
Quick note: I’m going to shake up the format to this thing a bit. I like this column a lot, but I know that I tend to make it rambly, especially if the movies are really interesting to talk about (even when they’re not good). So, I figured a more streamlined and organized approach could do the trick. Let me know what you guys think.

Story: God, in a fit of vengeance, wants to exterminate the sinful people of the Earth. But, lo and behold, his loyal archangel, Michael (the always-great Paul Bettany) rebels and vows to protect a woman in the Mojave desert, the very one bearing mankind’s future savior. Oh, yeah, and it features lots of angles firing machine guns and cursing grandmas crawling on the ceiling.
The Good: Paul Bettany. Clear and simple. I saw this last night, and I can say that Bettany, a longtime favorite of mine (see: A Knight’s Tale, A Beautiful Mind, Wimbledon), gives it his all and manages to come out unscathed from this mess. There are also about two good sequences that deliver some solid scares. Finally, and maybe this is just me, I love films that revolve around religious iconography or just Christian mythology in whole. You give me warring angels in Heaven, Lucifer, Paradise Lost overtones, all the like, and I’ll usually go for it (which explains why I like Keanu Reeves’ Constantine so much). Too bad this film barely works on that level.
The Bad: Everything else. This is the January movie—the prime example of the type of films we usually see in the beginning of the year. I’ll have a full review up next week, but, for now, just take my word that this film isn’t worth your time. Seriously, the plot’s ridiculous (with the most inept way of causing an apocalypse I’ve ever seen), the dialogue’s atrocious (I’m going to write down some of Tyrese’s thug character’s nuggets of wisdom next week—they’re priceless), most of the acting is over-the-top, accents are misplaced (we’re in California—why is the son of the main character speaking in a long Southern drawl?!), and the list goes on and on. There’s not even that much action—for the most part, the armies of bad guys seem more intent to give the characters time to talk about their problems than actually attack. It’s only grace note, though: it’s incredibly funny, almost in a so-bad-it’s-good way.
Reviews: Poor, pretty much as expected.
Overall: Don’t see this. Maybe if you want some laughs or you're a fan of Bettany, but I can’t think of any other reason to spend upwards of $10 on this. It might be best saved for a rental, and then you can get some friends together and make fun of it. (Although, in some tiny way, I hope this is a hit for Bettany, who deserves the attention and to move on to bigger and better things.)

Story: Dwayne Johnson (a.k.a. The Rock) stars as a hockey player nicknamed the Tooth Fairy (since he, you know, knocks out opponents' teeth). Life is perfect for him, until, accidentally, he squashes his girlfriend’s daughter’s belief in the Tooth Fairy. As punishment, the Fairy division forces him to serve as the actual Tooth Fairy, complete with tutu and wings (anyone else find it weird that we have two action heroes in one weekend with wings?). Cue the laughs and cuddly family moments.
The Good: The cast features The Rock, always likable (even though he should start doing better films), Julie Andrews, always regal and charming, Billy Crystal (great to see back on the screen), and, best of all, British comic Stephen Merchant in what I think is his first big movie role. He’s Ricky Gervais’ uber-tall better half, having co-created the British version of The Office and Extras with the genius funnyman, and co-starred in the latter series as the most hilariously inept agent you’ve ever seen. Here’s a clip below—he’s the consistent highlight of that very funny show:
Really, The Tooth Fairy might be cute and harmless, if not exactly good.
The Bad: Have you seen that trailer (embedded below)? It’s dreadful—I have no idea how the suits and filmmakers passed off on that. Even if it’s not a fair representation of the film, this still looks like something you could easily skip. The message if hammered in the trailer (Follow your dreams! Be true to yourself!) and you could probably predict most of the plot developments. The Rock is always watchable, but I think he could finally stretch his range and see what else he’s capable of (like his great role as a gay actor/henchman in Be Cool).
Reviews: Okay…though nowhere near good or recommendation-worthy. Most critics agree that it’s watchable but disposable, which is exactly what it looks like.
Overall: If you have little siblings, maybe it’s best to let them see something else (dust off a Pixar DVD, The Princess and the Frog, etc). For everyone else, I’m sure it’s better than Legion, but I’m also sure there are better things playing right now, even the flawed Book of Eli.

