not for everybody. That is for sure. If you can find this, good luck. I got it off of Blockbuster Online, but you won’t be finding it in-store. You’re best finding it on Ebay.
So, this movie explores one of my personal favorite styles- surrealism. The film is in black and white. It revolves around a young, optimistic man in a bleak, boring town in France. He works alongside his family and takes care of an older man who has trouble getting around. His otherwise boring and average world is changed when the circus comes to town.
But this isn’t the average circus. This circus has a whale. That’s right- a huge, dead, stinking whale carcass. It’s kept in a huge trailer that appears to be the only thing actually in the circus. Everybody shows up to see the whale. However, rumors begin to spread that there is a man who possesses the powers to see the future. He rouses crowds and creates riots and debauchery amongst the townspeople.
Our protagonist is such an optimistic and lively young lad. He has a lot to look forward to. The whale and all the excitement mesmerize him, but his neighbors don’t feel the same. One of his neighbors blackmails the older man he takes care of in order to get townspeople to petition against the circus. You never see any of this destruction for most of the movie, and an eerie sense pervades you that something dreadful will go down.
The uniqueness of this rather long (about 2 hours and 20 minutes) film is the length of the shots. The film is made on 32 single takes. That means you have 32 scenes, each roughly 4 or 5 minutes long without a cut. Compare that to say, Transformers or The Bourne Identity, in which you have hundreds of cuts and camera angle changes. Werckmeister just focuses the camera on the people and what they feel. It’s so simple, so beautiful, and completely profound.
This movie almost brought me to tears. It really did. Eventually, you find out that the rioter does, in fact, exist. He consumes the town, and we do see the riots. People run through the town, starting fires and breaking into stores. We see one particular scene in which the rioters break into a nursing home. It’s so heartbreaking.
Anybody who knows a little of European history knows the horrible violence and dread that has caused so much war and pestilence over the years. Europe is a much different place than the United States. They have suffered so much more as a continent, and now as a more unified entity, than we have ever imagined would occur to us. This movie really lets you feel how it might have felt in Bosnia and Serbia, or in WWII Poland.
And of course our protagonist is devastated. His old confidant, whom he has tried to convince to see the whale, finally goes to visit the animal. The square is empty, the townspeople gone. There is nothing left except the whale. The cold, empty, void in the creatures eyes…it is chilling to my soul.
You may not get this movie. It’s poetry on celluloid. I didn’t know what to expect, but Bela Tarr is really a genius. If you are a fan of poetry, allegory, and surrealism, see it. See it now.
98/100
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Pathfinder Review
Once in a while, you get a movie that is so mind bogglingly awesome that you just can't possibly conceive anything greater than it. Raiders of the Lost Ark, Psycho, Chinatown, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Memento...
Pathfinder is NOT that kind of movie.
In fact, it's the most dreadful kind of movie.
OK, lets start off with the basic plot facts. In about 900 A.D., a bunch of Vikings come to America to kick some Native American butt. One of their children gets left behind and is raised by the Indians. 15 years later, more Vikings come and plunder and pillage. This now grown man must become a prophecied hero(The Pathfinder) and defeat the Vikings.
That actually sounds slightly promising. I mean, we do NOT have enough Viking movies out there. But this...this is just terrible.
First off, the plot is actually so poorly excecuted that it barely even resembles a story. We never get a reason behind the Viking's bloodlust. We barely get a "legend" that the hero(played by Karl Urban) is supposed to fulfill. One of the elder Indians just says "You must find your true self" or some similar cliche. We have an extremely shallow love story from another trading tribe of Indians. No background is given for the characters. In fact, there is hardly any dialogue or setup at all. It's just "Here is this guy killing people. That's entertaining, right?" No, it's not entertaining at all.
The camera is atrocious. Please, oh please, tell me why five camera cuts are necessary for one single stabbing motion! it's ridiculous. You cannot tell what is going on in any of the action scenes. Anything remotely interesting is obstructed from your view. There is so much slow motion that it seems like your watching the entire movie IN SLOW MOTION. especially when people fall. Oh, they fall slowly. Very, very slowly. The already boring action scenes are enhanced by a LOT of walking. And some more walking. Then...some more walking. There is a large suspension of disbelief factor. One example: How come the Vikings speak Norse but the Natives speak PERFECT ENGLISH?
