REVIEW: Sin Nombre

16 01 2010

A few years ago, I watched an episode of “South Park” called “Simpsons Already Did It” that changed the way I view a lot of things. In the episode, one of the cartoon scoundrels is plotting with his best friend to bring about the demise of the show’s four main characters. Every time he comes up with what he thinks is an incredibly ingenious idea, the friend turns to him and says, “No, the Simpsons already did that.” In essence, the message that I got from these deliberations is that something isn’t worth doing is someone else has already done it.

If only someone were sitting at the table with Cary Joji Fukunanga when he was writing “Sin Nombre.” They could have given him a reality check.

“‘City of God‘ already did it.” Not only does “City of God” do a lot of what “Sin Nombre” does, but it also executes it with more grace and skill.

It’s a brutal movie – not the content, the experience of sitting down for an hour and a half and watching this. “Sin Nombre” has the plot sustainability of a ten-minute short film; by doing simple math, it is nine times too long. It wants to be a little bit of everything: a ganster movie, an exposé of poverty, a gripping emotional ride, and a touching human drama. But the movie doesn’t help itself by dividing up its attention between all four of them. It spreads itself too thin even though it has nothing to spread.

I haven’t talked much about the plot, but I will let you know that it is a story about illegal immigrants crossing into the United States. I feel sympathy for them on a human level; however, it’s hard to care too much because these are people who cause constant political turmoil. Given how boring Fukunanga’s movie is, I would have been much more interested in watching the characters stand in line trying to get a green card. D /





Random Factoid #172

16 01 2010

Because I am so enamored by movies, my house obviously has a lot of them.  This also means that we are constantly lending them out to friends.  I have already written a memorial to all of the lost DVDs that have resulted from this sharing, but I have never shared how I combated this senseless loss.

I created a monster Word document called “Our DVD Library.”  I catalogued all of our DVD inventory, and I wrote the name of the movie and the number of disks on the document.  I even threw in the release date just for kicks.  Next to all of this was a place where we could write where the movie went.

Did it work?  I don’t know.  If we have lost a DVD recently, I stopped doing inventory about 5 years ago, so the Word document wouldn’t help.





Random Factoid #171

15 01 2010

I swear to you that I do not have OCD, but you will probably think that I do after I reveal this pet peeve to you.

You know how sometimes when you peel the plastic off the case of a DVD and it clings to the spine a little bit?  It really bothers me when the plastic sticks to the case and you have to scratch to get it off.  I found myself quite preoccupied doing it with both “Food, Inc.” and “(500) Days of Summer” the other day.

I don’t know why it gets to me.  The only logical cause I can come up with is that perhaps I think that unless all the plastic is off, the DVD hasn’t fully been opened.  But that sounds a little silly even to me.





Random Factoid #170

14 01 2010

Thanks to blogging buddy Branden over at Foolish Blatherings, I have received my first award (of sorts).  He wrote:

Marshall at Marshall at the Movies – Marshall’s blog is fascinating that he could have film reviews, random factoids and could have room for Oscar talk. Anybody talking about Oscar is high on my list of must see.

Thanks, Branden!  If I ever do anything big with my blogging career, we can say you were the first person to see the future and put it in writing (althought that would make you sound kind of like James Cameron).





REVIEW: Did You Hear About the Morgans?

13 01 2010

Hey, Hugh Grant, over the holidays, I watched you in “Love Actually.” Really good performance in a really good movie. So tell me, Hugh, why on earth would you choose “Did You Hear About the Morgans?” You usually have good taste, but couldn’t you just hear the crickets chirping as you read the script?

Hey, Sarah Jessica Parker, I got a chance to feel the warmth of “The Family Stone” this holidays, a movie that earned you a Golden Globe nomination. We all know you have acting chops, so tell us, why did you choose to star in “Did You Hear About the Morgans?” You don’t do many movies, but you have a lot of respect from winning award after award for “Sex and the City.”

Oh, the questions I would love to ask the stars. I can’t, of course, nor would I to their faces. But I couldn’t help but wonder why two very capable actors would waste their time on a movie like this? Honestly, this movie deserves the talents of Pauly Shore and Jenny McCarthy.

The movie hasn’t the slightest desire to be original or at least interesting. After seeing the trailer and the leading actors, we know that this New York power couple is going to get over their rough spots and get back together. It’s the classic formula, and everyone knows it. Grant and Parker play separated New York moguls who witness a murder and are forced to enter the Witness Protection Program together in Ray, Wyoming. It’s a fish-out-of-water comedy where the fish is dead when you take it out of the water.

