Bottle Shock (2008)

"You think I'm an ass, and I'm not.  It's just that I'm British, and you are not." (Steven Spurrier -Alan Rickman)

Besides the one glaringly bad aspect of Bottle Shock and some minor plot questions, a good cast pulls of a movie about a story that didn't seem to have enough muscle to merit a movie.  Nice job.

And the award for the worst wig I have seen since John Travolta's in Battlefield Earth..goes to-(Drumroll)-  Chris Pine's terrible locks in Bottle Shock in 2008.

No seriously, the wig is so bad it jarringly knocked me out of the story and my interest more than a dozen times.

Beyond that, I was slightly confused as to why the love interest, Sam, in the context of Bo and Gustavo was included in the story.  Obviously, Sam may have been extremely important the actual events in 1973...but as far as the movie goes, a lot of the character's and their plots were somehow superfluous to the main story line.  (Bradley Whitford shows up for a memorable 4 minutes....only to never be seen again.)

Ratings:

Vinophiles:  Sure,  indulge yourself

Snobby Vinophiles:  You shouldn't lower your standards

Love Alan Rickman?:  See it

Passionate about your work?:  See it

On a scale of Pinot to Poirot, I give Bottle Shock 3.3 out of 5 stars.

Brave (2012)

"Mor'duuuuuuuuuuuuuu" (Princess Merida)

Well chalk one up for being human and the conservation of greatness.  Pixar is not destined to make mind-bogglingly good movies forever.  While, I fully acknowledge that Brave is a good movie.  It will never be in the pantheon of "Pixar" movies.  There is something often inexplicable about having pinash.  It's a shame that Brave does not have it.

The Good:  I actually enjoyed the whole concept that our villain in this movie was a giant non-talking demon bear.  It was even cool to learn his backstory.  The bear as force and as opposition for our characters had a lot of potential.  (I'm not entirely convinced that Brave's writers used this to its full potential but... it's all good.)

The So-So:  There were roughly three montages to music that took place during the film.  Two of them are used to establish/break, and rebuild the relationship between mother and daughter.  I didn't mind the first montage.  It was sharp and crisp in cuts in addition to providing a sense of timing and frustration.  However, the counterpoint montage mostly failed to deliver on any of the promise of plot or emotions of the characters.  It was just daughter and bear set to off-putting music.

The Questionable:   This may be wrong but, I got the distinct feeling from Brave that Pixar very much wanted to do a Scottish movie.  So the style, location, and feel were ingrained in the staff before they chose the story.  My opinion is that movies are generally better when one chooses a quality story before the location and accents.  So this is probably the reason that I did not connect with this Brave in the same way that I have with other Pixar movies in the past.  (This is not meant as a jibe at the storyline of Brave.)

Ratings:

Craig Ferguson:  Of course you saw it.  (Is there a Scottish related animated film that you are not in?)

Princesses:  See it

Scotsmen:  Skip it  (I just think you would feel bad about how thick and silly the accents are.)

Cineaphiles:  Skip it

Demon Bears:  See it

On a scale of Bob Villa to Bob Costas, I give Brave 3 out of 5 stars.

Sabrina (1954)

"Democracy can be a wickedly cruel thing Sabrina.  Nobody poor was ever called democratic for marrying somebody rich."  (Thomas Fairchild)

Ahhh Audrey Hepburn,  You were, and since your immortalized on film will always be, gorgeous.  Humphrey Bogart, no one delivers one liners like you.  I've seen you say horrible things to people in like 6 movies and people and characters still seem to adore you.  It's a rare gift.  William Holden, you were perfect in your role, except that I kept thinking about how much you look like Connor Trinneer http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0872997/  .  Simple 50s plot, simple direction, an excellent script, and fantastic use of music.  I do love "la vie en rose".  and Yes, I,too, have no bananas today. I was suitably impressed with Billy Wilder's ability to keep the plot going when the action was taking place in multiple locations.  Under less able hands it actually might have gotten confusing.  Additionally, I think that its refreshing to go back and see a movie that isn't under the constant pressure of a modern motion picture to "go faster".  I think Sabrina is something like 90 minutes, but it feels blessedly longer.  -Cant's say that about too many films.  I completely agree with any city's decision to show this movie in the park after sunset on a warm summer evening.

