Tag Archives: 3.5/5 stars

Mini Review: Sex and the City 2

SEX AND THE CITY 2 (In Theaters)

It’s been 2 years since Carrie married Big in Sex and the City movie #1, but things haven’t changed too much: Carrie and Big have moved to a more modest apartment, Charlotte is dealing with her new daughter Rose’s “terrible two’s,” Samantha is menopausal but still manages to get more action than any woman on the block, and Miranda is still a busy lawyer / mom / wife.  But when Carrie’s relationship is getting tough, Miranda quits her job, and Charlotte is worried her husband is cheating on her with the nanny, Samantha score an all-expenses-paid vacation to Abu Dhabi for the girls… but that’s just where the drama starts.

2010, Starring Sarah Jessica Parker, Kristen Davis, Cynthia Nixon and Kim Cattrall

It’s a Sequel to a Sequel, What Else Can You Expect?

As a film major it seems almost sacrilegious to write a review of Sex and the City 2, but hey, I’m a girl, and I’m obsessed with the show.  The first movie had its rocky moments but overall, it was a great addition to an amazing 6 season series.  This movie definitely has its merits– if you’re a fan– but it has its disappointments.

First off, let’s start with the fashion– what the hell happened?  I’m not sure if the wardrobe lady’s tastes changed as she got older, but on the whole, the glamorous outfits you expect from the show just weren’t there.  Let’s compare:

First SATC movie

It’s designer, but a total “meh,” and let’s not forget– this is one of the times she looked her BEST in the movie.

Okay, so the fashion was a bummer.  Another disappointment to me was that the movie was very 4-girl-centric.  Where are all the men in this movie?  You see Big a bit in the beginning and end, but I’m pretty sure that Steve and Harry don’t even have lines in the movie.  One of the things I loved about the first SATC movie was that they really developed the relationships between the women and their husbands… not the case at all with SATC2.  There is, however, an awkward encounter with fan-favorite lover Aiden– but Carrie’s married now– how much can happen?

Regardless, if you’re a SATC fan, you’ll definitely enjoy this movie.  It’s nice to see that several years later, all of our favorite characters are still alive and well.  There are some great conversations between Miranda and Charlotte about life after marriage, and you realize that the girls have finally grown up and gone from single territory to “desperate housewives” territory.  So, while you can still expect the same from them, their challenges have changed.  Instead of what to do about a guy who’s bad in bed, it’s now what to do when your two year-old throws tantrums every five seconds.  It’s kind of fun to see that they’ve grown up (well, maybe not Samantha), because how long can you really be on the man hunt?

With the relatively disappointing box office revenues so far and the fact that the girls are pushing 50 and 60 respectively in real life (they look so amazing for their age!), I really doubt there will be a 3rd movie.  While it can’t hold up to its predecessors, it’s a fun reunion.

Bottom Line: It can’t compare to it’s 5 star TV original or the previous 4 star movie, but if you like Sex and the City, you’ll be glad to have another chance to hang out with the girls.  3.5/5 stars.

Mini Review: The Persuaders

THE PERSUADERS (PBS FRONTLINE) (On DVD)

The tag describes it perfectly– what’s going on in the world of today’s marketers and advertisers?  Made in 2004, this documentary is still 100% relevant in the world of the “persuaders” and discusses such modern campaigns as the revolutionary iPod ads and the way Bush and Kerry used advertising and “narrowcasting” in their 2004 campaigns.

2004, Made for PBS Frontline

The Real “Mad Men”

When I mentioned this documentary to a friend he said, “if you’re interested in that you should watch Mad Men!”  Mad Men, an award-winning nighttime drama deals with the advertising world of the 1960s.  This documentary deals with famous ad campaigns and ad companies of the late 1990s and early 2000s.

About an hour into this documentary, I remembered that I had seen it in 2004 and that I was, at the time, fascinated by the Acxiom corporation and the way in which they collect information about every person in this country and their consuming habits for further advertising use.  Six years later, this documentary is still very relevant and makes the viewer want to know more about recent political advertising campaigns (especially Obama v. McCain).

Though Persuaders doesn’t have the pizzazz of a Michael Moore documentary (it’s dry and PBS-like, as to be expected), it is very interesting and deals with campaigns that you will recognize and have an opinion about, making it all the more interesting.

Bottom Line: Though sometimes slow, Persuaders deals with an interesting subject and relatively recent/popular ads.  3.5/5 stars.

