hoosierrevue Reviews

Rebound (2005)

Decent, Predictable Kid's Movie

[4/10 · 6 July 2005]

The filmmakers in Rebound diligently stick to the prescribed "kids sports movie" formula, and desperately hope that Martin Lawrence provides a flicker of spunk.

I can't give Rebound more than two stars, not because it was necessarily bad, but because it was painfully predictable. It dares not stray from the tired but true progression of, "a small team of misfits is matched up with a reluctant savior, who inevitably leads the team to victory only after learning a valuable lesson." In this case, the reluctant coach, Roy McCormick, is played by Martin Lawrence, who attempts to single-handedly provide some unique quality to this film in order to distinguish it from all other kid movies. He fails.

Roy McCormick is a hotshot college basketball coach with an outrageous temper and passion for endorsement deals. The audience is repeatedly shown how out of touch with basketball Coach Roy has become by showing many examples of his advertisements, his flashy car, his expensive suits, etc. We are even treated to the routine clips from "The Best Damn Sports Show," where Tom Arnold proclaims that Coach Roy is losing it. After we have firmly established that Roy is in fact out of touch already, we get the inevitable temper tantrum that results in his expulsion from the league. Coach Roy then reluctantly agrees to coach a struggling junior high basketball team. This brilliant plan will supposedly help him rebuild his reputation, thereby allowing him to gain readmittance to the league. Because apparently, the best way to gain credibility as a basketball coach is to instruct reject junior high kids, at which point one will just be rolling in offers from the NBA.

We watch as Coach Roy methodically teaches the kids how to play basketball, one skill at a time, through a series of over-dramatic techniques. He brings in a weird hoodlum preacher who is not funny at all and looks suspiciously like Martin Lawrence dressed up as a hoodlum preacher. He scours the student body for a very tall kid who is also clumsy in a humorous way. He also recruits a large girl to the team, as she is Susie-Likes-to-Fight, and Roy thinks that if things get rough, he can always channel his inner John Chaney and send her out to pummel someone. The audience laughs because she's a girl! Haha, get it—she's a girl! And all the while, goofy and upbeat music plays helpfully in the background, reminding us that this is a stupid kid's movie.

There's the romance factor of course, with Coach Roy trying to get a date with one kid's mom. There's also the slapstick assistant coach (played by SNL cast member Horatio Sanz), who bumbles around hoping to provide supplemental humor when basketballs slip out of his grasp and fly in all directions; there's the overzealous opposing coach who thinks junior high school basketball is as important as college or NBA--but then again, can you really blame the guy? After all, the film has already established that coaching junior high school basketball is a direct path to the big leagues.

Needless to say, this movie is tiresomely predictable, but not necessarily bad. I know that kids will like it, so I would recommend it as a very family-friendly movie. It definitely has the "cute factor," in that sense, but those of us who are not 13 may not see the same value in Rebound.

War of the Worlds (2005)

Spielberg Gives Realism to War of the Worlds

[10/10 · 1 July 2005]

Sometimes I go to a movie expecting that it will be horribly boring and it surprises me. Other times, I go to a movie expecting it to be good and it is extremely disappointing. This movie, however, turned out to be one of those rare occasions when I anticipated that it was going to be good, I was excited to see it, and amazingly enough it still managed to surprise me by how awesome it was.

Spielberg made an extremely intelligent move by limiting the amount of film that we see in the previews. I had no idea what was going to happen at any given time during the movie, which was refreshing and added to the suspense. I won't do the film an injustice by giving anything away in this review, as I believe that seeing this movie from such an unfamiliar viewpoint allowed me to truly be surprised by what I was seeing.

