blog.wddjr.com

So how does a broody Vietnam vet with a long-term case of post-traumatic stress disorder keep busy in the backwaters of Thailand for 20 years between Rambo III and the sequel called just plain Rambo? Judging from the appearance of Sylvester Stallone, who co-wrote, directed, and stars in the hell-with-it-all bloody fourth run of the stomping action franchise, John James Rambo at 61 has kept fit via a regular regimen of wrangling poisonous snakes, running a longboat, and keeping his head bandannas clean. Unfortunately, that quiet life is interrupted by a party of howlingly naïve Christian missionaries and medics from Colorado who request Rambo’s navigational services. The do-gooders are headed upriver to assist ethnic Karen refugees in Burma (apparently no one’s told Rambo that the country’s called Myanmar now), underdogs who have been fighting a brutal civil war with the ruling military junta for 60 years. The fools have chosen a profoundly dangerous route, of course, as befits any war pic involving the word ”upriver.” It’s a given that Rambo will initially say no, followed by grrr. Also a given is the capture of the hapless missionaries, the arrival of a search party of colorful mercenaries, and Rambo’s mournful decision to blow all of Burma to hell to rescue the hopeless lot of them — mercenaries and missionaries alike. Baby-stabbing, decapitation, gang rape, and rivers of blood: Rambo is up to its boot tops in numbing violence. The brutality, tough enough to take, would be intolerable if Stallone didn’t toss the movie like a cant-clearing grenade at notions of stay-the-course righteousness. Rambo teaches that fighting sucks, good intentions can be futile, and coalitions of the willing are a charade: A man’s got to do what a man’s got to do. Sometimes that means tying on the old bandanna to hack one’s way out of the Hollywood jungle so disorienting to aging action stars. I apologize for the lengthy plaigerized review out of EW, but this was actually a great movie. EW even gave it a B-. I haven’t seen this many flying body parts since the introduction to Saving Private Ryan. It’s the typical Rambo movie we have all come to know and love and don’t worry about the dialog from Stallone – he may have uttered 10 words during the whole movie. One can only hope for another sequel to this. It is certainly a franchise that to me is better than Freddie Krueger.

An enormous treasure of diamonds, rubies, and emeralds is at the bottom of the ocean, and the recently split-up couple Tess and Ben Finnegan (Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson) think they know where it is. Doing research in a dark and cavernous room provides just the spice they need to hook up again. This is a quasi love story that takes snippets from National Treasure and the old Goldie Hawn movie, Overboard. Anyway, since the plot is basically the same as National Treasure regarding clues and finding lots of gold with the bad guys on your heels, my guess is that the producers and director figured they would sell he movie with Matthew MCConaughey running around most of the time barefooted, in shorts, and no shirt. Go figure. The movie has its bit of love-hate humor between the divorced couple who, of course, get back together in the end. It’s always good to have some villian chasing you when you are looking for a treasure as well. Watchable, but matinee fodder only. Better still, wait til you can get it from NetFlix or RedBox.

This is saw with technology. Someone is snatching people and killing them on the internet. The gimmick is that whatever cruel methodology is used for each of the killings makes it faster as more and more people log in to see it. I am always amazed at the gruesome ways that can be devised to mutilate, maim, and kill people in movies. Anyway, the cybercrime division, most of whose activity was focused on sex offenders picks up on this one. One of their own, who was figured out the possible killer and motive gets his in a tank of acid. Diane Lane, who is the obvious single mom heroine gets kidnapped and is supposed to be the next victim, but all works well in the end and the cyber killer gets his just deserts. Watchable, relatively predictable, mindless, sufficient gratuitous gore, although another couple of victims would have been good. Not for the timid.

Cloverfield, a surreptitiously subversive, stylistically clever little gem of an entertainment disguised, under its deadpan-neutral title, as a dumb Gen-YouTube monster movie, makes the convincingly chilling argument that the world will end — or, at least, Manhattan will crumble — with a bang and a whimper. The bang part, as millions who have seen the trailer already know, is supplied by the…thing…that arises on an otherwise peaceful May night to wreak destruction on New York City: He (She? It?) swats at skyscrapers and smashes NYC landmarks, abetted by tentacled mini-monsters that lunge directly at humans like voracious paparazzi. And when the military arrives to fight back, let’s just say the troops opt for the all-out surge approach. The movie is not for the weak of stomach – not from excessive gore – but from the “blair witch” concept of filming using a single hand-held camera. Once you get over the initial shock of the cinematography it is about 84 minutes of interesting action. The movie ends with you figuring that probably even the hero and heroine wind up dying; however, my guess is that since it had a decent box office showing that either they will be rescued or at least the video they were filming when son or daughter of whatever the monster was decides to take revenge on Manhattan after it’s rebuilt decades later. With the caveat of the unsettling cinematography, there are certainly worse things you could do with an hour and 20 minutes.