It's just a drab movie. Everything looks gray. The grass- gray. The mountains- gray. The people- gray. Everything is either white, gray, or that disgustingly filtered brownish color. Nothing is vivid. The blood is even animated so poorly that it looks like the kool-aid-like goo that spews from characters in "God of War."
And I haven't even gotten to the acting. How on earth could anyone even consider these people actors? We get a few grunts, some talks about destiny, and an ending monologue. That's it. Any time actual words are spoken, however, you actually feel your mind being numbed like somebody dumped a gatorade shower on it. The characters are increasingly stupid. The hero is actually able to convince some Vikings to tie themselves together while crossing a very dangerous cliff. Guess what happens. Hero kills one bad guy, and the rest fall like dominoes.
Not to mention how historically inaccurate the movie is. It's too painful to even go into any amount of detail. I'll just say that it borders on being racist to both Vikings and Native Americans. Both are portrayed in such a dim-witted manner. There is one particular fight scene that must be seen to beleived.
I beg you, do not see this movie. It's about as entertaining and original as a sci-fi channel original. It tries to be an Apocalypto/Braveheart/Last of the Mohicans clone, but has none of the class or the epic scale that those movies have. I give this movie a disheartening and excrutiating
11/100
Pathfinder is NOT that kind of movie.
In fact, it's the most dreadful kind of movie.
OK, lets start off with the basic plot facts. In about 900 A.D., a bunch of Vikings come to America to kick some Native American butt. One of their children gets left behind and is raised by the Indians. 15 years later, more Vikings come and plunder and pillage. This now grown man must become a prophecied hero(The Pathfinder) and defeat the Vikings.
That actually sounds slightly promising. I mean, we do NOT have enough Viking movies out there. But this...this is just terrible.
First off, the plot is actually so poorly excecuted that it barely even resembles a story. We never get a reason behind the Viking's bloodlust. We barely get a "legend" that the hero(played by Karl Urban) is supposed to fulfill. One of the elder Indians just says "You must find your true self" or some similar cliche. We have an extremely shallow love story from another trading tribe of Indians. No background is given for the characters. In fact, there is hardly any dialogue or setup at all. It's just "Here is this guy killing people. That's entertaining, right?" No, it's not entertaining at all.
The camera is atrocious. Please, oh please, tell me why five camera cuts are necessary for one single stabbing motion! it's ridiculous. You cannot tell what is going on in any of the action scenes. Anything remotely interesting is obstructed from your view. There is so much slow motion that it seems like your watching the entire movie IN SLOW MOTION. especially when people fall. Oh, they fall slowly. Very, very slowly. The already boring action scenes are enhanced by a LOT of walking. And some more walking. Then...some more walking. There is a large suspension of disbelief factor. One example: How come the Vikings speak Norse but the Natives speak PERFECT ENGLISH?
It's just a drab movie. Everything looks gray. The grass- gray. The mountains- gray. The people- gray. Everything is either white, gray, or that disgustingly filtered brownish color. Nothing is vivid. The blood is even animated so poorly that it looks like the kool-aid-like goo that spews from characters in "God of War."
And I haven't even gotten to the acting. How on earth could anyone even consider these people actors? We get a few grunts, some talks about destiny, and an ending monologue. That's it. Any time actual words are spoken, however, you actually feel your mind being numbed like somebody dumped a gatorade shower on it. The characters are increasingly stupid. The hero is actually able to convince some Vikings to tie themselves together while crossing a very dangerous cliff. Guess what happens. Hero kills one bad guy, and the rest fall like dominoes.
Not to mention how historically inaccurate the movie is. It's too painful to even go into any amount of detail. I'll just say that it borders on being racist to both Vikings and Native Americans. Both are portrayed in such a dim-witted manner. There is one particular fight scene that must be seen to beleived.
I beg you, do not see this movie. It's about as entertaining and original as a sci-fi channel original. It tries to be an Apocalypto/Braveheart/Last of the Mohicans clone, but has none of the class or the epic scale that those movies have. I give this movie a disheartening and excrutiating
11/100
Cloverfield Review
So, a week ago I saw Cloverfield. Then, I saw it again on Tuesday. That should let you know how much I liked the movie.
The movie had such a huge amoutn of hype surrounding in the middle of last year. That "mysterious trailer" everybody remembers stirred the pot for a seriously huge movie. And I feel it lived up to its hype.
