Throwback Thursdays - V For Vendetta

Remember, remember the 5th of November...every year on November 5th, I can't help but chant out that rhyme. And although there is more meaning behind it, for me, it's all thanks to V For Vendetta. In honour of that day just passing us by, here's a review of the film for our this edition of Throwback Thursdays.

V For Vendetta
Director: James McTeigue
Starring: Hugo Weaving, Natalie Portman, and Rupert Graves
Released: 2006
Box Office: $132,511,035 (Worldwide)
Throwback Review

I still remember the day Christine and I went to see V For Vendetta in theatre. It was a Sunday night. A 10pm show. Which is odd for us, but at the time it would've been the only time that worked for us (with both of us in school and working). It was one of the first times we went to a movie and just before it started playing, we forgot what we were seeing. This eventually became par for the course for these movie geeks as we continued to increase the amount of movies we were seeing in the theatre, thus causing confusion each time we went. I distinctly remember just before the movie was starting, turning to Christine and saying, "What movie are we seeing? Is this Batman?". Now the reason I mentioned Batman was the opening sequence for the movie featured the Warner Bros. production promo, but it was the one that incorporates bats (ie. Batman). But I digress....

V For Vendetta is an adaptation of the comic book by Alan Moore and David Lloyd. Having never seen or read the comics, I was not sure what the film would entail. The trailer enticed us due to our recent love of Hugo Weaving and of course, the conspiracy theory-type plot line.

The film is set in the early 2030s where the United Kingdom is ruled by a totalitarian government under the fascist "Norsefire" party. Political prisoners, homosexuals, etc., are thrown into concentration camps and then exterminated by the fascist party (think Nazi Germany). A young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman) is rescued from an attempted rape by members of the secret police, or "Fingermen", by a Guy Fawkes-masked vigilante known simply as "V". He explains to Evey, and to the rest of Britain (via television - which he takes over from the government) that they need to rise against the government and meet him in one year on November 5th outside the House of Parliament, which he will then destroy. Evey decides to help "V" escape and goes into hiding with him in order to protect herself from the fascist government who is now looking for them both.

My first thought while watching this film was "wow. One day this could really happen". Honestly, it's not a far fetched notion, as it has happened before (again, think Nazi Germany). The story, which was brought to life by the Wachowski brothers (the masterminds behind the Matrix trilogy), deals with real political and social issues which force you to really think. This film incorporates a little bit of every movie genre: drama, thriller, action, and even comedy. And it's very pleasing on the eyes; rich colours are used in tandem with bland greys and whites to create a desperate and dire United Kingdom.

The cast is amazing. Weaving is wonderful as the title character. The amazing thing is - you never see his face! He's a faceless hero which makes him more believable. Essentially, he could be anybody. And I think that's the point of the character. Portman plays the perfect "companion" for "V". Her naivety balances his unwavering belief in a revolution. Once again, Portman completely threw herself into the role, becoming Evey, even down to really shaving her head in a climatic scene. The supporting cast, which includes: Stephen Rea, John Hurt, and Stephen Fry, contribute greatly to the film's success in portraying dystopian society.

Final Verdict: See it. Even if you're not a fan of comic book (or graphic novel) stories and characters, it is worth it to give this film a shot. It is not your typical comic book film . Realistically, the film should be seen as a separate entity from the comic book. The film gives you a lot to think about and to look at. Weaving is phenomenal, and anything he is in is worth seeing.

Rotten Tomatoes

Taken 2 aka don't piss off Liam Neeson!

Taken 2
Director: Olivier Megaton
Starring: Liam Neeson, Famke Janssen, and Maggie Grace
New Release Review

First off I have to say - Can Liam Neeson do no wrong? Honestly, I can't remember the last time he was in a terrible movie. Don't get me wrong - not every movie he is in is great. But you can't deny that Neeson is a fantastic actor. You know you have serious clout as an actor when you never have to hide your accent in any film you do! No matter what the character may be, Neeson always gets to portray them as an Irish man.

Now back to the film review!

Taken 2 picks up after the events of the first film (if you haven't seen the first film, don't bother seeing the second - it won't have the same effect on you if you don't know the story) and gives you little to no background on the Mills family. Some things have changed but Bryan Mills (Neeson) is still the overprotective super dad he was in the first film.