Hugh Grant is fairly bearable in this unbearable movie. However, Sarah Jessica Parker is endlessly awkward, and her every movement just made me cringe. I haven’t the slightest idea why she reverted to these mannerisms. I never watched “Sex and the City,” but if people thought she was sexy on that show, she surely had to carry herself with more poise than this. And it’s not like her character is some graceless buffoon; she is a real estate tycoon who is on the cover of magazines!

When I made the decision to see “Did You Hear About the Morgans?,” I was in a very interesting mood. I didn’t really have the desire to see anything good; I just wanted to see something kind of trashy and dumb. Upon reflection, there is much better bad entertainment out there than this. It isn’t egregiously awful, but it is so unimaginative that I found it hard to even laugh at the movie as a whole. In fact, you don’t even have to see a movie to be more entertained than this at your theater. I’d recommend watching the ICEEs mix. D /





Random Factoid #169

13 01 2010

Am I really that obsessed with “Up in the Air?”

I mean, I’m pretty vocal about my love.  But literally everyone I know that has gone to see it makes sure to tell me that they did.

Jason Reitman, Paramount Pictures, take note as to who is delivering plenty of money into your hands this winter.





Random Factoid #168

12 01 2010

Squeamish, stand back.  Today’s factoid will be sharing a particularly nasty moviegoing experience.

It was the night of June 12, 2009.  My friend and I were running into the theater (AMC Studio 30), hoping that we could still get good seats to the 7:20 showing “The Taking of Pelham 123” because it was, after all, opening night.  We sprinted in at about 7:15 only to find a line outside our theater that was looped several times.

This seemed a little suspect to me because lines are usually admitted 30 minutes or so before the movie starts, and we were waiting with less than five.  But from the looks of the line, we would be able to get pretty good seats, so I didn’t question it too much.

Minutes started to go by, and soon it was 7:20 and we were still waiting outside.  Some woman much bolder than I approached the manager and asked what the deal was.  The word spread quickly through the line.

Someone had urinated and defecated on the floor of the theater.

We were waiting outside because the custodial crew was still hard at work cleaning the excrement and purging the smell.  They let us in just in time to watch the last preview – which was for “Armored” – and get settled as the movie was starting.  No stench remained in the theater, but the perpetrator made sure that I remembered the night I saw “The Taking of Pelham 123.”





Random Factoid #167

11 01 2010

People talk about life-changing movies all the time, but a movie that truly inspired me to go out and alter my life was “Casino Royale.”

No, I didn’t leave the theater, go buy an Aston Martin, pick up gorgeous European women, and start firing my large arsenal of weapons.

Per se, it wasn’t actually the movie itself that inspired the change; rather, it was something that happened while I watched the movie.

I had gone with a friend, and my parents had so generously lent me their credit card to pay for the movie because I was plum broke and out of cash.  Even in November, I was wearing mesh shorts (that’s Houston for you).  These shorts did not have pockets, so I stuffed the card into the elastic waistline.

At some point during the movie, I felt my shorts and noticed that the card was gone.  I began to panic but remained calm and focused on the movie, knowing that I didn’t stand a chance of finding it in the dimly lit theater.

When the lights came on, I scoured the floors for the card.  The search became fruitful after about a minute or so when I began looking in the row below us.

The next day, my mom and I got in the car and headed to the Sports Authority where we bought five pairs of mesh shorts with pockets so nothing like this would ever happen again.





REVIEW: Invictus

10 01 2010

Now that the page has turned for the first decade of the new millennium, it can safely be said that Clint Eastwood was one of its definitive filmmakers. His final directorial venture of the era, “Invictus,” tops off a nearly immaculate resumé. While it doesn’t rank with “Mystic River” or “Changeling,” it is a moving portrait of a country caught at a very crucial stage in its history. Despite what the poster would have you believe, this is not a movie about Nelson Mandela, nor is it about the South African rugby team. It is about the triumph of virtue over hatred, and “Invictus” is a truly spirited and fascinating film because of this focus.

The film mostly follows Mandela (Morgan Freeman), starting from his first day as president of South Africa. He faced large racial divisions and dissent among his countrymen, and his decisions were crucial to bring the nation to unity. Rather than eradicate all vestiges of the hateful Apartheid era, he tries to use them as a rallying point, and this surprises and even alienates certain members of his staff. Included in this plan is the revitalization of the Springboks rugby team, the green and gold previously seen as an emblem of white supremacy, and the winning of the 1995 World Cup being held in South Africa. Mandela takes a particular interest in the team’s captain, Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon), a man who believes has the qualities necessary to lead a team to greatness. It’s an inspirational sports movie, so the math to get the final product isn’t hard. Despite the occasional narrative slowdown, Eastwood manages to keep us very absorbed in the story.

