Just to get this out of the way, I haven't read the book, so there will be no comparisons or anything like that. This is a movie review. I can barely read in the first place. On a related note, I talked to a couple after seeing The Martian that was all too happy to tell everyone within earshot that Andy Weir was his cousin. I had to fight every fiber of my being to respond, "Who's that?" Seriously though, The Martian is the kind of movie that makes you want to read the book.
The Martian doesn't waste any time. Mark Watney (Matt Damon) is stranded on Mars in the opening moments of the film. Since that's the whole premise of the film, might as well get it out of the way, right? No sense in building that up for 30 minutes when the trailer reveals this. Watney must figure out a way to make his supplies last and contact home. As said in the film, he sciences the shit out of it.
It made me happy to see a film where everyone is smart. Hell, the main character of the film is an astronaut-botanist. How geeky is that? Matt Damon might be the main character, but the hero of The Martian is Science. Anything that gets people interested in outer space and celebrates Science is already winning my book. Doesn't hurt when Neil deGrasse Tyson tweets that The Martian got "crucial science right." He did also say that it's still fantasy, but some of those comments seemed to in jest.
It's a testament to Matt Damon's acting and charisma that The Martian stays entertaining even when watching long stretches of just talking to himself, or doing repetitive tasks. Like many stranded films, it can be hard or tedious to watch a guy struggling to survive if you don't like the actor or can't root for the character.
The Martian is a good example of a great cast that isn't wasted. They exist in the Goldilocks zone where everyone's screentime and performances are just right. It's is also very funny with a lot of sharp dialog. I didn't realize Drew Goddard (The Cabin in the Woods) wrote the screenplay, so perhaps its humor shouldn't have surprised me as much. The script also does a good job of explaining everything just enough that it's not too complicated, so nobody will get lost. It's not bogged down with jargon or techno-babble.
I'm glad to see Ridley Scott knock one out of the park again. Feels like it's been a good decade since he really nailed a film, so it's nice to see him return to form. I was worried that he might have totally lost it
Funny, thrilling, and best of all, smart, The Martian hits on cylinders. This is one of the most entertaining films of the year, and you don't need to be a fan of the book to enjoy it. It's a must see!
5 (out of 5) Death Stars
Showing posts with label Kristen Wiig. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kristen Wiig. Show all posts
Friday, October 2, 2015
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is brought to you by Papa John's, eHarmony and Cinnabon. I've never had huge problem with product placement in a film, and I understand the need for it. In some films it can actually help sell the setting when you see businesses and brands that are common. "Oh, this is taking place in our world." Then there are times where it's just so in your face that it becomes distracting or takes you out of the film. In one particular scene Walter Mitty and eHarmony Customer Service Rep Todd (yes, an actual character in the film played by Patton Oswalt) are scarfing down some Cinnabon while commenting about how great it is and it's sex/drug like qualities or something to that effect. Earlier on, they make a point to have Walter say his first job at 17 was at a Papa John's. This is interesting since Papa John's was founded in 1984, which if Walter was the same age as Ben Stiller's actual age, the earliest he could have got a job there was at 19. However, I'll allow them that Walter Mitty could have been in his early 40's rather than pushing 50.
I'd have an easier time with this kind product placement if the companies featured weren't so awful. Cinnabon can barely be called food, and Papa John's is one of the worst pizza chains around. Don't get me started on eHarmony. When I was on eHarmony there wasn't any wink functionality (it's actually called "Send a Smile" now). In fact, eHarmony didn't even give you the ability to browse users. I suppose their customer service policy has changed as well, as eHarmony service reps will call you at any time to help you out. I'm sure much has changed since I last wasted my time there though. I'm was just surprised with such an overbearing presence that they got little details like this wrong. Oh, and if it's not clear, I really dislike online dating. I did it for a lot longer than I should have and found it to be a giant waste of time, but that's a conversation for another time and place.
Anyway, if you're still reading after another one of my tangential rants, then I thank you for your patience. Based on what I've written so far, you're probably thinking I really didn't like The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, but I probably liked it more that most considering all of the mixed and negative things I've heard about it. Then again, you know how it is going in with really lowered expectations.
When Walter Mitty (Ben Stiller) zones out, wild fantasies play out in his head. In the real world, Walter is a pretty shy person that knows how little he's done with his life. He's not a complete loser, working a good job at Life Magazine for 16 years, but that's in jeopardy now that Life has been bought out by a company that intends on turning it into an online magazine. They have the privilege or publishing the final issue, and are expecting the cover photo to be provided by ace photojournalist Sean O'Connell (Sean Penn), but this photo seems to have gone missing. Walter needs to find it asap or it's going to cost him his job. Using clues from other recent photos, Walter sets out to track down Sean and recover the photo.