The film centers around a group of partygoers in Manhattan who are thrown into the middle of a monster attack. That's...pretty much it. The film is made from the perspective of a handheld camera one of the characters in holding, creating a realistic (if not occasionally nauseating) viewpoint. I'd say it perfectly captures the hectic and panicked nature of the horrendous violence surrounding them.
The characters act like real people. There are a couple of big cliches, such as the central character's love affair with his college sweetheart and his subsequent selfless rescue mission. Some of the dialoge was overused and occasionally hackneyed, but since when have real people been completely cliche-less? You actually feel for the characters.
The violence in this film is fantastic and the cinematography captures such an amazing amount of breathtaking shots. The visual effects are no less than Oscar-worthy.
One thing this movie does is succeed at what a particular monster/disaster movie failed at. This movie just kept reminding me of the Tom Cruise War of the Worlds, just more focused and entertaining. I really loved Cloverfield. I did not expect it to be so good. One word of advice, however- see it with a crowd or on a huge screen. It wouldn't be a good movie to see on DVD unless you have one of the absolute best home theater systems out there. It's a once in a lifetime experience. Don't wait. See it now.
87/100
The movie had such a huge amoutn of hype surrounding in the middle of last year. That "mysterious trailer" everybody remembers stirred the pot for a seriously huge movie. And I feel it lived up to its hype.
The film centers around a group of partygoers in Manhattan who are thrown into the middle of a monster attack. That's...pretty much it. The film is made from the perspective of a handheld camera one of the characters in holding, creating a realistic (if not occasionally nauseating) viewpoint. I'd say it perfectly captures the hectic and panicked nature of the horrendous violence surrounding them.
The characters act like real people. There are a couple of big cliches, such as the central character's love affair with his college sweetheart and his subsequent selfless rescue mission. Some of the dialoge was overused and occasionally hackneyed, but since when have real people been completely cliche-less? You actually feel for the characters.
The violence in this film is fantastic and the cinematography captures such an amazing amount of breathtaking shots. The visual effects are no less than Oscar-worthy.
One thing this movie does is succeed at what a particular monster/disaster movie failed at. This movie just kept reminding me of the Tom Cruise War of the Worlds, just more focused and entertaining. I really loved Cloverfield. I did not expect it to be so good. One word of advice, however- see it with a crowd or on a huge screen. It wouldn't be a good movie to see on DVD unless you have one of the absolute best home theater systems out there. It's a once in a lifetime experience. Don't wait. See it now.
87/100
The Movies of 2007
So, the list of all the movies seen in 2007 and their ratings:
97- Zodiac
96- The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
95- Gone Baby Gone
94- No Country for Old Men
94- Ratatouille
92- Michael Clayton
91- Juno
90- There Will Be Blood
90- 3:10 to Yuma
88- Eastern Promises
88- Once
87- Planet Terror
87- Hot Fuzz
86- No End In Sight
85- Superbad
84- The Simpson’s Movie
84- 300
81- The Lookout
81- Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
80- Shoot ‘Em Up
79- Beowulf
78- The Orphanage
78- Live Free or Die Hard
76- Rescue Dawn
75- 28 Weeks Later
73- The Host
72- Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
71- Paprika
70- Sunshine
70- Stardust
70- I Am Legend
70- Hot Rod
69- Mr. Brooks
69-The Brave One
67- Hatchet
66- 30 Days of Night
64- Knocked Up
63- Smokin’ Aces
62- 1408
62- Fido
60- Transformers
59- Death Sentence
58- The Invisible
56- The Contract
55- Fracture
52- Resident Evil: Extinction
51- The Number 23
50- National Treasure: Book of Secrets
50- Meet the Robinsons
48- Shooter
43- Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem
40- Evan Almighty
38- Dragon Wars
35- Spider Man 3
33- The Kingdom
32- Primeval
31- Elizabeth: The Golden Age
30- Ghost Rider
24- Death Proof
5- Epic Movie
On a side note, Epic Movie is the worst movie I have ever seen.