Lightning Round: Lost in La Mancha

LOST IN LA MANCHA (On DVD)

A hilarious documentary about Terry Gilliam’s totally disastrous attempt to make a Don Quixote movie.  After floods, military bomb testing, serious actor injuries and many other “acts of God,” the movie was abandoned and everything was turned over to the insurance companies.  (2002)

My film teacher Bill always says that it’s amazing any movies even get made because so many things can go wrong.  This film was the epitome of that theory.  Watching the documentary is probably far more amusing than watching the movie could ever be– had it not been completely abandoned and turned over to the insurance companies.  The film was a disaster from the get-go– Gilliam was forced to shoot in Europe significantly under-budget.  When he gets to his sound-stages, he finds out that they are actually warehouses that you cannot record sound in.  He learns that the Spanish military is doing bomb testing right next to his shoot.  Despite good weather reports, the crew is completely flooded out in a remote location where they cannot protect themselves or the equipment… on day one of shooting.  The main actor who has spent 7 months learning English for the film is injured riding is hours on day two.  Production is over before a week even passes.  It is interesting to note, however, that Terry Gilliam is apparently in the process of attempt #2 with this film.  Hopefully it is better planned and there aren’t any crazy accidents this time.

Bottom Line: If you’re interested in the process of filmmaking, this is certainly an interesting, hilarious and often painful movie to watch.  3.5/5 stars

Mini Reviews: The Hurt Locker

THE HURT LOCKER (in theaters and on DVD)

An American bomb squad in the modern Iraq war must protect their fellow soldiers, civilians and themselves from the danger of unexploded bombs.

2009, Starring Jeremy Renner, Ralph Fiennes and Guy Pearce, nominated for 9 Oscars and 3 Golden Globes

Badass War Movie– but not for me

You may not have heard of The Hurt Locker until this weekend, when Kathryn Bigelow became the first woman to win the prestigious Director’s Guild of America award, but this movie is slowly taking America– and the Oscars– by storm.

Let’s just say up front that I am not a war movie girl.  War movies bore the hell out of me, with a few exceptions– Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, Saving Private Ryan and yes, I admit it, Pearl Harbor (who can resist Ben Affleck, really?).  But, in spite of the fact that I don’t like war movies, I can recognize that The Hurt Locker is a good one.  Probably one of the best movies we’ve seen about the current war.  James Cameron called The Hurt Locker the Platoon of our time, but after watching this movie, I think he was too quick to judge.  For me the biggest problem with watching The Hurt Locker is that I simply don’t know enough to understand it fully.  I’m a news junkie– I read Time, The Week, sometimes Newsweek; I check BBC, CNN and the Huffington Post online each day.  But I still don’t understand what the hell is going on over there.  Maybe that’s why I have a better appreciation for WWII and Vietnam war movies– I’ve studied them extensively in school so I have an appreciation for small events in a greater context, I know who the major players were, and I understand the historical and cultural implications of the respective wars.  For this reason, I think The Hurt Locker was mostly lost on me.  I just don’t know enough to be able to appreciate it.

That being said, however, the movie was definitely good.  All the elements were in place.  Jeremy Renner’s character is the lucrative type in war movies– the one guy who never follows orders will always get himself into sticky situations, and that’s just what an audience craves.  The shaky documentary style of shooting often made me seasick, but for the circumstances, it was probably a good choice.  If you want to see a film that actually used slow motion well and for a reason (unlike 99% of the movies that come out these days: New Moon- cough cough), go see The Hurt Locker. There are some absolutely stunning shots of stuff blowing up in slow motion.

I do agree that The Hurt Locker deserves it’s 9 Oscar nominations, but as far as I’m concerned, it just isn’t good enough compared to its competitors.  Jeremy Renner was a great choice for the movie, but can he beat Morgan Freeman, Jeff Bridges, Colin Firth or George Clooney?  Maybe not.  There were some great shots in the movie, but they definitely weren’t better than in Avatar or Inglorious Basterds.  I may eat my words later, but I really think the only categories in which The Hurt Locker is legitimately competitive are editing and sound.  Apocalypse Now, my favorite war movie, is known for an absurd ratio of actual footage shot to footage that ended up in the final movie.  The Hurt Locker surpasses this with a 100:1 ratio.  For every one hour of screen time in the film, 100 hours were shot.  It takes a good editor to rummage through all that footage and create a cohesive movie.

