The Game (1997) Review

THE GAME (1997)
Director: David Fincher

Writers: John Brancato and Michael Ferris

Producers: Jonathon Mostow, Steve Golin, Ceán Chaffin, Michael Ferris, and John Brancato

Editor: James Haygood

Cinematography: Harris Savides

Music: Howard Shore

Starring: Michael Douglas, Deborah Kara Unger, Sean Penn, and James Rebhorn

Runtime: 2 hours 9 minutes

Rating: R (language, some violence and sexuality)

Genre: Mystery, Suspense, Drama

Release Date: September 12, 1997

Intro: Twas a rainy day a couple weeks ago in the Southland (Southern California for those of you who don't live here) and I had the day off school. I also had Netflix at my disposal and wanted to watch a mystery/suspense or film noir-esque movie. I chose to do a double feature of The Game and Drive. I chose the game because it's a David Fincher movie, and I am a fan of his. I also read the synopsis and it sounded really interesting. The Game is like a football team at the one-yard line on 4th down with only a few seconds left on the clock. It is about to score a crucial touchdown if only it can pull off the last play right, but somehow it ends up failing to score, despite all the options it has to do so. The Game is gripping and suspenseful to the end, but it fails to execute the ending in a manner that satisfyingly wraps up a movie with great acting, a good script, and lots of potential, thus leaving the viewer extremely frustrated.

Plot: Nicholas Van Orton (Douglas) is a wealthy banker in San Francisco without any real friends. It's his 48th birthday and this has an impact on him because that was the age his father committed suicide. After spending most of his birthday alone, his formerly troubled brother Conrad who he has not seen in years (Penn) invites him to dinner. Conrad brings him a present of a card to try out a new type of entertainment called CRS or Consumer Recreation Services, since Conrad did it and loved it. Intrigued, Nicholas goes to CRS and signs up for their real life "game."Suddenly, weird things begin happening to Nicholas that only get worse and worse as he and a girl he meets (Unger) are sure CRS is up to something. The only thing to do now is for Nicholas to find out what exactly CRS is doing by piecing together what scraps of information he can find while trying to keep his sanity.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The big thing here is swearing. The f-word is used occasionally, along with some milder ones. There is also one scene where there sexual pictures laying around a room, but it is impossible to see any nudity since they are flashed at you quickly or are too far away to make out anything.

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 10/10. It had the stylized and interesting direction of David Fincher that I've come to like. I really like Fincher because he picks really interesting shots and adds a smooth, yet suspenseful directing style to the movie. Part of the reason I chose to watch this movie is that I knew if nothing else, it would have good directing.

     -Acting: 9/10. This was definitely a strength. Michael Douglas does a great job as Nicholas and the supporting actors all give solid performances as well. Even though he has a minor role, I liked Sean Penn as Nicholas' brother. He seems to me to play the part well.

     -Writing: 6.5.

          -Story: 6/10. The story is good and well-told for quite a while with several plot twists, albeit there are a few plot holes. The only problem is that the ending seemed underwhelming and unsatisfying, as if it almost didn't fit in with the rest of the movie. There are a million different ways the writers could've ended the movie that would've made it immensely more satisfying than the way they chose to do it. To be honest, the ending ruined the movie for me. It was confusing and extremely unsatisfying. I like the message and meaning behind the ending, but it just seemed out of place, considering the tone and general direction of the movie beforehand. It almost seemed like the screenwriters got stuck when trying to write an ending, so they just went with this one because they couldn't think of anything better. It reminds me quite a bit of the ending of Huckleberry Finn, on which Twain got stuck and settled for a lesser ending after carrying the story spectacularly up until then. Anyway, the plot was good except for the infuriating ending.

          -Script: 7/10. Pretty good script. While it wasn't the best ever written, it was definitely solid. If nothing else, it served its purpose well.

     -Special Effects: 8/10. Not used much, and when used, used subtly, but they work nicely. The best one was the guy on the TV phasing in and out telling Nicholas about his game. It was pretty subtle, but it was creepy and fitting.

Expressing my frustration with how the end of the movie
was written.

     -Music/Score: 9/10. The music is quiet, creepy, and suspenseful and accurately reflects the tone of the movie. I though the score, though it wasn't meant to stick out, did a very good job at adding that extra something to make several scenes more suspenseful.

     -Power/Emotion: 5/10. I can't really pretend that the characters have a ton of depth in this movie. They really don't. The screenwriters try to give them some, but it is fairly obvious that all the time and effort was put in to the story and not the characters (and yet they couldn't manage to come up with a good ending). Still, you manage to feel for Nicholas, especially as he begins to fall lower and lower.

