Movie Review: Harry Potter and The Half Blood Prince

Who's in It: All the Harry Potter regulars plus Jim Broadbent

What It's About: Surprisingly, this is actually the one film in the series that ISN'T about someone trying to kill Harry.

What I Was Expecting: Let's see. It's the SIXTH film in the series, so basically, I was expecting to see how ugly the once cute kids have gotten over the last two years.

What I Got: To be honest, I'm torn. As Harry matures, so do the films. Much less focus on the action, which might explain the attack on the Weasley house, which I don't recall being in the book. Nothing had gone BOOM in a while, so.... For me, the film is paced brilliantly. The scenes that aren't all that important are short and usually montage-like. The scenes that do matter are fleshed out and take their time. Quite the opposite of, say, "The Prisoner of Azkaban" which feels like a 150 minute montage on repeat viewings. The students in this film are allowed to play to their strengths. Daniel Radcliffe, who keeps getting better, carries the film nicely. Emma Watson, who seems to get worse with each film, seems to just get a scene here and there. The kid playing Ron might as well have sat this one out. He wasn't very good, but he wasn't given much to work with anyway.

Grade: A-

Oscar Potential: With the new rules, Oscar potential is huge. If it's a weak year, it will not be shocking to actually see a Best Picture nod. It won't be a contender since there won't be any nods for directing, acting or writing. Editing, Cinematography and Sound are possibilities. Oddly, there's very few special effects.

Five Random Thoughts:

1. It was really nice to see Alan Rickman being used more often in this one, although there is not one single scene showing Snape teach Defense of the Dark Arts. Harry's inability to silently cast spells was interesting to me and I was a little disappointed to see it left out.
   
2. I hope they are shooting Maggie Smith's scenes first for the last two films. She looks like can't be with us much longer. For those not in the know, Deathly Hallows will be split into two .
   
3. How has screenwriter Steve Kloves not lost his mind yet? It's one thing for J.K. Rowling to have written the seven books. It's another thing to basically spend 10 years rewriting someone else's work. I can't help but wonder how many times he must have called Rowling to scream "If I'd known that would matter, I would've written it in 4 movies ago!"
   
4. By the end of the series, David Yates will have directed half of them. Will he have any career after the series is over? Both his films feel like Rowling is on the set saying "This is how it should look" and Yates just runs around the set with a camera. It's not directed badly, just not very creatively. Of course, the same could be said about the first two films.
   
5. Why did John Williams walk away from the series? Yes, I know he left after the third film. Just curious why.

Trailer Park:

2012 – Another mega disaster film (figuratively and literally) from Irwin Allen Roland Emmerich, who brought us Independence Day, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorrow (Irwin Allen is responsible for 70s disaster classics like The Towering Inferno, Airport and The Poseidon Advernture). Who the hell knows what the actual plot will be of this one other than that ancient civilizations were right and the world is ending? Looks horribly stupid and I will be seeing it opening night, since my one true guilty pleasure in film is crappy disaster film. I can't get enough of them.

Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief - Can I just say I look forward to the day when there is once again economy in film titles? Anyway, this was little more than a teaser that presumes the viewer has even heard of these books. Apparently, it's like a Harry Potter meets Greek mythology in modern day New York. Okay. I'm game. Right until the words "Directed by Chris Columbus." Sorry. Not gonna see it.

Despicable Me - It's a little daring to preview a movie starring Steve Carrell and not include any of his scenes. If the trailer is any indication, too much set up for too weak of a punchline. Although the Keith Olberman bit is cute.

Sherlock Holmes - Why do I feel like I've written about this one 100 times? Come to think of it....where are all my other reviews? Hmmmm..... I think Guy Ritche is capable, if not consistent. Curious to see how it's handled. My one major concern is the girl floating with the pentagram in the background. I hope the plot involves occult and not the supernatural.

