"My Q-Bertese Is A Little Rusty."

WRECK-IT RALPH (2012)

It's been a while since I've laughed this much in a movie theatre. And not just the "haha, everyone around me is laughing so I guess I'll snicker" laugh. A genuine, unflattering bark of a laugh. In a place a least expected it: a child's animated movie. To be fair, something tells me Wreck-It Ralph isn't exactly targeting kids. It's a movie about video-games for video-game lovers, a nostalgic parody of those old school games we once loved. The plot runs like this: Wreck-It Ralph, a video game villain, wants more out of life and starts jumping games to try to win a medal and come back a hero. 

And if you didn't spent the better half of your childhood with a gameboy in hand, don't sweat it--neither did I. Yet I still managed to get most of the references and understood the humor. At the end of the day, it's just a well written, solid script, which seems to be a rarity these days. The characters were great, lovable; the writing was interesting and didn't talk down to its audience; and it was just straight-up fun. Of course, I have to namedrop: we've got a lot of great voice actors in this one. John C. Reilly is Wreck-It Ralph, Sarah Siliverman is the not-so-sweet Vanellope, Jack McBrayer is hilarious as Felix, Jane Lynch is flawless as Calhoun, and Alan Tudyk--yes, Alan Tudyk--makes an appearance as King Candy, though it's near impossible to recognize his voice. In short, I know it's easy to chalk this one up as a "maybe I'll see it, maybe not," but I'm here to tell you the answer is yes. You want to check this one out, if only for nostalgic value. 

"What If?"

THE TIME MACHINE (2002)

Considering the fact that this movie has a tendency to attract bad ratings, I'm probably going to get some raised eyebrows on this one. Full disclaimer: I haven't seen the 1960s Time Machine. I haven't read H.G. Wells' novel. And I definitely did not go into this one expecting some full-on, H.G. Wells intellectualism. I just wanted to see a good, sci-fi movie. And I got exactly what I came for. I'm aware that this movie was made in 2002, but to me, it still carries all the innocence and charm of a good, pre-2000s adventure movie. When adventure movies were full of adventure rather than dead cat skins filled with a CGI stuffing. The good guys are good. The bad guys are bad. And there's just something very genuine about the whole film, a certain kind of honest simply hasn't existed in the past decade or so. 

Maybe the special effects weren't always all that great, but everything was much more organic. It was more believable because the actors were able to act with physical people wearing animatronic masks, rather than trying to respond to black dots on a green screen. Not to mention, there's a sense of wonder about it. Nowadays, characters have a tendency to stride onto another planet with a been there, done that attitude. But audiences remember the wonder they felt as they watched the beast of the Brachiosaurus lumber across the screen in Jurassic Park. They remember the awe of the prized artifacts Indiana Jones dug up from the dirt. Now, The Time Machine is in no way comparable to those two classics, but it carries with it that same, unpolished curiosity as we travel through time and get to experience flashes of the world at different times. And since I am a sap and apparently completely nostalgic for a good, solid adventure movie: four stars to you, Time Machine.

As for the content itself, it's just a fun movie. There isn't actually a whole heck of a lot of plot, more like a starting point, some random stuff in between and an ending point. That said, the acting is all on point. Guy Pearce plays a great, obsessed scientist. With a time machine. Orlando Jones is incredibly likable as a hologram librarian. Jeremy Irons is an crazy albino Legolas. Everyone was exactly what they needed to be and pulled together an engaging, creative movie. 

"He Doesn't Want Us To Cut Through Our Chains."

SAW (2004)

So here's the thing. I actually avoided this one when it came out. I couldn't tell you why. Probably because it was around the time when the theaters were infested with plotless gore and I was over it. I was getting sick and tired of the same "rotting" green filter and the same heavy breathing in the microphone. So I skipped this one. For much too long. Finally, I sat down to see it. And I'll be the first to say it: I was wrong. 

