THE LOSS OF MAGIC

 MOVIE REVIEW:

THE INCREDIBLE BURT WONDERSTONE

By:
G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Steve Carrell

Steve Buscemi

Jim Carrey

The Incredible Burt Wonderstone – tells the story of two boys named Burt and Anton who grew a partnership together as magicians. As they grow older doing the same shtick for the past 10 years of their professional career, a new “magician” came on the scene and he becomes more famous than both of them and with his rise in fame costs Burt’s friendship and ticket sales. And so begins the battle of “magic”.

 

I was not looking forward to seeing this movie, the main reason why I actually got up and see this movie is for the scenes of Jim Carrey (Which I will be more in-depth later on). I was expecting the movie would at least be enjoyable nonetheless and there’d be some things that I can say that the movie is worth seeing somehow. The movie as a whole is a very stale movie to begin with. They had many ideas in this movie but (almost) all of them just fell flat in the ground, though there was one idea/message that did stood out. 

I’ve said this many times when I would review a comedy movie, If the movie did made me laugh until I cry (or altleast laugh out loud in general) despite its flaws I can still say that I was entertained nonetheless but in this case - I barely laughed in this movie. I think it is the writing that made this movie suffer; the primary example is around Burt Wonderstone himself, they did the cliché of his character being an “over-indulged (bratty) and asshole type of person from the start but as the movie goes on he will change his ways and everything will be rainbows and butterflies” cliché. But he never had that charm or wit to him that can make him a likeable person anyways, instead he comes off as an asshole which is (to me) very bearable to watch throughout the first act, though when they did execute his change as a person in the third act I did enjoy the movie more. 

It is rather ironic that you find the antagonist (played by Jim Carrey) to be more likeable along with Alan Arkin’s character, I think Alan Arkin’s character should’ve been written that way for Steve Carell’s character. There were most characters in this movie that are very under-written which results to them having little to do in this movie and it was Steve Buscemi and Olivia Wilde’s character. Olivia Wilde as you watch the movie it felt like she was just a plot device to be a love interest and a conscience but she was very under-written that you ended up thinking that they didn’t really need her to be in this movie in the first place and just focus on Buscemi’s and Carrell’s “magical friendship”. It is fair enough to say that atleast I was entertained by the magic tricks featured in this movie.

The message that I was talking about earlier was “doing what you love”, many reviewers pointed this out that this was one of the saving graces of the movie. The movie’s message gives emphasis on doing what you love the most and how you can share your happiness with others with the thing you love to do for the sake of entertainment. One YouTube movie reviewer Jeremy Jahns (who I idolize) is one of those people who pointed out that you don’t need to turn your passion into a form of business, Though as the movie ends the message was badly executed when it got condescended (when you watch the movie you’ll know why). I relate to that message very much since I like being my own boss (yes, I actually call this a job). Even If I am talking to you in a form of writing I still try to entertain you with talents I have (or at least I think I have). The saving grace of this movie was the scenes of Jim Carrey’s version of modern day magicians/illusionists (David Blaine, Chris Angel), he was very hilarious in this movie; He had the best jokes, lines and scenes in this movie for it is Jim Carrey’s at its finest, every time he’s not in the movie I was begging for him to come back on screen. If he wasn’t in this movie I wouldn’t know how this movie will end up. 

In the end, this movie is worth checking out as a rental, it’s not something to rush to the theaters but It’s fair enough to wait for its release on DVD (don’t even go the extra mile to get it on blu-ray). Like Wonderstone and Anton’s tricks to the movie, they do not really offer anything new for the audience but you will enjoy some of the things in there nonetheless. The only thing worth seeing in this movie is scenes with Alan Arkin and Jim Carrey. The movie as a comedy did have its laugh out loud moments in scenes with Jim Carrey and also some chuckle-worthy scenes here and there though as a whole the movie suffered from the flaw of an under-written story. I enjoyed this movie for the most part though I have no plans of seeing it again. Maybe this movie is not really "Incredible" or "Abracatastic" after all.

THE GOOD:

+SCENES WITH JIM CARREY AND ALAN ARKIN

+THE MESSAGE

+THE THIRD ACT

THE BAD:

-UNDER-WRITTEN CHARACTERS AND STORYTELLING

-MOST OF THE JOKES DIDN’T WORK

MY RATING:

2.5/5 – IT’S GOOD….. FOR A RENTAL

UNAPOLOGETIC

MOVIE REVIEW:

DJANGO UNCHAINED

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Jamie Foxx

Christoph Waltz

Leonardo DiCaprio

Django Unchained – Takes place in the Old West where slavery is excessively done at those times. It centers a slave named, Django who was freed by a bounty hunter, (Dr.) King Schultz who is in the disguise of a dentist. As the two grew a partnership together, Django decides that he needs Schultz’s help in freeing his wife from a plantation owner that goes by the name of Calvin Candie.