97- Zodiac
96- The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
95- Gone Baby Gone
94- No Country for Old Men
94- Ratatouille
92- Michael Clayton
91- Juno
90- There Will Be Blood
90- 3:10 to Yuma
88- Eastern Promises
88- Once
87- Planet Terror
87- Hot Fuzz
86- No End In Sight
85- Superbad
84- The Simpson’s Movie
84- 300
81- The Lookout
81- Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
80- Shoot ‘Em Up
79- Beowulf
78- The Orphanage
78- Live Free or Die Hard
76- Rescue Dawn
75- 28 Weeks Later
73- The Host
72- Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
71- Paprika
70- Sunshine
70- Stardust
70- I Am Legend
70- Hot Rod
69- Mr. Brooks
69-The Brave One
67- Hatchet
66- 30 Days of Night
64- Knocked Up
63- Smokin’ Aces
62- 1408
62- Fido
60- Transformers
59- Death Sentence
58- The Invisible
56- The Contract
55- Fracture
52- Resident Evil: Extinction
51- The Number 23
50- National Treasure: Book of Secrets
50- Meet the Robinsons
48- Shooter
43- Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem
40- Evan Almighty
38- Dragon Wars
35- Spider Man 3
33- The Kingdom
32- Primeval
31- Elizabeth: The Golden Age
30- Ghost Rider
24- Death Proof
5- Epic Movie
On a side note, Epic Movie is the worst movie I have ever seen.
Score System
So, there are an awful lot of score systems out there. There is the standard star system of either four or five stars. There is an "Out of Ten" system rating it on a scale of one to ten. There is a letter grade system from F to A+.
But my system is an out of 100 system. I really like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes, and they both use out of 100 systems to rate movies. So, I shall, too. Here is a breakdown:
100- You won't find any movies getting this score. This is a perfect score. I've never seen a totally perfect movie.
90-99-Absolutely great. Amongst the best of all time. Definitely see in the theatres.
80-89- Pretty dang good. Possibly see it in the theater, definitely buy it on DVD. Probably Top 10 of the Year candidates.
70-79- Good. Entertaining, but not quite a favorite. Rental, possibly ownable on DVD.
60-69- Decent. Had potential, but probably only has limited appeal. Only rent if you are a fan of the particular genre.
50-59- Average. Completely unmemorable in every way imaginable. Only watchable once or twice.
40-49- Below average. Manages to fail at most things but somehow is able to not totally suck.
30-39- Bad. Don't see it. It may have had an inkling of something decent, but has lost all of it.
Below 30- Varying degrees of terrible. Never see anything in this level unless you are paid copius amounts of money, prizes, and/or sex.
There you go. The next post will be a list of all the movies I've seen from 2007 complete with ratings I gave them, just so you know my tastes.
But my system is an out of 100 system. I really like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes, and they both use out of 100 systems to rate movies. So, I shall, too. Here is a breakdown:
100- You won't find any movies getting this score. This is a perfect score. I've never seen a totally perfect movie.
90-99-Absolutely great. Amongst the best of all time. Definitely see in the theatres.
80-89- Pretty dang good. Possibly see it in the theater, definitely buy it on DVD. Probably Top 10 of the Year candidates.
70-79- Good. Entertaining, but not quite a favorite. Rental, possibly ownable on DVD.
60-69- Decent. Had potential, but probably only has limited appeal. Only rent if you are a fan of the particular genre.
50-59- Average. Completely unmemorable in every way imaginable. Only watchable once or twice.
40-49- Below average. Manages to fail at most things but somehow is able to not totally suck.
30-39- Bad. Don't see it. It may have had an inkling of something decent, but has lost all of it.
Below 30- Varying degrees of terrible. Never see anything in this level unless you are paid copius amounts of money, prizes, and/or sex.
There you go. The next post will be a list of all the movies I've seen from 2007 complete with ratings I gave them, just so you know my tastes.
The Beginning of a New Habit
This blog shall be my baby. This will be my attempt to legitimize myself as a film lover and possibly increase my chances of one day becoming a full-fledged film writer (be it in either history, criticism, or even in writing screenplays).
My name is Shane Plyler, and I love movies. Yes, that is a picture of me up there. To give a little background about myself, I am an 18-year-old college student currently working towards my degree in journalism. That's really all you need to know right now. I'll give an update later detailing my scoring system and my favorite filmmakers/films. I will be updating this blog daily with reviews. They may be old reviews, new reviews, or maybe just a list cataloguing my favorites in something. Maybe I'll write opinion pieces. I don't know. We'll see.
My name is Shane Plyler, and I love movies. Yes, that is a picture of me up there. To give a little background about myself, I am an 18-year-old college student currently working towards my degree in journalism. That's really all you need to know right now. I'll give an update later detailing my scoring system and my favorite filmmakers/films. I will be updating this blog daily with reviews. They may be old reviews, new reviews, or maybe just a list cataloguing my favorites in something. Maybe I'll write opinion pieces. I don't know. We'll see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
