Short Review: Snatch.

I finally got around to watching this. I was confused as hell. So I gave it a second chance before reviewing it. Here we are.

-----------

Premise: A bunch of random people are all randomly connected to a diamond heist.

Starring: Benicio Del Toro, Dennis Farina, Vinnie Jones, Jason Statham, and Brad Pitt (among a bunch of others).

My Reaction: The beginning montage bit was, and still is, incredibly, mind-bogglingly confusing. To the point it messes with me for the remainder of the movie. The acting was brilliant all around. The editing style was brilliant, as well. I particularly liked the juxtaposition of the Coursing with the chasing/questioning of the one thug guy, as well as the slow motion fall into the dream-water during the boxing match and that whole little segment. I also really liked the ending, though it utterly confused me the first time around (mostly due to being linked with the incredibly confusing opening). I wanted to like this more, but the more I think about it and try to connect everybody/everything, the more my brain hurts. Too much interconnected randomness going on all at the same time. But for some odd reason, I still liked it.

I Am McLovin!

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON.

When in most films with a gimmick, if you take the gimmick away and just have the story play as normal, the movie would be boring. The case with this movie is half and half. During the backdrop of Hurricane Katrina, a young woman (Julia Ormond) reads a diary to her dying mother, which tells the story of one Benjamin Button. Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt) was born old and grows young as his life goes on. His father Thomas (Jason Flemyng) abandons him thinking him some kind of monster, and he’s adopted by a young black woman named Queenie (Taraji P. Henson), who runs an old folks’ home. But when Benjamin meets a young girl named Daisy (Elle Fanning, Madisen Beaty, Cate Blanchett), he immediately falls in love. The movie tells the story of their lives when they’re both with and without each other, with one getting older and the other younger.

Let me first discuss my opening statement. There were times when the movie’s story was so captivating that it would have been interesting with or without the reverse aging in play. But the other half of the time, the plot relied heavily on that idea. To make a long story short, the story was good, but it was really long with some parts that were probably unnecessary and could have been cut out. I was really into the movie most of the time, though. But during the last hour or so (maybe more like thirty minutes), I was really looking down at my watch, wondering how much longer the movie had. And a lot of what could have been cut came from the beginning of the movie, as it really was a slow start getting to the main plot of the story (though there really isn’t a plot, honestly. It’s more of a character study).

And the acting was good overall, especially with Brad Pitt (who I think is good in just about anything). But the most curious part of all dealt with the ages of the characters as the movie went on and how they looked amongst each other in correspondence to how old they should have looked. Now, it would take a lot more concentration on my part to really nit-pick at that, so I’ll leave that be. But there was one thing about the acting that I really didn’t like, and that was Cate Blanchett’s narration as an old woman. I could hardly understand a word she said, and she would always narrate important parts of the story, which upset me as I only understood half of what she was saying. And there is one age discrepancy I’d like to bring to attention, which is the young Daisy. When she’s first introduced, imdb has her listed as 7, though she’s played by a 10-year-old and talks like she’s older. And then toward the end of the movie, during some voice-over narration, there’s a mention of how she would have been about 5 when she first met Benjamin, and that threw me off completely.

And speaking of more visual aspects, and with Daisy, there was another discrepancy that bugged me. Benjamin makes note of how he’ll never forget Daisy’s bright blue eyes, and he repeats that a few times at the beginning. And Elle Fanning had these gorgeous bright blue eyes. But throughout the movie, Daisy’s eyes are continually changing color. The Daisy played by Madisen Beaty looked like her eyes were nearly brown, and Cate Blanchett’s eyes would go from pale blue to light blue. With all the money spent on Benjamin’s looks, they could have least thrown a few dollars in for some contacts. Though on the more positive side, the visuals were excellent. The older Benjamin (in looks) reminded me of the CGI from the Final Fantasy movies with such attention to detail. But the visual effects that blew me away the most weren’t of the older Benjamin, but of the younger. The way they made Brad Pitt look so young made even the similar process at the beginning of X-Men 3 look shabby.