I couldn’t wait for Django Unchained, because it’s a Tarantino film – what more can you say? especially when this movie is going to be released in The Philippines in a solid R-16 rating with no cuts at all (as they say); In fact this is probably the first Tarantino movie that I have witnessed on the big screen. And I am very (VERY) happy to say that I had a bloody good time watching Django Unchained. As usual, Quentin Tarantino would share his love for films (or the “cinematic arts” if you’re that fancy). His work is pretty much proof of how much he loves film as he pay homage (in this situation) to old school spaghetti westerns and gives us something fresh at the same time. As a result, this movie is an entertaining homage of spaghetti westerns accompanied with his snappy trademarked writing style and over the top (gory) action scenes.

Right off the bat, in every Tarantino movie something worth anticipating from the man is his writing. Besides the action he offers, he’d give us some entertaining and hilarious quips from characters. It is rather challenging for some writers to handle a touchy subject on slavery unlike Tarantino who is a very unapologetic director/writer, especially for a guy who have excessively used the “N” word (which happens to be a rather poisonous word to say nowadays) in his past movies. I can actually see and sometimes understand why people would be disturbed by such word, especially when it is brought up on a touchy subject like slavery.  I remember what Film Critic, Richard Roeper said in his review of this movie which is the use of the “N” word in this movie is more of a “reminder to Americans on how the word became part of the vernacular in this country and why it remains as such an obscenity” and that was pretty much why I didn’t mind the use of the “N” word in this movie, I see it more as historical accuracy than it being an “obscenity” and same to other illustrations that shows how disturbing slavery and racism were done back then.

That being said, Tarantino was able to deliver a hilarious, clever, and entertaining movie with his writing. Tarantino movies tend to be lengthy; in fact the movie felt like the three acts of the movie felt very separate to each other, it felt like they were telling a very different story that still ties-in to each other. The movie would excessively take its time in showcasing a series of scenes of just dialogues throughout the movie (as his movies would usually do) but his writing and direction made those scenes of just two (or maybe more than two) people talking very entertaining and it really engages you throughout the film; for the most part the conversation would end on an unpredictable turn for most parts of the movie, He makes a simple every day conversation feel intense and interesting in his past movies. And I thought that he always does a great job on doing that in his films and it definitely shows here.

The writing wouldn’t really work out on screen than it did in paper without the performances, and as always there are very entertaining and exceptional Oscar- worthy (I know, I’ve watched the Oscars, pretty disappointed that Leo didn’t get nominated) performances. To start off with the performances, Jamie Foxx; I thought his performance of this slave was very convincing, because he starts off as this very timid person because of his place in life (People like him back then are like that unfortunately) but as the movie progresses it develops him into the exact opposite of what he was. I liked the buddy-relationship he had with Christoph Waltz, seeing those two together doing their own thing was very entertaining.

Speaking of Christoph Waltz, he continues to do a great performance in this kind of role; it’s great to see him working with Tarantino again. Leonardo DiCaprio his performance is a very different performance from him as you never expected from him. The reason why I say “different” because if you notice his projects in the past (after titanic) he’s always this much “damaged” anti-hero who sets on a quest for redemption (either that or he’s just madly in-love with someone) but here he’s more of a flamboyant, unpredictable, and dark villain in this movie and even I have to admit watching his performance is fun to watch and I’m glad that he is doing a different performance. He was definitely the one who stood out in this movie as he steals the show every time he is in a scene. The remainders of the cast were all great as well, Samuel Jackson who pulled off a very hilarious performance; I thought he had a great on-screen presence right from the first scene he was in. I thought Kerry Washington wasn’t bad as well. Everyone in this movie were all great and we have (probably) seen that coming.

In the end, Django Unchained is a very original, enjoyable and entertaining spaghetti western movie from the one and only Quentin Tarantino. This is probably one of the best Tarantino movies I’ve seen and may be what should’ve been the best of 2012 (if this movie did get an early release date) to me. The movie is filled with excellent performances from the cast (especially for Leonardo Dicaprio). The movie not only showcases his brilliance in filmmaking and love to cinema but also how disturbing the practices of different forms of slavery were back then.

MY RATING:

5/5 – EPIC WIN!

HEART

MOVIE REVIEW:

OZ - THE GREAT AND POWERFUL

Starring:

James Franco

Michelle Williams 

Mila Kunis 

Oz the Great and Powerful - Is about a conning circus magician named, Oscar Diggs. When he travels away from the circus he got hurled away by a tornado and transported him to the land of OZ where the citizens believe that he is this great and powerful wizard, Oz takes the opportunity to take this title and win over the crowd just for him to gain riches. But the three witches of Oz Evanora, Theodora and Glinda are both skeptic and doubtful about him gaining such title, and now it is up to Oz to prove that he can be the great and powerful wizard as he sets out his quest to change himself and free the people from the reign of the wicked witch.