Not going to go into too much detail about the plot of this film as there really isn't much difference from the first. A little change to the basic plot in order to make it more plausible that someone from this family could be "taken" for a second time. This time, Bryan Mills is working a job in Istanbul and since Lenore's (Famke Janssen) family trip to China has been canceled (due to a crumbling marriage to her second husband), Bryan invites her and their daughter Kim (Maggie Grace) to meet up with him in Istanbul. The family of the men that Mills killed in the first film when saving Kim from being "taken", have banded together to hunt him down and make his family pay for their suffering. This time, it is not Kim who is "taken"; it's Mills and Lenore. And so the action and thrill ride begins.

The film is a typical sequel - though I don't think it was in the master plan to make a sequel of this film. This was a prime example of a sleeper action film becoming a hit and the production company trying to capitalize on its success by making an unnecessary sequel. The storyline was simple enough to make a compelling action film but at times it did feel forced. The action itself was great - car chases, fight sequences, etc. were impeccably done, save a few glitches with the filming of the car chases where you weren't quite sure what was going on (hard to follow cars zooming around a congested city).

Neeson, once again, is remarkable as a the hero. He's not your typical action star, which is what makes him, and this film series, so effective. You see an actor who can really act, step into a role that is foreign to him, and make it work really well. And what's even more remarkable about Neeson is that he was able to take a sequel that was barely put together in a decent manner and make it enjoyable for the audience.

Final Verdict: See it. But only after you have seen Taken. If you enjoy that film (which is hard not to), you will enjoy more of the same in this film. And ladies, if you, like many women in this world, love Neeson, you will definitely enjoy watching him kick butt in this action thriller.


Rotten Tomatoes

Trailer Tuesdays - The Guilt Trip

The one thing I love most about going to the movie theatre is seeing new trailers. It's a great way to see what's coming out soon and what can be put on the movie list for that time. I dared to go to the theatre on a Friday night for the opening day of Flight (a review on that movie will be posted shortly) and was hoping to see at least one new trailer. And I got my wish.

The Guilt Trip is an upcoming comedy starring Seth Rogen and Barbara Streisand. No, that was not a typo. Barbara Streisand is starring in a new movie! That's reason enough for me to see this movie!

Here's the trailer:

Road trip movies always seem to bring out the big laughs (think Plane, Trains and Automobiles or more recently, Due Date) so I am happy to see that this movie looks to do the same. The pairing of Rogen and Streisand is genius - who would have ever imagined these two actors in a film together!

The film is set to be released on December 19 - which is great marketing on Paramount's behalf seeing as it has a family-type vibe to it and the movie theatres seem to be packed with families leading up to the holidays.

I love a good comedy so I have high hopes for this film. With Streisand's last comedic adventure (Meet the Fockers and Little Fockers) and Rogen's numerous laugh out loud hits (Pineapple Express, Paul, Knocked Up, etc) I have a feeling I won't be let down.

For more information on the upcoming film, check out the Wikipedia page. 

The Intouchables

The Intouchables
Directors: Olivier Nakache & Eric Toledano
Stars: Francois Cluzet, Omar Sy, & Anne Le Ny
New Release Review

"You know the whole thing is in French, right?"
That's what the kid said to me when I bought my ticket for The Intouchables. He went on to tell me that a lot of people didn't realize it is a French film with subtitles and were complaining they weren't warned beforehand. It's a shame that the Australian audience isn't more adventurous because The Intouchables isn't a bad way to spend 2 hours.

From my Trailer Tuesday review:
The story focuses on Philippe (Cluzet) and his attempts to be more integrated into mainstream life by hiring Driss (Sy). Driss is also an "untouchable" in the social sense because he lives in a cité which is the suburbs where those of North African nationality or heritage typically live. Through the eyes of Driss we see the distance between the rich and the poor by highlighting the luxury Philippe indulges in while Driss and his family experience a much different life.

The Intouchables stays with Philippe throughout most of the film but manages to provide a snapshot of Driss' life on the margins as a member of a poor immigrant family. In an interesting touch, the way we're introduced to the gap between the haves and have-nots in Paris is through a bathtub. In Driss' family apartment, he has an almost laughably small tub in which to bathe. However all that changes when he starts living in Philippe's home and has not only a private bathroom but a tub that allows him to stretch out. It's this simple thing, a hot bath, that reminds us how even simple daily tasks can be made that much harder.

The Intouchables provides some great laughs and some touching scenes of friendship. Don't let the subtitles put you off, this is a very enjoyable film that will leave you smiling all day.

House at the End of the Street - or did I just watch Criminal Minds?