A large part of the movie is dedicated to the racial tension among Mandela’s security. Many detractors point this out as a flaw in the movie, but I found the subplot to be a very nice illustration of the themes Eastwood wished to highlight. The whites and the blacks in the detail initially butt heads, yet they find common ground in their desire to protect the man with the power to change the world. It is particularly rousing to see them playing rugby together towards the end of the movie, and little moments like these are what makes Eastwood’s value of the human spirit shine.

Morgan Freeman is remarkable as Mandela, and it is a performance that reminds us why he has such a revered status among actors. It’s tough to play someone who is as well-known as the ex-President, and he pulls it off with endearment. Freeman is always soft and gentle, but we never doubt that he means business. There is no stand-out powerhouse scene for him because Mandela kept his cool at all times, so it is only through slight but powerful shifts in tone that he communicates the feeling. Damon also projects his authority, although a little bit more sternly. No remnants are left of his blubber from the “The Informant!,” and we not only buy him as a rugby player but as a commanding presence on the field. The urgency with which he sets out to transform rugby into something more than just a game for his team is played with an ardent and admirable intensity. From corporate drone to triumphant athlete, 2009 has reminded us that Damon is one of the most versatile working actors, constantly working to improve his craft.

Eastwood handles the rugby fairly well, and he manages to make it compelling even though most Americans (including myself) had no idea what was happening. Although it may not be as exhilarating as watching a climactic football game, we see the significance of the game, which is what really matters. More importantly, we see the game as merely symbolic of the progress made by a country who sought to overcome hatred. “Invictus” is more than a history lesson, it is a depiction of two fine leaders using their example to brighten the future. A- /





Random Factoid #166

10 01 2010

At my humble abode, my favorite room to watch movies is connected to the kitchen.  Often times, while I am kicking back in the comfortable recliners, someone in my family will feel the need to get some ice from the freezer.

This causes quite a rumble, and the sound disrupts my focus (if I sound like a huge diva, I really don’t try to be).

Now, my family has lovingly adapted their ways in order for me to achieve maximum satisfaction while watching movies.  They will say, “Marshall, heads up, I’m going to get some ice,” or something along those lines.  I then pause the movie, allow them to get some ice, and everyone moves along happily.





Random Factoid #165

9 01 2010

I think we all take sound quality for granted.  It is something that we expect to be a non-issue when we go to the movie theater, yet when it is lacking, the experience is tainted.

I was reminded of the importance of sound quality over the holidays when I went to see “Sherlock Holmes.”  For the first 30 minutes, all the voices sounded muffled and as if I was hearing them from a great distance away.  It impacted my ability to focus on the movie and made my ear work too hard.

Oh, and it was at the same theater that all my problems seem to occur.  AMC Studio 30.  Love the place, but it’s time to get the act together.





F.I.L.M. of the Week (January 8, 2010)

8 01 2010

This week’s “F.I.L.M.” is one of my most unconventional picks yet.  It is not independent, but it is most assuredly first-rate and little-known (at least relatively forgotten).

As soon as I finished my last grueling final in December, I plopped my behind on the couch and began watching a movie.  Scrolling down past HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, TMC, I finally found exactly what I needed as catharsis from the exams.

The movie was “Cats Don’t Dance,” a fun-loving musical that was a staple of my childhood.  I remember how much I loved it when I first saw it at the age of 5, and that passion has not faded a bit as I watched it for the first time in years.

The movie is a celebration of dreams as Danny, the singing cat from Kokomo, heads to Hollywood to light the world on fire.  But things are not what he imagined, and he soon finds that life isn’t easy for an animal actor – especially when his co-star is a tyrannical child actor who refuses to be upstaged. He refuses to be crushed, keeping his optimism while bringing together a large group of animals to recapture their dreams. There are some hilarious characters, including a hippo voiced by Jennifer Tilly and a surly goat voiced by Hal Holbrook, as well as some rousing musical numbers (thankfully all are easily found on YouTube).

It may be a movie for kids, but I think it has one of the most profound quotes I have ever heard in a movie of this style: “They can smash your cookie, but they can never take your fortune.” It’s a great helping of nostalgia for me, but I think anyone can enjoy “Cats Don’t Dance.” It really is that disarming.





Random Factoid #164

8 01 2010

Since I just talked about Box Office Mojo in my factoids, I thought I might share with you some interesting response I gave to polls on the site.

Q: What is your most anticipated movie of 2009?
A: “Watchmen”

Q: What will be the top-grossing December [2009] release?
A: “Sherlock Holmes”

Q: What will be the highest-grossing September [2009] release?
A: “Jennifer’s Body”

Just a sampling of my bad prognostication.  Somewhere on the site In Contention, I commented that I thought “Avatar” would not make more than $250 million domestically.





