I Love You, Man.

Good comedies aren't hard to come by. You just have to know what to look for. And lately what to look for has been Paul Rudd. Who would have thought the creepy step brother from Clueless would become one of comedy's surest things nearly 15 years later? Jason Segel is great, but of the two leads it is Rudd that steals the show in I Love You, Man.

It's another in a series of films about children in adult bodies, and while this one is in no way Judd Apatow related, it does so many of the same things right that Apatow does. Chief among those is awkwardness. No one plays awkward like Paul Rudd. He perfectly captures the difference between asking a woman on a date and asking a guy to hang out. He also does a great job with awkward pauses and trying so hard to be cool when you are really just the world's biggest nerd.

Jason Segel isn't half bad either. For a guy that has made a career out of playing the good guy (How I Met Your Mother and Forgetting Sarah Marshall) he plays the jerk well too. And his character Sydney isn't really a jerk. He just has the confidence that Segel's past characters have lacked. A role in I Love You, Man may not seem like a stretch for an Apatow veteran, and I guess it isn't for Segel. I mean Sydney is just a more developed version of his character in Knocked Up, but it is nice to see Jason Segel doing something so different from what he does each week on TV.

The real gold in the movie comes from two angles. First, the range in emotion in Paul Rudd's Peter is priceless. (Boy, I didn't mean that to read the way it does.) Peter is a completely different person around his co-workers, his family, even his fiancee than he is around Sydney.

The greatest thing about the movie is the number and quality of cameos. Plenty of faces you know pop up in the movie. Jamie Pressley and Jon Favreau play a great married couple. J.K. Simmons has become Hollywood's go-to dad. Joe Lo Truglio and Thomas Lennon are each amazing in their scenes as potential best friends for Peter.

Finally, Lou Farigno does a great job just playing himself. This kind of stunt casting could have really hurt the movie, but Farigno is hilarious and the filmmakers did a great job of making him central to the plot without relying on him - something the minds behind Will Ferrell's Kicking & Screaming clearly didn't get when they decided they needed Mike Ditka for their movie.

There are very few flaws in I Love You, Man - kind of hard to believe considering it comes from one of the writers of Eddie Murpy's Dr. Doolittle series. I Love You, Man does everything it sets out to right. My only complaint is that it is a little predictable, but then again most light hearted comedies are.

It's the funniest movie of the year so far, and while I am optimistic about Apatow's Funny People (due out at the end of July), I have been let down before. Plus, it stars Adam Sandler, so that one could go either way.

As for I Love You, Man, the Greek gives it an A.

Fanboys

Is it possible to give a movie a D+ and still have enjoyed yourself? I hate to telegraph my pass like that, but that is my final grade for Fanboys, and if it weren't for Kristin Bell rocking Princess Leia's gold slave bikini...


I may have given this thing a flat out F.

Fanboys is the story of four friends that decide to make a road trip to San Francisco to break into the Skywalker Ranch (George Lucas' home and studio) and steal a print of Episode I: The Phantom Menace before one of them dies. The concept is funny and as something of a Star Wars fan myself, I have been looking forward to seeing this movie for a long time. I really had no expectations though. I did not know what to think going in.

The casting isn't exceptional. The movie's producers clearly blew most of their casting budget on Kristin Bell. Sam Huntingdon's(Jimmy Olsen in Superman Returns) face has one emotion: disappointingly surprised. Chris Marquette and Jay Baruchel are so wrapped up in playing nerds that all they can muster are some stereotypes without any depth. And Dan Fogler - that f***ing guy - is a poor (very very poor) man's Jack Black.

The cameos are all kind of dumb too. There is a reason that Ray Park plays characters like Toad in X-Men or Darth Maul in Episode I. He can't act! He can wear make up and do kung fu. Sadly, his appearance in Fanboys involves neither. Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith show up as a very odd version of Jay & Silent Bob. It did not make me laugh.

There are three MVC's (Most Valuable Cameos) in the movie - Seth Rogen in duel roles as a violent Star Trek lover and as a Star Wars loving pimp, Danny McBride doing his best douche bag as George Lucas' head of security, and William Shattner as (what else?) William Shattner.