     -Adrenaline: 9/10. This movie is the definition of a potboiler. It does a good job at keeping you thrilled from beginning to the bad ending. Just when you think you know where the movie is going, it pulls the rug out from under you with another plot twist and it always keeps you guessing. I think this involvement in the plot the movie creates makes the ending just more disappointing. Like I said, there are so many other ways in which the movie could have ended that would have blown the audience's minds and capitalized on the immense suspense it had been building up, but this is sadly not the case.

     -Mind-Bendingness: 8/10. The one thing I loved about this movie is how many plot twists it had, as it always kept you thinking and wondering what exactly is going on. It's almost like you're playing the game along with Nicholas, as you never know more about his situation than he does. I definitely love movies that engage you mentally, and this is one of them.

     -Humor: 1/10. Not very much humor in the movie, but the writers weren't really putting much effort into it.

     -Best Credit: Jason Kristofer as "Teen Thug."

     -Final Score: The Game is a really good mystery/suspense movie that always leaves you guessing what's next, but its ending kills all the momentum and tension the movie had been building up. If there had been a different ending of pretty much any kind, The Game would be a great, memorable, and exciting mystery/suspense, but for me, the ending ruined everything. If you don't mind getting disappointed by the ending, you should watch the movie, as it's a great ride to get there.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

Drive (2011) Review

DRIVE (2011)

Director: Nicolas Winding Refn

Writer: Hossein Amini (based on book by James Sallis)

Producers: David Lancaster, Bill Lischak, Linda McDonough, Peter Schlessel, Jeffrey Stott, and Gary Michael Walters

Editor: Mat Newman

Cinematography: Newton Thomas Sigel

Music: Cliff Martinez

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Bryan Cranston, Carey Mulligan, Albert Brooks, Oscar Isaac, and Ron Perlman

Runtime: 1 hour 40 minutes

Rating: R (bloody violence, language, some nudity)

Genre: Crime, Drama, Action

Release Date: September 16, 2011

Before Watching the Movie: Though not necessary, it might be good to familiarize yourself with the movie A Fistful of Dollars beforehand. it doesn't help or hurt your viewing, but it was interesting to me to draw parallels between the movies, since I found many.

Things people may find “objectionable”: This is definitely not a movie I'd take small children to. First of all, there is quite a bit of swearing, as the f-bomb is dropped on numerous occasions. There is also one scene that takes place in the back of a strip club where there is some nudity and BWC shots. (If you are unclear on what a "BWC shot" is, read the objectionable section from my review of Starcrash). Also, and most prevalent in the movie is the violence. The violence is intense, brutal and bloody, as well as surprising. Some of the most violent moments happen out of nowhere and can really catch you off guard. If you have a hard time handling brutal violence in movies, this one probably isn't for you.

Intro: Today was the first real rainstorm in Southern California in probably 4 months. Home alone in the morning (I had a random day off school), I decided I wanted to watch a film noir-esque movie, or one that would complement the dark and gloomy rainstorm outside. I perused Netflix and came across Drive, since I remembered it got good reviews when it came out last year. My choice ended up being a good one, especially on a rainy day. Drive is a well-made, stylized update of 60s and 70s Man with No Name classics like A Fistful of Dollars with brilliant cinematography, sometimes slow, yet relentless tension, and a very good usage of music.

Plot: A mysterious and quiet Hollywood stunt driver and garage mechanic (Gosling) one day falls for his neighbor Irene (Mulligan), who is a single mother with a young boy and a husband in prison. The Driver (Gosling's character's name is never mentioned) becomes closer to Irene and her son Benicio until one day Irene's husband, Standard (Isaac) is released from prison. After the Driver sees Standard beaten up one day, he finds out Standard owes a mobster in repayment for the protection he received in prison. This prompts Standard to ask the Driver to help with a robbery of a pawn shop so they get the money. The Driver agrees because he wants what's best for Irene and Benicio, which is their father and husband. When the robbery goes wrong and the Driver is left with a million dollars in his car, the mob starts coming after him and he soon realizes that Irene and Benicio are targets of the mob. The Driver must try to protect Irene and Benicio from the mob while not getting himself killed and controlling his rage issues.