But my favorite moments of the movie were the smaller moments. First, the man who had been struck by lightning and all his stories. Those had my audience laughing, and I thought they were a fun touch. But my favorite part in the entire movie was the brief segment around the middle of the movie, I suppose it was, when Benjamin tells a story of intersecting lives and how changing one thing could have changed everything, so therefore how every little action causes a greater reaction. I really loved that scene, and it really stuck with me during and after the film.

I really don’t see how people are comparing this to Forrest Gump (I guess that’s just for people who haven’t actually seen it), as I don’t think they’re anything alike at all. Not to mention that, technically, Benjamin Button was written first. I had no idea until the credits that it was based on a short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald. But then again, who the heck knows anything about what F. Scott wrote outside of The Great Gatsby. So the movie does have some faults, but it is an all-around great movie and great experience, especially during all the scenes with Katrina raging in the background, when you know what’s going to happen, even if the characters don’t (dramatic irony!). But anyway, I’d recommend the film. Another Brad Pitt success.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

BURN AFTER READING.

So I finally got around to seeing this movie, and I now know why they didn’t show really any plot within the trailer. It’s best summarized in the last couple lines of the film, but I won’t write them here, because it’s one of the biggest laughs of the movie. So instead, I’ll try to do my best here. Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) quits his job at the CIA after they start to screw him over and decides to write his memoirs instead, but this doesn’t bode well with his wife, Katie (Tilda Swinton). Katie is an austere hardass who just so happens to be having an affair with the highly paranoid Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), who is also married and having numerous affairs with other women. Katie starts to file for divorce against Osborne and pressures Harry into doing the same with his wife so they can be together. Enter Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand), a woman with low self-esteem who works at a gym and wants to get four different cosmetic surgeries, but just doesn’t have the money to pay for it. And then a disc that includes copies of Osborne’s memoir notes shows up at the gym, wherein Linda and her friend/co-worker Chad (Brad Pitt), a goofy and rather innocent ‘good Samaritan’, think they could get some kind of reward for returning what looks to be highly confidential information. But things get mixed up and everything begins to spiral down and become chaotic, causing bad things to happen to pretty much everybody.

The movie starts off rather slow. For about the first twenty or so minutes, I would figure, everything seems slightly random and unimportant. I wasn’t sure what to make of the movie, especially when it would use highly over-dramatic music for scenes about practically nothing. But the movie really starts to pick up once Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt are introduced. I would say that they were the highlight of the movie (specifically Brad Pitt). The only character I liked better than Pitt’s was JK Simmons’, but he was only in the movie for two scenes (though those two scenes were basically two of the best/funniest scenes in the movie). And the humor itself was randomly dispersed throughout, so it wasn’t non-stop laughter, but there were a good amount of laugh-out-loud moments.

The two best things about the movie, I would say, were the acting and the camera work. The acting from everybody was top notch, which is expected from such high-caliber actors and actresses. The underdog of the acting scene of the movie, however, was Richard Jenkins, who I don’t believe was even promoted to being in the movie, even though he has a rather big role. His character was rather heartbreaking, really. His and Brad Pitt’s character can really be seen as the two ‘innocents’ of the film (even though Pitt was involved in blackmail schemes, the quality of his character wasn’t even remotely malignant). And as I mentioned, the camera work was great. There were some really fun angles and shots that caught my attention as I was watching. Though this is a Coen Brothers’ movie, so that is expected.

There isn’t much else to discuss about the film. Those are all my positive and negative comments about it. I think the beginning could have been done a bit better, but the second half of the movie is just superb and really funny. There should have been more JK Simmons, though. Similar to my biggest complaint about No Country For Old Men, I would have almost complained about it having some anti-climactic moments (for not showing huge events and just ‘telling’ about it instead, especially at the end), but the only times that happened, it was ‘told’ during a JK Simmons scene, which really redeemed the quality of the effect. Otherwise, that’s all I have for you.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

2 In 1: Jesse James and King of Kong.

Every now and then I buy a couple movies on DVD and, because of the randomly silly rule I set for myself with this review blog (only give formal reviews to movies in theater, everything else gets discussed in some kind of article), I find it increasingly difficult to actually do just that. However, it’s always fun trying to find loopholes to my rule (because I’m too stubborn to break it). Therefore, I’ve come up with this idea to do an article where I just review two movies on DVD or whatnot together, but in a shorter fashion. So here I go.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.

