The Weekend Line Up- June 1

Wondering what to watch this weekend?  Here are the new releases coming to a theater near you!

Snow White and the Huntsman
In a twist to the fairy tale, the Huntsman ordered to take Snow White into the woods to be killed winds up becoming her protector and mentor in a quest to vanquish the Evil Queen. -IMDb

 Snow White and the Huntsman, seems to be the headliner for this weekend's new releases.  Yes this is the second Snow White adaptation released this year, but it clearly takes a different direction than Mirror, Mirror.  As a sucker for a good fairy tale adaptation, this film intrigues me.  Though I do not plan to use this blog to intentionally bash a particular franchise or actor/actress, I do have opinions.  I, personally, do not particularly like Kristen Stewart's acting.  Hopefully she will make a good performance for a film that seems like an action-packed take on a tale that I have always found particularly gruesome.  It will be interesting to see Snow White as a strong. independent character who saves herself.  Expect to see me do a review on this one!  Rated PG-13.

On a side note, if you happen to be into Snow White, I recently read a book (not what this blog is dedicated to, I know!) called Fairest of All.  It is authorized by Disney and tells the Evil Queen's story.  It describes her descent into madness and how it affected her love for Snow.  I recommend it!

Piranha 3DD

After the events at Lake Victoria, the pre-historic school of blood-thirsty piranhas make their way into a newly opened waterpark. -IMBd

Seems like the standard Hollywood smut-humor-horror flick, now in 3D! or excuse me, 3DD.  Okay, if you are into that sort of thing.  I predict the majority of its sales will be in the teenage/early twenties male demographic.  Rated R.

Battlefield America

A young businessman who lands a community service sentence falls in with a group of misfit kids who need mentoring. With the help of a pro instructor, he works to get the kids ready for a big underground dance competition. -IMBd

As this seems to be an inspirational story and it is a musical, it is probably not releasing quite as widely as the two previous movies discussed.  Only one theater out of six or so around me are playing it, so be sure to check your theater ahead of time if you want to see this one.  Rated PG-13.

On limited release this weekend:

For Greater Glory

A chronicle of the Cristeros War (1926-1929); a war by the people of Mexico against the atheistic Mexican government. -IMBd

From the few TV spots of this I have seen on the History Channel, it looks interesting and it features a pretty strong cast.  I have not learned about this war before, so I would like to see it.  Unfortunately, I will probably not get to see it until it comes to DVD.  If it is in a theater near you, it may be worth a look.  Rated R.

If you see any of these movies, please comment and tell us what you think of them!  Happy watching!

Katelyn

P.S. Also coming this weekend:  Victoria's wedding!  Congratulations to the bride-to-be and her groom!

The Future

Well, ladies and gentlemen, Victoria and I have reached the end of our semester.  For this summer, Victoria and I have a couple of new goals and ideas for the blog and now we will finally have time to implement them.  First, we will change the way we post.  We will make our reviews shorter and more concise.  We will also try to watch and review movies in a timely manner, which was just not possible with school work burying us.  We will also be branching out into opinion and news pieces, like Victoria's pieces on Chick Flicks and The Hobbit.  About once a week, we will try to post a list of films coming out that weekend, along with any plans we have for reviewing within the next week.

So, that is the immediate future... let's talk about next semester.  Sadly Victoria and I will not be able to watch movies together in the fall.  More happily, the reason is because I will be studying in the UK!  Hopefully I will have time to watch and review movies there, but I make no guarantees.  Victoria will also be going through some happy changes, as she is getting married next week!  So you see, things will be different for us in the coming months, but we have no intentions to stop blogging so we hope that our readers do not stop reading.

If anyone has any suggestions for us or things that you would like to see happen with this blog, feel free to leave us a comment.  We truly value your opinion as we work to make this blog more informative and entertaining.

Katelyn

Dark Shadows

I went and saw Dark Shadows yesterday morning.  This film is based on an old 60's soap opera of the same name, and the style of the film greatly reflects this.  Before I review this film, I'd like to take a moment to issue a disclaimer:

I AM NOT A TIM BURTON FAN.

Movie Poster for Dark Shadows

However, I liked the film!  It managed to be an excellent mix between drama and comedy, and some of the humor was rather dark while other bits were quite light.  It meshed together well to create an interesting film.  The storyline was simple enough to follow but complicated enough to be interesting, and the film definitely sets itself up for a sequel in a couple years (big surprise there).  My one complaint is that I wish there were fewer sexual references/scenes, though other people may not be as bothered by those things as I am.