I was literally on the edge of my seat for nearly the entire duration of the film. The first half hour was beyond suspenseful, and I found myself wide-eyed and mouth open for a solid 20 minutes. The effects in this movie were simply astounding, and for once, not overdone (*cough* George Lucas!). Steven Spielberg was brilliant in his execution of the effects, in that they look real as opposed to being blatantly CGI, and the movie does not depend on them for its visual appeal. The acting was well done, and no matter what your opinion on Tom Cruise, one can't deny that he plays his role in this movie quite well. I wouldn't say that any of the roles were necessarily difficult to play, but if the actors hadn't been so competent in their performances then I don't believe I would have been quite so captivated by the film. Every aspect of War of the Worlds combined to draw me in completely, so that it almost seemed like I was watching some horrific documentary. It's my understanding that the famous radio broadcast of this story in 1938 was mistakenly taken by thousands of listeners as a description of real events, causing widespread panic. What I like about this movie was that it seems as though Spielberg wanted to create the same believability of the story, which is perhaps why the special effects are more subtle and the camera angles taken in many instances from the perspective that a news camera would have. Combined with realistic acting that didn't seem forced but jarringly natural, and the film took on the documentary feel that I mentioned earlier.

As I said, I don't want to ruin anything for you, so I can't give any examples of the things that I found to be most powerful in the movie, but there were several moments when I actually verbalized my astonishment. The actions and details on which Spielberg chooses to focus were stunningly powerful in their subtlety, as it's not hard to imagine them actually happening. The actors strengthen these parts with their reactions to the events surrounding them, behaving exactly as one would expect in times of panic and complete hysteria. The lightening storm at the very beginning of the movie (as seen in the previews), is a perfect example of this, as people cannot help but stand outside and watch despite the obvious danger. Events change quickly from merely strange to absolutely sinister, and the characters are forced to face a very ominous future.

I have never read War of the Worlds, but apparently this movie stays very true to the book and its illustrations, including the ending. This conclusion of the story might bother some viewers in its abruptness, but as they say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (*cough cough* George Lucas!) I want to see this film in the theater again. I highly, highly recommend that you see War of the Worlds as well, but given the way this movie looks, sounds and feels, I don't suggest that you wait until it comes out on DVD. The first time you see it should be in the theaters, trust me.

Oh yeah, and much as I like most of your movies, M. Night Shyamalan, take notes buddy. Take notes.

Land of the Dead (2005)

Zombies: We're Smarter Than You

[7/10 · 29 June 2005]

It's always encouraging when mindless zombies display more intelligence than regular humans. Sadly, it's also not surprising.

Land of the Dead is not your average predictable zombie movie, in that director/writer George Romero throws in the additional plot component of zombie evolution combined with human stupidity. While he does not explore the intricacies of the physical and chemical zombification process, he does make it clear that one walking corpse in particular, Big Daddy, is one quick-learnin' dead dude. Big Daddy gets an A+ in common sense, whereas many of the humans attempting to escape do not meet the requirements for such a grade. Then again, perhaps that's not fair of me. After all, the zombies do possess some superhuman powers, such as the ability to rip down small, unstable chainlink fences. Humans could not possibly be expected to display such mental and physical capacity, nor should they be expected to later find an escape route through the fortress that is chainlink protection. I mean if these people came up with the brilliant idea that flimsy metal wires criss-crossed into diamond shaped patterns would be more sufficient protection than, I dunno, say…concrete or steel, then it's really not fair to expect any amount of intelligence from them.

The movie takes place some thirty years after Romero's original zombie film, Night of the Living Dead, wherein the dead are brought back to life with a rather unfavorable tendency to eat human flesh. Once a person is bitten by a zombie, he has about an hour before transforming into a zombie himself, at which point it becomes necessary to shoot said person in the head in order to destroy him. Fairly standard so far. However, this movie actually explores a future in which zombies were never fully annihilated, so it portrays a culture that has degenerated into near anarchy, as only a very few cities have managed to survive. Riley (Simon Baker) lives in one of these cities, and commands a militaristic crew of men who periodically raid zombie towns for food and supplies. The kingpin of this last remaining human city, Kaufman (Dennis Hopper), operates a residential complex in the middle of the city called Fiddler's Green, in which only the rich are invited to live. The rest of the people are forced to make do on the streets, living a life of poverty and service to those in Fiddler's Green.

Eventually, the zombies, led by Big Daddy, get fed up with all this raiding nonsense and decide to attack the city. I can hardly blame them—after all, here they are living peaceably amongst each other, and then in come some rootin' tootin' cowboys stealing supplies and shooting up the town. So Big Daddy, Ph.D leads his fellow zombie townsfolk in an attack against the city while the humans stick their fingers up their noses and run around in a necrophobic panic.

