Catching Up, Part 1: Two Hits And A Miss

OK, I've left this long enough. I've seen that many movies I've been meaning to review that it's getting out of hand.

So, for a little while, going to post a few at a time, no plot synopsis, just my thoughts. If you are interested, check the IMDB pages for the general story breakdown. Sorry about taking the easy way out, but if I want to catch up, I'd better get into gear. Besides, some of these, I don't have much to say anyway (oh and there may be a few small spoilers littered throughout).

Silver Linings Playbook

Pros:

-The acting. The biggest selling point of this film is its cast, and no one slacks off (and when you have Chris Tucker in your cast, that IS a big accomplishment. He's not an actor I would consider to be great by any stretch, but if he does more stuff like this, that could change).

This is arguably the best film De Niro's been involved with for years, and it helps that he's not playing a tough guy or hamming it up (I will say at this point that to me, his last outstanding role was in Stardust, where he also tries something different), but instead a man who doesn't know how to connect with his son any more, with Jacki Weaver offering superb back-up as the mother who tries to keep the peace in the family.

Bradley Cooper's great too, my favourite role of his to date. His character's plight, to get back together with his wife and regain some sense of normality, garners great sympathy.

The stand-out, however, is Jennifer Lawrence, who says what she wants and doesn't give a damn what anyone else thinks. She has her vulnerabilities, but she doesn't let them drag her down. Like all good characters, the flaws help define them without pigeon-holing them, and the relationship between her character and Cooper's is believable, seemingly running with the message “people are screwed up, but sometimes, they find other screwed up people and find out you can be screwed up and happy, and compliment each other's weaknesses”.

- The dance scene at the end. First off, I'm not much for dancing, and know little of technique, but I'll be damned if that wasn't an impressive display. It's wild, energetic, and it's plain to see that Cooper and Lawrence are having so much fun while doing it than you can't help but feel a little pumped. Bonus points for one of the songs in their medley being Fell In Love With A Girl by The White Stripes. The dance itself is also a great representation of the two of them in a nutshell: it's unconventional, it changes tone without warning, it's confrontational, uncaring of what other people think, but between the two of them, it makes perfect sense.

Cons:

- Well, there's really only the one, and not much of one at that, but the movie can make you uncomfortable early on, with some of its confrontational scenes. I mean, that was the point, but I can't help but wonder if David O. Russell didn't go a little too far.

One of the better films I've seen this year, and worthy of all Oscars it was nominated for, and definitely so for those it won. 4/5

Flight

Pros:

- The sequence which leads to the crash that sets up the plot. It's amazingly shot and acted, and I actually felt like I was there in the plane. Which is also a bad thing, since I've never flown and I'm actually afraid of flying, so this only added to that fear...

-While the supporting cast are great (especially Don Cheadle), this is pretty much Denzel Washington's movie, and in his role as Whip Whitaker he carries it fantastically. This portrayal of a self-destructive, egotistical man is a little different from Washington's usual fare, and it's probably my fave role of his to date (before anyone asks, no, I haven't seen Training Day yet, I'll get to it one day). Denzel's character is a complicated man, and his journey of self-discovery never enters a place in which it strains credibility.

Cons:

- I mentioned the supporting cast are great, and they are, but with one character, we have a puzzling element. Harling Mays (John Goodman) is a dealer friend of Whip's, and a close confidant. Before Whip's court appearance, Whip drinks himself to near-death and is in no shape to turn up. Enter Harling, who knows how to whip Whip (no pun intended) back into shape. I should note his leitmotif, if I can use that here, is Sympathy For The Devil by The Rolling Stones, and his role is played for comedy. Considering the serious nature of this film, this is rather jarring, and an unnecessary distraction.

So far, this is my favourite movie of the year, though we're only about a third of the way through, so there's still plenty of contenders. Even so, I highly recommend this, even with a review that doesn't give it any justice at all. 4/5

This Is 40

Pros:

-Uh... well, the music is nice. No, seriously, the musical selection, I dig it. And since music and the marketing of one group is a subplot, you would expect the music to be decent. Thankfully, it is. I had never heard of Graham Parker And The Rumor before, but I can't say I regret listening to the music.

Cons:

-Is it me or are films trying to make me hate Leslie Mann? Seriously, most of the movies I've seen her in, it looks like she's not having any fun. It's almost like she's Debra from Everybody Loves Raymond (oh, how I hate that character), she has to be mean-spirited to nearly everyone, even though her husband is a reasonable guy (that's not a compliment to Ray Barone from that show, though, he's almost as bad as his wife) and her few heartfelt moments are... well, few and far between. It's sad when a film from earlier this year, ParaNorman, shows she can play lovely characters.