Even thought I usually can't stand Tim Burton, I feel like he didn't try to take this film to the next level of weirdness and creepiness, which worked out well for me, at least.  It kept to his style without being over the top, and for the type of film this was intended to be, his style worked perfectly.  The characters were decently believable (though, of course, greatly exaggerated), and there were several excellent actors.

Also, FINALLY there is a good, nice, intelligent character named Victoria!  Seriously, all the Victoria's are either evil, annoying, or dim-witted, so it's nice to see my name put to dignified use!

All in all, I'd recommend this film to anyone who likes Johnny Depp or Tim Burton, or anyone who likes dramatic yet funny vampire/horror-type films.  I rate this film a C+.

Cheers,
Victoria

PS: Katelyn and I hope to be making a post about our summer and fall semester plans in the near future.

How to Create a Decent Chick Flick

I have found that chick flicks often get a bad rap for being pointless, silly, and as far from life-like as you can get with live action and no special effects.  However, I think that there are levels of quality for chick flicks, and I have come across several of them that are actually pretty good films, even according to non-chick flick standards.  So I'd like to take some time to go over several things that can turn a silly chick flick into a good general film.

1.) Believable characters
Love at first sight hardly ever happens in the real world, and relationships have to be founded on much more than a single glance.  The characters in a good chick flick are believable; they are not flawless or wonderful people.  In fact, often the chick flick characters with the biggest personality glitches are the best ones.  Take, for example, the film Two Weeks Notice  starring Sandra Bullock and Hugh Grant.  Sandra Bullock plays an organized, highly goal-oriented workaholic and Hugh Grant plays a spoiled millionaire who doesn't take anything seriously and can barely take care of himself.  These two personalities are meant to clash horribly, creating part of the plot of the film, but they also seem to complete each other in some way.  It works out into a lovely and memorable film.  The two personalities are also believable because both characters have normal faults (Bullock's being that she is often too serious about things and Grant's being that he is horribly irresponsible and selfish) and they come together in a way that would be completely normal for regular people (she works for him).  The believability is what makes this film work.

2.) Have a plot that doesn't center completely on romance.
I know that the point of most chick flicks is that the man and woman fall in love.  It's what happens in 99% of them, so it's not anything new.  In order to have a quality chick flick that isn't just the cheesiest thing you've ever seen, it has to have SOMETHING ELSE in it besides romance.  The plot of the film needs to be driven by something other than two characters longing for each other and all the things that stand in their way.  It's boring, it's old, and it's been overdone so many times that it's not even funny.  (I think the only film I'll allow to get away with this one is Sleepless in Seattle, but that one's a classic, the chick flick of all chick flicks.)  Films like The Notebook, while they are sweet and make you cry, are pretty darn boring.  You know they're going to be together in the end.  That's what those films do.  It wouldn't be a proper chick flick if that didn't happen, and everyone who watches it knows that's what's going to happen (if you say you really thought she was gonna go for the other guy, then you are just gullible or kidding yourself).  Chick flicks with plots that have something going for them other than romance tend to be much more entertaining to watch and also much more believable.  Usually there is something else going on that acts as a catalyst for the romance between the two characters, something that forces them together in a way they would not normally be together.  Being stranded on an island, having to pretend to date to avoid being deported, dating someone on a bet or for some sort of payment, or even an unlikely work pairing all form better story lines than just a simple romance.  10 Things I Hate About You (based on Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew) is an excellent example of this.  Sure, Kat and Patrick fall for each other in the end...that's expected.  But that wouldn't have happened if A) The characters did not both have pretty glaring personality flaws, B) Kat's father wasn't super overprotective and C) Patrick was not paid to take her out.  There's a whole other list of story lines in this film besides two people falling in love: the development of the sisters' relationship, the loss of the mother and dealing with the over-protectiveness of the father, Cameron's silent admiration of Bianca as well as her development into a character that the audience doesn't want to just slap, and especially the character development of both Kat and Patrick separately.  All the things that happen in the film help move it toward the denouement of Kat and Patrick falling in love, but they could not have fallen in love without the rest of the plot.

3.) Go easy on the cheese.
I know that in a chick flick, it's difficult not to include lines like "The best love is the kind that awakens the soul and makes us reach for more, that plants a fire in our hearts and brings peace to our minds"  (The Notebook), but really, lines like that don't help the movie.  It might make the girls sigh, but in the end it just makes everyone want to groan and roll their eyes.  Lines like that might sound good at first, but if you heard them in real life, you'd probably wanna puke.  Try for witty instead of gushingly romantic, those often create the best chick flicks (see Pride and Prejudice for proof).