Shorts - Well, the kids in the audience thought this was cute and got quite a few giggles. Just not any from me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3xJRjKyCM4

Where the Wild Things Are - It's been 30 years since I've read the book and I can't remember a single detail about it. Possibly because I grew up in a Norman Rockwell home. My friends whose parents split when they were young or had traumatic childhoods remember every bit of it. It looks fascinating to me. It's certainly been a long time coming.

A Whole Blog Posting, Shot to Hell

The day after the Oscars, I posted my annual Oscar bliss blog and made my predix for the following year. Obviously, since then, the movie industry decided to capatalize on the free advertising of a nomination Academy decided to expand the number of Best Picture nominees from 5 to 10. Something I lovingly call "The Dark Knight Rule." My previous picks were as follows:

1. Nine
2. The Informant
3. The Lovely Bones
4. Untitled Clint Eastwood (now titled "Invictus")
5. The Boat That Rocked

with the alternates of:
1. Inglourious Basterds
2. The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay
3. The Road
4. Stutter Island
5. Away We Go

We're just over halfway into the movie year, most of those movies have yet to be released and already, there's obvious changes to be made. Unfortunately, not because great movies have been released. Starting at the bottom, "Away We Go" got some great reviews, but has been soon forgotten. The trailer for "Stutter Island" makes the film look mediocre at best. The buzz is still strong for "The Road." "Kavalier & Clay" still hasn't started production. And, unless QT makes a major save, "Inglourious Basterds" will not leave much of a mark.

Moving on to my gut instinct picks, "The Boat That Rocked" has already been released in most other countries and has gotten decent reviews, but whether that translates to U.S. appeal remains to be seen. "Invictus" is a question mark, just like "Million Dollar Baby" was a few years back. I'm still liking "Lovely Bones" chances, along with "Nine", even if it does look like "Chicago Part II". "The Informant" looks like a terrific film, sort of like a "Thank You for Smoking" about corn.

This may not sound like a lot of changes, especially since I still consider four of my five picks to still be serious contenders. But it's the OTHER six nominees that are going to throw people for a loop. If there aren't 10 "serious" films to consider, where are the other nominations going to go. THAT'S where things get interesting. What you are likely to begin to see are movies that people "loved", as opposed to "respected". Pixar's "Up" is likely to benefit from the new rules and that was everyone's first comment. But there are other non-Best Picture type films that could slip in. There's even talk about a movie like "The Hangover" slipping in if it's a particularly weak year. Something people really enjoyed. There's some buzz that J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" is a strong possibility, particularly since the DVD should be out around Christmas and hitting F5 on the voters' memory. Even the early buzz on the latest "Harry Potter" has people wondering if it could sneak in. But let's SERIOUSLY look at that for a moment.

It January 2010. The day of the nominations. And the nominees for Best Picture are...(Do me a favor and read this OUT LOUD)

Avatar
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
The Hurt Locker
The Informant
Invictus
Lovely Bones
Nine
The Road
Sherlock Holmes
Star Trek

If THAT were the list, any takers that a 10 nomination list would be a one year and out deal?

The big problem is that this was simply the wrong year to try it out. While there are a few Oscar winning directors putting out films this year (Scorsese, Coppola, Eastwood, Jackson, Cameron, Howard, the Coen brothers, Ang Lee, Mendes, Zemeckis), for the most part, outside of Eastwood and Jackson, they aren't doing Oscar type films.

Wow. I keep re-reading that list of directing firepower and can't BELIEVE only two of them are doing films worth considering for an Oscar list. Okay, Mendes did "Away We Go", probably to cheer up from the uber-depressing "Revolutionary Road" and Zemeckis' take on "A Christmas Carol" with Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman does sound intriguing. But Scorsese is doing strange thriller. Coppola is doing whatever the hell he wants and who cares if anyone else cares. Cameron is probably either going to kill his career forever or establish himself as a total visionary. Howard did "Angels and Demons". 'nuff said. The Coen brothers seem to be remaking "You, Me & Dupree". Ang Lee is getting awful notices for his Woodstock film. All we need is Spielberg and Polanski and it's every Best Director winner of the last 15 years. This year should have been better. But it's not. And trying to come up with an additional 5 Best Picture nominees will be a stretch.