My biggest complaint is in a movie that revolves around five Star Wars super fans' quest to see The Phantom Menace there is no acknowledgement that the movie is a piece of crap! If director Kyle Newman did one thing right it was capture the anticipation that so many of us felt leading up to that movie. Why no pay off? Why didn't he also choose to capture the disappointment (and I'll admit it) anger that most of us have for the prequels?


There were some laughs to be had in Fanboys, but they are too few and far between. The Star Wars jokes (which are most of the jokes) aren't too inside they just aren't funny. The movie almost isn't worth your time, but it does redeem itself in the final few minutes (Kristin Bell as Leia the Slave Girl). Here's one more look at sweet redemption!



The Greek gives it a D+.

Push

This movie was a helluva lot better than I expected. That's not to say the movie is a classic - it just isn't a piece of crap. The movie has it's share of problems, but it is balanced nicely by a good story, a decent (not great) script, gritty sets and solid casting.

Push is the story of a group of American ex-patriots, all with super powers, living in Hong Kong. Governments around the world have set up divisions to try and harness these powers and use the people as weapons. It's not an original story, but then again neither is anything about a "group of super heroes."

The powers and back stories of the characters all seem very similar to fans of super hero stories. Dakota Fanning's character Cassie sketches out her visions of the future (a la Isaac Mendez). Cliff Curtis' Hook can make you see whatever he wants you to see (Mirage from The Incredibles). Chris Evans' Nick is a young man struggling with being a hero and learning how to use his own powers (Spider-Man).

I saw this movie with Salt & his girlfriend Sarah. She pointed out how important setting the movie in Hong Kong actually is. The gritty urban markets make great battle ground scenes, while Nick's shabby apartment makes you believe that this really is a guy trying to stay off the radar. Even the city's unique architecture and nightlife serve as important factors in the plot's development and eventual climax.

Push also makes great use of it's relatively small budget when it comes to casting. Camilla Belle isn't a great actress, but she is very believable as Kira, a girl who has spent most of her life drugged up or just plain tired. Conversely the use of great actors like Cliff Curtis and Djimon Hounsou helps breathe life into a couple of characters that are nothing more than action/super hero movie stereotypes.

My biggest complaint with Push is that the script feels a little uneven at times. Dakota Fanning just shows up without much introduction or explanation. And here is this girl that we have seen up til now almost exclusively in roles as sweet, scared little kids - in Push she has pink hair. She curses a lot. She drinks. She goes to clubs and she wears an uncomfortably short skirt. Plus her feelings towards Chris Evans' Nick aren't really clear until Camilla Belle shows up. After that happens Nick and Cassie have a brother/sister relationship. Before that, all we see is this 13 year-old clinging to a guy that is 20 - 23 years-old and doesn't really want her around. Frankly, for me as a viewer it was creepy.



I have a lot more positive to say about Push than I do negative, and that surprises me. I am a little over super heroes after a summer full of them with only one and a half that were worth a damn. Push, though is exactly what you would expect from a movie this time of year - not garbage, but nothing you that will change your life.

The Greek gives it a B.

Revolutionary Road

From the outset, Revolutionary Road looks like a can't miss. Sam Mendes is behind the camera. His wife, the lovely Kate Winslet, won a Golden Globe for her work in the film. She is reunited with her Titanic co-star Leonardo DiCaprio, who for my money is one of the best actors around. And lest we forget the script focuses on an unsatisfied spouse something Mendes has done beautifully in the past.

Unfortunately the movie isn't enjoyable for the average movie goer. Sure, there are some solid performances in the movie. Winslet is great and relative unknown Michael Shannon is awesome (more on that later), but the film moves so slow.

Revolutionary Road centers around April (Winslet) and Frank (Leo) Wheeler. They're a couple that used to love each other. They used to love life. Now they have kids, they're in their 30s, they live in the suburbs, and they're both sure there has to be more to life than that. Their lives change when April convinces Frank to move to Paris, but rather than be the spark to their marriage the move seems to be, it starts to cause a major division between them that eventually turns their love to hate...or at least an epiphany that they may have never really loved each other to begin with.

So there's the story. Here are my problems with the movie. Let me start by saying that I am not one to poo poo free nudity, but the less than 2 seconds that we see Zoe Kazan topless are unnecessary.



Also, she has the most unattractive breasts I have ever seen. The whole thing is really horrifying.