House at the End of the Street
Director: Mark Tonderai
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Elisabeth Shue, and Max Thieriot
New Release Review

As a self-proclaimed scaredy-cat, I was hesitant to see House at the End of the Street. Especially in the movie theatre, on a Friday night, at 10:00pm. But alas, I stepped up to the plate on the hopes that this wouldn't be another ghost story that would have me running out of the theatre screaming bloody murder.

The plot starts off like your typical horror film: single mother moves with her outcast teenage daughter to a rural upscale town to start their lives over. They find the house of their dreams, which of course is super cheap because, although conveniently not advertised on the listing, it's next door to a house where a family was murdered.

Everything starts off peachy (as in all horror films) and the teenage daughter, Elissa (Lawrence) becomes involved (shocker!) with the mysterious stranger who lives in the aforementioned "murder" house. As the stranger, Ryan, who turns out to be the brother of the young girl who murdered her parents in their home (don't worry - this is not a spoiler - you find this out right away), begins to open up to Elissa, things start to get strange. And I won't delve any further into the plot because that will head into spoiler country.

The story felt like it was taken from an episode of Criminal Minds. Not a ghost story or even killer-stalking-its-victims-for-revenge type story. It was more psychological. And seeing as it was marketed as a horror film, I can see why a lot of people were disappointed with this film. It wasn't scary. Well, the actual filming was sometimes quite scary - scary bad! It was so choppy at times, I wasn't sure what was going on because I couldn't look at the screen much longer! The story dragged here and there but never quite picked up speed until closer to the end of the film. The twist was okay. Not stellar. Not horrible. Just okay. It's been done. Some say this film is to Psycho what Disturbia was to Rear Window. I would say that comment is pretty on point.

Lawrence is great in this role, considering what little she had to work with. She demonstrates characteristics of an actor well beyond her years (she's only 22) and with each role she once again solidifies her calibre as an Oscar-worthy actress. (She was nominated for an Academy Award in 2010 for Winter's Bone)

The supporting cast was dull to say the least. Without spoiling the "twist" (which you can probably see coming from the get-go) the film's antagonist was utterly non-scary. Shouldn't you be at least a little terrified of the bad guy? Especially if this is supposed to be a  "horror/thriller"?

Final Verdict: See it. Simply because anything Jennifer Lawrence is in these days is worth seeing. It might not be the most thrilling thriller (haha) out there but it's an okay episode of Criminal Minds. Oops I mean it's an okay film - as long as you know what you're in for.

Rotten Tomatoes

Throwback Thursdays - Salt aka Angelina Jolie isn't COMPLETELY Awful

Throwback Thursdays have begun!

Every Thursday, we will bring you a review of a "throwback" film - something that wasn't released within the last year. Sometimes they will be one of our all-time favourite flicks; sometimes it will be something we randomly stumble upon. And we take suggestions too of what you want us to review!

The other day I was looking for something to watch on Netflix. I needed something to watch before I went to sleep and saw that Netflix had recently added Salt. I enjoyed the movie the first time I saw it in theatre back in 2010 so I decided to give it another whirl. And so came the first Throwback Thursday review for Don't Sit Next To Us.

Salt
Director: Phillip Noyce
Starring: Angelina Jolie, Liev Schreiber, and Chiwetel Ejiofor
Released: 2010
Box Office: $293,503,304 (Worldwide)
Throwback Review

The film stars Angelina Jolie as Evelyn Salt, a C.I.A. agent who is accused of being a Russian sleeper agent part of "Day-X", a plot that plans to destroy the United States by using spies trained from childhood. Salt is told that she is an agent called "KA-12" and will kill the Russian president, a reformer who has heavily invested in measures to improve relations between Russia and the United States. Salt protests her innocence, breaks free from the C.I.A., insisting on seeing her husband. After realizing he has been kidnapped, she goes on the run. And so the action ensues.

This was a surprise for our Summer Movie List 2010. The trailers peaked our interest due to it's decent action scenes and of course, conspiracy theories, which we just love. However, Jolie as the star had us reluctant to believe it could actually be a good movie. The title role was originally intended for a male actor, however Columbia Pictures (the studio behind the movie) suggested Jolie as the lead after Tom Cruise backed out. This was a great move - go with the lesser of two evils! And I must admit, she was pretty good in this role. Jolie proves that she can carry a film, especially if it is a decent action one. After years of playing strong "action hero" type characters in lackluster films, she deserves one with a little more clout.