I was not looking forward to watching Oz the Great and the Powerful, my first impression of this movie is pretty much Disney replicating their success from the live action Alice in Wonderland movie that came out 3 years ago by Tim Burton and the trailers for this didn’t really win me over that much with me being a huge fan of the classic Wizard of Oz and the musical Wicked, The trailer barely gave me an idea of what the movie will be and I end up thinking that this will be another CGI-fest like Alice in Wonderland. Going back to Alice in Wonderland, I was not a very big fan of that movie because of its overly-depressing presentation of Wonderland and it is a CGI-fest than giving Heart and depth to the story, this on the other hand did the exact opposite; this movie is a Tin Man for it does have heart and depth to the characters and storytelling.  At first, I really had very low expectations about this movie. I was about to think that this movie would be like Spider-Man 3 for it to be really bad and kinda good at the same time. But I was surprised that I was wrong, it was actually very enjoyable and brought down all of my expectations of this movie ending up bad.

Going back to my statement of this movie having heart and depth to it, despite the fact that it was overly-long the characters made it all up. But there was one character that I thought was weak and I will go through that later. The characters were entertaining and they show is heart and depth to them, that being said I thought the CGI characters showed that there is so much depth and heart put into them. I like how they are not actually just grounded characters in a depressing world, they still have a large amount of wit to them and they came off entertaining like the China Doll Girl and Finley the Monkey as representations of the people Oz encountered in his reality, I thought I liked that aspect of the movie having representations of the people he knew be in the land of Oz, both of those characters actually stole the show as they were accompanied by great voice acting and very strong writing put to them. Those characters actually had that feeling that this is a Wizard of Oz movie, especially the way you encountered those characters. There was something about that China Doll Girl that gave me a tear-jerking missile with her back story also giving her this child-like personality at the same time was handled very well. and every time that monkey shows up on the screen he would always have something funny to say and do, just by the smile I find myself chuckling. I thought James Franco was good as Oz, I was very disappointed when I heard that Robert Downey Jr. and Johnny Depp turned down the role and they end up choosing James Franco was an odd choice to me but he came off with a good performance anyways though I still think that RDJ or Johnny Depp could've done better. I liked how the writing built him up into this mature, wise and witty wizard that we know and loved in the 1939 classic. Now I thought the weak part of the movie was Mila Kunis as Theodora, I thought that someone could've done a lot better in the role or maybe it is the writing's fault for giving her little to do in the first half. As much as I like how there is much more story to the character, Her performance in the first half was over the top in a really bad way up to the point that she would end up having very awkward delivery (the scene of her crying took me off), I thought her over the top performance worked in the second half (when you watch the movie you’ll know why) though the writing did have her do very little along with co-star, Rachel Weisz as Evanora though Michelle Williams as Glinda was the best one among the three witches. The story was strong in this movie, sure there were some pacing issues I must admit but the story still came up strong on its own and I'm glad that they actually have some Oz elements put into it.

This being a huge CGI-fest and all, I thought that the movie takes the CGI to its advantage as they bring the land of Oz back to life differently from what we remember the Land of Oz was.  Though I have to admit there were shots where the CGI is overly-cartoony up to the point that it looked fake (having the human characters look awkward in green screen scenes) and there were shots where the CGI is rendered very well up to the point that it almost looked real and every color is vibrnt. Unfortunately I did not see this movie in 3D, I was very late on the 3D screening and I ended up watching this in 2D but I did heard that the 3D is Disney’s best,  judging by it there are tons of shot that looks great in 3D especially IMAX 3D. Knowing the fact that Warner Bros. still owns the rights to the 1939 classic and still gets away with some nods to the old one, Fans of the classic will likely be pleased by some of the references in this movie, I like how it paid homage on the aspect ratio and color changing when the movie changes worlds, I liked the amount of cleverness put to the fact on how they made the “man behind the curtain” thing , there aren’t any references that you’d expect like the red shoes or witches red striped socks. But the main problem with the movie is the pacing, the pacing, there were most scenes where it made me remember Alice in Wonderland which is being a forced presentation, I don’t really think there were some scenes needed to present unnecessary things on how scary the surroundings can be or how whimsical most places can be like, A good 15-minute cut could’ve been perfect. But when the movie end I thought the finale was worth the wait anyways. 

In the end, Oz the Great and the Powerful was an enjoyable movie. It is surprising that this movie had a lot of heart and depth put to it, all of my expectations of this movie being bad didn’t meet, I thought Sam Raimi and the cast did a very good job welcoming us back to a very different Land of Oz, sure some elements of the movie came off pretty weak but other elements of the movie did made it all up, the pacing was slow but The finale was worth the wait and definitely worth the price of admission along with some of the characters who can entertain you. It’s not the greatest or the shittiest movie that I was both expecting it to be but it came off as a very enjoyable movie that is very watchable with the whole family, both new and old fans of the classic will find themselves enjoying this from start to finish as they both welcome and return to the land of Oz, I highly recommend you see this in the big screen. 

THE GOOD: 

+ENTERTAINING CHARACTERS

+GREAT WRITING
+SOME GOOD PERFORMANCES 

+(FOR THE MOST PART) GOOD SPECIAL EFFECTS

+GAVE (SOME) CHARACTERS A LARGE AMOUNT OF HEART AND DEPTH

THE BAD:

-PACING ISSUES

-(FOR THE MOST PART) BAD SPECIAL EFFECTS

-SOME CHARACTERS HAVE LITTLE DO

MY RATING:

4/5 - WIN!