In essence, we have a story about a guy that daydreams of doing amazing things that finally gets an amazing adventure of his own. While some of Walter daydreams were interesting to watch, they weren't grounded in any kind of reality, and some felt like they were done more for laughs. Walter's real adventure was much more engaging and inspiring.
It is also a gorgeous looking film, and a lot of it is due to the Earth's natural beauty. I thought the visual effects were a little rough in a few parts, like a bad looking great white shark (and I'm pretty sure white sharks don't migrate that far north). However, it's the kind of film where I can forgive some lackluster CG due to the rest of it looking so good.
Unfortunately, as we get towards the end some pretty glaring plot hole and consistency issues arise. You may want to skip ahead to the next paragraph if you want to avoid anything spoiler-ish. Throughout the story, I thought the whole missing photo was set up intentionally by Sean to get Walter out of his head and out in the real world, like a final gift to him. Instead, it turns out to be a misunderstanding that makes you smack your forehead with it's simplicity. A lot of trouble could have been saved if Walter had just been thorough with a particular item. Another issue arises when the final image is revealed. When you see that image, you'll wonder why Sean didn't recognize Walter when they meet. Was he playing dumb? Was Sean also not able to piece it together? Plus there are also some issues with time and distance in respect to Sean and his photos. Finally, calls are made by people without regards to timezone or location when you'd think they'd likely be asleep. It all makes the ending feel a little too forced and tidy rather than have the emotional payoff it could have had.
I liked Ben Stiller's performance though, and I tend to forget he's a capable actor when forced to something dramatic. While I get a little tired of when he plays these meek, ineffectual types, it worked well for the type of person Walter was and to show some growth. As much as I love Kristen Wiig, she's really underutilized and there's just not that much to her character. One of the interesting things about Adam Scott, other than sporting one of the oddest looking fake beards I've seen, is that he's pretty convincing being able to play a nice, affable guy on something like Parks and Recreation and then pulling off a character like he does here where you want to him get hit by a bus. I would have liked seeing a little more of a dynamic between his character and Walter, but he's not much more than a one-dimensional bully.
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is an ambitious, mixed bag of a film. There are some great visuals and nice messages about getting out there and living life, but ultimately there's not much to connect to and some plot issues that were a little too messy for my tastes. It's still a pleasant enough family film that makes for a decent matinee or something to rent.
3 (out of 5) Death Stars
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues (2013)
Has it really been nine years since Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy? I have to give them credit for not rushing a cash-grab sequel out immediately after. Believe it not, I actually didn't like Anchorman all that much the first time I saw it. I can only remember laughing once or twice in the theater, but a lot of that was due to my mood (and being on a bad date). It wasn't until I watched it a second time that I really started to love it. I think that's the case with a lot of comedies though. With so much time passing between films, can Anchorman 2 live up to the expectations? Let's see...
Since Anchorman, Ron (Will Ferrell) and Veronica (Christina Applegate) have moved to New York and are anchoring a weekend news show. Their boss and legendary reporter, Mack Harken (Harrison Ford), offers Veronica a promotion while firing Ron. As you'd expect, this doesn't have a good outcome for their relationship and Ron dives into another tailspin. Eventually he's offered a job by Freddie Shapp (Dylan Baker), who offers him a job at the Global News Network, which is trying to become the first 24-hour news network. Ron assembles his old news team, and they head back to New York. There's not much more to the plot than that, and it can be kind of a mess at times. In fact, much of the story feels like a remix of the first, hitting many of the same beats. Let's be honest though, is anyone watching Anchorman 2 for the plot? We all just want to laugh, right?
Anchorman 2 is a little rough in the opening minutes. Many of the jokes were landing with a thud, and I was concerned they were trying too hard. I've said this before, but it's really hard to recapture that same lightning in the bottle, especially where comedy is concerned. Fortunately after it settles in, there are plenty of good laughs to be had. Having said that, there are a few gags that go nowhere or outright don't work, and more than a few times, they are basically recycling a joke from the first. They can't be all gems though, and I was pleased that some of the better laughs weren't spoiled by the trailer, so if you're concerned about that you should rest a little easier going in. Another thing that you'll notice is that this installment isn't quite as quotable as the first, although subsequent views once this hits blu-ray may prove otherwise. I still think Anchorman will be the winner in that category though.