Story: Based on a true story, this film follows the exploits of the Crowley family (Brendan Fraser and Keri Russell) and how they sought to cure their children of the rare genetic illness, Pompe disease, with the help from the curmudgeonly but brilliant Dr. Stonehill (Harrison Ford).
The Good: I’m a huge fan of both of the stars, especially when they put aside their blockbuster roles for more quiet, challenging ones. (They were both even the subject of one of my first big pieces for this blog). The story also sounds like it could deliver some powerful drama. If only that's the case…
The Bad: Well, for starters, the below trailer does it no favors. It sounds like an Oscar-type picture—big stakes, big stars, heart wrenching subject matter. Instead, it comes off as a well-cast TV movie, with lots of corniness and overly dramatic scenes. I do want to see it because the story holds so much promise, and there is real hope and beauty in what the real-life scientists accomplished here (and, by the way, Dr. Stonehill never existed—the man who played the vital role in the cure for Pompe was the distinctly Asian Dr. Yuon-Tsong Chen). That aside, the word-of-mouth is mostly negative (see the status of the reviews below), with most people who've seen it complaining that the script lacks the necessary emotional impact, and that Fraser, Russell, and, of course, Ford get stuck amidst the heavy melodrama. It’s really too bad; on paper, this sounded like a winner—a nice chance for some of my favorite actors to stretch and deliver some inspiring entertainment.
Reviews: Moderate, with critics citing the film’s poor dialogue and tacky moments for ruining the potential of this story.
Overall: I had higher hopes for this. But, with the disappointing trailer and the lukewarm reviews, I think I’ll catch it on TV someday. Here’s hoping Ford and Fraser (and Russell as well, who’s far too talented to be typecast in weepy wife roles) will find more quality dramas for their next go-arounds. For now, this doesn’t look like a great choice for the theaters.

Story: Jake Taylor, a popular, cocky high-school athlete must reexamine his life after an old friend (whom Jake ignored as they got older) commits suicide.
The Good: In the right hands, this could be touching and real material. I like that it’s a cast of unknowns as well, and, as long as it doesn’t get too preachy, it’s always interesting to explore how people grow up and fit themselves into (or break away from) social hierarchies.
The Bad: Its limited January release isn’t a good sign. Neither is the overdone trailer, which pushes the angsty and “make a difference” notes much too hard. I think there is potential here (Veronica Mars did wonders with honest, believable high school stories, albeit with a savvy tone and top-notch writing); I’m just not sure if this film will follow through on it.
Reviews: Completely mixed, with some praising its genuine approach to the subject matter and moving performances…and others despising its 7th Heaven-ish, hokey tone and, well, poor acting. It’s difficult to judge, but the 30% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes seems to be a good indicator of the movie’s quality.
Overall: I doubt this will be any good. From the trailer, the writing looks anything but subtle, and it’s a personal pet peeve of mine whenever movies try to hit hard with their Big Lessons. I could be wrong, but this simply doesn’t look like something worth catching.
Yeah…so maybe not the best weekend for movie-going. What do you guys think? Is anyone thinking of watching Legion? (and I don’t blame you at all—I was actually kind of excited to see it) At the very least, February looks to bring some interesting new flicks, including The Wolfman, Valentine's Day (although its U.S. Love Actually approach might stumble upon itself), the could-be-good franchise-starter, Percy Jackson and the Olympians, and, perhaps best of all, a 3-D reissue of Disney's Beauty and the Beast!
Clips courtesy of Trailer Addict.
Sad to hear Legion was a disappointment, it looked promising from the trailers. Maybe I'll wait to Netflix it now. Also, definitely like the new format of the column!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Kristal! :) And, yeah, I thought the trailer for Legion looked great too. But it actually showed pretty much every cool moment the movie has to offer (especially the grandma-attack sequence and the angel fight with Gabriel...who played Agent Keamy on "Lost"! That was a nice surprise). Definitely a better rental than one to see in theaters.
ReplyDelete