Archive for the ‘S’ Category

The Social Network Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Monday, October 4th, 2010

It seems that everyone in the world is on Facebook. Facebook is so incredibly popular it’s used as a verb now. Facebooking as we all know is when you are talking to your friends online and become part of a social network, or so we pretend. What the smart, acidic The Social Network posits is that Facebook isn’t a way to interact with people. It’s a place of narcissism. A webpage devoted to us. When people check out YOUR Facebook page they see how many friends YOU have, what YOU are interested in and YOUR thoughts, no matter how benign.

The Social Network (pejoratively known as “The Facebook movie”)  shows that Facebook wasn’t invented as a way to make friends but as a way to feel good about oneself and to increase ones own feeling of importance. “Look at me! Look how many friends I have and isn’t it interesting when I tell people where I buy my socks and what I ate for dinner!”

The first scene sets the tone up perfectly. Smug Mark Zuckerberg (played by the always excellent and underappreciated Jesse Eisenberg) is talking about himself to his girlfriend. He doesn’t care that his thoughts aren’t interesting to her and treats her as a lower life form. When his girlfriend says she has to go and study, Mark responds, “You don’t have to study; you go to BU;” implying that she goes to a less challenging school than Mark, who goes to Harvard and just bragged that he got a perfect score on his SATs. His girlfriend, Erica is tired of Mark’s narcissism and breaks up with him telling him, “You are going to go through life thinking that girls don’t like you because you’re a nerd. Let me tell you from the bottom of my heart, that’s not true. [Then a beat] It’s because you’re an as*hole.”

In his rage and feelings of hurt, Mark goes to his dorm and blogs about how Erica is a jerk and posts pictures of different Harvard girls and comparing which one is hotter. Mark’s blog generates so much traffic it eats out the electricity of the Harvard computers. Mark’s blog is a success and this leads to being approached by the Winklevoss twins to make a website where people can look up their friends at Harvard and talk about them and see their pictures. Mark takes this idea and turns it into a more ambitious project where instead of just Harvard students going on a website to see other Harvard students, any person can go on to see any other person, hence what is now known as Facebook.

Mark Zuckerberg isn’t a bully as the previews would lead you to believe. Rather he is a self-absorbed techie lacking social skills, a perfect candidate to build the largest social network ever. A social network where people can believe that they have a lot of friends without ever having (or wanting) to talk to them. This is perfect for a guy like Mark Zuckerberg. The Social Network is about Mark Zuckerberg getting sued by the Winklevoss twins for stealing their idea and by his former and only best friend (well except for the ones on Facebook), Eduardo Saverin (played by Andrew Garfield) for screwing him over by having him removed as the co-founder of Facebook.

The Social Network is well acted by all involved, especially Jesse Eisenberg as Mark Zuckerberg, who clearly has the most depth to him. You alternately hate Zuckerberg for his smug and coldness and admire him for his ambition, brains, and creativity. The writing is typical Aaron Sorkin: fast, clever and biting.  The Social Network is a sad film because it shows how superficial we are as a society. We pretend to care about others, when all we really care about is ourselves.  The Social Network isn’t so much about Mark Zuckerberg as it is about us—wanting to make friends but going about it the wrong way. Mark Zuckerberg may have made Facebook, a superficial social network where no one has to actually socialize, but we are the ones who go on it and help make it a success. I mean how many of us text instead of talking to people face to face or on the phone. The title of the film is a joke and a slap in the face, as the last scene of the film makes clear. I mean how many of our “Facebook friends” do we really talk to? Yep, we might not like the Zuckerberg The Social Network shows, but we are like him—self-deluded narcissists who believe that we have thousands of “friends,” without even knowing what the word really means and how to treat them.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 5.5/10 (4 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Salt Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

Salt is nothing more than a fun popcorn movie. It’s well-made, but shallow. If you simply want to be entertained and don’t mind ludicrous plot holes, Salt gets the job done.