I found Land of the Dead to be more than entertaining, and if you like horror movies, zombie movies, scary movies, etc… then you will definitely appreciate this one. The humans are wonderfully idiotic, the zombies refreshingly two-dimensional (versus the standard one dimension), and there are many surprising moments of comedy when the viewer least expects it. There's a healthy amount of gore for those who like that sort of thing—I always cringe during those parts—but it's not overflowing with guts, as the movie really relies on the story and characters for entertainment, with the gory bits being more supplemental. Keep in mind that this is a zombie movie, so I wouldn't recommend it unless you dig that genre. I give it a high rating because I think it is actually a GOOD zombie movie.

Bewitched (2005)

Cute and funny but nothing spectacular

[4/10 · 28 June 2005]

Thankfully, there's only one scene where Will Ferrell has the opportunity to really ham it up.

My date claimed that the second half of the movie was better than the first, but that was only because he fell asleep midway through. I didn't find the movie to be quite that boring, but I can certainly understand why he and others might have a hard time watching it. With that said, as the tagline for the movie states, "Be Warned."

Isabel Bigelow (Nicole Kidman) is a witch who decides that she is tired of the instant gratification that comes with possessing magical abilities. She leaves the magical realm behind and moves to Hollywood in search of a normal life complete with a normal relationship. And yet, her inherent naivety about the real world lends her many opportunities to continue using magic despite her desire to quit the practice. Meanwhile, struggling movie star Jack Wyatt (Will Ferrell) has just been cast as Derrin in the revised version of the television show, Bewitched. Seeking to steal the spotlight and boost his career, Wyatt insists that the character of Samantha be played by an unknown actress who won't upstage him. Blah blah blah, etcetera, etcetera, they end up casting Isabel as Samantha. Haha, yes, it's all very ironic. The remainder of the movie focuses on Isabel's growing understanding of life in the real world and Jack's continuing belief that the show should revolve around his character. Why anyone with half or even a quarter of a brain would like a show revolving around the blah blah character Derrin, given that the title and premise of the show is about a witch, is apparently left as an exercise for the viewer.

Jack Wyatt is for the most part entertaining, and I think that this is because Will Ferrell is not relying solely on his usual comedy from Saturday Night Live. His character is somewhat goofy but not slapstick, and Ferrell is not allowed the customary leeway to go off on random and unfunny tangents. Nicole Kidman plays a natural naivety very well, in that the audience realizes that she is simply innocent and trusting, but all the characters around her believe she is a dumb ditzy blond. Isabel is inherently the very same as the character whom she portrays, Samantha, in that Isabel really is a witch in love with a mortal man, trying to live a normal life. When real world problems become too much for her, she begrudgingly falls back on magic, as she is unable to change who she really is.

There are definitely moments in the movie that are really quite funny, but unless one is engaged in the story and has an interest in the characters, then I can see why Bewitched could be rather tiresome. Personally I thought it was basically entertaining and laughed out loud several times. Then again, I am as they say, somewhat easily entertained, so keep that in mind. Bewitched is very lighthearted and innocent, the characters are likable enough, but in the end there's nothing spectacular about the film. I think Bewitched is best left to the list of "DVDs I want to rent."

The Honeymooners (2005)

Funny moments, but not enough to sustain the whole movie

[5/10 · 24 June 2005]

This is a movie that teeters on the brink of six or seven stars, but just doesn't quite get there.

The Honeymooners had several moments of certifiable humor, and I don't think that without the performances of Cedric the Entertainer and Mike Epps this movie would have been even remarkably amusing. Cedric plays Ralph Kramden, a city bus driver whose wife, Alice (Gabrielle Union), dreams that one day the two will have enough money to buy a house. Their upstairs neighbors, Ed Norton (Mike Epps) and his wife Trixie (Regina Hall) are the couple's best friends and potential co-owners of a duplex that Alice and Trixie have been admiring. Unfortunately, they need to collectively acquire $20,000 within two weeks in order to buy the property. Blah blah blah, Alice thinks they already have half the money without realizing Ralph has spent it on another useless scheme, blah blah blah, Ralph and Ed have to come up with a way to quickly earn all $20,000 in order to avoid disappointing their wives. Cue hijinks.

