Angelina Jolie

Movie Issues: Wanted

Posted by: |

Movie Issues: Wanted

They have reached the end of August Action Month, and the guys ended it with the 2000’s. They decided to go with the 2008s Angelina Jolie, Morgan Freeman, James McAvoy action flick Wanted. The over-the-top story of loser Wesley and how he becomes one of the world’s greatest and deadliest assassins. With tons explosions, car stunts and massive amounts of gun play to shake a stick at. It’s one action film-troupe after another. Sit in as the guys discuss the new Doctor Who and disagree all about Wanted.  They are all over the map in this episode. So just another week as normal. Please download and enjoy. Huzzah!

Read On

Movie Issues: Maleficent

Posted by: |

Movie Issues: Maleficent

Maleficent, directed by first time director Robert Stromberg and starring Oscar winning actress Angelina Jolie, re-tells the Sleeping Beauty story from the villain’s point of view. The how’s and why’s are now being answered as to why Maleficent would become so evil she would curse a child. Set against a stunning backdrop of special effects and dark fantasy, Disney brings to life this unknown story of their most popular villain.

Lana Del Rey 4 Read On

Movie Issues: Hackers

Posted by: |

Movie Issues: Hackers

This week the guys wanted to give some love to a movie from their high school years. They went with 1995s Hackers.  A movie that follows a very young Angelina Jolie and Jonny Lee Miller as computer Hackers that have been set-up for a crime they didn’t do. They then enlist the help of the Hacker society to help them clear their names and take down “the man” before it’s too late. Also they guys talk about other 1990s movie that have stand with them over the years. It’s another filled episode full of their normal BS. Please download and enjoy! Read On

Comments Off on Beowulf

Beowulf

Posted by: |

Matinee Price, begrudgingly

If you’re going to see Beowulf, at least see it in the 3D IMAX if at all possible. There is little substance or poetry in this adaptation of the oldest written story in the English language, but it certainly wants your undivided attention for the stuff it added. (Note to students: do not base your report on this film! Just read Seamus Heaney’s translation, it’s pretty painless.) It was not as terrible as I suspected it would be, nor as good as it should have been with Neil Gaiman (with Roger Avery) handling the screenplay. The 3D is very good – not to much hurling of items or forced perspective, but there is some. It’s most effective when used in the same way as multiplane animation – to add depth to scenery or richness in the depth of field.

Unless you have been living under a rock, you know director Robert Zemeckis’ Beowulf was made using the same motion capture technology as his Polar Express. The technique has improved over the past 3 years, but this film still looks like the world’s longest video game cut scene. And it is just shy of two hours long, ladies and germs.
Beowulf begins in Denmark in the year 507 AD. Stiff-faced subjects of King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) are savaged by the monster Grendel (Crispin Glover, even speaking in proper Old English dialect). Accents are all over the map, but it’s hard to know what early Dane-Saxon dialect really sounded like; it would have been nice to have some consistency though. Here comes CGI-buffed Beowulf (Ray Winstone, who does not look like that) to save the day, hiding his nakedness in a series of ridiculous Austin Powers-esque camera tricks. Who’s mad? Grendel’s mom (Angelina Jolie, as a healthier, prettier version of herself). It’s distracting to have Jolie look just like Jolie, hair and mole and all. Sure, Hopkins and John Malkovich and Robin Wright Penn all look like their wax selves, but Jolie is on 200 magazine covers, being distracting and annoying – and we all know about her husband-stealing fetishes. So while I have never before been distracted by a celebrity’s personal life in a movie, I sure was now. She was just…herself, crazy eyes and man-stealing and all.

Beowulf is rated PG-13, but it’s about as gory scary as any Rated T for Teen video game, without a live-action movie’s sense of empathy. I would hate to take an under-13 year old kid who would be constantly “What did he say? Why’s he doing that? When’s it over?” The motion capture is still creepy and weightless and stiff. I hate to say it, but Shrek 3 looked better, and there you have that. It’s OK, but it’s definitely going to be better on the big screen than it ever will be at home.

MPAA Rating PG-13
Release date 11/16/07
Time in minutes 113
Director Robert Zemeckis
Studio Paramount / Warner Brothers

Comments Off on Mr. And Mrs. Smith (2005)

Mr. And Mrs. Smith (2005)

Posted by: |

Oh, this should have been funnier. With Doug Liman (Swingers, Go) at the helm, and two actors who can actually pull off supernatural bad-assness with a certain believability (at least one of which is a proven funny guy), this movie could have been a riot. Instead, it was a weird amalgam of very funny moments, such as when the Smiths are in therapy, and aggressively pointed Action with a capital A. Not that there’s anything wrong with it, when the mix gels. Here, however, we have two superstars trying to be cool, beautiful, funny, and play up the story.

Someone pointed out that all the hype surrounding Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s personal lives makes you watch the chemistry and not the story, but what I noticed is that the movie is all chemistry and not a lot of story – always a lull right after a major plot point. It’s enough chemistry that Jennifer Aniston will never be old enough to watch this movie without getting a spontaneous ulcer. Does the chemistry build into comedy? No. Does it make the action more exciting? Occasionally. Mostly the best parts are watching them do their independent things in such different ways, and then waiting out the lulls while the plot readjusts to new information.

It should not be a shock to anyone who has seen the preview to reveal that they are both spies or assassins or both, and they don’t know that the other person is. Later, they find out. The story ambles sure-footedly through each event episodically and not particularly interestingly. It is necessary to appreciate the entire movie to know their secrets going in; yet it takes nearly all of the surviving bite out of the film when the reveal happens. Instead of the exciting “now what!” that drives all action-adventures, it becomes more of an exercise in waiting for them to get past this phase and to the next one, whatever it may be. The dramatic irony of the pre-reveal is exciting to us. How will they figure it out? How can they keep this secret so well?

All that tension is lost, and instead we are watching two beautiful zillionaires take aim at each other and ruin their impeccably production-designed home. The action sequences are fun, and the episodes have their own charms; little vignettes of any spy movie you care to think of, ending with a perfectly executed job. Pitt shines the most when he is having fun; Jolie shines most when she gets to suck all the attention in the room into her lips. It’s sort of like the biggest budget black box 2 person play in the world, but sadly, written by the guy who wrote XXX: State of the Union and not say, Neil Labute. Labute could have made this movie sing. Indeed, so could have Jon Favreau (writer and star of Swingers).

It’s uneven, but it’s enjoyable. It’s disposable fun, like a Wetzel dog in the mall before dinner. For your double feature, see this before Batman Begins.

MPAA Rating PG-13
Release date 6/10/05
Time in minutes 115
Director Doug Liman
Studio 20th Century Fox