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 10/10. Brilliant cinematography and direction. The movie is full of interesting shots and lighting. The lighting was probably the best part. The lighting made a huge difference in the movie. Every scene is brilliantly lit and it always represents the mood of the scene. The lighting also helps create a gritty, retro feel that really helps contribute to the style of the movie. O think this would be a good movie for aspiring cinematographers to watch and learn from, since the filmmakers make it work so well on so many levels. Why did this not win an Oscar for cinematography? It wasn't even nominated!!! Why??

     -Acting: 9/10. Ryan Gosling, though he is seen by many as a heartthrob, can actually act. He really does a good job in his role as the Driver, and this will likely be the role he will be remembered for. The Driver reminds me a lot of The Man with No Name from Sergio Leone's western classics with Clint Eastwood, and Gosling seems to understand this and plays the character similarly to the way Clint Eastwood did. The rest of the cast gives solid performances as well.

     -Writing: 8/10.

          -Story: 8/10. The story was nice and twisted and dark and for the most part, well told. The only problem I had with it is that in the second half of the movie, the screenwriters seem to forget to include Irene and Benicio and the characters barely show up in the second half, even if they are trying to be protected by the Driver.

          -Script: 8/10. Pretty good script. Definitely solid, but it didn't stand out to me as much as the visuals did.

There are tons of fan-made posters for the movie, and I think many of them are better than the poster they decided to use. Here are a few that stood out to me. The middle one is my favorite of these.

     -Special Effects: 8/10. Not many special effects to speak of except the gunfire and blood. Still, the gunfire and blood look realistic.

     -Music/Score: 10/10. The music was used very well in the movie. Though some of it wasn't my favorite, the filmmakers nonetheless use it very effectively to convey the mood of different scenes.

     -Power/Emotion: 7/10. The movie definitely packed an emotional punch on me, as I can't seem to get it out of my head. In any film noir (I'm counting this as one), it can be hard to care for characters because it is usually hard to distinguish whether the character is good or bad. I went through that with the character of the Driver. I felt for him, but I couldn't confirm or deny my feelings until the end. Even while deciding if he's good or bad, I definitely had some sympathy for him, as he seems lost in life through a good portion of the movie.

     -Adrenaline: 9/10. Though the tension builds rather slowly for the first half of the movie, it almost never goes away. Afterwards in the second half of the movie, the tension ramps up and becomes unrelenting until the end. This uncertainty of the character of the Driver made the tension build and I think this was one of the main reasons I found the movie captivating.

     -Humor: 1/10. Humor is really the last you'd expect in a movie like this, and there's just about as much as you'd expect. Other than the occasional comic relief, the movie is dead serious the whole time.
     -Best Credit: John Pyper-Ferguson as "Bearded Redneck"

     -Final Score: Drive is a very style-driven movie and I think you have to tap into this to fully enjoy it. Since I am a film noir fan and a fan of Leone's Man with No Name Trilogy, I think I was able to do so. Even if you don't get or don't like the movie, it's really hard to ignore the fantastic cinematography and lighting. I'd recommend this to anyone who can take brutal violence and I'd especially recommend this to aspiring directors and cinematographers, as I think they can learn a lot from this movie. In short, this definitely was a great, gritty, rainy day movie.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

From Prada to Nada (2011) Review

Even just looking at the title and the poster
should tell you something about
the quality of this movie.

FROM PRADA TO NADA (2011)

Director: Angel Garcia

Writers: Fina Torres, Luis Alfaro, and Craig Fernandez

Producers: Deborah Del Prete, James M. McNamara, and Ben Odell

Editor: Brad McLaughlin

Music: Heitor Pereira

Starring: Camilla Belle, Alexa Vega, Luis Rosales, Adriana Barraza, Wilmer Valderrama, and Nicholas D'Agosto

Runtime: 1 hour 47 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (brief drug use, a sexual situation)

Genre: Romance, Drama, Comedy

Release Date: January 28, 2011

Before Watching the Movie: First of all, I want to apologize for not getting any reviews out lately. School has kicked in to high gear and my life has been kind of crazy of late. I'm going to try and get more reviews out soon, as I've started to see some movies again. Secondly, allow me to introduce a new term that may apply to some of my reviews. This term shall become known as the HM factor. HM stands for "heterosexual male," which I am. It refers to the slanted view of more female-centered movies (AKA "chick flicks") that I possess because I am a heterosexual male. In other words, these types of movies don't really appeal to people like me, so the HM factor points out the fact that I may rate some of these movies lower just because of my perspective. See visual representation below.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The main thing here is language. Though it is all mild (no f-words), there is a fair amount of usage. Also, there is one implied sex scene, but absolutely nothing is shown. There is also apparently a scene in which a character smokes pot, but I honestly don't remember that part at all. Either I just plain missed it or it must have happened while my friend and I were making fun of the screenwriters.