Ralph and Ed dance in the park for money; they pretend to be blind beggars on the streetcorner; they try to defraud kindly neighborhood folk by pretending they are raising money for some children's charity. It's OK though, afterall, they just want to make their wives happy.

The movie finally gets funny once Ralph and Ed hire Dodge (John Leguizamo) to train a greyhound that they found carelessly misplaced in a dumpster, with the idea that they will enter the dog, Iggy, into a race and win the convenient $20,000 prize. Dodge is quite easily the funniest character in the movie, and his interaction with Cedric the Entertainer almost forces the leading comedian to be the straight man for Leguizamo's comedy. Unfortunately these moments of genuine humor are just a little too sparse, and the remainder of the movie drags on. There were only so many of Alice's reproachful looks at her husband that I could take. I began to wonder at one point if Gabrielle Union's sole purpose in the the movie was to tilt her head and look exasperated.

In the end, I wouldn't say this was a bad movie, and it could have been a lot more cheesy. The actors really did a good job keeping the movie somewhat realistic, and like I said there were some very funny moments. Not a bad movie to watch if you find the time, but it wouldn't be a terrible decision to wait for the DVD to come out.

Batman Begins (2005)

Yes yes yes, this is how it should always be done!

[9/10 · 24 June 2005]

It would have been absolute perfection if they could have just gotten those fight scenes right! I can't stand it when these scenes are cut to such extremes that it is impossible to tell what the hell is happening in the actual fight. But, aside from that minor objection, this movie was absolutely brilliant.

I was delighted when I first heard that Christian Bale had been cast as the newest incarnation of Batman, and I was not disappointed with his performance in the slightest. This version of the Batman mythology is reminiscent of the first Batman movie starring Michael Keaton back in 1989, in that it is grittier and explores more of the actual character of Bruce Wayne/Batman rather than focusing on doofy villains and their pointless schemes (ahem, "Batman & Robin," most notably). Christian Bale brings Bruce Wayne's hatred and thirst for vengeance to the surface and makes that the focal point for the character's motivation.

The story begins with Bruce Wayne learning to, as the previews make it clear, "make himself more than just a man," under the instruction of Ducard (that almighty film mentor/sage, Liam Neeson). Flashbacks during these scenes show us the night that a young Bruce witnesses his parents' murder at the hands of a petty thief and his resulting struggle with vengeance and hatred for crime. When he eventually returns to Gotham City (after Liam Neeson's expert tutelage of course) in an effort to rid the city of its infestation of crime and corruption, the viewer has a complete understanding of his intense obsession with justice.

I loved the Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul as Batman's first foes. Considering that the bulk of the story deals with Bruce Wayne's confrontation of his personal fears, it was appropriate that the Scarecrow—a villain who literally manifests people's fears—was the main adversary. I personally believe that the casting for Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy) was fitting, as Cillian Murphy gives me the creeps. This movie is filled with a spectacular cast, however, and each role seemed absolutely perfect for the actor/actress. Morgan Freeman plays Lucius Fox, a kindly old scientist who assists Bruce in acquiring whatever tools he may need for his nighttime activities. Michael Caine plays the fatherly butler, Alfred, and brings his usual aplomb to the role; and Katie Holmes, while having beaten out my personal favorite Sarah Michelle Gellar for the role of Rachel Dawes, is well-suited to the idealistic and righteous district attorney.

Not only is this movie far beyond comparison to the last two Batman movies to which we have been subjected, but it successfully sets the foundation for the entire Batman mythology without being boring or sacrificing the integrity of the story. There are many different elements at work in the film, with clever bits of humor scattered throughout, an appropriate amount of drama, and several good action scenes including the requisite batmobile car chase scene. The extremely talented cast brings a power to the characters, most notably Christian Bale as I mentioned before. I can't emphasize enough how perfect he was for the role, not only as Batman but as the billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne.

In the end, as someone who enjoys comic books as well as a good story, I found this movie to be extremely fun to watch. I highly recommend that you see this, as it is without a doubt one of the best movies I've seen.

Except for those blasted fight scenes! Put the camera on a mount and for the love of god hire a choreographer who knows what he's doing!

The Perfect Man (2005)

Two hours of my life I will never get back

[3/10 · 24 June 2005]

Yes, in this movie, Heather Locklear has trouble meeting men.

