Aliens (1986)

Sequels are hard.  I'm going to repeat that.  Sequels are hard.  Often time they are crafted out of an economic need and not the intent of the artists to continue the story.  Jason X is unspeakably worse than Jason.  If there is no need to make a movie beyond money......don't do it.  (You heard me, Dumb and Dumberer.)  But alas, Aliens is a amazing break from the schlock of my prior sentences.  There is significant time lag between it and the original (1979, 1986).  I think that helps the movie.  It has allowed technology and movie magic to expand to the point wherein the visuals can match the initial impact of the original. I feel like the Matrix Reloaded and "whatever the third was called" suffered from not being able to push the boundaries of visual effects enough to shock us in the way that the original did. (Ohhhhh and they're just not very good.)  Aliens, made on a reasonably small budget, met all the visual requirements that an "Aliens" film must to amaze and suspend disbelief.  Nice job!

I usually don't like James Cameron.  I didn't like Avatar and I saw Piranha.  But, as a follow up to Terminator, Aliens is a resounding success.  The story flows, the editing is quick and sharp, the lighting contrasts to promote terror, and the visuals of the Alien Queen were out of control.  Boom!  Way to cement yourself as a legit director with back to back glory.

One funny thing that I liked about Aliens was the performance of Paul "Mad about You" Reiser.  One thing I thought was terrible was the acting of Bill Pullman.  Sorry, Buddy.

Alien:  There are more of you....See it

Starcraft players: Zurg  See it

Reebok:  See it     Product placement everywhere

Real Steel:  Skip it.  You copied them.

Helen Hunt: See it   You worked with that guy "Burke" for years.

On a scale of MN Twins 2011 to MN Twins 2012, I give Aliens 3.98 stars out of 5.

Die Hard (1988)

 

Die hard rocks pretty hard.  It is totally 80's there is no doubt.  I'm not sure that the movie couldn't be made better by speeding up the timeline....but that's pretty minor.  Here was something I noticed.  There is an incredible list of B-stars in this cast.  Wilhelm von Homburg was Vigo the Carparthian from Ghostbusters II.  Robert Davii I recognize from Stargate Atlantis (among others).  Al Leong was Ghengis Khan from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.  Reginald VelJohnson was the dad on Family Matters.  Paul Gleason was the principal from the breakfast club.  Dennis Hayden was in Action Jackson, and my favorite is that I recognized Clarence Gilyard as Ben Matlock's assistant.  (Wow am I nerdy.)

Die Hard deserves a place of honor in the pantheon of action star films mostly for it's commitment to the reality of a fight, injury over time, and above all for its one-liners.  (Nice Job, Bruce)

Alan Rickman deserves special mention for his perfect interpretation of a self assured, superior, villain.  He seems more real because he is so stylish and well educated.

Ratings

Demi:  See it  (remember the glory years.)

Action Cravers:  See it

Dates:  Skip it  (This is a movie for guys who like movies.)

FBI:  Skip it (You look bad.)

B-list actors:  See it  (There are so many of you.)

On a scale from Oops all berries to Cooooookie Crisp, I give Die Hard 3.69 out of 5 stars.  

  

Wall-E (2008)

Bravo Pixar!   You basically appoint me with every movie.  Wall-E is phenomenal.  I would state that the first half of the movie before they go into space is significantly better (borderline cinematic wonder) than the second half.  The plot surrounding the return of humans to Earth from the clutches of Automation is just not as truly and ineffably brilliant.  However it does not detract from the film.
Without the clutter of excessive dialogue or need to drive a plot, Wall-E shines in subtle salute to humanity's past, present, and future.  I like that Wall-E is a PC and EVE is a mac.  I love the use of la vie en rose coupled with classic iconography and charlie chaplin schtick.  One would not think robot silent film and physical comedy would pair so well, but they do.

Ratings:

Those that think different:  See it

Those that think at all:  See it

Those unsure of our destiny:  See it

Hate the environment:  Skip it

Hate Hello Dolly:  Skip it

On a scale from Azimov to Herbert, I give Wall-E 4.1 out of 5 stars.

Good Will Hunting (1997)

I'm always sort of astounded that Ben Afleck and Matt Damon won an Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay.  It's very strange  because the screen play for Good Will Hunting is absurdly good, and I like Matt Damon and tolerate Ben Afleck (I saw Gigli.) so my inability to process that THEY won an Oscar defies logic.  There was one technical point that I notice this time.  I'm not sure if it was the editor's or the director's decision to include so many pillow shots of Boston to act as interludes but, I found them annoying.  Additionally, I didn't like Minnie Driver in this role.  I know she was nominated for an Oscar for it, but.....meh.