First I’ll start with the good. The acting was great, and I’m stumped as to how Casey Affleck received an Oscar nod but Brad Pitt did not. Both were great, but Brad Pitt was just purely fantastic. The whole time watching, I never thought “hey, that’s Brad Pitt.” But anyway, as I said, the acting rocked. Another great thing, which is a vast understatement, is the cinematography. This was really one of the most beautifully shot films I have seen in a long time. Every frame of this movie felt like a piece of art. Finally, the movie’s musical score was awesome, as well, especially the song played during the initial train robbery and at the end after Jesse James gets shot (if you call me on a spoiler for that, you need to be slapped). I loved that theme.

If this movie had any downfall, it was the actual story. Or the lack of one, really. There were quite a few times in this movie where I had no idea what the hell was going on (moreso in the first hour and a half or so than the second half of the movie). But really, there is no over-arching plot. It’s seemingly just a bunch of random occurrences strung together, like somebody opened up a biography of Jesse James, pointed out some key chapters, and filmed it. And, like the title, the movie was a tad too long. Without the ending credits, it’s about 2.5 hours long, with half of that time frame being scenes mostly unimportant to the little story there was. It just seemed to jump from one character to the next and back again with nothing in between, and the voice-over narration didn’t do much, as it was basically reading from the aforementioned biography book detailing what will happen to characters after the timeframe of the movie. I’m a very visual learner, so following along with a history lecture in an auditory fashion was very difficult for me.

However, that doesn’t make this a bad movie. I really think the great acting and the beautifully stunning cinematography keep it pinned to a high rating. And if this movie doesn’t win the Best Cinematography Oscar, I’ll be upset. It better. Anywho, my rating is…

A Keanu 'Whoa'

King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters.

Now THIS is a great movie. I can’t comment on the acting, because there wasn’t any. It’s a documentary, so these are just real people doing their thing. I can’t really comment on cinematography, because, as I said, it’s a documentary, and those aren’t known for breath-taking camera angles and wide-lens masters. But what I can discuss is entertainment value. This documentary really feels like it’s a scripted movie, though it isn’t. You have your villain and overall hypocritical jackass, Billy Mitchell. You also have your down-on-his-luck, family man, school-teacher, and overall underdog, Steve Wiebe (pronounced Wee-Bee). You have your villain’s henchman, Brian Kuh. And you have the nice, old middleman, Walter Day.

For those that don’t know, this movie is about the ultra-competitive sport that is arcade games, specifically Donkey Kong. Billy Mitchell took the all-time high score back in 1982 and kept his title. However, after being laid off from work, Steve Wiebe takes up Donkey Kong to pass some time and thinks it might be fun to try and beat the high score. What he didn’t realize is the hardcore world he was getting him and his family into. And after he beats Billy’s score (by a lot) and submits it for the records, it’s refused by a really depressing series of events. So this leads Steve to go to any competition around the U.S. to try and publicly beat Billy’s score.

I didn’t know what to expect when going into this. I had heard nothing but good things, so my expectations were rather high. And, needless to say, they stayed that way. It starts off a bit slow, but once it really gets into it, it’s addictingly entertaining, much like video games themselves. It was a lot like watching Survivor, I think, because you grow attached to some people (Steve and Walter), annoyed by others (Brian), and just plain hate some (Billy). Seriously, Brian Kuh reminded me of like a cartoon sidekick, willing to hump his master’s leg and do any evil deed that was wished, while Billy often made me think back to characters like Dr. Claw from Inspector Gadget. He never showed his face, but he was always in the background doing dastardly deeds.

Anyway, this movie was great, entertaining, and funny. By the end, I was gripping my bed sheets in suspense, just praying that Steve would beat Billy’s high score. So I suppose this one will get…

Royale With Cheese