A CRAZY THING CALLED LOVE...

MOVIE REVIEW:

SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

By:
G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Bradley Cooper

Jennifer Lawrence

Robert De Niro

Silver Linings Playbook – is based on the book with the same name by Matthew Quick and it centers on a man named, Pat who is suffering from unannounced bi-polar after an “incident” with his wife. When he is finally free from the mental institution, he comes back from his family having everyone he knew are very worried that things will go wrong again. When Pat discovers that his ex-wife gave him a restraining order, he ends up obsessing on bringing her back to him. But when he meets a mysterious girl named Tiffany, who is also troubled yet they are very alike to each other, he thinks that she can help him in bringing his wife but in one condition she needs his help to participate in this dancing competition that she wants to participate in.

Of all the Oscar movies I was anticipating on this movie (Django will be awesome, don’t get me wrong), I finally went out of my way to watch this movie and it was worth it because right off the bat, I loved this movie, I was expecting it to be good, but I wasn’t expecting it to be this great. I thought that it was entertaining; I thought that this was a beautifully written, perfectly acted and masterfully directed by David O. Russell.

As I describe the plot, I know it sounded silly and it is something that I can rent from a DVD store but as I watch the movie, it’s actually not that shitty cliché movie that I describe it to be. There’s something about David O. Russell’s writing (and I’ve seen this in the past) that he can write off clichés in his movies but you ended up not minding it because of how compelling the story was told that the clichés actually work, it felt like he writes real people with real problems, it shows in his previous movie “The Fighter” and it definitely shows here and that kind of writing style actually works In a movie like this. You believe in the dilemmas they are going through, you believe that Bradley Cooper is suffering in this “disease” and how it affects the people around him and yet these dilemmas can actually happen in real life, how characters can be representations of the people you know or maybe even those dilemmas must’ve happened to the person you know got through the same thing. The writing actually gave both Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper’s character (probably) both shared a great on-screen chemistry in this movie, and both are very relatable (oddly enough I can relate to Bradley Cooper’s character) and engaging characters from start to finish. The writing gave each tone a room to breathe; a dark tone being accompanied by a light-hearted comedy gave each other time to showcase it in well thought-out comedic timing, This being a romantic-comedy with really dark and light-hearted jokes at the same time.

Not only had the writing done a fantastic job telling the story but also the performances were really… up there (as I’d like to describe it). David O. Russell continues to prove that he is masterful in directing actors; Bradley Cooper in this movie, this is probably Bradley Cooper’s best performance yet. I like how he is trying different roles nowadays; he is building up to be a perfect leading man in movies and I also like how he has a new identity than being “That guy from the hangover”. He along with co-star Jennifer Lawrence made you believe in their self-destructive behavior(s) and as their chemistry goes on and you thought that it is pretty sweet that they are helping each other out and you see the progression of their change. We also have a very surprising performance from Robert De Niro, He always gives it his all despite in the shit he is in in the end we would say that he is good nonetheless but here it is different. Sure he (definitely) gave it his all but it was in a different level of a performance from him. And last but not the least is Chris Tucker, Which is a surprise to me when I have heard about this movie, I read the cast one by one in the poster and I saw his name I was very surprised that he is in a project that is not Rush Hour.  This is definitely a different role from him; sure he is still doing the hyper-active talking but it actually works when you know about his character.

In the end, Silver Linings Playbook is a well done film. It’s masterfully written and directed by David O. Russell. This movie had spectacular performances and writing. This movie had engaging characters as they take you to the ups and downs of their lives. I enjoyed the movie from start to finish; I highly recommend seeing this movie immediately in theaters. It’s a very romantic movie about crazy people… Who knew? 

THE GOOD:

+UNPREDICTABLY SPECTACULAR PERFORMANCES

+GREAT WRITING AND DIRECTING BY DAVID O. RUSSELL

+WELL BALANCED TONE

+COMEDIC TIMING

THE BAD:

NONE

MY RATING:

5/5 - EPIC WIN!

EXAGGERATING REALITY

MOVIE REVIEW 

-

HITCHCOCK 

by:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Anthony Hopkins

Helen Mirren

Scarlett Johansson 

65% of the population may know who (or atleast familiar of )Alfred Hitchcock is, but the question to those 65% is that do they really know the person fully, the way he thinks or do things. With this new film based on the events on how he made his riskiest move in his career? does this offer any details on his persona? 

Hitchcock - Tells how the famous and well known director, Alfred Hitchcock made the riskiest project of his career which is probably the most controversial and game changing movie of all time, Psycho. In making of this project, behind the scenes he have many troubles in his family, close friends and studio executives.