Intro: It's a wise and old saying that you shouldn't judge a book by its cover. There are, however, some cases in which this saying does not apply. This movie happens to be one of those cases. Take 3 seconds to glance at the title and the poster. Now think to yourself: does this movie really have any potential to be anywhere near a cinematic masterpiece whatsoever? Your answer is correct if you answered with "no," or "yes, but very little," or something like those. Why, you may ask, did I watch a bad chick flick? Well, my spanish teacher actually showed my class this, since it deals with Mexican culture, which is a culture that speaks spanish. We were then to discuss the movie after we were done watching it. I don't know why he picked this movie of all the movies out there that are in spanish or relate to the culture of spanish-speaking countries (How about Pan's Labyrinth?), but he unfortunately did. Anyway, From Prada to Nada takes what little potential it has and squanders it with an overly formulaic plot, cheesy dialogue, and failed attempts at humor despite pretty good directing and music.

Plot: Two rich, spoiled, Mexican-American sisters living in Beverly Hills are living fairly carefree lives and are getting caught up in their rich, luxurious lifestyle. One day they go to their dad's 55th birthday party at his mansion. While dancing with the sisters, he dies of a heart attack. After the funeral, the sisters found out that their father lost all their money, so with nowhere else to go, the sisters move in with their aunt in East L.A. In East LA, the two sisters Nora (Belle) and Mary (Vega) must adjust to a new way of life and reconnecting with Mexican culture. Meanwhile, both try to make it back in the world as they pursue serious relationships with guys.

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 7/10. This was really kind of a bright spot in this movie. The directing is really pretty good. I feel sorry for Angel Garcia because he didn't get a better movie to direct. He's maybe the only person aside from the composer that may actually be going somewhere.

     -Acting: 5.5/10. No Oscar-worthy performances here. The acting wasn't horrible, but it definitely wasn't great either. Some line deliveries felt kind of wooden. Then again, that might also be the fault of the screenwriters and their cheesy lines.

     -Writing: 2/10.

          -Story: 1/10. About as predictable of a story as you can get. Absolutely no unpredictability at all as far as plot and character development were concerned. If this movie were a murder mystery, you could probably figure out who the murderer is in the first 10 minutes in the movie. Yes, it was really that predictable. It was predictable to the point that as I mentioned earlier, my friend and I were making fun of the screenwriters.

          -Script: 3/10. AAAAAA!!!! The cheesiness!!! Make it STOP!!!!! This sums up my reaction to the writing in this movie. Was the writing as bad as that of The Last Airbender? No, but it was definitely getting there. It was extremely formulaic and in that regard matched the story pretty well.

     -Special Effects: n/a. It was clear that the movie had a small budget. There are no special effects to speak of, and I think the most expensive things on any set in the whole movie were the cars the girls owned in the beginning of the movie.

     -Music/Score: 7.5/10. The movie actually had a pretty good original score. It consisted mainly of music with Latin-American themes, which was pretty fitting since the story was mainly set in East Los Angeles and all the characters were Mexican-American.

You tell 'em, Spidey! This is an accurate visual
representation of the HM factor.

                                                                 -Power/Emotion: 2/10. I really didn't care about any of the characters at all. While the HM factor is alive and well in this rating, I really don't see how anyone could care too much about these characters, especially considering how predictable the plot was.

     -Adrenaline: 1/10. Pretty much no action at all except for an incident at the very end, and even through it, it was clear that the character(s) (Even though it's a crappy, predictable movie, I still want to keep my reviews spoiler-free) would end up fine in one way or another.

     -Mind-Bendingness: n/a. Only mind-bending if you think of it in terms of how mind-bendingly formulaic the writing is.

    
     -Humor: 3/10. A for effort, D for execution. I didn't find the movie overwhelmingly funny. There were a couple kind of funny moments, but that was really it.

     -Best Credit: Susana Altamirano as "Cubicle Head."

     -Final Score: From Prada to Nada is not a great movie. Though it's not great, I do have to defend the filmmakers on this one as they had very little good material to work with coming from the writers. The lazy, formulaic screenwriting and storytelling ruin the movie for sure. I would not recommend this movie, even to those who love chick flicks or movies like this, or even those who are immune to the HM factor. If you're going to watch a chick flick, at least do yourself some good by picking a halfway decent one.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook Page.