Based on the Steven Gould novel, Jumper follows a young man from a broken home who discovers that he has the ability to teleport. In his quest for the man he believes is responsible for the death of his mother, the kid draws the attention of the National Security Agency and another kid with the same abilities. It’s an interesting premise teleporting without any kind of machine to do it. It’s an ok movie for a matinee if you can stand Hayden Christensen who still can’t act.

Charlie Wilson’s War is a movie adaptation of the true story about Democratic Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson, who conspired with a rogue CIA operative named Gust Avrakotos to launch an operation to help the Afghan mujahideen following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The film is adapted from George Crile’s 2003 book Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History. Urged on by his staunchly anti-communist friend and romantic interest, Joanne Herring, Wilson helps lead the effort to provide United States aid to the mujahideen. In the process, the film also reveals Wilson as a Congressman whose disdain for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan is supplemented by his gregarious social life of women and partying. U.S. support for the mujahideen ultimately evolved into a policy known as the Reagan Doctrine, under which the U.S. assisted the mujahideen and other anti-communist resistance movements around the world. Controversial at the time, some now credit the policy with contributing to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union and global communism, bringing about the end of the Cold War. This was an interesting cast. Tom Hanks provided one of his better performances as of late except for his hideous attempt at a Texas accent. Julia Roberts, also with a bad Texas accent, actually looked pretty good and it seemed that her lips had been deflated a bit giving her a normal mouth appearance. She was well cast in her part and is at least deserving of a nomination for something. Phillip Seymour Hoffman gave a brilliant performace, again demonstrating that even trolls can act. He is certainly one of the few actors that could play Shrek without makeup. I think he is underestimated as an actor even if you can’t stand his looks. I think Tom Hanks is looking for a good part. I personally feel he hasn’t done anything of merit since Perdition. Ladykillers was a bust, obviously a tax write off. He was a bumbling buffoon in The Da Vinci Code. Of course that movie was equally sluggish. If they were going to make a movie of a Dan Brown book, they should have chosen Angels and Demons. It had many more puzzles to solve, a lot more action, and significantly more killing. Anyway, this movie personified what our Congress is all about and should make you appreciate how much money is saved when they are in gridlock. It also makes you appreciate that in that every once in a while when one of our congressional bozos actually has something worthwhile, that maybe some good can actually come from it. This was a good movie. Entertaining. However, it is not the fodder that should feed Oscar nominations (with the exception of Hoffman). Don’t miss this one on the big screen.

Charlie Wilson’s War is a movie adaptation of the true story about Democratic Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson, who conspired with a rogue CIA operative named Gust Avrakotos to launch an operation to help the Afghan mujahideen following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The film is adapted from George Crile’s 2003 book Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History. Urged on by his staunchly anti-communist friend and romantic interest, Joanne Herring, Wilson helps lead the effort to provide United States aid to the mujahideen. In the process, the film also reveals Wilson as a Congressman whose disdain for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan is supplemented by his gregarious social life of women and partying. U.S. support for the mujahideen ultimately evolved into a policy known as the Reagan Doctrine, under which the U.S. assisted the mujahideen and other anti-communist resistance movements around the world. Controversial at the time, some now credit the policy with contributing to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union and global communism, bringing about the end of the Cold War. This was an interesting cast. Tom Hanks provided one of his better performances as of late except for his hideous attempt at a Texas accent. Julia Roberts, also with a bad Texas accent, actually looked pretty good and it seemed that her lips had been deflated a bit giving her a normal mouth appearance. She was well cast in her part and is at least deserving of a nomination for something. Phillip Seymour Hoffman gave a brilliant performace, again demonstrating that even trolls can act. He is certainly one of the few actors that could play Shrek without makeup. I think he is underestimated as an actor even if you can’t stand his looks. I think Tom Hanks is looking for a good part. I personally feel he hasn’t done anything of merit since Perdition. Ladykillers was a bust, obviously a tax write off. He was a bumbling buffoon in The Da Vinci Code. Of course that movie was equally sluggish. If they were going to make a movie of a Dan Brown book, they should have chosen Angels and Demons. It had many more puzzles to solve, a lot more action, and significantly more killing. Anyway, this movie personified what our Congress is all about and should make you appreciate how much money is saved when they are in gridlock. It also makes you appreciate that in that every once in a while when one of our congressional bozos actually has something worthwhile, that maybe some good can actually come from it. This was a good movie. Entertaining. However, it is not the fodder that should feed Oscar nominations (with the exception of Hoffman). Don’t miss this one on the big screen.