Anyway, as a film major I can break The Hurt Locker down into its elements and say why it is well done, but in the end, it just wasn’t the movie for me.  My train of thought while watching this movie was something like “Oh my god! I hope he doesn’t blow up! … That’s a cool shot… I wonder what time Lost is on tonight?… I’m sure glad I wasn’t filming the desert… has it really only been 4 minutes since I last checked Facebook?”  In essence, it didn’t hold my attention.  Great movie, but not for me.

Bottom Line: Good idea, good characters, good cinematography, good editing, good sound design, good directing, good acting– but not for me.  But if you’re a war movie junkie, this movie is pretty badass.  3.5/5 stars.

Mini Reviews: A Single Man

A SINGLE MAN (in theaters)

A day in the life of a man who’s mind is filled with memories of his partner, who was killed in a car crash.

2009, Starring Colin Firth and Julianne Moore, nominated for an Oscar and 3 Golden Globes.

Visual and Auditory Delight

If you’ve seen the trailer for A Single Man, you probably have no idea what it’s about.  When the movie was over, you’ve learned little more, but you’ve had the combined experience of going to an amazing photography exhibit and a really great concert.  To me, watching A Single Man was more like see a really great hour-long music video.  It was beautiful and lush, but the plot and the characters were shallow and mostly undeveloped.

The problem with A Single Man is that the plot is just not engaging enough.  It’s a powerful idea– everywhere he goes, everything he sees and everything he does sparks memories of his dead partner.  Will he kill himself?  Will he make it through the day?  But the movie is a slow one and in spite of how powerful the topic is, I’m guessing the general American audience just doesn’t have the attention span for it.

That being said, I loved watching this movie.  It was visually and musically stunning, but I imagine if I don’t have background in cinematography or years of musical experience like I do, this movie would be a total wash, because its genius is much more subtle than something like Avatar.  To some extent, you have to know how hard it is to do something to appreciate how beautiful it really is.

If you’re a cinematography lover, see this on the big screen.  Otherwise, throw it in the Netflix queue and wait for DVD.  If you are a classical music lover, buy this soundtrack, even if you haven’t seen the movie.  It’s so beautiful.  I can’t even believe it wasn’t nominated for an Oscar.

Bottom Line: If you have an eye for art or an ear for music, you’ll find something in this film.  Otherwise, it’s a very predictable, drawn out story of a man on the edge.  3.5/5 stars on the whole, 5/5 stars for cinematography and music.

Mini Reviews: Up in the Air

UP IN THE AIR (in theaters)

In the down economy, a suave businessman is hired to travel across the country and fire people for bosses who don’t want to get their hands dirty.  A young college grad develops a program to fire people over the internet and he must take her on the road to show her the importance of doing his work in person.

2009, Starring George Clooney, nominated for 6 Golden Globes

Up in the Air

Of all the movies released this year, it seems that no other is more timely or depressingly appropriate than Up In the Air. A story of sad economic times, this movie deals with the reality of the American job market from an interesting perspective: the 3rd party “termination specialist.”  However, one truly unique aspect of the film is that we also get the perspective of many non-actors who have recently been laid off.  Non-actors were hired to speak into the camera as if they were speaking to the person who fired them, which provides a genuine, very powerful response to Clooney’s straight-talking antics.

Clooney has been getting quite the press for his performance, but I was only mildly impressed.  I’m dying for George to choose a daring role for once—one that challenges his acting skills.  These days, it seems that his roles can be divided into two very predictable categories: neurotic, “comedy George” (Burn After Reading, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, Men Who Stare at Goats) or smooth-talking, intelligent “businessman George” (Michael Clayton, Up in the Air, Oceans 11/12/13).  Don’t get me wrong, I love George Clooney, but I feel like I’ve seen this act before and I’m ready for something new.

However, the two female leads were particularly impressive and definitely deserve their nominations.  Vera Farmiga’s portrayal of a beautiful middle-aged traveler ready to settle is an interesting contrast to Anna Kendrick’s portrayal of a 23 year-old entrepreneur who is determined to find the perfect man, the perfect job, the perfect life and the perfect solution to every answer.

Bottom Line: Up in the Air is a movie that makes you think.  I was slightly disappointed because I had too high of expectations coming into this movie, but it is a genuinely good film, and one of the best of the year.  3.5/5 stars