What they should have done is changed Best Picture to be more like the new rules for Best Song. In order for a song to be nominated, it must received at least 8.5 percent of the vote. Make it 20 percent for picture and I'm there. Remember, they pick 5 on their ballots, so 20 percent is not too hard. But it will make it a LOT more interesting. There could theoretically be as many as 25 Best Picture nominees, if each received the exact same number of votes. Let's see the Oscar prognosticators try and guess who would win there.

Right now, I'm just hoping "Avatar" bombs and Kathryn Bigelow's rides the huge wave of buzz for "The Hurt Locker" and sweeps so she can give Cameron the finger from the podium and apologize for making "Point Break".

Post Oscar Bliss

Another Oscar ceremony, another Post Oscar Bliss blog.

For the first time since 1993, my favorite movie of a given year won Best Picture. If you haven't seen Slumdog Millionaire, you are missing out on what could be one of the best films of the decade. And after you see that, go check out Danny Boyle's other films, especially Millions, 28 Days Later and Sunshine. He's on quite a roll.

I agreed with most every one of the winner's so I won't break down each category. Even the ones I didn't necessarily agree with (Best Actor), I'm cool with the pick.

The show itself was okay. The last musical number was totally pointless. Just an excuse to have Zac Efron on the show, I suppose. Hugh Jackman was a decent host. The presenters were good for the most part except for the pinhead from Twilight and bimbo from Mamma Mia, who gave the evening the most boring and excruciating moment.

SO....on to next year.....

Your 2009 Best Picture nominees are (or will be)......

1. Nine

Yes, even with Fergie in the cast. Director Rob Marshall (Chicago) is making the film version of the Tony-winning musical based on the Oscar winning film 8 1/2. The script is by the late Anthony Minghella and Michael Tolkin (The Player). And the cast includes six, count 'em, SIX Academy Award winners. Daniel Day-Lewis, Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Sophia Loren and Marion Cotillard. Not to mention a director who made a Best Picture winner and an Oscar-winning cinematographer (Yes, that's important), Art Director and probably Marshall's usual Oscar-winning film editor too. There's so much pedigree behind this film, it's tough to imagine this not being right up Oscar's alley.

2. The Informant

The Academy LOVES movies about whistle blowers and people who fight big business. This one is a Steven Soderbergh (Traffic, Erin Brockovich) film with Matt Damon as the VP of an agriculture giant who rats his company out to feds for price fixing. AND it's a comedy, albeit, a dark one a la the Coen brothers. Just playing a hunch on this one.

3. The Lovely Bones

Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings, King Kong) is filming the popular novel about a girl watching over her family from heaven. Two Oscar winners (Rachel Weisz and Susan Sarandon), two nominees (Mark Wahlberg and Atonement's Saoirse Ronan) and "how hasn't he been nominated" Stanley Tucci are your starts. Plus, it's got a December time slot.

4. Untitled Clint Eastwood

Well, if Gandhi is Best Picture material, why not Mandela? Clint Eastwood is on such an incredible roll right now. I suggested before, go look at his imdb and check out what a decade he's having. And why not Morgan Freeman as Mandela. And Matt Damon as the South Africa rugby captain! Yes, you read that right. That's not a joke. The film is about the newly elected Mandela trying to unify the country through South Africa's run at 1995 rugby World Cup. A political sports movie? Why the hell not?

5. The Boat That Rocked

Okay. A couple of years ago, I was dead wrong when I predicted Richard Curtis would strike Oscar gold with Love Actually. After all, he'd defined himself as the master of the English romantic comedy. He wrote Four Weddings..., Notting Hill and both Bridget Jones movies. This time, he's still doing the romance, placing it in a historical context, focusing on a tidbit of English music history. The boat in the title was, quite literally, a pirate radio station that was estimated to have as many as 25 million listeners, more than half the population of England. If nothing else, the soundtrack is going to be incredible.