The brilliance of Saw is that it's just a straight-up good movie. There's a good deal of gore, sure, but that's nothing compared to the mindfuck that this movie puts you through every time Jigsaw gets another victim under his grasp. We have our killer, our hero, we even have the obsessive cop with a chip on his shoulder. It's all the makings of a good, physiological thriller. The acting is, for the most part, pretty solid, and it helps that Ben makes an appearance. It puts a lot of twists on what you expect from a horror film and constantly ups the ante. Case in point: tired of the one man fumbling through his dark apartment to avoid a hidden assailant? Try a photographer fumbling through his apartment, constantly flashing pictures to give himself some makeshift light. Brilliant. The music is epic, the pacing is great, I really have no complaints with the movie as it is. 

Of course, one of my favorite things about Saw is how simple it is. The majority of the movie just focuses on two guys in a filthy room. It was created by two film students straight out of school who wanted to make something low-budget and brilliant. Honestly, it doesn't get better than that. What can I say, I'm a sucker for a Cinderella story that ends in a jaw-splitting torture helmet. 

I'm probably the last person on earth to see this movie, so I highly doubt I have to recommend this one to anyone. Onto the rest of the series! 

Politics Vs. Art

It's official: the much anticipated Gangster Squad has been postponed until 2013 due to the fact that it depicts a shooting eerily similar to the Aurora shootings.

Personally, I'm completely torn about how I feel about this. On one hand, I want to commend their tastefulness. The shooting in Aurora was a horrific tragedy. Everyone can agree with that. On the other hand, part of me wonders if this is an appropriate response. A great response to the shooting would be what Christian Bale did--he went around visit victims of the shooting, on his own, without the press. Of course, "without press" means basically nothing in this day and age when it's impossible for an actor to cover his mouth while coughing without it being a PR move. That said, the sentiment was there, and it was a touching move on his part.

But then there's that nagging left side of my brain. The part that can't abide censorship, even under the right circumstances. The part that doesn't like to see art tamed and neutered. The part that believes we shouldn't jump to stigmatize the violence in a movie like that right away--if art is good at anything, it's good at therapy.

I'm sure Warner Bros. knew what they were doing when put this movie on pause. I'm sure every knew what they were doing when they decided to chop out that bit of the script and started to go into reshoots to fill in the gap with something a little more political correct. And, again, I praise them for their tact and respect for everyone affected by the shootings. But there's just a part of me that's uncomfortable with the way they're handling this tragedy. Maybe I'm just a bitter leftist who doesn't like the fact that, while the victims and heroes are (rightly) being showcased in the media, no one is talking about the societal repercussions of glorified villains and a lack of gun control. Windows of discussion that, maybe, a movie like this might have opened up. If you need to chalk it up to that, so be it. But I need some voices to quell that nagging dissent in the back of my head, because I really do want to give three cheers to the decision makers behind this shift in Gangster Squad, and right now I'm at two cheers and a golf clap.

"How Pregnant Did You Get That Girl's Mouth?"

MAGIC MIKE (2012)

This is just going to have to be one of those movies I enjoyed much more than I wanted to. Really, I figured it'd be worth the ticket price for the cat-calling alone. After all, how many movies really bring out the fat construction worker in drunk and happy women? But once we got passed Channing Tatum's ass and a couple dance numbers, something truly weird started to happen. I began--ye gods--to actually enjoy myself! And it wasn't because I'm a bad lesbian. It's because it's actually a damn solid movie. 

Let's look at the facts. Channing Tatum, before his claim to fame on screen, used to strip for money. So he wanted to make a down-to-earth movie about the industry of male stripping. And then the plot bunny fell into the lap of Steven Soderbergh. Done. Let's face it, Soderbergh knows how to do bromances. And that was, essentially, the heart of this movie. A great bromance between Master Stripper Magic Mike (Channing Tatum) and his padawan stripper Adam (Alex Pettyfer). And then there's the tug-and-pull of drugs, sex, and partying way too hard. All the elements are there. The actors are all fantastic (and can do crazy things with their hips). The stripper clan, consisting of Joe Manganiello, Matt Bomer, Adam Rodriguez, and Kevin Nash were all fantastic. But three main characters really held their own--Channing Tatum was a great, charismatic Magic Mike, Alex Pettyfer actually proved to me that he could act, and Cody Horn pulled off a very organic, believable over-protective sister. And, of course, props have to be given to Matthew McConaughey. That man had a bad habit of rubbing me the wrong way but when he lets go and stops taking himself so seriously...he can pull it off. 