Salt is the story of Evelyn Salt, a CIA agent who is accused of being a Russian spy. The movie has her being chased by her fellow co-workers while the audience wonders if Salt is who she claims to be. This ambiguity remains throughout most of the film and provides most of the suspense.

Unlike Inception, Salt has no artistic pretensions. Salt is nothing but pure escapism and it knows it. The movie (unlike Inception) doesn’t pretend to be smarter than it is. Phillip Noyce knows the kind of movie he is directing and doesn’t give the film greater importance than needed. Salt isn’t a deeply probing film which questions the way we live and our values. It’s simply a fun way to pass the time. Too many mainstream big-budget films pretend to be something they’re not, so it’s refreshing that Salt knows what it is and doesn’t pretend otherwise (only the characters do).

After Salt questions Orlov (Daniel Olbrychski), a man accused of being a Russian agent, and Orlov accusses Salt of being a Russian spy, the movie is mostly filled with chase scenes. The meeting between Salt and Orlov occurs within 20 minutes of the film (if not before).

The scenes where American Agents and Salt’s co-workers, Peabody (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Ted Winter (Liev Schreiber) chases Salt (Angelina Jolie giving her typical charismatic performance) are fastly cut to leave our blood rushing and energy pumping. The movie is very fun, albeit far-fetched and corny (get it, because it’s a popcorn flick).

Phillip Noyce’s over reliance on music to add emotion and suspense and a weak ending are really the only flaws of the film (I mean there are a few plot holes here and there, but the movie moves so fast you won’t notice or care about them).

Salt works more as a condiment, adding flavor to the popcorn movie than as a full meal. As it stands, Salt is an entertaining, shallow, agreeable enough time-passer. If that’s all you look for in a movie, you’ll have fun watching the film. But if not, you’ll wish the movie added a little more spice with the Salt.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 10.0/10 (4 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: -2 (from 4 votes)

Salt Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from Salt

Monday, July 26th, 2010

Salt, Phillip Noyce’s recent film, is a thoroughly average concoction. It’s also a very lucky film.  As many of you know, there have been talks of Russian spies entering America. That this is part of a true American fear (we Americans are such pus*ies!) makes Salt have some resonance. If the American people didn’t feel that a Russian takeover is coming soon (and the rational ones have no fears of such), Salt would come across as a lot more far-fetched then it is.

Salt is an entertaining tale of espionage but is so thoroughly average it’s grating.  Salt is an entertaining by the numbers popcorn flick.  It’s well directed, fast moving, builds up tension and is well acted. In terms of craftsmanship, the films only drawback is its musical score which is used throughout the entire movie. The music never shuts up and that there are no scenes without a musical score is a real weakness of the film. Music is like salt (the analogy is intentional); it’s supposed to add flavor to what’s on the plate, not replace it. Music should bring out more tension, not be the tension itself. Salt’s overuse of music is a big flaw of the film, especially where craftsmanship is concerned.

Salt is an entertaining movie about Russian spies and about Eve Salt (Angelina Jolie), an American agent who may or may not really be a covert Russian agent. This ambiguity leads to most of the suspense of the film. Salt doesn’t really have much of a plot. Most of the movie is spent on people running around and people chasing after them (mainly Salt).

Angelina Jolie does a good job as the charismatic and reserved Agent Evelyn Salt. The greatly underrated and underused Live Schreiber does an excellent job as Ted Winter, who works with Evelyn Salt. Live Schreiber does an excellent job making his character interesting and adding layers of ambiguity so the audience isn’t really sure of the type of person Ted Winter is.

Salt is fast moving and an agreeable enough time passer. It’s mainstream popcorn fluff well crafted. Salt is fun while you watch it, but by the time you leave the theater the movie evaporates from your mind. What Salt lacks in originality it makes up in adrenaline and high-octane excitement.

I do wish the film had a little more substance to it as well as having a storyline that ends. The ending of Salt is made to leave room for a sequel which is very annoying. Why can’t a film be self-contained anymore? I know movies are made to make money, but why does Hollywood feel the need to franchise every movie they think will be a hit?!