Actually, it's not that hard to believe that most men would be intimidated by a woman as good-looking as Heather Locklear and have difficulty summing up the courage to talk to her. Her character, Jean Hamilton, is approached by all sorts of weirdos and guys who are misguided in their confidence—this is to be expected, but what is difficult for me to accept is that Jean would actually give most of these doofus dudes the time of day no matter how desperate she is.

So, Jean (Heather Locklear) is a divorced single mother who is so frightened of ending up alone forever that she hooks up with the first guy who looks her way regardless of whether he is right for her or not. Every time the relationship inevitably fails, she packs up and moves across the country with her two daughters, Holly (Hilary Duff) and Zoe (no purpose whatsoever). The movie starts with such a breakup, so the family moves to Brooklyn to start a new life/relationship. At this point in her teenage life, Holly has grown decidedly tired of moving every few months, so she hatches a cleverly thought-out and ingenious plan to set her mother up with an imaginary man. Seemingly under the impression that her mother is still 6 years old and able to sustain such chimerical friendships, Holly puts this masterful plan into action by sending her mother flowers and writing her love letters signed by a secret—and I can't stress this enough—imaginary admirer. This fake relationship has the desired result of preventing her mother from moving again, with only the slightly bothersome side-effect of completely decimating her mother's heart if she ever realizes that Johnny-Perfect-Man does not exist. But, you know, Holly just wants to make her mom happy and stuff.

So this harebrained scheme of Holly's results in all sorts of would-be comedic moments. Holly tries to leave her mother an orchid at the front door, but is repeatedly unsuccessful in getting her mom's attention with the buzzer. Later on in the movie she and her friend Amy (Vanessa Lengies) try to create a diversion in order to prevent Holly's mother from meeting the actual guy on whom Johnny-Perfect-Man is based, so the audience is treated to 10 minutes of slapstick scheming.

Not surprisingly, I found this movie to be rather asinine and only mildly entertaining. All the characters are veritable fountains of wisdom, spewing forth such life lessons as, "we all make mistakes," and "new people are only new the first day." Yet for all their supposed wisdom, the characters make the most idiotic decisions. I wasn't in complete misery while watching this movie, but I certainly don't recommend that you spend precious time and money seeing The Perfect Man. There are far better movies out this summer in which you can waste those commodities.

The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl 3-D (2005)

Good concept, bad execution, and terrible in 3-D

[2/10 · 24 June 2005]

I'm sure kids will like this movie, but I found it to be a bit tiresome and at times absurd.

The 3-D effects that Robert Rodriguez seems to insist upon using in his children's movies (e.g. Spy Kids 12: Game Over, Man) were completely useless and extremely distracting. There are far more expensive ways to create a 3-D movie, and while I understand that Rodriguez is Johnny-Low-Budget-Director, I don't see the point in using 3-D if it's just going to look crappy on screen. I don't know how many 3-D movies you might have seen lately, as it was a trend that went out of style back in the 80's and all, but it's almost impossible to see anything out of those ridiculous glasses because of the dark red lens on your left eye and blue lens on your right. Most of the color is therefore zapped out and you're left squinting and crossing your eyes, all in an effort to see the fabulous 3-D bubbles that appear to float at your face. Wow, thank god that was in 3-D because otherwise it would have just been 2-D bubbles. And come on, that's just lame.

Anyway, so Max is a nerdling whose parents (David freaking Arquette and Kristin Davis—Rodriguez doesn't bother to give the parents actual names) fight a lot and might be getting a divorce. Max also has a really hard time making friends at school, so he retreats into his imagination and dreams of a far better, more desirable world. A world of drool. Yes, I can see how that would be much better. This dubious planet o' fun is ruled by kids, chiefly Sharkboy and Lava Girl, who are the beloved superheroes of Max's imagination. Max is discouraged from dreaming, however, by his friendly and well-intentioned teacher, Mr. Elecricidad, who encourages him to try and make friends in the real world. Max decides to take his advice, at which point his dreams (Sharkboy and Lava Girl) materialize in the real world using a random tornado (?) and enlist his help to save Planet Drool from destruction.