I should stop there. I should. But I feel a feminist rant coming on. Nothing wrong with Magic Mike itself--in fact, they did a great job with their female characters. They had a good mix of all kinds of women--bimbos, drug addicts, but also strong, solid-on-their-feet women. Yeah, it was nice to see the female character telling her man to "shut up and look pretty." A little change of pace for Hollywood. My bone to pick has nothing to do with this movie...rather, with these types of movies. Movies about male sexuality. My problem is they're always so fucking good. We've got 8 1/2, Boogie Nights, Shame and now Magic Mike. Really good, solid movies that explore psychological issues and lots of bromance. So what have women got? Burlesque? If this is the best we can do, shoot me now. 

This is my long way of saying: good movie, check it out. And if you don't check it out, look for the soundtrack. Damn catchy tunes.

Getting Adults Out Of Their Diapers.

TWELVE AND HOLDING (2005)

I know, I'm on a Renner rampage. However, Jeremy Renner, as epic as he is, is a shadow in the backdrop of this straight-up good movie. The premise follows like this: after the death of his twin brother, one 12-year old boy and his two best friends struggle to get a hold on plots for revenge, their own wild hormones, and unhealthy family dysfunction. It's a dark, intense movie that keeps the viewer in a vice grip of teenage angst and drama. But this isn't about teen pregnancy or the popular cheerleaders in class. Instead, this is one of the few movies I've seen that treats children with the dignity and the respect they deserve. And it's for that reason alone, really, that I gave this one a full five stars, because children are so often swept under the rug in cinema. Steven Spielberg aside, no one seems to really care about what goes on in the mind of a child, unless they can slap a talking dog in it and sell it for millions. Instead, Twelve And Holding gives the children the much-deserved center stage, while the adults take a backseat. 

In order to have a movie like this work, however, you need good child actors who can handle the heavy material, and not cereal box Anakin Skywalker. And, damn, do these kids hold their own. Watch out for these names, because they're going to get a heck of a lot of recognition when they grow up. Conor Donovan plays the ill-fated twins, giving a performance Cate Blanchett would be proud of. Zoe Weizenbaum (stealing the scene from Jeremy Renner) gives a positively fearless performance as the attention-seeking Malee Chuang. And Jesse Camacho pulls off a bold performance and one of my favorite subplots of the movie as he bears the burden of his family's unhealthy lifestyle. All these kids hold their own, and I really don't know what I'm more impressed with: children who can act like adults, or adults who can write like children. Either way, if you can handle the dark side of growing up, I highly recommend everyone check this own out.

"I'm A Killer...Like You."

DAHMER (2002)

So I finally got around to seeing The Avengers (2012). Which left me, like everyone else, teeming with Avenger fever. So I did the next logical step: I set out to hunt down the Avengers cast on Netflix and see if I could find anything to take the edge off. So I popped in Dahmer. Let's just say I couldn't get further from Hawkeye if I tried. Dahmer is a retelling of the life of Jeffrey Dahmer, a serial killer who murdered 17 men. And occasionally raped them and ate their flesh. Sounds horrifying? It is. Though now have a good theory about where Joss Whedon's Reavers came from.

Dahmer is one of those high-profile stories that demands an audience. However, it's clear that this was the only thing the writers banked on when doing the script. The movie has two timelines running simultaneously alongside each other. Moving forward, we have Jeffrey Dahmer grooming his latest victim--a flashy, flamboyant black man, Rodney. Told in reverse, we have the story of how Jeffrey Dahmer became the psychopath he is. In theory, this kind of storytelling should work, but the transitions are a little too sloppy. We've got flashbacks in flashbacks. Yeah. That.

However, Dahmer has a couple saving graces. The story is twisted and intense. Jeffrey Dahmer is neither demonized or forgiven. But the real reason to see this movie? The acting. After watching Jeremy Renner pull off the calm, rational Hawkeye, you really get the full extent of his acting abilities when you see him as the socially inept, mentally damaged Dahmer. Matching him frame-for-frame is Artel Great, who plays Rodney. Artel Great is full of energy and vibrance and he adds a layer of much-needed humanity to the film. In short, if drawn out scenes of mutilation and psychological torment don't make you run for cover, I'd recommend this one solely for the exceptional acting.