4.) Cliches are only okay if used in a creative manner.
I'm not gonna go on a tirade about staying away from cliches.  Sometimes you really do need them (after all, aren't chick flicks kinda cliche in themselves??).  But try not to use cliches in a cliche way, if you catch my drift.  If your characters need to have a romantic, climactic kiss, please don't spin the camera around them while they stand on a hill in the bright, golden sunlight.  That's cheesy.  Perhaps they could have their climactic kiss in a hallway or standing outside a car (kisses in cars are also a horribly cliche way of doing things).  The climactic kiss in How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days happens in a bathroom in Ben's parent's house - very not cliche.  Also, balcony scenes should be avoided unless there's a new and creative way to use it (I can't think of one off the top of my head).  Also avoid romance scenes in the rain.  Ugh, those are pretty bad.


5.) Make sure the film makes you happy...happy endings are a must.
I think at least 90% of all regular films have happy endings in some way or another.  Chick flicks basically require a happy ending...the point of watching a chick flick most of the time is to feel good, right??  So you can't have your characters hate each other at the end.  Some chick flicks get away with a sweet but sad ending (like P.S. I Love You), but most of them need a happy ending to hold it all together.  You can have a happy ending without being horribly cheesy.  After all, everyone expects that the characters will fall in love at the end, so it's not like that fact alone will start up the groan machine.  This is the point where even the best chick flicks sometimes fail.  The happy ending/fall in love/happily ever after moment doesn't have to be the biggest cliche of the film.  With a bit of creativity, it can be something unique.  I think 10 Things I Hate About You is a good example (though I won't spoil the ending for you...if you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about...her list and the guitar, or rather the idea of those things, is a pretty good ending).  


Overall, I must say that it is quite possible to have a really good chick flick.  So the next time someone wants  to watch one, don't groan and resign yourself to a horrible experience.  Instead, find some of the good ones and suggest one of those.  You might just share a valuable cinematic experience.  Who knows??

Hunger Games

Let me begin by getting my fan-girling out of the way.  OH MY GOSH!  THE MOVIE WAS AMAZING!!!  There.  I am better now, and ready to be objective.  Dignity, always dignity.

In all seriousness, The Hunger Games was one of the better book adaptations I have seen.  Though extreme book purists (a category I usually put myself in) may have a problem with the decision to move outside of Katniss' perspective, I thought that the scenes outside of the arena added a lot of depth to the plot and the world of Panem.  Fans can rest assured that the director Gary Ross and producers did not high-jack the story from Collins and have their way with it; in fact she wrote the first draft of the screenplay.  Characters like Senca Crane, Caesar Fickerman, and President Snow, who barely make an appearance in the book, are much more central to the movie.  I believe this was crucial to the casual viewer's understanding of the social and political structure of Panem, in addition to being very good scenes.  These actors (especially Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman) did an impeccable job.  Overall, even though the screenwriters did not chain themselves to the text, it was faithful to the essence of the story as well as the plot.

Okay, now it is time for the gripes.  For the first time, my major complaints are not about the movie itself, but the reaction to it.  I saw it once at the midnight release and once on a weeknight.  What disturbed me most of all was when viewers would laugh or cheer at the death of a tribute.  Do you know who else gets excited about a tribute's death?  That's right, the Capitol.  Part of the blame belongs with the film because it made the careers into the main villains, but that does not change the fact that they were children who died especially horrific deaths (If you would like to read more about this, see the pre-Hunger Games post).  In the end, the writers did try to humanize Cato, but it was too little too late.  I also took issue with the odd little Cato/Glimmer thing going on.  That came out of left field.  Laughing and cheering was not as much of a problem on the weekday viewing.  I understand that it is premiere night, and its exciting, but let's not forget what the book actually stood for.  If you read the book and thought the killing was supposed to something to cheer for, maybe we read different books.  The movie is not meant to glorify the Games; it is meant to condemn them and the society they stand for.  Frankly, I thought the cheering was disgusting.