I have not always been a big fan of Alfred Hitchcock but that does not mean i hate the guy, I really appreciate his work even if I watched only two of his works (which is Psycho and Vertigo). But I wasn't very much familiar with Alfred Hitchcock himself, This movie on the other hand I can't really say if this movie really did show the humanity of Alfred Hitchcock, completely. I can't really say that this movie offers anything for people who is very unfamiliar with Alfred Hitchcock's works since it's not really a straight-up biopic that you may be expecting as how the Social Network focuses on how Facebook is made and how the people that  are close to Zuckerberg are affected by it. Like the Social Network, Hitchcock is more on the things he went through this risk and how it affects the people around him as well. That being said, was the movie good on it's own? Even if I am unfamiliar with the man himself or his works that much, the movie on it's own is just good and enjoyable.

It must be difficult for the writers to replicate Hitchcock's persona, because as I've heard is that he was a rather complicated, unusual and sophisticated person, In this movie the way they wrote off Hitchcock having his own sanity where he sees Norman Bates around telling him what to do or giving him ideas of what's going on is more of an odd yet somewhat intriguing choice to do for the writers. Again, I'm very unsure of things if they are making it "accurate"even if some of the things that did happen here did happen in real life like the fact that Alfred Hitchcock ordered every bookstore to take out every copy of Psycho so that anyone won't know the surprises of the movie, or how Paramount rejects his idea of making this movie and ends up financing it himself. But beyond the fact that this is a behind the scenes drama of the making of Psycho it's actually also a romantic drama between Alfred Hitchcock and his wife Alma Reville, to be honest i didn't see that part of the movie is one of those things that caught me off guard and I was actually interested in watching these two develop their relationship and also seeing those moments that i mentioned earlier after hearing many controversies about the movie. But it felt pretty weird to see these relationship and the Psycho thing to be in the background. that being said, it was more Alma's side of the story of how she is going through with his relationship and how she wants to have a stamp of her name at something. At first I thought that as the movie progresses, all these things happening the film doesn't really know where it wants to go, there wasn't a really good direction to it, things happen and they barely explored some stories and characters here and there. Some of the stories worked out on it's own, some weren't really clear.

The meat of the movie is definitely the cast, the cast made this movie to a performance piece and they are all uncannily cast and formed (with make-up), Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren carried this movie as Alfred Hitchcock and Alma Reville, delivering charm and cleverness in the movie. Anthony Hopkins was a joy to see as Hitchcock right from the beginning when he greeted the audience, how the make-up was constructed made him (almost) look like the man himself. But to be fair the supporting cast like Scarlett Johansson (Who is having a good year and uncannily cast to be as Janet Leigh), Jessica Biel ( for the little scenes she was in, she was pretty good), Danny Houston, Toni Collette and James D'Arcy (Also uncannily cast as Anthony Perkins) that being said, all of them were able to deliver their A-game.

In the end, Hitchcock is not really for the new but for those who have known the man and his works before, there are bits here and there that will make a Hitchcock fan happy, long time fans of Alfred Hitchcock may find this movie entertaining as the cast deliver their A-game. But I wouldn't really recommend you see this because you may think that this is a bio-pic of Alfred Hitchcock or something that will help you familiarize with the man himself. Getting that away, Stories of Hitchcock and Alma stabilizing their relationship and Hitchcock making Psycho shines on it's own but other stories are left off flat and weren't explored very well. The movie to me was pretty good, it's not the Oscar movie that i was expecting nor is it a bad movie as well.

THE GOOD:

+THE CAST

+THE PERFORMANCES

+SOME STORIES WERE WELL TOLD

THE BAD:

-SOME THINGS AREN'T DEVELOPED OR EXPLORED VERY WELL

MY RATING:

NOT BAD! - 3.5/5 

THE NEW TWILIGHT?

MOVIE REVIEW

WARM BODIES

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Nicholas Hoult

Teresa Palmer

John Malkovhich 

ever since a sparkling Vampire and a bitchy "werewolf" got paired to an even bitchier human girl, It seems that it is a fad now to have classic monsters to be paired with teenage girls. With that kind of money Twilight gets for every movie, most studios wouldn't say no when money can talk, With Warm Bodies on the other hand; Over the past years there's been a lot of news about Warm Bodies and the initial reaction is obviously a lot of f-bombs and videos linking to various clips of people shouting "NO".  I was pretty much doing both at that time. But hearing that a good director is behind the project I was a bit optimistic about it. Now that we have the movie out in theaters... Is it the NEW TWILIGHT everyone is talking about at first?

Warm Bodies - Is based on a young-adult novel with the same name by Isaac Marion and it takes place years after the Zombie Apocalypse began, It follows a very unusual Zombie (who is meanwhile called "R") who has no memory of his past, he is different from the other zombies as he proves it to a human girl that he is attracted to named, Julie. But as he interacts with this girl further, he finds himself slowly transforming into his human self. But then complications happened between them with her father and a large group of Bonies (Decayed, Skeleton Zombies).

In other words Love is the cure... It sounds silly... But it's actually told well, well enough to get me interested.