This is all well and good from a creative standpoint so far, so Max wanders around Planet Drool with Sharkboy and Lava Girl, trying to find an ice crystal that can save the planet or some damn thing. His classmate and friendly neighborhood bully, Linus, is cleverly renamed Minus in Planet Drool, and he evilly attempts to destroy the place in the same manner that he destroyed Max's dream journal in real life. Sharkboy and Lava Girl will have none of that, as they would prefer not to be eliminated by some bully who is really just sad and lonely inside (as all bullies are of course). Lava Girl, amidst searching for the crystal, asks Max what her powers are every five minutes. Um, you're made of lava. You've been shooting the stuff out of your hands throughout the whole stupid 3-D movie! But, I guess that particular power is simply not good enough. Sharkboy then takes the opportunity to chime in and whine to Max about his lack of an army of sharks, all the while yelling at Max to please dream up some cool new stuff, yo.

All of this nonsense is supposed to convey the message, don't stop dreaming, damnit! The audience is mercilessly beaten with the message in 3-D every few minutes. I think it's odd that the one grownup who doesn't stop dreaming, David Arquette, is an unemployed loser on the verge of a divorce. Yet despite this obviously dismal future for dreamers, Sharkboy and Lava Girl tirelessly repeat the message to Max (and the visually assaulted audience) every two seconds. In 3-D.

You know, I'm sure that kids will enjoy this movie, but I can't help but feel that there should be a standard for quality in kids' movies. This one, while conceptually pretty creative, falls way short of the bar.

Herbie Fully Loaded (2005)

Fun if you don't take it too seriously.

[6/10 · 24 June 2005]

Repeat the following prior to viewing this movie: "I will suspend my disbelief and dutifully accept all plot devices in order to maintain the sanity that would otherwise escape me were I to process events in the movie from a logical perspective." Because yes, Herbie, an old VW Bug, will compete in a NASCAR race and drive sideways on the fence--as seen in the previews.

Having said that, this movie is quite enjoyable when watched from such a standpoint. It's fun and innocent, but it carries the typical Disney fantastical vibe as well. I sometimes get annoyed with the cheesy ridiculousness of those types of movies, but then again, when I was a kid I thought they were wonderful. So, take that as you will.

Maggie Peyton (Lindsay Lohan) has just graduated from college and is about to happily embark on her new life as an ESPN writer. Her father (Michael Keaton aka The Dark Knight) and late grandfather own Peyton Racing, a NASCAR team in which her brother, Ray Jr.,competes. Unfortunately for the family, Ray Jr. (Breckin Meyer) lacks the racing talent that his father, grandfather and sister possess, and the team is now struggling to keep sponsors from backing out after numerous crashes and defeats on the track. Maggie dreams of racing for the team, but her father desperately wants her to use her college degree and leave the horrible world of racing behind. We're never really told why her father considers professional racing to be so lowly a profession, given that it produces dozens of respectable sports stars and, oh yeah, lots and lots of money; but, again let's stick to the original "suspension of disbelief" mantra, and we'll have no trouble with his opinion of the sport. Maggie comes across Herbie and quickly learns that the car has a mind of its own and can magically propel her and her family into fame and fortune on the racetrack.

The movie is complete with a standard garden-variety villain, Trip Murphy (Matt Dillon), a four-time NASCAR champion, who, despite being competent enough to win the Nextel Cup series four times, cannot keep his mind off an impromptu street race that he lost to Herbie. He acts like a jerk, flings insults at Maggie, and generally struts around like he's better than everyone, thus enabling the audience to despise him. Plus, he was like, totally mean to Herbie and called him a piece of junk! You just don't talk about Herbie like that, and I so kept hoping he'd get his comeuppance in the end.

I did like the movie, however, because from a certain standpoint it is enjoyable to watch. Herbie himself has several humorous moments, and I couldn't help but like him. Given that this wasn't a documentary it's forgivable in its transgressions on reality, which in the end make the movie more entertaining. It's lighthearted and doesn't attempt to beat the audience down with a message (ahem, Sharkboy & LavaGirl). I highly recommend Herbie: Fully Loaded for kids and for those who like cute and wholesome movies—if you're simply looking for a good pick-me up and a fun movie, then this is definitely one that you shouldn't miss.

Just...don't get caught up in the details.