Atonement is a novel by British writer Ian McEwan. It is widely regarded as one of McEwan’s best works and was shortlisted for the 2001 Booker Prize for fiction, an award he had already won for his previous novel Amsterdam. In addition, Time magazine named it the best fiction novel of the year and included it in its All-TIME 100 Greatest Novels, and The Observer cites it as one of the 100 best novels written. A synopsis of the novel can be found in the Wikipedia so I will not pursue that here. The movie is an acceptable adaptation of the novel. You hate the right characters and love the right ones. I am not a fan of James McAvoy and his performance is much better here than in The Last King of Scotland. He also has a better haircut. Unfortunately Briony, in my opinion, never gets her just deserts for what she did, the fact that she has had to lead a long life and to live with what she did to two other lives gives a bit of satisfaction. Her feeble attempt to give those she wronged some happiness through the fiction in her novel cannot repay the damage a jealous, stupid, spiteful, arrogant, and holier-than-th0u sibling did. A bit of a period piece. Takes considerable time to develop the plot, but does move relatively well and the flashbacks, flashforwards, and fiction vs reality snipets demostrate considerable expertise in direction. Decent cinematography.

The Predator scout ship from the first AVP movie crash lands in a Colorado town after being taken over by the Pred-Alien that was spawned at the end of the first movie. The Aliens on board escape while all Predators are killed. A Predator from the Predator home world becomes aware of the crash and embarks alone on a mission to destroy all the Aliens. Meanwhile the townspeople are helplessly caught in the middle of the face-off between these two alien races. The situation escalates, leading to the military dropping a nuclear bomb on the town, killing all humans and presumably all aliens. The few human survivors, who made a narrow escape in a helicopter, deliver a captured Predator weapon to the military. I find it interesting that they release this movie on Christmas Day. What was more surprising, the theater was packed for the first matinee (11:45 am). And it wasn’t all children. It was the opportunity of a lifetime for the Alien creatures – an endless supply of humans. Even children and infants weren’t spared in this one. Unfortunately there weren’t enough Predators and the proliferation of Aliens exceeded that of rabbits. There wasn’t a “big momma” in this one. However, there were enough mid-size models running around to make this one a real chest popfest. Not a super plot but you wouldn’t go to this movie expecting one. Actually there hasn’t been a version of this to top the original 1979 Alien. However, it was 84 minutes of gory mindless entertainment and was a good stress releiver to all the holiday stuff. My guess is that Alien and Predator will have a long and prosperous existence much like Freddy and Jason.

It’s a simple exercise. Make a list of all the things you want to do in your life, big experiences, noble goals, altruistic urges. From peering into the Grand Canyon to learning a foreign language to dating a cheerleader. This is what you will squeeze in before you “kick the bucket.” Needless to say, that list will change, maybe take on a certain urgency, if you learn you have a terminal illness. What’s the old adage? “Nothing focuses the mind like the knowledge of impending death.” That’s the premise of Rob Reiner’s engaging but well-worn comedy The Bucket List. Pair up a healthcare mogul and a working-class mechanic in a hospital room, tell them they have months to live and let them work out a list together. The rich guy will pay for it. The mechanic-philosopher will fill in the blanks, provide “meaning.” Jack Nicholson devours the scenery as hospital magnate Edward Cole. Morgan Freeman is Carter Chambers, a guy who has had a real life, just not a lot of fun in it. They are two cancer patients thrown together who decide to make their last months memorable, at least to themselves. Theirs is a reluctant partnership. They have little in common. The rich guy is a loner, a bon vivant, a jerk who intentionally gets people’s names wrong just to put them in their place. The mechanic is a kindly Jeopardy! fanatic, a reader, with a wife and grown children who love him. One has sacrificed family for a lifestyle and gathering wealth; the other has given up himself for his family. This movie is formularic. Of course, if one of the participants wasn’t as rich as Cresus the movie wouldn’t work. However, if you overanalyze, then you will miss the point. The movie has its moments of schmaltz but that’s what makes you feel so good in the end. I class this move with “The Ultimate Gift” and “August Rush.” Unrealistic but with a moral lesson that is very important if you don’t try to over psychoanalyze the movie or expect it to be really realistic. “The Bucket List” got mixed reviews and overall got ok reviews by critics and mostly about 8/10 by viewers. I highly recommend this movie if you promise to look at it as a type of life lesson you can come away with. I think the main point is that you shouldn’t let your life get so busy that you can’t find a little joy every now and then. Well worth the price of admission, even if you have to pay full price.