Ratings:

Dates:  No brainer,  See it

Getting over a breakup?:  Sure...at least it won't make things worse.

Love Paris?:  Watch this, and then watch a movie that takes place in Paris

Grinches:  Skip it

Want to be effortlessly gorgeous?:  See it.  Men watch Humphrey B.  Women watch Audrey H.

On a scale from Yachting to Submarining, I give Sabrina (1954) 3.8 out 5 stars.

God Bless America (2011)

"Naw, I don't want to kill that guy, I want him to suffer."  (Joel Murray)

Well done Bobcat.  Well done.  When I was told that Bobcat Goldwaith had directed  a shoot-em-up about taking back rage on mean people.  I was intrigued but had very very low expectations.  Interestingly, I was not as impressed with the plot of the movie as much as I was floored by the craft and effort it took to make this movie with heart and the best of intentions.  (The irony of what i write in comparison to the film is so thick, I could spread it on rocks.)  I also want to congratulate Joel Murray on a job well done. -Yes, Joel Murray: the other other Murray.  It is semi-unfortunate that you were outshown by Bobcat.

I think the way to tell that movie is made by a true craftsman and not just some hack is that they know how to flow seamlessly between scenes and stretch the narrative to include dichotomies that are simple and profound. It's so hard to do the simple things well. Cuts-pans, overlays, and inter-splices are so easy to overlook but so glaringly obvious when they are done poorly.   I like the music matched the actions seamlessly without becoming a soundtrack, and best of all that scenes could play with other times and spaces to bridge gaps in the story was magnificent.  For example, at one point our main character is disgusted by a spoiled child, that interplays perfectly with his own child demanding an Ipod.

This movie also knew how to play right into my dislikes of useless people, mean people, and above all "My Super Sweet Sixteen."  There is no greater sin than giving a child teenager everything they could possibly want.

Ratings

Mean Douche Bags:  See it

You talk in the Theater:  Be afraid.  Be very afraid

Feel like you TV is just yelling at you sometimes:  See it

Wallow in your own idiocy and sloth?:  Skip it

Haters:  See it

On scale from Parthenon to the Colosseum, I give God Bless America 3.68 out of 5 stars.

    

Extract (2009)

"There he goes....Johnny-horse-cock."  (Ben Afleck, as Dean)

Whelming, Yup, Whelming.  I'm going to admit that I watched this movie because I was actually looking to watch whatever that movie with JT and Mila Kunis was, but I ended up watching this.  Yup.

Extract features a reasonable cast, and they do reasonable jobs. -oh but Gene Simmons is in this movie for just a few minutes and he is pretty great.  Pure bilious swill erupts from his mouth.

I will also add that for a movie that was supposedly featuring Mila Kunis as a "sex-pot" con-artist, she was not in the movie enough for her to meet the requirements of the archetype, and she was not given the camera-time or super shots to be enticing.  (I found her way more attractive in Black Swan.)  Her acting was just fine...I just wish the editors, Mike Judge, the producers, and writers had not squandered her talents.

Strangely, Extract spent a lot of time with Ben Afleck's character who was actually non-essential to the plot.  So, while he was funny....I don't get that either.

In the end, while the movie was acceptable and even respectable "I chuckled a couple times; mostly at David Koechner".  Extract was a diluted Office Space.

Ratings:

On a date?:  There could be worse choices

Got the giggles:  Sure, see it

Actually make extract for a living:  Skip it

Pool boys:  See it

Con-Artists:  Skip it

On a scale of plumber's trap to plumber's crack, I give Extract (2009), 2.7 out of 5 stars.