It's all the same silly stuff you've come to expect from Will Ferrell and Adam McKay. So, if you're not a fan of the overgrown, man-child act, then this is likely not going to be for you. Will Ferrell portrays Ron again with the same over-the-top buffoonery, but he might have dialed it up to 11 this time. If you're a Champ (David Koechner) fan, he seemed to take a back seat, as well as Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), who played more of a voice of reason this time around. As much as this is Will Ferrell's show though, you'll likely notice there's a lot more of Brick (Steve Carell). He has an oddly sweet, but funny, courtship with Chani (Kristen Wiig). I can only describe it as watching monkeys learn how to use tools.
There are lot of new members to the cast, such as Dylan Baker, who's primarily a straight man to all of the antics. Meagan Good joins the cast as Ron's fiery and sexy boss. Films need more Meagan Good. Greg Kinnear also has a few funny moments. I was very happy to see James Marsden finally getting a chance to show mainstream audiences that he can be a funny guy. I've long felt he was an underappreciated actor who usually ends up playing the other guy in romantic comedies or even in action films (like his role in Superman Returns or Cyclops in the X-Men series). Here he has a central role that I hope gets him the recognition he deserves. Another interesting performance was the kid (Judah Nelson) they had playing Ron and Veronica's son. At times, he's delivering lines like an inexperienced. overly enthusiastic child actor, but then there's a scene towards the end that made me think this was an intentional direction and make it that much funnier.
I was surprised to see this was two hours, as I often complain that comedies have no business being that long, but I didn't notice the length at all. Time flies when you're having fun, eh? I also applaud the movie for getting away with just a PG-13 rating. Anchorman 2 doesn't get its laughs from being vulgar or gross. I don't have an issue with that normally, but it's nice to see a comedy not going for shock value.
While not as funny as the first film, Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues has enough of the same absurd and silly humor that made the first so enjoyable and fans will have a good time watching. I can't say it was worth waiting nine years for, but in a weak year for comedy it'll do.
3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars
Labels:
Anchorman 2,
Christina Applegate,
David Koechner,
Dylan Baker,
Greg Kinnear,
James Marsden,
Josh Lawson,
Judah Nelson,
Kristen Wiig,
Meagan Good,
Paul Rudd,
Ron Burgundy,
Steve Carell,
Will Ferrell
Monday, March 19, 2012
Friends With Kids - Movie Review
This is going to be a quick review as I find that I'm probably going to echo a few sentiments about this movie from my Jeff, Who Lives at Home review.
The premise of Friends With Kids might be a little out there depending on your perspective: two old friends, Jason (Adam Scott) and Julie (Jennifer Westfeldt), after seeing how having kids have affected the relationships of their mutual friends, decide that maybe the best course of action is to just have a kid together. The hope is that this will get them past any messy divorce issues and allow both of them to still date and play the field. The movie shows that they are both still looking for 'the one', but understand that their window of opportunity for having a kid is closing. They agree to split responsibility down the middle. What could go wrong, right?
Initially, it works out well for them, as it's treated almost as a business arrangement between friends. They are both rational and mature about it. This irritates some of their married friends, as they think it's a bit of a slap in the face to their relationships and wonder if they will be able to keep over the long haul. As you may have already guessed, emotions do get invested and the relationship gets complicated. This the main flaw of the film. What starts out as a subversive look at 'traditional' relationships and having kids, ends up becoming just kind of a standard romantic comedy aimed at people over 30.
One thing that kind of bugged me was when characters talked about New York like the audience is all from New York. I know movies can't 100% appeal to everyone, but there's a part of me that feels left out when very specific references are made to living in a certain city. I imagine people from NY though might feel the same way about movies based in San Francisco or LA. This is a minor point though and it didn't make or break the movie for me. It's just a pet peeve of mine.
The movie is basically carried by Adam Scott. If you've been a fan of his from Parks and Recreation and his other various movies, then this movie is the one you've been waiting for. I think it's going to be a breakout role for him as far as being in more films. He's kind of like a more serious, less snarky, Paul Rudd.
The cast is very strong. It's essentially a Bridesmaids reunion with good performances from Maya Rudolph, Kristen Wiig and Chris O'Dowd. They are all very funny in parts. Although, I'm actually mad that Don Draper wasn't in it more. He's shown that he has the comedy chops and I didn't feel like he got a chance to really show it. Maybe because Jennifer Westfeldt his is real life girlfriend she avoided putting him in the movie too much. I dunno, but I think we could all use some more Hamm.
