Mini-Review II: Return of the Mini - Date Night

In brief, director Shawn Levy (whose previous stabs at directing include Night at the Museum and Cheaper by the Dozen) manages to bring life to Date Night out of a stereotypical humdrum screwball comedy by leaning heavily on the skills of Tina Fey and Steve Carell.

I'll give the bad news first. On the downside, the trailers and previews killed a handful of good moments. Some of the comedy relies on surprises, one-liners, and quick turns. While exiting the theater I heard another mini-review, "It wasn't as funny as I expected it to be." If you haven't payed attention to advertising for Date Night you stand a better chance of enjoying it, as opposed to anticipating foreseen sequences and gags. Also, the film stretches itself a bit thin at times. It broadens to touch on action and romance, causing lulls in pacing.

So, the film is not particularly well written and the plot is thin. However, this film doesn't need either element to be strong because it is all about riffing between Fey and Carell. Chuckle lines rock back and forth between the two like a seesaw. Their chops carry the film throughout. I get the sense that filming Date Night was akin to watching the Bird and Diz trade fours in their prime. The cutting room floor probably laughed it's ass off on fifth and sixth takes. Another high note in the overall presentation is a solid supporting cast, with a handful of well-played extended cameos. Lastly I'll note that my celebrity crush on Tina Fey has grown again. She'd be on my celebrity dream date night list, but this film has convinced me against it.
______________

The skinny:
Pros: funny people being funny, great cast, light-hearted
Cons: "not as funny as expected"

Make an Assessment:
I didn't bust a gut or find myself rolling in the aisles. I am glad I saw Date Night, and thoroughly enjoyed watching it, but I wouldn't recommend paying theater prices for it. Unless you're an absolute maniac for Tina Fey or Steve Carell it is skippable. Worth watching for free? Absolutely. Worth redboxing? Yes. Worth buying 4 different dvd and Blu-ray editions for maximum worship? Not even close.

Overall Review Score:
Grade: B+
Score: 85%
If it were a movie: ★★★★
My Feelings: I find it funny that I spent a Hamilton to see a movie with a lol line from James Franco featuring an antiquated pistol and mention of Aaron Burr.

Gefaf: Water Night Shorts

The First Annual Gainesville Environmental Film & Arts Festival 2010 (GEFAF) took place at the Hippodrome State Theatre March 19-28. The event included 18 environmental film screenings, gallery events, guided nature outings, and eco-film related discussion forums. The Hippodrome State Theatre and GoGreenNation.org collaborated to present the festival.

March 22 is World Water Day, and at the festival all the events of the evening all focused on--yes, you guessed it, water. There was a water tasting, a screening of the fantastic St. John's River documentary The River Returns by Wes Skiles, and a screening of a series of shorts with a directors Q&A. I attended the water shorts screening and Q&A session that followed. There were three shorts featured together, each one highlighting a different aspect of water pollution or misuse. Two of the three directors were in attendance, which added greatly to the screenings.

The first short shown was The Phosphate Dilemma by Lakeland native filmmaker Carter Lord. The film explores phosphate mining in the Peace River watershed in Hardee County, Southwest Florida. The film was put together on a shoestring budget by a tiny group of extremely concerned Hardee County locals. The simplicity of the film is apparent. There aren't any bells or whistles, no shiny special effects. What the film does have plenty of is aerial photography of a ravaged landscape. From up in a helicopter the magnitude of damage to the formerly beautiful Floridian habitat is clear. In creating a case against phosphate strip mining the film is effective. It presents an easy to understand tale of a major corporation buying up land and local politicos to turn a profit at the expense of the environment and the well-being of proximal residents. Despite the abundance of shaky-cam footage and lack of polish this film is both poignant and entertaining.

After the screening Director Carter Lord introduced himself and pleaded the case of his organization 3PR (People For Protecting Peace River Inc.). After apologizing for the simplicity of the film he answered audience questions and dipped a little farther into the mining company's process of exportation (domestic and international) of the phosphate end product. He then begged us all to join and/or support their organization. The group is small now, but they know there is power in numbers so they're currently trying to spread their word as much as possible. The entire film can be viewed and more information on phosphate mining can be found at ProtectPeaceRiver.org.