Under Siege (1992)

"All my life, Saturday morning cartoons; the best."  (William Stranix -Tommy Lee Jones)

Ohhh Steven Seagal,  I simultaneously don't watch enough of your movies, and should forget that I have seen  most of your movies.  Interestingly enough, Under Siege is the least formulaic of all the Steven Seagal movies I can remember.  There are notable and credible actors that perform with Seagal-(Nick Nolte, Tommy Lee Jones, Colm Meany).  Most other Seagal films can't attract other actors.  The movie does not end with the classic round-house kick.  (I was shocked!!)

There were highlights and laudable things about Under Siege. (Yup). Some of these were Tommy Lee Jones,   the Seagal fight sequences, the writing, and the explosions.  If I didn't mention it in the above list, it was wretchedly bad.

Tommy Lee Jones:  I honestly forgot that you were in this film, and that you were without question the best actor and most interesting character in the movie.  I think the idea of a slightly deranged post-yet wannabe Vietnam era warrior on a mission to make a little money and show the world its failings is very interesting.  I wonder if they will just make the character wish he had been in Iraq when they remake this movie in 2030.

Steven Seagal fighting:  Yes, there is a specific way to fight like SS.  It is undeniable.  In Under Siege, as usual guns are abhorred.  (at least generally.)  But as the "throat rip out" and Tommy Lee "eye pull out" were still "ohhhhhhhhh^^^" inducing in a small crowd, I have to applaud this specific film's Seagal style.

Th writing:  To all Under Siege writing staff;   well done on interesting monologues for Tommy Lee Jones, and finding the best way to get a buxom and silly (and poor actress) Erika Eleniak onto a military vessel for Seagal to stumble upon.  (The answer is: in a cake.)

The explosions:  There aren't that many in Under Siege, but they are acceptable and well crafted as movie explosions go.  Way to go technical crew.

Ratings

Guys in a backyard on a projection screen: See it

Girls:  If you want... but I wouldn't

Muscle bound?:  It's not that kind of action film

Martial Artists:  Skip it

Military cooks:  See it and dream

On a scale of Charles Bronson to Marlon Brando, I give Under Siege 2.3 out of 5 stars.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

* I watched this while shaking heavy heavy kegs of beer- I may have missed some stuff.

"I've knocked out Hitler like 92 times." (Capt. America)

I think Marvel has stumbled onto one of the better strategies for making bankable movies.  Step one, avoid excessive focus on non-story elements like new technology, and visual wizardry.  (Those are important, but the moment they are the focus of the movie....) Step 2, hire a cast of recognizable actors to play all the fun roles and to ensure that the performances have substance.  Step 3, make sure that your writers stick to the essentials of the story, and only add flourishes where appropriate.  Step 4, profit.   Captain America: The First Avenger does these ordinary things very well and is thus a highly acceptable movie.

Step 1,  The focus of the movie is always on the Capt.  There are no shout outs of ridiculous "look at me" special effect shots.  I admit that the whole zip lining onto a train was pretty cool, but I wouldn't consider it flashy.  They develop his backstory, love interest, friends, and mission without fuss, muss or grandstanding.

Step 2:  Hugo Weaving as the Red Skull (Check), Stanley Tucci as brilliant German scientist with a pension for schnapps (Check), Tommy Lee Jones as gruff military officer "I'm not going to kiss you." (Check), and even Neal McDonough -I recognize you for just about everything. (Check)  Chris Evans and Hayley Atwell you were acceptable.

Step 3  I think what was really impressive about this movie was they way that the director used montages to accomplish storyline essentials like the passage of time, or the learning of a skill.  They were very well done, cut down on extraneous scenes and met all their established criteria.  They writers were good enough to keep their extraneous character development to well placed liners and some monologues.  I thought it was a good touch to have the Captain point out all the places that he had been beat up.

Step 4:  I'm pretty sure they did.

Ratings

Hydra:  You have so many heads and eyes you have to see it at some point.

Historians:  Skip it

Not an American?:  Skip it or see it (Spoiler: this is a pro-america movie.)

Scientists:  Skip it  No one wants to hear about how the science is bunk.

WWII vets:  See it with your relations and then tell them a story about how it really was.

On a scale of WWF to WWE, I give Captain America: The First Avenger 3.1 out of 5 stars.