Source Code (2011) Review

SOURCE CODE (2011)
Director: Duncan Jones

Writer: Ben Ripley

Producers: Jeb Brody, Fabrice Gianfermi, and Howard Koch

Editor: Paul Hirsch

Music: Chris Bacon

Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan, Vera Farmiga, Jeffrey Wright, and Michael Arden

Runtime: 1 hour 33 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (some violence, disturbing images, language)

Genre: Action, Sci-Fi, Romance

Release Date: April 1, 2011

Before Watching the Movie: This is a movie that is best to start watching with little to no prior knowledge. There's not a whole lot you really need to know in advance, since the movie explains it all. Since the movie's told from the perspective of Jake Gyllenhaal's character, you never really know more than he does. Because of this, it's best to no nothing going in. I'll include the plot section below, but if you want the "full experience," I suggest skipping that and the intro section.

Things people may find “objectionable”: Probably the worst moments the movie has to offer are during the explosions when it's clear the people are dying and Stevens has to watch this. There is also one use of the f-word and some violence as well. A couple people are shot, and Stevens gets into a couple fist fights throughout the course of the movie.

Intro: I really didn't know much at all about this movie when I saw it. All I knew was the very basic plot premise and that it had gotten really good reviews when it was out in theaters. It turns out that my lack of knowledge was a good thing, especially for this movie. Source Code is a movie that could have daily been terrible, but it's also one that is pulled off well very due especially to the writing, directing, and storytelling, as it's full of fun and mind-bending plot twits and is also exciting and engaging.

Plot: I'll keep this section brief so I don't ruin any of the plot twists. Colter Stevens (Gyllenhaal), a US Army captain who had been serving in Afghanistan, suddenly wakes up on a train in Chicago inside the body of a man named Shawn Fentress, sitting across from a young woman named Christina (Monaghan). After trying to get accumulated to his new surroundings, the train blows up from a terrorist bomb. Stevens then wakes up in a military capsule where he finds out he's being sent into the past via a system called Source Code and his mission is to find the bomber on the train before he or she wreaks more havoc on the city of Chicago. In the meantime, he becomes attached to the train's passengers and wonders if tries to wrestle with the fact that he's connecting with them yet they're all dead in real life.

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 9/10. Very well directed. Jones picks interesting angles and shots and also paces the film really well and does a great job at telling the story.

     -Acting: 8/10. Decent acting by the entire cast. Everyone gives a pretty solid performance in their respective roles.

     -Writing: 9.5/10.

          -Story: 10/10. The story was definitely really cool and I loved all the twists and turns it took throughout the movie. The story was easily the strongest part of the movie and it's also what made Source Code a good movie instead of a mediocre one.

          -Script: 9/10. Very good and solid script to go along with the great story. Like I mentioned before, the writing is what makes Source Code so good.

If this is what you thought Source Code was going to
be about, you're probably a programmer.

     -Special Effects: 8/10. You could tell that the special effects were not the most up-to-date, but they still work well with the movie and it's easy to find them believable.

     -Music/Score: 10/10. The movie had a very good score that fit it quite well. It was really perfect for most of the scenarios, and it reminded me of the kind of score you would get along with a 40s or 50s mystery/suspense movie. In short, I really liked the score.

     -Power/Emotion: 8/10. All the characters were pretty likable and it's easy to feel for them, especially Stevens' character, who is caught in the middle of an unsolvable problem from his point of view, since he wants to save the people so badly, but know he can't with Source Code's 8 minute limit.

     -Adrenaline: 8/10. The movie is if nothing elementally engaging from start to finish. There are also quite a few exciting scenes, as this is an
                                                                                       action movie.

     -Mind-Bendingness: 10/10. The movie was basically one mind-bending plot twist after another w. This is definitely a movie that makes you think and always keeps you surprised, and I think this is part of why I liked it so much. I definitely like movies that make you think.

     -Humor: 2/10. There were a couple funny moments, but they were few and far between. This was definitely not the point of the movie. 

     -Best Credit: James A. Woods as "Aviator Glasses Guy."

     -Final Score: Source Code is that wonderful type of movie (according to me) that blends mentally engaging sci-fi plot twists with an exciting and fast-paced action story. Its directing and especially its writing make Source Code intelligent, engaging, and highly-watchable. I'd recommend this to anyone who likes intellectual and/or mind-bending movies movies or those who love fast-paced mystery and suspense movies.

Been liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page