My next problem is that Leonardo DiCaprio, who can be great - I mean truly amazing, is just sleep walking through this movie. I don't believe him as a loving husband. I don't believe him as a jerk. I just couldn't get behind the guy in this one.

My biggest complaint though has to do with the film's ending. First, let me say that I was relieved that the film didn't end with Frank and April simply having breakfast, as it appears it's going to. That breakfast does lead to a more satisfying resolution, but we close the film on a character that we have absolutely no connection to.

What did I like about Revolutionary Road? Well, I did like the two odes to Titanic. It was a nice way for the filmmakers to acknowledge to the audience that, yes we saw that movie too. It also kind of showed you that just maybe, it was best that Jack drowned in that movie. That way he and Rose never had the chance to hate each other.

I also like Kate Winslet. Not just her acting, but the way her character was presented. Let's be honest, she is a beautiful woman.



In the early stages of the movie, Sam Mendes shoots her and dresses her in a way that makes her seem like any other girl. It isn't until April makes the decision to move to Paris that she really looks beautiful. After she realizes she wants nothing to do with Frank, we notice another change in April. Watch Winslet's dance scene with David Harbour's "Shep," and try to tell me that April hasn't changed into something of a sex pot.

Kate Winslet won a Golden Globe for her role in this movie, and it was much deserved. I hope she wins the Oscar too, but if I have to pick one actor that was compelling every second he was on screen it was Michael Shannon as the Wheeler's neighbor's uninhibited, socially unaware son. Shannon's character, John, is recently released from a mental institution and is a mix of crazy, insightful and fearless - the complete opposite from Frank and April. Where the hell is his Oscar buzz?!

Revolutionary Road isn't bad. It just isn't for a casual movie fan. I don't say that to appear snobbish or hammer home that I have a film degree (University of Alabama class of 2003). It is just that most of the enjoyable stuff is technical - choices made by director Sam Mendes rather than plot points or great performances. Also, you should know, you are going to walk out of the theatre really, really, I mean really depressed.

The Greek gives it a C.

Bolt

Okay, if you listen to the show you know that I have something of a soft spot for the Walt Disney Company. I grew up watching the movies. My family vacation was to Disney World in Orlando every year. I worked for the Disney Store while I was in college. There is probably a good chance I cannot give an unbiased review of Disney's latest offering, Bolt. Also, my wife and I don't have kids. So that means that we can't enjoy it from the stand point of being parents, which is also probably an unfair way to review the movie.

Bolt isn't all bad. It really isn't all that good though. It clocks in at just about 95 minutes and maybe 30 of those are enjoyable. The problem is they are all at the end, so by the time anything funny or visually stunning hits the screen adults are already bored out of their skulls.

The movie has good characters. Every moment Rhino the hamster is on screen is enjoyable. Pigeons are used to represent the locals in each town Bolt and his cohorts visit. The New York pigeons (which are recycled versions of the Goodfeathers from the animated series Animaniacs)



are all very funny and the Hollywood pigeons are even better. Look out for a delightful cameo from stand up comedian Nick Swardson!

Visually Bolt is at it's best when we follow Bolt, Rhino, and alley cat Mittens as they travel across America. The Las Vegas sequence is breathtaking and ends with a nice homage to Ocean's 11.

What was Bolt missing? A lot. The jokes all seemed to just kind of miss the mark. None of them were terribly funny. There was nothing about Bolt, his owner Penny, or really any other character that made me emotionally connected to them. Mittens' back story is the only one that kind of tugs at your heart strings.

I really hate this push towards digital animation. I enjoy a Pixar movie as much as anyone, but Bolt is digitally animated just for the sake of being digitally animated. It made me long for the hand-drawn Disney Classics I grew up on like Peter Pan and Pinocchio. Hell, Disney animators did things with Dumbo that are still mind blowing to this day. Digital animation takes out the innovation and invention that made Disney special and different to begin with.

I really wanted to like Bolt. I really did. I have been following the progress of the movie for a while. You can get the whole story on the film that used to be called American Dog here. Trust me, that article is more interesting than the movie.

The Greek gives it a C.

Soul Men

Based on trailers and previews it's very easy to dismiss Soul Men as just another black comedy. You might expect a lot of high pitch voices and white people being made to look like nerd, but look a little longer and think about it for a bit. You might realize that Soul Men is something all it's own.