Salt isn’t a rarity among films and at ticket prices being what they are I wouldn’t suggest rushing to the theater to see Salt since they are many movies of similar ilk that can be found on DVD. But when Salt makes its way to DVD, it’s an agreeable enough time-passer to watch; it’s just doesn’t have enough of a salty kick to be worth checking out now.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Splice Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Thursday, June 10th, 2010

Splice splices together something that is deeply missing in recent sci-fi films—a sense of humanity. While there are few lines of dialogue in which scientists talk science, most of the movie thankfully removes the pseudo-intellectual scientific mumbo jumbo and adds a layer of reality to the proceedings. I consider Rosemary’s Baby to be the best horror film I ever saw because it takes an absurd, unrealistic situation and places it out in the real world to see how it could play out if such a thing were possible. Splice does the same. Even though this movie is completely fictional, there is a sense of honesty and realism that seems to be missing from most fantasy and sci-fi films.  Splice is dramatically satisfying and produces a few laughs (albeit extremely deadpan ones) and suspense. The awful trailer makes Splice look like the kind of dumb, generic sci-fi horror film that we’ve seen countless times and does a disservice to the film.

I have read a lot of reviews of Splice and am amazed at the dichotomy between what the critics say and what the audience does. Splice seems to be a love it or hate it film.

Splice is the best film I have seen so far this year. A dazzling, humane, passionate, original film, marred only by a generic ending that seems to belong to a part of another more inferior film (did the projectionist fall asleep?) Except for the last 10 minutes, the film is just about perfect. Confidently directed, without a hint of pretension.

The film is about Clive and Elsa (see The Bride of Frankenstein to get that reference), who are spouses and work partners. Clive and Elsa are naïve scientists who create clones of animals and aspire to cloning people.  Elsa ‘splices together human and animal DNA to create a half-human, half-bird like creature whom she names Dren (Nerd spelled backwards or forwards if you’re dyslexic.

Dren is the best part of the film and is what really makes Splice special. Dren is a creature molded from CGI and played mutely by Delphine Chanéac. Delphine Chanéac deserves some type of accolade for her performance. Without saying a word she creates a computerized creature into a fully dimensional human-like creature. Although a computerized creature, Dren is played splendidly by Delphinine Chaneac. Without saying a word, she creates a fully dimensional human-like creature that provides most of the drama in the film.

Splice is being marketed as sci-fi horror film. If you are expecting to be horrified by blood and guts and are expecting a Species knockoff, then you will indeed be disappointed. Splice is a metaphor of (bad) parenting and about the process of growing up. Dren starts life as a little baby, where Elsa and Clive are trying to feed Dren while Dren is running around the room going what she can to not be feed. Dren also develops hormones and has stages of rebellion and outbursts. There are many touching scenes that turn Splice into a heartbreaking work of art.

Elsa, played by Sarah Palley, acts as the mother to Dren and Clive (played by the talented and underused Adrien Brody) doesn’t want to act as father at first. Clive seems to listen to Elsa but does it under duress.  He later warms up to Dren, and in fact, the scene in which he teacher her to dance is very moving.

Elsa and Clive are bad parents, but not intentionally.  They create a creature—the first of its kind—and aren’t sure of how to treat it or communicate with it.  Dren learns to communicate via Scrabble titles and when she is locked up in the barn she spells the word, “outside” to show her frustration at her parents for making her feel like a prisoner. She wants to explore the world, the way humans do and this human element is what makes Dren and the entire film so special.

There are many great moments. I’m not going to ruin anymore. Splice is about discovery of a world foreign to you and so I’m not going to deprive you, Dear Reader, from the sense and joy of discovery.

The acting is fine. There are a few minor characters her and there, but most of the film revolves about Dren, Clive and Elsa. All three actors do a fine job.