Honorable Mention:

1. Inglorious Basterds - Here's to hoping Quentin Tarantino has escaped from genre hell. I liked Kill Bill and Death Proof, but enough is enough. It's getting an August release, so I wouldn't hold my breath. But if it is good, expect it to carry over to Oscar season.

2. The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay - Stephen Daldry. The dude seems to get nominated for breathing. 3 movies, 3 nominations. With so much focus on movies based on comic books, how about a movie ABOUT comic books. Kavalier and Clay created a superhero called The Escapist and "ushered in the golden age of comics." This might have been higher, but there's rumors of budget problems.

3. The Road - The Academy doesn't usually go for many post-apocalyptic thrillers, but this one does have Viggo Mortenson, Robert Duvall and Charlize Theron and it's a Pulitzer prize winning novel. We'll see.

4. Shutter Island - Dennis LeHane novels have been doing well at the Oscars. As has Martin Scorsese. But has it been too many trips to the well?

5. Away We Go - This one looks to be a lighter comedy which is a little shocking given that it's directed by Sam Mendes (American Beauty) and written by Dave Eggers (A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius). Plus it's got a summer release. I'm kind of scraping the barrel here. There just aren't that many standout movies announced for this year. We will see.

Until next year.....

Movie Review: "Smart People"

Who's in It: Dennis William Quaid, Thomas Haden Church, Sarah Jessica Parker and Ellen Philpotts Page

What It's About: Widowed professor tries to sell his book. Widowed professor flirts with former student, now his doctor. Widowed professor's loser adopted brother moves in to be his chaffeur. Widowed professor's daughter does a lot of things that aren't really important to the plot. In fact, not much happens that feels very relevant to anything.

What I Was Expecting: First time director. First time writer. Good cast. Trailer looked amusing.

What I Got: A disjointed mess. This film jumps around like you wouldn't believe. I threw out 3 of the storylines above and I can think of another 4 or 5 that they tried to squeeze in a 95 minute film. Some storylines are only hinted at in a scene or two and never addressed again (i.e., Sarah Jessica Parker's relationship problem). It seems to realize that the drama isn't all that dramatic and the humor isn't all that funny. So, when there's not much going on and it's not really going anywhere, they show us Church's bare ass. Audience chuckles. And here's the odd thing. The film is never boring even though it's never all that interesting. None of the plots and subplots are ever fleshed out into a real story. In fact, the film gives you the impression that there is a terrific 2 1/2 hour film sitting on a cutting room floor somewhere. I didn't like this movie as is, but if I hear about a much longer Director's Cut, I will definitely check it out.

Grade: D+

Oscar Potential: Zero. But it is the kind of film that the costumes subtly tell you a lot about the characters, but not the kind of costumes the Academy pays attention to.

Five Random Thoughts:

1. I can't help but wonder how much this film is hurt by the presence of Ellen Page. Her performance is just fine, but I think with the success of "Juno", the film was re-edited to beef up her part, when her part wasn't all that necessary to begin with.
   
2. I have zero idea what the time frame of the film is, it appears to be over the course of months, but Sarah Jessica Parker, who gets pregnant at the beginning of the film, never shows.
   
3. In reverse of the Ellen Page scenario, the part of her brother, I imagine, was probably a bigger part. It seems as if there was a stronger story with the son who writes poetry and the dad who is an English Lit professor. They don't go too deep into it.
   