The second short screened was Born Sweet by director/producer Cynthia Wade. It recounts the heartbreaking tragedy of arsenic poisoning that has affected over 2 million people in Southeast Asia. Following a young Cambodian arsenic-poisoning sufferer named Vinh and his family, the film paints a desperate portrait. One Cambodian organization is shown to be working to fix the problem and raise awareness through the universally appreciated art of karaoke. The pathos level of the film is intrinsically high. I was on the verge of tears a couple of times during the screening. The film is very well made and very entertaining. It seeks to raise awareness about global access to clean water (or lack thereof). I found it to be the most effective of the three shorts that were screened. Born Sweet had a run at the Sundance Film Festival earlier this year, and even won an Honorable Mention in Short Filmmaking. The official website for the film (with a list of screenings), and a link to the organization helping villages like Vinh's, can be found at bornsweetfilm.com.

The last of the three shorts shown was Gimme Green by UF's Doc Film Institute grads Isaac Brown and Eric Flagg. Gimme Green uses a great sense of humor to illustrate the absurdity of America's "obsession with the residential lawn". The film has toured the festival film circuit for the past few years and has earned numerous awards. The message is clear from the outset, people obsessed with lawns are nutty and maintaining a residential lawn at the expense of citizen safety is even nuttier. There is plenty of information and support for pointing out the problems addressed in the film, but there isn't as much support for solutions or alternatives to residential lawnscaping. Artificial turf is shown to be an unrealistic, impractical alternative to sod. One natural Florida-native yard is shown, but little else is mentioned. A more dedicated passage about realistic, enviromentally-friendly alternatives would have increased the effectiveness of the film greatly. Despite it's flaws Gimme Green is both captivating and entertaining.

Director Eric Flagg was on hand to entertain audience questions and give general insight about the film. Flagg seemed a down-to-earth and funny filmmaker, leaving me looking forward to his future projects. An employee of the UF/IFAS Extension added more about solutions to our lawn obsession (to start check out their website, solutionsforyourlife.ufl.edu). Gimmegreen.com is the official website of Gimme Green, and the film can be viewed entirely online here.
______________

The skinny:
* Pros: cheap, good entertainment, properly focused documentary shorts
* Cons: none to mention

Make an Assessment:
I had a good time at GEFAF, and on the Water Shorts Night as well. I recommend that anyone in Gainesville check out GEFAF next year.  With tickets at $5 a pop you're in for a good cheap date. I also recommend that anyone outside of Gainesville who has an opportunity to attend a screening of any of these three shorts do so. The Phosphate Dilemma and Gimme Green can both be viewed online, so that's a good alternative for anyone who can't make a screening. I personally think everyone in America should make themselves watch a handful of American documentaries to support the spirit of documentary filmmaking and to raise individual awareness of issues that affect people here at home and around the world. You may even learn something!

Overall Review Scores:
The Phosphate Dilemma
* If it were a movie: ★★★
Born Sweet
* If it were a movie: ★★★★
Gimme Green
* If it were a movie: ★★★

The Hangover

Many casual movie reviewers in the blogosphere, or the internet at large, will only go all or nothing on their reviews. It's either two thumbs way up or the worst movie they've ever seen, 5 stars or none at all. I personally think this is a totally bone-headed way of reviewing, and it casts a long shadow over the accuracy of ratings on sites like imdb.com and rottentomatoes.com. The reason I mention all of this is that last night I watched a fine film that has seemingly fallen prey to all-or-nothing raters, The Hangover.

The averages for the ratings of The Hangover are fairly accurate in my opinion, with enough haters giving it no rating at all to balance out all the people who think it's the Citizen Kane of screwball comedies. The general consensus has granted The Hangover between 70% and 80% positive reviews.

First, I'll go through my complaints. This film doesn't really stretch out and do anything new. There's a pretty stereotypical and completely expected storyline here. A handful of excellent gags and some fine comedic deliveries are needed to save what could easily be a dull showing. Another huge problem with this movie is that the marketing campaign for it was so expansive that many of the greatest moments were completely spoiled even before the premiere. I try to avoid watching trailers and ruining films, but with The Hangover it was virtually impossible to accomplish. What could have been some incredible laughs were spoiled by having seen complete scenes in the tv ads.

Those problems aside, this movie is great. The acting is good. As a huge Zach Galifianakis fan, I'm extremely biased about his performance. Ed Helms delivers well (if not a bit too Andy-ish at times), Ken Jeong (Señor Chang from Community) comes through with some shining lines, and Jeffrey Tambor brrings in a few brief but hilarious moments. Even the parts of the cast I wasn't familiar with do a passable job, no real praiseworthy accomplishments, but few completely dead moments.

The pacing is another strong point. There are a few moments without a laugh, but the film keeps the story moving and basically stays entertaining from start to finish.