What To Look Forward To in … February 2010

7 01 2010

We’re still in some hazy territory in the month of February, but the new decade looks to give this month some much needed energy.  Fueled by two movies originally scheduled for release in 2009, I might actually drop a good amount of change at the movies in February (not just on repeat viewings of Oscar nominees).

February 5

Put “The Notebook” in front of anything and you are guaranteed a flock of screaming girls coming with boyfriends in tow.  Put wildly popular model/actor Channing Tatum in the poster and you can add some more girls aside from the hopeless romantics.  “Dear John” has just that: a super sweet story from author Nicholas Sparks and girl eye candy Tatum.  Thankfully for the guys, the filmmakers cast Amanda Seyfried (“Jennifer’s Body”), who isn’t so bad on the eyes either.

I’m a little weary to endorse “From Paris with Love,” another John Travolta villain movie.  He’s only good at playing subtle ones (“Pulp Fiction”) with the exception of “Face/Off.”  2009’s “The Taking of Pelham 123” was a disaster mainly because of Travolta and his villainy established only by constantly dropping the F-bomb.  Potential redemption here?  I’ll need positive word of mouth before I watch Travolta go evil again.

February 12

“Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief” is the name given to the film adaptation of Rick Riordan’s kids novel “The Lightning Thief.” Clearly Fox is setting up a franchise with the title, and they picked the right place to stake the claim. I read the book in seventh grade, and it is the real deal. I even got a chance to have lunch with the author, Riordan, who is one of the neatest people I have ever met. Whether they ruin it or not is yet to be known, but the movie is being helmed by Chris Columbus, the man who got the “Harry Potter” series flying. That has to count for something.

If Pierce Brosnan isn’t a big enough star to draw you to the aforementioned movie, you should find solace in “Valentine’s Day,” which features just about every romantic comedy actor ever. Literally, I can’t even list all of the stars of the movie here. The post would just be too darn big. Garry Marshall, director of “Pretty Woman” and “The Princess Diaries,” is in charge here, so I find some comfort in that. But if the movie flops, this will be a high-profile disappointment.

Sorry girls, the werewolf in “The Wolfman” is not played by Taylor Lautner. Academy Award-winning actor Benicio del Toro metamorphasizes in Victorian England into the hairy beast when the moon is ripe.  This werewolf is not based on cheeky teen lit but on the 1941 horror classic.  And this adaptation is rated R for “bloody horror violence and gore.”  Get ready for some intense clawing.

A big winner at Cannes and a contender for the Best Foreign Film at this year’s Academy Awards, “A Prophet” is a foreign film that may be worth a look.

Read the rest of this entry »





Random Factoid #163

7 01 2010

I get inspiration from strange places.  This factoid hails from Box Office Mojo’s chart of the highest grossing overall weekends in movie history (or at least since 1982).

As a hyperactive moviegoer, you can imagine that I dropped my change in Hollywood’s bowl on some of these weekends.  Just how much?  Look below.

Top Grossing Overall Weekends at the Box Office

  1. December 25-27, 2009
    • #1 movie: “Avatar” with $75.6 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $260 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $30 ($7.50 to “The Princess and the Frog,” “Nine,” “Up in the Air,” and “Sherlock Holmes”)
  2. July 18-20, 2008
    • #1 movie: “The Dark Knight” with $158.4 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $253 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $25.50 ($9.25 to “Wanted” and “Hancock,” $7.00 to “The Dark Knight”
  3. November 20-22, 2009
    • #1 movie: “New Moon” with $142.8 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $250 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $15 ($7.50 to “Couples Retreat” and “2012”)
  4. July 7-9, 2006
    • #1 movie: “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” with $135.6 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $209.9 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $12.25 ($6.50 to “Pirates,” $5.75 to “Nacho Libre”)
  5. May 25-27, 2007
    • #1 movie: “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” with $114.7 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $199.2 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $8 to “Pirates”
  6. June 26-28, 2009
    • #1 movie: “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” with $109 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $192.9 million
    • Marshall’s participation: Technically – nothing.  I saw “Transformers” on Thursday and I went to a free screening of “Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs” on Saturday morning.
  7. May 26-28, 2006
    • #1 movie: “X-Men: The Last Stand” with $102.8 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $188.4 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $5.50 to “The DaVinci Code”
  8. May 28-30, 2004
    • #1 movie: “Shrek 2” with $72.1 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $185.6 million
    • Marshall’s participation: nothing.  I saw “Shrek 2” for the second time that Wednesday.
  9. June 4-6, 2004
    • #1 movie: “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” with $93.7 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $182.7 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $5.50 to “Potter”
  10. May 4-6, 2007
    • #1 movie: “Spider-Man 3” with $151.1 million
    • Total gross of weekend: $181.3 million
    • Marshall’s participation: $6 to “Spider-Man 3”