4. There is one great moment in the film towards the end. Church instructs Quaid to tell Parker, "I'm sorry. I love you." When Quaid finally says it, it's said as just one sentence, "I'm sorry I love you." It says volumes about the Quaid character at that moment and is about the only subtle moment in the film. It shows his guilt over being such a pain in the ass. As if to say, "I'm sorry to do this to you. I know being in your life will make you miserable at times, but as long as I'm there, I won't be miserable too." And they did it in 5 words.
5. Quaid's performance is all over the place. Sometimes great, as in the line just described. Sometimes you wonder if he's playing some sort of crazy recluse, Maybe he is, but it doesn't quite fit.

Trailer Park:

Blindness – If this film is half as good as the trailer looks, it could very well upend the Oscars this year because it's about as non-Oscar as you get. The director of "City of God" and "The Constant Gardener" does this film about a woman (Julianne Moore) who fakes being inflicted with a virus that causes blindness, a virus that inflicts her entire town in one night, in order to take care of her husband (Mark Ruffalo). The dramatic potential is huge as the people who can see are shipped off to safety from the virus. The blind are left to fend for themselves. The book it's based on is by a Pulitzer Prize winner who is known for his allegorical work, so it's potential to be something really deep, and given the director, it probably is.

Movie Review: "The Bank Job"

Who's in It: Jason Statham, Saffron Burrows and Daniel Mays (who I recognized from Atonement, but spent the whole movie wondering where I knew him from.)

What It's About: The title pretty much says it all.

What I Was Expecting: Given that it's Jason Statham, I was assuming that it was going to be a heist film version of "Transporter".

What I Got: Something very unlike the "Transporter" films. In fact, there's only one fight scene in the whole film and it seems totally out of place when it happens. The movie is actually a surprise. It's well acted. It's never obvious. It's not perfect by a long shot. But very good and never boring. There's a long scene in which the police learn a bank robbery is occurring, but only have a vague idea what part of London in which it's taking place. And how our "heroes" manage to escape is truly inspired and unexpected. A few too many sideplots. I could have done without the undercover agent in Trinidad. I don't know how much of the film really happened, but it would be hilarious if it did happen that way.

Grade: B

Oscar Potential: None. The art direction isn't bad though.

Five Random Thoughts:

1. There are several stories going on at the beginning. Stay with it. They all tie in together.
   

2. Holy crap. Jason Statham can act!
   

3. Lots of actors you recognize but can't quite place. Ignore it and go to imdb later.
   

4. Stay for epilogue. There's an amusing title card at the end. For those who don't plan on seeing the movie, highlight between the arrows. >>>The names of the people in this film have been changed to protect the guilty.<<<<< It's a shame there wasn't more of that humor in the film itself.
   

Trailer Park:

Shutter – I know with every fiber of my being that this film will be crap, but man, did that trailer give me the creeps.

Ruins - I've been hearing rumors that this one is really well done. Have to wait and see. Creepy trailer.

Forbidden Kingdom - This movie is either going to really suck or it's going to get a huge following. This trailer kinda made me think the latter.

Midnight Meat Train - My jaw dropped when they gave the title. Followed by hysterical laughter. Number of Clive Barker movies that were any good: ZERO. That Brooke Shields was the best they could get for a lead, says VOLUMES!

Movie Review: "Be Kind Rewind"

Who's in It: Jack Black, Mos Def and Danny Glover

What It's About: Two video store clerks recreate movies for customers after an accident erases all the tapes.

What I Was Expecting: Not much, to be honest. Sort of seemed like a one-joke film.

What I Got: A movie that knows it really only has one joke, so it tries to keep improving on the joke to some degree of success. The film takes a little too long to start telling the joke and goes on a little too long after the joke is done. But the ending did get to me a little bit. It's similar in tone and pace to last year's "Lars and the Real Girl". Jack Black is reigned in a bit from his usual manic self. He actually seems to be playing a part at first, but starts to stray towards the end. Mos Def gives a more genuine performance. Danny Glover reminds the audience that he can still deliver a good performance, even in a pimple of a part. The recreations of other movies are consistently funny and clever in how to reenact scenes on no-budget. Might have been more interesting to see a Kentucky Fried Movie style film of the two of them redoing more films.