I'm a huge believer in the notion that first and foremost movies are made to be entertaining. Every scene doesn't have to be completely original or artistic. As long as a movie knows what it is, and doesn't try too hard, it can be enjoyed fully. The Hangover seems totally self-aware throughout, going for screwball comedy and nothing more. Many of the negative reviews I've read state the opinion that this movie is just stupid. I say of course it's stupid, it's supposed to be. This style of comedy is mostly zany and shocking gags with just a hint of intelligent humor, mostly in the form of references, that are meant to float by. Anyone claiming this movie is stupid has missed the point entirely. I say loosen that tie, get unbuttoned, and learn to laugh at dick and fart jokes.
______________


The skinny:

* Pros: Light and funny, easy to watch
* Cons: Overly methodical, predictable, you've seen 1/3 of the jokes already


Make an Assessment:

This is a good film, certainly worth watching now that it's out in the home theater domain. The humor is often base and crude, so my Grandma's house might not have been the ideal venue. I don't know yet if it stacks up (in my mind) to other uber-popular naughts comedies like Superbad, Knocked Up, Juno, Wedding Crashers, Old School and Dodgeball. I tend to want to enjoy more obscure movies, but this one could be considered a good pop guilty pleasure.


Overall Review Score (I haven't figured out how I want to do this yet):

* Grade: B
* Score: 85%
* If it were a movie: ★★★★
* My Feelings: ☺

องค์บาก 2

Ong-bak 2 is a good film. For the overall, scroll it, otherwise read the following babble.

Ong-bak 2 isn't really a sequel. It's billed as a prequel, but it's not actually that either. As I was kindly warned before watching, the story really has nothing to do with Ong-bak outside of the fact that Tony Jaa's character uses crazy martial arts to either kill or maim every other character in the film. Of course, it goes without saying that nobody in their right mind would watch this film expecting to be drawn in by story. The story isn't bad either. Instead of a modern-day take leading itself easily into Ong-bak, the setting is taken all the way back to 15th century feudal Thailand.

I suspect the naming of the film may have something to do with cashing in on a previously established audience from the original. I also suspect that despite any real story-related links to the original film they will try to touch on some tie-ins with the next installment, Ong-bak 3, slated for release this year.

Naming issues aside, as a standalone film this is in almost every way entertaining, but not quite complete. The fights are another incredible display of Tony Jaa's acrobatic and martial arts abilities. The digital effects aren't the cleanest, but are used in a tasteful and subtle way, staying out of Tony Jaa's way for the most part. The dramatic dialogue is certainly passable, and the acting is very good given the genre. The story embodies the stereotypical lowly, unskilled kid turned killing machine in order to avenge the death of his family.

My main criticisms would be that the character development is about as deep as the shallow end of a kiddie pool, and that the film ends rather abruptly. It's difficult to develop a rapport with any character but Jaa, and by the time we finally get a grasp on him the film is over. Word is that they intentionally cut the film short with the plan of Ong-bak 3 coming in to pick up the pieces. The choice to make that happen rather than try to produce the rest in this film with limited funds will make for a better overall product.  However, it does make this installment feel like an installment instead of a powerhouse film on it's own two feet.

The film really scores with constant and varying action, a selection of different martial arts styles that are very fun to watch, and a keen attention to smooth cinematography in beautiful Southeast Asian locations. I also award some nods  for a couple fun twists and turns and a heavy emphasis on what I can only assume is actual Thai history and culture. I don't like to feel like I'm learning things watching action flicks, but this easily stayed interesting throughout.

______________


The skinny:

* Pros: Tony Jaa's jaw-dropping skills will make you say "THIS IS INSANE!" out loud, beautiful vistas, ridiculous (and awesome) characters and costumes
* Cons: Having to wait for Ong-bak 3 to come out later this year, feeling like you've exercised just by watching Tony Jaa go crazy for 90 minutes


Make an Assessment:

* If you like Tony Jaa's movies, action movies in general, or watching ridiculous stunts and bone-crushing fighting watch Ong-bak 2. If you don't enjoy those things you won't like 90% of the film, but you can still learn a little bit about Thai history and see some beautiful landscapes.


Overall Review Score (I haven't figured out how I want to do this yet):

* Grade: B+
* Score: 88%
* If it were a movie: ★★★★
* My Feelings: ☺


Hyping up Ong-bak 3 on websites like IMDB and RottenTomatoes will give it a better shot at hitting US theaters. Don't you want to see Tony Jaa knee some 7 ft. tall bald guy's head off on the big screen?