The directing is confident, stylish, and maintains a perfect tension throughout. There are some excellent camera moves and the use of a worm’s eye view in many scenes adds a layer of tension and power. Director and co-writer, Vincenzo Natali is a talented craftsman behind the camera. The use of music is subtle and doesn’t call attention to itself like most music used in films of this ilk. The cinematography is excellent will careful attention to detail and extreme contrasting colors. The lab where Dren is is brightly white and cold blue, symbolizing life and the feeling of just becoming part of it and adapting to the changes around you. And the dark lighting outside creates a feeling of claustrophobia and foreignness which is certainly how Dren feels.

Splice is an excellently rendered sci-fi yarn and so much smarter and moving than it needs to be. Splice doesn’t seem to be getting the kind of reaction from viewers it deserves. When I saw the movie there was a total of 6 people in the theater. When the movie was over, some guy in front of me said, “Wow!” “Exactly,” is what I wanted to respond. Splice splices together different film styles—part Frankenstein (more the novel than the movie), part The Elephant Man, part David Cronenberg’s The Fly—and ends up with a movie, wholly its own (besides for its disappointing mainstream ending). Dren would be proud.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.0/10 (3 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

Splice Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from Splice

Thursday, June 10th, 2010

Splice splices together something that is deeply missing in recent sci-fi films—a sense of humanity. While there are few lines of dialogue where scientists talk science, most of the movie thankfully removes the pseudo-intellectual science mumbo jumbo and adds a layer of reality to the proceedings. I consider Rosemary’s Baby to be the best horror film I ever saw because it takes an absurd unrealistic situation and places it out in the real world and see how it could play out if such a thing were possible. Splice does the same thing. Even though this movie is complete fiction, there is a sense of honesty and realism that seems to be missing from most fantasy and sci-fi films.  Splice is dramatically satisfying and produces a few laughs (albeit extremely deadpan) and suspense.

The awful trailer makes Splice look like a dumb, generic sci-fi horror film that we’ve seen countless times. The trailer does a disservice to the film. Splice is being marketed as sci-fi horror film and I think what leads to a lot of people’s dissatisfaction with the film is not due to the quality of the film but rather people’s expectations of it. If you are expecting to be horrified by blood and guts and are expecting a Species knockoff, then you will indeed be disappointed. Splice is (until the bad ending) a metaphor of (bad) parenting and about the process of growing up.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 3.8/10 (4 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

Sicko Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from Sicko

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

Michael Moore’s Sicko has all the things we love and hate about Michael Moore. Like all his documentaries, Sicko has its faults. I would guess that one of the reasons Michael Moore’s documentaries are so popular is that Michael Moore blames the rich and the powerful corporations for all the ills of society instead of allowing the viewer to look inward and accept part of the blame. Even with this flaw though, Sicko is still worth seeing. It’s worth seeing for its humor, empathy, straight forwardness (Michael Moore doesn’t pretend to not be a rabble rouser) and originality. Say what you want but Michael Moore is an expert at his field. He is an expert craftsman who leaves the spectator spellbound. His documentaries move so fast and have a narrative flow found in few too many documentaries. Michael Moore’s documentaries are more than just talking heads and random facts. Michael Moore’s voice can be heard in all his films. His anger, humor, compassion and sarcasm are evident in everything he makes and Sicko is no different. Sicko won’t change the way heath care is run in this country, but few documentaries lead to governmental change. Love him or hate him, there is no denying that Michael Moore makes a strong presence wherever he goes, which satisfies his fans, but is enough to make his detractors sick.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 8.5/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Sicko Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

According to Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko, the reason that America doesn’t have free health care is not because America can’t afford it, but because Americans –to borrow a phrase from the movie, Wall Street – believe that “greed is good.” Sicko looks at countries that are much poorer than America, yet have nationalized health care. It’s no secret that Americans are greedy. We use more natural resources than all the other countries combined. Americans are tremendous wasters who confuse wants with needs. No one needs million-dollar houses and five expensive cars – no one except Americans that is. I know it seems like I’m going on an angry tirade against Americans, but I’m not. I’m simply stating facts. Americans are greedy and quite a lot of them believe that money and happiness are interchangeable words. Feeling this way, it’s only natural that I enjoyed Sicko.