It's runs on a bit too long, especially once you figure out how the movie is going to play out. I think about 5-10 minutes needed to be trimmed to tighten it up. Overall I thought Jennifer Westfeldt's story and direction were fine. This is her directorial debut, but I think many may be fans of her previous writing for Kissing Jessica Stein (haven't seen it). I hate to criticize her, but I think as far as the cast goes she might have been the weakest link. I didn't think she was bad, I just think there a missing element between her and Scott as far as the chemistry goes. Oh wait, Westfeldt could never be the weak link in a movie that features Megan Fox in any role. Megan Fox just bugs me.
Despite the way the film wraps up, it does avoid a lot of the usual conventions of weaker romantic comedies. How many times have you seen a romantic comedy where there's a conflict that would be resolved if the characters just had a five minute conversation. Well, in this movie, characters actually communicate once there's conflict. Because Friends With Kids avoids that flaw, it's conclusion does feel a little more earned.
I did enjoy Friends With Kids despite my issues with it, which really are minor compared to other films. It's very funny in parts and has a great cast. It's an above average romantic comedy with it's subject and setup, but the ultimate conclusion is what prevents this from being rated higher. I do think it's worth watching, but maybe saving for a rental.
3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars
The premise of Friends With Kids might be a little out there depending on your perspective: two old friends, Jason (Adam Scott) and Julie (Jennifer Westfeldt), after seeing how having kids have affected the relationships of their mutual friends, decide that maybe the best course of action is to just have a kid together. The hope is that this will get them past any messy divorce issues and allow both of them to still date and play the field. The movie shows that they are both still looking for 'the one', but understand that their window of opportunity for having a kid is closing. They agree to split responsibility down the middle. What could go wrong, right?
Initially, it works out well for them, as it's treated almost as a business arrangement between friends. They are both rational and mature about it. This irritates some of their married friends, as they think it's a bit of a slap in the face to their relationships and wonder if they will be able to keep over the long haul. As you may have already guessed, emotions do get invested and the relationship gets complicated. This the main flaw of the film. What starts out as a subversive look at 'traditional' relationships and having kids, ends up becoming just kind of a standard romantic comedy aimed at people over 30.
One thing that kind of bugged me was when characters talked about New York like the audience is all from New York. I know movies can't 100% appeal to everyone, but there's a part of me that feels left out when very specific references are made to living in a certain city. I imagine people from NY though might feel the same way about movies based in San Francisco or LA. This is a minor point though and it didn't make or break the movie for me. It's just a pet peeve of mine.
The movie is basically carried by Adam Scott. If you've been a fan of his from Parks and Recreation and his other various movies, then this movie is the one you've been waiting for. I think it's going to be a breakout role for him as far as being in more films. He's kind of like a more serious, less snarky, Paul Rudd.
The cast is very strong. It's essentially a Bridesmaids reunion with good performances from Maya Rudolph, Kristen Wiig and Chris O'Dowd. They are all very funny in parts. Although, I'm actually mad that Don Draper wasn't in it more. He's shown that he has the comedy chops and I didn't feel like he got a chance to really show it. Maybe because Jennifer Westfeldt his is real life girlfriend she avoided putting him in the movie too much. I dunno, but I think we could all use some more Hamm.
It's runs on a bit too long, especially once you figure out how the movie is going to play out. I think about 5-10 minutes needed to be trimmed to tighten it up. Overall I thought Jennifer Westfeldt's story and direction were fine. This is her directorial debut, but I think many may be fans of her previous writing for Kissing Jessica Stein (haven't seen it). I hate to criticize her, but I think as far as the cast goes she might have been the weakest link. I didn't think she was bad, I just think there a missing element between her and Scott as far as the chemistry goes. Oh wait, Westfeldt could never be the weak link in a movie that features Megan Fox in any role. Megan Fox just bugs me.
Despite the way the film wraps up, it does avoid a lot of the usual conventions of weaker romantic comedies. How many times have you seen a romantic comedy where there's a conflict that would be resolved if the characters just had a five minute conversation. Well, in this movie, characters actually communicate once there's conflict. Because Friends With Kids avoids that flaw, it's conclusion does feel a little more earned.
I did enjoy Friends With Kids despite my issues with it, which really are minor compared to other films. It's very funny in parts and has a great cast. It's an above average romantic comedy with it's subject and setup, but the ultimate conclusion is what prevents this from being rated higher. I do think it's worth watching, but maybe saving for a rental.
3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