You could mistake the new film starring Samuel L. Jackson and the late Bernie Mac as nothing more than an Afro-centric remake of Blues Brothers. You have two guys who used to be popular soul singers trying to get back on top. There are certainly elements of the John Landis classic, but the movie is also filled with elements of Ron Shelton's Play it to the Bone, the aforementioned Blues Brothers, and even a little bit of Spike Lee's The Original Kings of Comedy - because Bernie Mac brings a lot of himself and his stand up material to the role.

The movie is nothing to write home about. It's not going to bring home any awards or be included on my year end top 10 list. It is a lot of fun though. Mac and Jackson have great chemistry and play off of each other very well. The musical sequences are all very memorable. Jennifer Coolidge has a solid five minute cameo. Sharon Leal looks incredibly sexy in a role that is very similar to her role in Dreamgirls - she was the one that wasn't Beyonce or Jennifer Hudson.

The movie's biggest treat comes as the closing credits role. They are laid over a fifteen minute tribute to Bernie Mac, who died of pneumonia earlier this year. If, like me, you loved Mac in The Original Kings of Comedy and his Fox TV show, but have found his more recent work insufferable, this will remind you what you liked about Mac to begin with. The short tribute really paints the picture of what it must have been like to work with Mac, and it looks like an experience that those that had it will always cherish.

Soul Men isn't without it's down falls - the biggest of which is Affion Crockett. I wanted to walk out every time this guy popped up on screen. The other down falls are all acting related as well. Adam Herschman and Sean Hayes are just awful as this movies goofy white men.

In actuality I have more positive to say about Soul Men than I do negative, but nothing so great that I can justify pushing my grade above a B-. I do think this is the kind of movie that could get better with age. It's the kind of movie that has been missing from theatres lately - a music based comedy. Not a musical, but a comedy with great musical elements. Also, with Mac's death there is no way for producers and Hollywood executives to ruin what was fun about the original with a lack luster sequel. It sounds morbid, but to me that's a positive.

THE GREEK GIVES IT A B-.

Max Payne

I am doing my best to not seem like a film snob on this blog. That was the attitude I took with me into the Rialto on Wednesday morning when Salt & I were given an opportunity to see Max Payne. I really did try to like it. I tried to appreciate the movie for what it is - a mindless, fun action flick. I even tried to have my opinion swayed by Salt, who is more apt to enjoy a mindless action movie that I am. I texted him later in the afternoon to find out what he thought.

"It was the worst" he texted back. Wow, the worst?

I admit, what I liked about the movie was the way it was filmed. Max Payne is based on the video game of the same name, and I appreciate director John Moore's attempt to make the film look like the video game - the screen flashes red whenever Max gets hit, the film is not well lit by any means, it makes use of bullet time and there are a lot of sequences that feature Mark Wahlberg diving in slow motion.

Check out the trailer for the 2001 video game.

Hell, Mark Wahlberg even looks like the video game character a little bit, no?

My list of problems with the film begin with a biggie! There were plot holes in the script so big you could drive a cruise ship through. That's the problem with trying to adapt a video game for the big screen - a video game is usually about 6 - 8 hours of story, because they manufacturers don't expect players to hammer it out in one night. A movie (especially one like Max Payne) has 2 hours at most. Either you need a screenwriter that can work magic or you need to commit to making two movies. Max Payne employed neither strategy. Hell, I didn't even know the name of two of the main characters until the final 15 minutes of the movie.

Secondly, does Mila Kunis really need to be involved in a movie like this? I think she's funny. She's certainly beautiful, and I'm sure she's plenty talented. I just can't watch her run around firing machine guns and killing people only to have Meg Griffin's voice come out of her mouth.

Can you say an action movie based on a video game or comic book is predicable? Because that is complaint number three. The movie is completely devoid of surprises.

I started to weigh the positives and the negatives of the movie and realized that making a movie look like a video game is a fun novelty, but not something that you should be hanging your hat on. The effects and recreations of some scenes from the source material are fun, but not enough to save this turd from it's eventual destination.

So I've used a lot of words to make my point and probably wasted a lot of your time. Maybe I should have just printed Salt's second text message as my review.

"Trite. Boring. Predictable and the plot had some big holes."

The Greek gives it a D.