The supporting characters, Liev Schreiber and Chiwetel Ejiofor, are perfectly cast. Not overly huge roles, as the majority of the film focuses on Jolie's character, Schreiber and Ejiofor deliver performances that go beyond expectations for characters who are provided little to no plot lines, save some minor twists and turns that are very much expected.

It's a bold and encompassing story - conspiracy theories, especially in American government, are very tough to carryout on the big screen. Audiences can generally nit pick and find numerous holes in the plot that could very well turn the story from serious to seriously ridiculous in a matter of minutes. However, the action and the sometimes illogical twists, keep the audience hooked until the end.

Final Verdict: See it. A spy vs. spy type thriller that keeps you entertained. It's not the smartest movie, so don't argue with its logic. It's meant to be a fun, action-packed film akin to the Mission: Impossible series. And if you're like me and can't stand Jolie, you will be presently surprised with her believable performance in this film.

Rotten Tomatoes

Looper - a simple title for a semi-complicated film

Looper
Director: Rian Johnson
Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, and Emily Blunt
New Release Review

Christine's Review
I really enjoyed Looper, but it is being advertised wrongly. It is not a high-action sci-fi thriller, as the trailers suggest, but a slow burn of a movie with a story that uses the time travel device to ask larger questions about humanity. And it isn't as complicated as you'd think. Briefly, the plot centres around young Joe (Gordon-Levitt), an assassin contracted by future mobsters who send their victims back to Joe's time (before time travel is invented, in fact) where he does his work. Problems start for young Joe when the future version of Joe (Willis) is is sent back in time and escapes before young Joe can complete the contract or "close the loop" in the film's parlance. Don't worry, all of this comes out in the first 10 minutes of the film so I'm not spoiling anything for you.

Old Joe tells young Joe about the Rainmaker, a hugely powerful mobster in the future who is taking over the city. Old Joe has come back to track down the Rainmaker and stop him from taking over the city in the future by killing him as a child. This is where the film gets interesting because now there are subtle questions raised essentially opening the determinism versus free will and nature versus nurture debates respectively. I'd go so far as to say that the time travel elements of the film are just a MacGuffin, a way to drive the plot to the real story: can we change the course of the future with a single act?

I would recommend Looper because it isn't a typical sci-fi, time travel movie because it doesn't get bogged down in the details of the science. In fact, there is no science, it's just presented as fact that there is time travel in the far future. And for a movie set in 2044 it looks remarkably like today except for the robots working the fields and the motorcycles with jet engines. I like that the movie chooses to present just a few differences to remind us that we're in 2044 and keep us feeling comfortable in this future world.

Arlaine's Review

I also really enjoyed Looper. Though it wasn't the most compelling film I have seen this year (that award still goes to The Cabin in the Woods) it was very entertaining. Christine was right; this is not an action-packed, sci-fi film as the trailers and marketing would have you believe. There is a stronger storyline than the typical action movie that brings out the heart of the characters involved. Particularly Gordon-Levitt's portrayal of Joe; a character that you get to follow on his journey (his current dilemma and his self-discovery as a man).

Perfectly cast, the film's main ensemble of Gordon-Levitt, Willis, Blunt and Jeff Daniels, provide a well-rounded story that is easy for the audience to follow. But like Christine mentioned, this story provides you with information that makes you question what is happening on a deeper level than say a movie like Iron Man. Hence, the title of this post.

Although I would normally prefer to see a little more explanation when it comes to the "why" and "how" of time travel (even something as simple as needing 1.21 gigawatts), I did appreciate the simplicity of not adding this into the film. And I think this act helped create a more neatly put together storyline. Most sci-fi films leave tons of plot holes. This film filled what little holes popped up without being hoaky, which some sci-fi films tend to become. Although critics raved it is a terrific sci-fi film, I would have to disagree with James Mottram of Total Film who stated it's "the best sci-fi movie since Moon". Please Mr. Mottram. Yes, Looper was a great film. But it was in no way comparable to the marvel that was Moon. (If you haven't seen Moon yet, DO IT! Especially if you love sci-fi films).

Final Verdict: See it. An enjoyable thrill ride that doesn't take you on the extreme highs and lows that some big budget action movies always do. A time travel plotline that doesn't solely revolve around time travel and is easy to follow. A sci-fi film for those who aren't necessarily sci-fi fans.

PS: if anything, see this film for the adorable young actor, Pierce Gagnon. He stole my heart on One Tree Hill and he does it all over again in this film.

Rotten Tomatoes