Like I said, I wasn’t very happy to hear about Warm bodies at first, especially when I have not read the book of the movie that it is based on, I was half blind going into this movie (since they sorta’ explained the plot in the trailers) I was expecting this movie to be "shitty", to keep that in a G-Rating I had no high expectations for Warm Bodies when i read the synopsis and saw the first photos but when the trailer came out I thought that it may not be shit-fest it may be. Is it really not the shit fest i was hoping it to be at first? (Surprisingly) Not really? Is it the greatest movie? No, not really but I had to say that i actually enjoyed this movie and I actually liked it. I know it's weird for me to say it, but i actually like it, in fact i can see both a man and a woman enjoy this movie (And I was in a theater full of couples).

Right of the bat, Is it like Twilight? Not at all it is far away from having it deserve such a title Sure the way i summarized the plot made the movie sound cheesy and sound like Twilight, but they were actually self-aware of how it is like a Twilight-Ish formula, The flaw of Twilight is that it takes itself way too seriously, up to the point that it ends up as a very badly drawn out, (in a bad way) soap opera type of film. This on the other hand is self-aware of the concept that it is silly but the movie actually made it work as these characters give their charm as they ham the camera. Warm Bodies stands alone as a movie than being called a Twilight rip-off. Director, Jonathan Levine knows how to balance the seriousness and the wackness (if you are familiar with his works you may get the reference) of his movies go, like his recent work 50/50. 50/50 had a very good balance of comedy and drama; it shows in this movie as well. But it wasn't much of a depressing drama like 50/50. And also it does not look cheap like Twilight did (seriously that movie looks like it can be for TV).This movie has more depth than i was expecting it to be in the rom-com side of the movie. You should stop thinking about the fact that this is a Twilight rip-off because it’s not. 

The comparison out of the way, the movie on its own; Going back to the comedy aspect of this movie, the writing for the comedy is not as forced as I was expecting it to be. You can get good laughs out of this movie, especially in the first half of the movie. The jokes are genuine and not forced at all, the movie felt like the movie got in a different way when it comes to it being a zombie film as the film progresses. The jokes were in the movie at the right time, and I like it when comedy movies go that way.  This being a (horror-) romantic-comedy and all, I find the romance… Cute I think that’s a good description for it. The chemistry between Nicholas Hoult’s character and Teresa Palmer’s character is enjoyable and interesting (surprisingly interesting) to watch, more enjoyable and interesting than a sparkling vampire and a human bitch making out in 5 movies. I thought both actors worked really well together on-screen. I thought Rob Coddry as the Bro-Zombie was pretty funny than the rest of the cast, for the scenes he was in. But I did have very few problems with this movie it being under-developed things here and there, The Bonies felt like an obvious plot device than an actual threat in the second half and John Malkovhich is in the movie in very few scenes, for a great comedic actor like him It felt like he was very under-used, but for the scenes he was in he was still pretty good.

In the end, Warm Bodies is a very enjoyable movie. It’s a 2013-released movie where I would highly recommend you see this movie immediately, It’s a very good date movie that I’m pretty sure you and your date will enjoy together this Valentine’s day (or maybe any day in February). Director Jonathan Levine and the rest of the cast were able to deliver a well-handled film as the writer(s) and the director of the film took the genre in a different direction. I had a very good time watching this movie, It is funny,  I found myself laughing (not out loud, but it is surprising that I did laugh and chuckled at some point), the romance is cute and interesting to watch, and I also forgot to say that the soundtrack was very well put together as well.  I liked this movie very much though it still had some of its problems. Again, I would highly recommend you see this movie (not alone, because it felt weird to be alone in a movie like this).

THE GOOD:

+WELL BALANCED TONES

+GOOD PERFORMANCES

+SURPRISINGLY FUNNY

THE BAD:

-UNDER DEVELOPED THINGS HERE AND THERE

MY RATING:

WIN! - 4/5

DISBELIEF

MOVIE REVIEW 

-
GANGSTER SQUAD

By:

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Josh Brolin

Ryan Gosling 

Sean Penn

Gangster Squad, seems to be one of those movies that historically happened but turned into Action Movies type. It can go through for better or for worse or maybe it could be in the middle of it, did it follow the road those kind of movie went through? Let's dive in to Gangster Squad.

Gangster Squad - In 1949,The Chief of the LAPD, Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) enlists Sgt. John O' Mara (Josh Brolin) to create a secret squad of underground cops to take down the biggest mob boss of Los Angeles Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) as he rise from power over the city of angels.

I was very excited to see Gangster Squad, from the start I thought it has a pretty good (scratch that: great) ensemble cast. But the excitement pretty much got into halt when they had to delay the release date 4 months later because they had to cut out one scene that happens to be a Theater Shooting so that it will not offend those people in the "Aurora Theater Shooting Tragedy". Getting that out of the way, was the wait worth it? Yeah, My expectations but exceed and eluded at the same time. But in fairness I did enjoy the movie.