Grade: C+

Oscar Potential: Zero, but art is not really what's being aimed for here.

Five Random Thoughts:

1. The film opens with a LOUSY special effects shot as the camera swoops down into the town. It's very obvious the freeway isn't there and the cars frequently changing lanes aren't real.
   

2. Mos Def should be hired more often. The range in doing Ford Prefect in "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" and this role here proves he has a lot of talent and, more importantly, pathos.
   

3. Are Mos Def and Jack Black supposed to be slow or are they actually disabled?

4. Why is Mia Farrow here? Are her children Danny Glover's?

5. The subplot involving Sigourney Weaver's character is not only pointless, but completely unrealistic. If what Def and Black are doing is copyright infringement, why do Bunny Theatre and Thumb Wars get away with it?

Trailer Park:

Never Back Down – Thankfully, the title is practically advertising that this is a film devoid of thought and should be avoided.

Run Fatboy Run - I was a little lost as to what this film was supposed to be about. I've read a plot synopsis and am even more confused. But it's got Simon Pegg and I'll go with it.

Get Smart - Lord, they need a new trailer.

Baby Mama - Tina Fey's new comedy comes out April 25, just before the summer movie season launches. A real shame. If they'd bumped it up a month, they could have ruled the box office for all of April and made $150 million. The trailer looks hilarious.

Sex and the City - I'm a fan of the show. I'll see it the first weekend. I just don't see how this will be little more than an elongated episode of the show. We will see.

Movie Review: "The Other Boleyn Girl"

Who's in It: Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson and Eric Bana

What It's About: Anne and Mary Boleyn battle for the love of Henry VIII.

What I Was Expecting: Besides the historical inaccuracy of the previous statement, I really had no expectations. It was written by the same guy who wrote “The Queen” and “The King of Scotland”.

What I Got: Oh, Lord. Where do I start? Natalie Portman's back and forth between English aristocrat and Cockney accents? The mind-numbingly short scenes? The BIG laughs from the audience during scenes that should have been heartbreaking? (Note to wannabe filmmakers: incest in dramas shouldn't draw massive guffaws from the viewer.) The Portman comment pretty much speaks for itself. The brevity of the scenes was something that I noticed right off the bat. It was making me crazy to the point that about 10 minutes into the film, I actually started counting how many lines were in each scene. Here's a typical scene: Character #1 says something, usually a question. Character #2 responds with something significant to the plot. And...scene. For the curious, the longest scene I counted was 13 lines, during the trial of Anne Boleyn, and 12 of the lines were “GUILTY!”(sorry for spoiling the movie for those who slept through history class who didn't know Henry VII had 6 more wives after Anne.) As far as the laughs go, yeah, the incest scene really did not work. Anne's life was on the line and didn't see any other choice. She had just lost Henry's potential heir and needed to get pregnant fast. So why NOT turn to your brother? At that point, I started to wonder, “Is this MEANT to be funny?” I really don't think it was, but much like a lot of other dramatic moments in the film, it was met with much laughter. So if BAD movies make you break out in hysterics, this just might be the film for you.

Grade: D

Oscar Potential: Zero. Might even get some razzie consideration.

Five Random Thoughts:

1. ADCD: Attention Deficit Costume Drama. It's like watching an adaptation of the Table of Contents of the Cliff's Notes of the book.
   

2. I'm not sure if getting Portman or Johansson to go nude would've helped, but it sure as hell wouldn't have hurt.

3. The best line during the film: the woman behind me during Anne's beheading, “You know, I think this might be a true story.” The woman was around 45.

4. The second best line: Me to my wife as Anne is pouring a glass of water before climbing into bed with her brother, “Honey, I think you're gonna need something a lot stronger than that.”

5. Funny how after Eric Bana's bed scene with Johansson, he actually looks bored in the film.

Trailer Park:

Made of Honor – I'm not all that big on the McDreamy chick flicks, but this one looks pretty funny.