Moore shows us Americans who have health care and those who don’t. The audience hears horror stories from people who own health care. Michael Moore shows us people who weren’t covered by their health care company because their disease was too serious. We hear a woman who was denied health care because “the ambulance wasn’t pre-approved.” The woman talks about the absurdity behind such a clause. How was she supposed to pre-approve the ambulance when she was unconscious? Such stories populate Sicko.
Michael Moore has been accused of making documentaries that are one-sided. Therefore, his films should be called movies, not documentaries. But in Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore is the only one talking in the whole film. He never brings experts to confirm the idea of global warming and even when he uses sources, Gore never cites them. At least in Michael Moore’s documentary, experts speak to confirm Moore’s point of view. Michael Moore is branded a propagandist for his documentaries, while Gore is awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his documentary. What a world.

The flaw of Sicko is that Moore blames the rich companies for America’s lack of a free health care system. Instead, Moore should be allowing the viewer to look inward and accept part of the blame. Sicko is mostly filled with lambasting health care corporations and of people talking about their experiences with how their health care providers tricked them into denying health care.

One of the smartest parts of Sicko is when Moore goes to England. In the film, the rumors of people in countries that have nationalized health care having to wait months and even years to be treated for diseases seem to be untrue (according to Sicko, the average wait time is an hour and a half for people to be treated). Since England’s health coverage is being supplied by the country, doctors’ salaries are paid by the government. Moore talks to a doctor from Britain who seems to still have a comfortable salary and a nice home, despite having a government-controlled budget. The doctor lives in a nice house, has a nice car and makes close to $1 million a year. Moore asks him if it’s possible for America to adopt a system of nationalized health care similar to the U.K.’s. He says that “it’s possible to have nationalized health care if people are satisfied with having million-dollar homes and one or two nice cars, but [nationalized health care] isn’t possible when people want $10-million homes and four or five nice cars.” This statement seems to be the point of Sicko— government-funded health care is possible if people want to live comfortably, but not if people want to live hedonistically and greedily. Unfortunately, this cynical reviewer believes that Americans are too selfish and greedy to have nationalized health care.

Michael Moore (as usual) goes too far in blaming the American government instead of the American people for being greedy. There’s a recording of former President Nixon talking with an official about putting into place a system of health care. The recording has Nixon talking about how he doesn’t want to give the American public free health care. The official tells Nixon not to worry and that the health care system he is talking about is one that gives money to the rich companies and does not provide health care to the average American citizen.

Moore goes to Cuba and mentions how Cuba has better (and free) health care than America. Whether this is true or not, how many people would be willing to have a communist government in return for free health care? These two flaws greatly dilute the documentary from seeming believable. Despite Moore’s penchant for going over the top to prove his point, Sicko is still worth seeing. Sicko might be one-sided, but amidst all Moore’s attacks on the rich, the documentary is funny and moving. Though Moore occasionally hits below the belt, he seems to care about what he is doing. Sicko is passionate and is worth seeing just for that. Though some might deride Moore for using people’s sob stories to reflect his own point of view, he never ridicules his subjects’ horror stories. It’s obvious that Moore cares about his subjects and sympathizes with them.

The DVD has plenty of special features, although most of them have the same point – look at how evil the rich businesses are. The two features that are worth seeing are the music video, which has a nice sound to it, and a video of Moore talking with Tony Benn, a British socialist politician. Benn talks about socialized medicine and gives logical arguments as to why such a system would be beneficial. Tony Benn is a very smart and logical man, and even if you don’t agree with what he has to say, you’d be hard pressed to misunderstand his point of view. Anything that helps one understand another person’s point of view is well worth checking out.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)