The reason why I said that my expectations were eluded because of the fact that there were things that I don't expect where it would go on different directions. The movie looked like it will be that popcorn action type movie but then it takes to different roads, it didn't know what it wants to be. The movie tries to be a drama, at some point it's this over-the-top action flick and forcibly try to put some humanity to the characters in a bad way. To go into detail with three of the statements, The movie was  a well put together in the first half but the second half was a mess. The movie tried it's best to develop these characters with some sort of humanity, which I don't mind sometimes as long as it is relevant to the storytelling but here at some point it was told well but at some point wasn't and it felt forced, and it mostly revolve around Giovanni Ribisi's part. Sometimes the drama will be off-ly developed as the movie progresses, when people got killed off there wasn't really much depth to give a shit about that one character who died. Also Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling's romance I didn't buy but I did buy Brolin's relationship with his wife more (despite the fact on how cliche it is). The tones got mixed in with actual history and over-the-top really poorly. Those were a few things that bothered me about this movie.

But were there any good things to pick up from this movie? actually, yes. Despite my complaints I was still able to enjoy the film. It was definitely a good popcorn flick. Every action scene is entertaining even if it does discount the fact that this is somewhat a real life story, there were a lot of action scenes that really stuck out to me as I got out of the theater. What I also like is how well written some characters are, especially the gangster squad itself as they have this good enough on-screen camaraderie. The writing for this movie was both clever and sometimes flat, When I first saw Sean Penn in the trailer doing his "menacing" monologue (making all the  "boom", "bam" sounds in that monologue) It took me away a little bit when I was watching the trailer, here you got some lines like that both worked and fell flat. The performances I thought was very good in this movie, despite the fact that some characters weren't really developed very well. Not to go into detail with this huge cast, Josh Brolin continues to impress me with this new young Tommy Lee Jones image, Ryan Gosling was also great there were a few scenes coming from him that is memorable and he was also great in this movie (he had that Drive vibe, I think that's his new image now). Sean Penn, earlier I did say about my first impression about Sean Penn as Mickey Cohen was not very good, It looks to be that he'd be a little too over the top but when I watched the film I thought that he wasn't bad, his over the top performance worked out pretty well pulling as he shapes up to be this badass and threatening villain in the movie. Emma Stone, was barely developed and ends up having a rushed romance with Ryan Gosling (that I really couldn't buy). The Gangster Squad themselves, Anthony Mackie and Michael Peña, Giovanni Ribisi and Robert Patrick were good as well and some of them did deliver an entertaining enough performance. 

In the end, Gangster Squad was not that bad and not that good, But in all fairness it was a very entertaining movie as it captures both the dark and glamorous side of Los Angeles in the late 40s and director Ruben Fleischer and the cast were able to deliver an entertaining action movie. It still has flaws in the writing and pacing department because of the second half (which was pretty messy) they could've worked it all out. Going back to that theater scene I thought they disguised that scene very well, I couldn't really pick point which scene it was going to come in. In this movie, I liked it for those small good bits. I would recommend you see this movie If you want to see a very good popcorn flick, but it's not necessarily something It's not necessarily something to get out of your way to watch, It could be a good rental i suppose.

THE GOOD:

+THE PERFORMANCES

+CAPTURED THE FEEL OF 

+ENTERTAINING ACTION

+SOME OF THE WRITING WORKED

THE BAD: 

-THE FILM DOESN'T KNOW WHAT IT WANTS TO BE

-SOME OF THE WRITING DIDN'T WORKED OUT

MY RATING:

NOT THAT BAD, NOT THAT GOOD! - 3/5

RAW EMOTIONS

MOVIE REVIEW - Les Misérables

By: 

G.P. MANALO

Starring:

Hugh Jackman

Anne Hathaway

Russell Crowe

There were many versions of Les Miserables over the past few decades But the most famous and what people call the definitive version of Les Miserables is the Musical version. But then hollywood were able to get their hands on this property and promised a movie-ized version of the highly-acclaimed broadway musical. Many were excited, Many feared that it would be horrendous. But with a huge cast of talented people came on board with a very talented director, many have changed their minds, and many continues to anticipate this film. And now we finally have it, gracing our silver screens.

This is based on a book that is later adapted to a play/musical that is very highly (I mean highly) acclaimed by critics and audience alike over the past few decades. It is centered around; Jean Valjean a criminal who was able to break parole after serving many years in prison to do so, as he escapes he wishes to turn his life around as he runs away from his past life. Years later, he meets this woman and vows to take care of his daughter for her. But his past continues to follow his trails as Javert returns to hunt him down. 

I have always been familiar with the musical since i was very young since my music teacher would show us various musical works like Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz and Les Miserables. That being said, I have been anticipating on Les Misérables ever since i have heard that the musical is being adapted into a film. When I first saw the trailer of Anne Hathaway's interpretation of the classic "I Dreamed A Dream" just blew me away and made me shed a manly tear. But to be perfectly honest, I was not a very big fan of musicals. Probably because I don't see a lot of musicals in the theater (because they are very expensive), But I still love some musicals (besides some works from Andrew-Lloyd Webber), I thoroughly enjoy them. But the main reason why that i was anticipating on this movie (even if I am not a big fan of musicals) is because of utter curiosity and seeing this as a very ambitious film from the start because of the director, the actors and the fact that the actors give out a really raw performance like how actors in musicals do (had to say it again, that trailer pretty much made this movie look like a musical with an epic scale). Now that i have watched it, I definitely enjoyed this movie; I thought that this is a beautiful and engaging film. That's saying a lot for a guy like me, who is not a very big fan of musicals/movies like this. 