Good Will Hunting is now 15 years old.  It is not new or ground breaking.  It has been copied and parodied many times, (perhaps too many times.) However, it is a probably will always be a movie that is worth watching on just about every level.  Some movies reach.  Some movies pander.  Audiences and I seem to enjoy watching movies succeed at their goals.  Good Will Hunting reached its very high goal and for that it should be applauded.

Ratings:

Southies:  See it

Therapists:  See it

Know it alls:  See it

Poker Players:  Skip it

MIT gradates:  Skip it

On a scale of Gigli to Dazed and Confused, I give Good Will Hunting, 4.00000001 out of 5 stars.  

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Whoa!!  Tarantino?  How were you able to pull off this insane and yet diabolical ode to vengeance on the screen?  The only part of this movie that I didn't find fascinating was Brad Pitt.  (and I like Brad Pitt,)  Lots of times symbolism goes over my head.  It's hard for a movie to communicate political or social theses without disrupting the plot of a movie or seeming pretentious. Nice job Quentin.  (oh and thanks for providing me with a slightly more gruesome image to replace the one from Old Boy where teeth are pulled out with the back of a hammer.)

The symbolism:  The one that I want to talk about was at the end of the movie...wherein the Nazi's are watching a movie of Nazi's slaughtering Americans and British troops and laughing, all the while we are watching a movie about American and British officers that mercilessly slaughter Nazis for our entertainment.  The juxtaposition is too eerie to ignore.    

The languages:  I applaud most English speaking directors that go out of their way to make American audiences read and uncomfortable by using different languages.  It's kind of a "screw you" to dullard audiences.  I thought Inglourious Basterds did an amazing job of merging French, English, German, and even some Italian into a smooth story that didn't lose potency because of strange character interactions.  I also thought that having the "give-away" be a gesture and not a word was a brilliant subtle cue by the Tarantino that even our bodies betray our origins.

Ratings:

Nazis:  Skip it

Not good with blood:  Skip it

Afraid of giant heads laughing maniacally through fire:  Skip it

Realists:  Skip it (It's a fantasy after all)

Cinaphiles:  See it

On a scale of The Great Escape to Leather Clad Nazi Werewolf Women of the SS, I give Inglourious Basterds 3.89 out of 5 stars.

Despicable Me (2010)

A wonderful, woefully predictable, and lovely movie.  Cliche?  Yes.  Funny?  Yes.  Heartwarming?  Most definitely.  "So fluffy you're going to die?" "Ohh Yeah!!"

Excellent choice of voice actors.  Steve Carell, Jason Segel, and the little girls were excellent.  Nice job, on the creation of the piranha gun and the squid launcher.

Enjoy the dance at the end.

Ratings:

Three little kittens:  See it

Fluffy Unicorns: See it

Pinky and the Brain: Skip it

Disney: Skip it

Kids of all ages and hearts: See it

On a scale of Kung fu Panda to the original animated "Hobbit", I give Despicable Me 2.98 out of 5 stars.  

Predator (1987)

I had never actually seen Predator from start to finish.  I've seen it many times on TV with commercials and edits.  As is just about always the case, there is no substitute for the real thing.  The plot of Predator is actually quite ingenious.  How can the writers get a cast of two ex governors and Carl Weathers into the jungle with an amazing amount of weaponry?  The answer: fake military insertion into hostile guerrilla jungle.  (Nice job, writers.)  The plot is meaningless.  The setting is what is stellar.  It is slightly sad to see so much rainforest destroyed for the sake of a movie, but in 2010; sunk costs are sunk costs.
In terms of actually describing and understanding the "predator" as movie creation the best I can say "pretty good".  The predator, when seen, is on par with the best good monster movies have to offer and has an intriguing yet unanswered background.  But, I want to focus on director John McTiernan's decisions to go with far more cinematic, gutsy, and above all scary approach of not showing the monster until the end.  The idea of the invisible enemy, the camera shots of trees, the in and out focus on nothing, the predator's signature cackle, all create the suspense that all the subsequent feature predator movies lack.  Without the John McTiernan this movie would have been a colossal failure.  Thus does Predator stand as a mediocre example of classic tension building and audience investment.  It is a stellar action movie of the 80's, but one should place it outside of the category "80's monster-fest" and into a relm of " 80's monster fest standard-setter".

Ratings

Aliens:  See it

Jesse "The Body":  You were in it

Jesse "The Mind":  Skip it, "you might not like what you were.....

Political aspirants:  See it

Dates:  Skip it

On a scale of Zoolander to Zulu, I give Predator 3.5 out of 5 stars.