Up

I love Pixar movies.  That probably doesn't surprise you. If you listen to the show, you already know that I am a Disney buff.  I think Pixar has released the most creative and unique family movies of the last 15 years.  I actually know in what order I would rank each of the movies...Okay, here we go.

1. The Incredibles
2. Ratatouille
3. Finding Nemo
4. Wall*E
5. Toy Story
6. A Bug's Life
7. Monster's Inc.
8. Cars
9. Toy Story 2

So how does the company's latest, Up, compare to its predecessors? 

I was very impressed.  Pixar has always been great at the technical side of things.  The animation is breath taking. The detail is stunning.  The other aspects seem to get better each time out.  Pixar movies have gotten funnier.  The stories have gotten better with each time release and Up is no exception.  

Storywise, this might be Pixar's most creative effort.  Carl Fredrickson is an old man that has lost his wife and is dealing with the prospect of losing his home.  He decides to give up on the world around him and follow his and his wife's dream of traveling to Paradise Falls in Venezuela by attaching helium filled balloons to his house.  Minutes into his journey he discovers Russell, a pudgy little stow away.

It's a Disney movie, so I don't need to tell you that the two become friends and learn from one another.  Up isn't about the destination though.  The movie is all about the journey.  After all, early on we're introduced to explorer Charles Muntz, Carl's boyhood idol whose motto is "Adventure is out there."

The film is filled with great characters - a giant bird named Kevin 

a talking dog named Doug 

and even an older, sinister version of Muntz.  

These characters all have stories that tug at your heart strings.  Even the evil Muntz draws some sympathy.

That's what I liked about Up.  The year's other big animated hit, Monsters vs. Aliens 3D, was all about cheap 3D tricks and showing off what could be done in the 3D medium.  What was the result?  A loud, annoying, painfully unfunny movie.  Up is Pixar's first venture in 3D and rather than show off what they could do visually, the company turned a quality, deep script into a great movie.  It's funny.  It's uplifting (no pun intended).  It's even a little sad at times.

So what does my Pixar ranking look like now that film number ten has been delivered?  It's gonna take some time for me to be sure, but my initial impression has it looking like this.

1. The Incredibles
2. Ratatouille
3. Finding Nemo
4. Wall*E
5. Up
6. Toy Story
7. A Bug's Life
8. Monsters, Inc.
9. Cars
10. Toy Story 2

Top half.  Not bad when you're talking about a company that has put out as many great movies as Pixar has. 

The Greek gives it an A-.

Star Trek

HOLY CRAP THIS MOVIE WAS AWESOME!

J.J. Abram's reboot of the classic sci fi franchise was even better than I expected and I expected a lot!  How could I not?  Every trailer has made this look like the greatest action movie ever made.  Star Trek didn't disappoint.  Every actor fit into their role nicely.  The movie is a perfect blend of familiar characters, sets and catchphrases thrown into a great new story.  Star Trek is really everything that a franchise reboot should be.

The casting is spot on.  Chris Pine, who honest to God I had never heard of, is great as the young James T. Kirk.  His performance combined with a strong script really make William Shattner's older Kirk seem a little more human.  Captain Kirk was a rugged, arrogant jerk on the original TV show.  Pine plays Kirk as kind of a dumb kid.  A "too big for his britches" type that gets smacked down over and over before he gets the strength and knowledge to back up his bravado. 

Zoe Saldana is a pleasant surprise.  She is barely in the movie (which is weird considering the amount of press photos and Burger King glasses she is on), but her Uhura comes across like a female version of the young Kirk.  It's easy to see why she and the Captain butt heads and why she and Spock work so well as a couple.

Speaking of Spock, writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman took a real chance writing a part in for Leonard Nimoy when they had already cast Zach Quinto to play the young Spock.  The two Spocks work.  The script keeps them apart for long enough to make their meeting something we look forward to rather than something we know has to happen, but expect will suck.

Oh and speaking of Zach Quinto, how perfect is he to play Spock?  We know from watching Heroes that he is a master of the emotionless, deadpan delivery.  And it's creepy how much he looks like a young Leonard Nimoy.

And by the way, Leonard Nimoy looks like hell these days.

Star Trek is the perfect summer movie.  You really don't get new, original scripts these days.  The summer movie slate has become littered with sequels, reboots, and superheroes.  Star Trek is good enough to turn haters into fans and casual fans to Trekkies.  

There's plenty of humor in the script.  Look, it would be ridiculous to make a Star Trek movie and not acknowledge how campy the original series seems now.  That's what Tim Burton did with his first Batman film.  Like that movie, J.J. Abrams has created a movie that is funny enough for people that can take a joke, but not derogatory in a way that pisses off the hardcore fans.

The summer of 2009 is off to a good start.  I liked X-Men Origins: Wolverine and I loved Star Trek.  We're two weeks in and I have already seen as many blockbusters that I like at this point as I did all of last summer.  

The Greek gives it an A+. 

The Soloist

I really didn't expect to like this movie at all. I saw the trailer for The Soloist and thought it looked kinda hokey - like it was supposed to tug at my heart strings and make me remember everything that is right about humanity.

Then there is the fact that the movie was supposed to be released in November to contend for an Oscar, but then was pushed back for some mysterious reason. I have to admit, I assumed the movie must suck.

I was wrong. I truly enjoyed The Soloist. The acting was terrific, but the acting didn't steal the show. The real star here is the film making. The audio effects and flashbacks used to show Jamie Foxx's Nathanial Ayers Jr. is trapped in a bout of schizophrenia are very effective.

Also, director Joe Wright gives a nice nod to all of Disney's Silly Symphony cartoons. How did most of us first hear an orchestra as a kid? We heard it on the Disney Channel as colors flashed on the screen. That same technique is used here. At times it can get a little tedious, but it is a nice tip of the hat.

The acting is as good as advertised. Robert Downey Jr. has always been underrated in my opinion. He plays Steve Lopez as a down-on-his-luck smart ass. Even in the end his heart doesn't entirely melt, which is nice, because it isn't what you would expect from a movie like this.

Jamie Foxx is just plain brilliant. He is an actor that took his Oscar and made smart choices to build a great reputation. His character William Ayers Jr. is a crazy person. He spends most of his time dressed like Chuck Berry or Don King, but Foxx never lets you laugh at Ayers.

The movie did have its short comings. It starts waaaaaaaay too slow. I was bored for the first 20 minutes or so. The movie also goes for too many cheap laughs. For a drama, Robert Downey Jr. got doused in urine an awful lot.

Also, there is an unnecessary shot that pans across the top of a row of bathroom stalls, where we see a guy taking a dump. Why? For the love of God, why did we need that?

The Soloist is absolutely worth your time! I was thoroughly entertained by both the acting and the film making. So many movies are filmed in LA. This is the first one I have seen in a while that makes great use of the city as a character. The Soloist can seem a little preachy on issues of poverty and care for the mentally ill, but there is nothing gratuitous that isn't essential to the story.

The Greek gives it a B+.

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.