Moving on to the actual film... Gary Ross was loving the shaky-cam.  If you are easily motion-sick, be forewarned and sit high up and in the center.  In action sequences, it was a good effect and it was not distracting.  It may also be theorized that it kept the viewer from focusing on the acts of violence, which kept it in the range of a PG-13 rating.  This may be true, but many PG-13 movies have a fair amount of violence without using shaky-cam.  Granted, they are not brutally killing children.  In the opening establishing sequence, I found the shots hard to watch.  I heard someone on another site (sorry I forgot which one) say it was like they taped the camera to a chihuahua.  I have to agree with that.  The cutting in this sequence was interesting (and plentiful) and I think it would have sufficed to make the scene visually compelling.  Combined with the shaky-cam, it was a bit dizzying.  As the movie progressed, I am not sure if Ross used less of the shaky-cam, or I became more used to it, but it was less noticeable.  All and all, I wish it was used less in non-action shots, but I did not think it took too much away.

I have talked about the adult actors, so now I will talk about the younger actors.  I was skeptical of the casting choices going in, but the film sold me.  Jennifer Lawrence (Katniss) was excellent, and though Josh Hutcherson (Peeta) was a bit upstaged by her for the most part, he held his own.  Their chemistry was good and the romance believable, even if the pacing made it somewhat rushed.  Book readers will know why believable romance could be a bit of a problem, but there are small signs that Katniss isn't fully in it the same way Peeta is.  These could be missed by someone who wasn't looking for them, but as there was no voice-over (thank goodness!) viewers could not be in Katniss' head.  The signs were subtle, but they were there.  Amandla Stenberg was an excellent Rue.  She was sweet and innocent... exactly what Rue should be.  With what little we saw, Dayo Okeniyi as Thresh was good, but there was not much of it.  I can honestly say there was not a single cringe-worthy performance, and with a younger cast, that is saying something.

Overall, I liked the look of this film (minus the shaky-cam) and I thought the screenwriting was done well.  The actors didn't just fill in their roles, they made them come alive.  It has great re-watch value--the second time was even better than the first.  I give this film an A-

Katelyn

The Hobbit's Worry

Director Peter Jackson has apparently filmed The Hobbit at 48 fps (frames per second), double the normal rate, and people are freaking out.  Some think that it's a horrible idea and will make the film difficult to watch.  Others praise Jackson as a pioneer for new film technology.  I think that this will definitely be something interesting to see.

The Hobbit is J.R.R. Tolkien's prequel to his famous Lord of the Rings trilogy, following the adventures of Bilbo Baggins of Bag End as he embarks on an adventure (sent by Gandalf the Grey) to help several dwarves reclaim their homeland.  Along the way, he stumbles upon the One Ring, and so the epic journey begins.

The trailer for this film looks absolutely amazing.  The Lord of the Rings films are well-known for being fantastic films, and The Hobbit looks like it's going the same way.  Here is the official trailer for the film, due out December 14 of this year:

The Hobbit will actually be split into two films, I believe, with the first being called The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.  

An article from Hypable.com addresses Peter Jackson's thoughts on the negative reactions he's received for his use of 48 fps technology to shoot the film:

http://www.hypable.com/2012/04/28/peter-jackson-addresses-hobbit-48-fps-concerns-nobody-is-going-to-stop/

Jackson spoke to Entertainment Weekly:

Peter Jackson says the negative reaction this week over new technology he’s using to shoot The Hobbit won’t hold him back, and he hopes moviegoers will give it a try and judge for themselves.
“Nobody is going to stop,” he said. “This technology is going to keep evolving.”
He hopes critics of the format will change their minds when they see the finished film.
“At first it’s unusual because you’ve never seen a movie like this before. It’s literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn’t last the entire experience of the film; not by any stretch, after 10 minutes or so,” Jackson tells EW. “That’s a different experience than if you see a fast-cutting montage at a technical presentation.”
So what does he say to people who just decide they don’t like the glossy new look of the format he’s using?
“I can’t say anything,” Jackson acknowledges. “Just like I can’t say anything to someone who doesn’t like fish. You can’t explain why fish tastes great and why they should enjoy it.”

I personally trust Jackson's decision.  Someone in the comments of the article pointed out the worry when Jackson wanted to use motion capture to make the character of Gollum feel more realistic for The Lord of the Rings, and that turned out splendidly.  Jackson knows how to make a good film, so people should let him.  We shall view the finished product on December 14 and make our judgments afterwards.  Let Jackson make the film he wants.  He made three fantastic ones before, I'm sure he'll do it again.

Meanwhile, I'm going to watch that trailer over and over again, just for the chills it gives me.