Of all the musical-turned-to-movies that i have seen in the past this is probably different out of all them. It had that cinematic feel to it, but it never loses its musical feel. By musical feel i mean by how the actors are filmed when they are singing and acting, (director) Tom Hooper does these close-up facial shots a lot in his past movies and it fits very well in a movie like this and what made it work with it is how the director let's these people sing live on set than lip-syncing (in their pre-recorded voices), though there were many shots that are very distracting. You can see it on their face, you can hear it from their voices that they are really singing naturally, every emotion they give out has a huge amount of effectiveness to you like how real musical actors give out in a live musical. Usually in adaptations, there’d be changes. Re-watching the concert of Les Miserables a month before seeing this film, I can tell in this movie that they changed a lot of the lyrics; they cut a few lines of the songs that is necessary, at some songs it works but in some songs it felt rushed a little bit and also they cut out a few songs. They also added a new song which is “Suddenly” I thought that the song was added in the movie very well, it was added in the right time and it really illustrated the tender and kind side of Jean Valjean very well. The performances in this movie were just incredible to see in the big screen with surround sound (200 pesos well spent). Do keep in mind though, this is not your everyday musical, since (say) 99% of the dialogue in this movie are being sung, word by word (and if not it’d be a second of vocal break) usually there’d be a huge gap of spoken dialogue and it’d be a set-up to another song. But here it felt like the movie never stopped for a break and when they do it's a 15-second break. Also to keep in mind is that this is a rather lengthy film with a huge cast of characters to develop (almost 3 hours, this movie is). At some point the movie flew by faster than you thought and then it would drastically slow down up to the point that the last half felt very rushed with its development. If I would have a complaint about this movie it would be that.

Speaking of performances, the performances are a really big deal in this movie. Each and every one of the actors gave their all in this movie through singing and acting (though one actor can only handle 1 out of the 2 things I mentioned and I will go to that later on). Tom Hooper knows how to direct actors very well up to the point that the actors deliver such an effective performance (Again, taking an example from the King’s Speech). Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway were the ones who really stood out to me in the entire film and yet this is probably their best performance yet. Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean is a joy to see this character brought to life again in the silver screen. I’ve always thought that he is a very good stage performer and actor over the past years, when I heard that he is playing Jean Valjean, it was a very big surprise to me hearing the news that he is casted as that character. Anne Hathaway was definitely the one that stood out in the singing department, because when you hear her sing “I Dreamed a Dream”… Wow….  I’m no Simon Cowell to judge someone’s singing, because I’m not very good at judging singers and music in general. But going back, Anne Hathaway brought a very strong presence as she sings in this movie, the amount of emotion she brought in both her acting and singing performance is just incredible to watch. Russell Crowe is probably the mixed bag of the movie, Acting-wise he is very good as usual but Singing-Wise… Eh…. Russell Crowe’s singing is like the first time watching a movie in 3D, it takes some time to adjust until you get used to it and starts to look (in this case, sound) good for you. He was fine in the movie, he delivered a good enough singing performance in a few songs. Then again it could’ve been worst for the guy like Pierce Brosnan in Mama Mia. I’m not really going to go into detail with the others since this is a huge cast. I thought Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter were able to deliver hilarious and entertaining performances every time they are on-screen. Samantha Barks, this movie is definitely her breakthrough performance (even if she is the same character from the concert version), she also delivered a powerful performance as well,  Aaron Tveit, Eddie Redmayne and Amanda Seyfried are great as well and in the end. In the end the cast delivered powerful performances from start to finish.

In conclusion, i enjoyed this movie very much this movie is the definitive movie-musical experience to me, Its a musical with epic proportions, It is enjoyable it is entertaining, and it is very well done. Director Tom Hooper and the cast did a tremendous job delivering this movie, each and every one of the cast delivered such a powerful performance that you may leave the theater with your eyes bawled because of how attached to these very engaging characters, the writing and the way they envisioned the movie through the visuals (again) really felt like a broadway musical that has come to life in the big screen, the set pieces are immaculate to look at. The writing made you believe that these people are at their lowest low, you root for the heroes, laugh at the comedic timing, and brood for the villain. The movie did feel rushed, the movie did dragged but still Les Miserables is a great film nonetheless. Not only does it deserve your money but also your standing ovation (which the audience in the theater I was in surprisingly did). Fans of the musical will definitely love this movie, If you don't like musicals at all this movie may or may not change your mind about them.

THE GOOD:

+FANTASTIC DELIVERY IN SONGS

+ A MUSICAL EXPERIENCE

+ INCREDIBLE PERFORMANCES

+GOOD CHANGES

THE BAD:

-PACING IS ALL OVER THE PLACE AT SOME POINT
-DISTRACTING CAMERA WORK
-

MY RATING:

4.5/5 – SO CLOSE! (FOR THE WIN!)

Photos by:
CinemaBlend.com