And keep in mind, she's married to the director of this film, Judd Apatow. Dude, are you trying to make us hate your wife? Why?

-The other characters don't get off scot-free, but a lot of them are useless and go nowhere anyway, just like their subplots. Biggest example: Mann's character, Debbie, runs a boutique, and she finds out one of her employees is stealing money. She confronts Desi (Megan Fox, whose performance is unremarkable) about it, but Desi says it's the other employee, Jodi (Charlene Yi and dear God, I swear Apatow is trying to make me hate her, too! I hated her in Knocked Up, and she's irritating here, too. She started off annoying when she was in the last season of House, but I did warm up to her there). Turns out Jodi has a drug habit, that's never hinted at, and as soon as Debbie fires her, the subplot ends on a joke about her being out of it, and that's it. Yeah, that sure needed some screentime, not like you don't have enough going on already...

Speaking of Desi, while she sticks around, she doesn't exactly get better, and the ends-as-quickly-as-it-started subplot with Ronnie (Chris O'Dowd) and Jason (Jason Segel) trying to get into her pants. Keep it classy, guys. It's near the end of the movie, so what's the point? The movie's runtime is a little over two hours, we could have had this cut and lost nothing.

-OK, these last two are nitpicks, I'll admit. First, I'm sick of all the promotion for this film saying “semi-sequel” to Knocked Up. It makes no reference to Seth Rogen's and Katherine Heigl's characters from that film, so you'd never know it, and we already have a term for that: spin-off. This is a spin-off, just call it one.

Next, the title's kind of arrogant isn't it? Like, is this what we're all going to be doing/have done at 40? No, this is “privileged whiny white arsehole's version of 40”. Or, First World Problems: The Movie, if you were.

If you don't want to bother with this movie, I don't blame you. There are some bits I laughed at, but not so much that I'd recommend this. So far, the weakest film I've seen this year. 2/5

Yeah, sorry there isn't a lot of meat on them, but it's been a while since I've seen this films, so some details will have been missed. Hell, they probably come off as looking like slightly better Chris Bores movie reviews (and the slightly better might be giving myself too much credit).

Next post, another three films, so that I can keep on catching up.

I Just Keep Fighting That Windmill

So, yeah, been a while since I updated. There's a reason for that, one I intend to discuss today.

And before I get to it, a disclaimer: anyone who wants to leave a comment about me whining or having a pity party, this is MY blog, and I'm entitled to complain. Yeah yeah, first world problems, I'm better off than some people and all that, but really, if we kept playing that card, no one could complain about anything ever.

I've talked about this before, but now it's getting worse. I work 5-6 nights a week, depending on the week. This month has been a nightmare, due to the amount of holidays (Labour Day and Easter), and that means a lot more to do.

Being at my workplace kills a lot of motivation for everything else in my life. The stream, doing this very blog, even going to the movies. Mainly because, sometimes, they feel like work. And on my nights off, which gives me a great amount of time to catch-up, my mind rebels, because of that feeling. I have so many movies to review, but sometimes, I lose the desire to actually talk about them.

At my work, I feel like I give and I give, and return, all my workplace does is take and take and ask for more. And quite frankly, I don't know how much more I can give.

So, you're asking, why not just quit? There are a multitude of reasons, but perhaps the biggest: there's nothing wrong with ME. I'M doing what I'M supposed to do. I'll be damned if I'm leaving just because I care. I'm not trying to talk myself up, but I put in a damn good effort.

What I'm getting at is, because of how much of a mental toll it's taken on me, I've become concerned with some of the thoughts I've had lately.

Going back to what I said about motivation, caring is also a factor. Sometimes, I don't know if there's enough room in my heart to care about anything else. It's like the joy has been sucked right out of me.

To quote the song “Going Through The Motions”, from the Buffy The Vampire Slayer episode “Once More With Feeling” in Season 6, nothing seems to penetrate my heart. I do pretty much the same thing, day-in, day-out. I just don't a lot of people see how much it gets to me. Or, to quote another song, Smokey Robinson and The Miracles' “The Tracks Of My Tears”:

“So take a good look at my face

You'll see my smile looks out of place

If you look closer it's easy to trace

The tracks of my tears”

The concern mostly comes from the fact that, dealing with the public has also made hate humanity just that little bit more. Not humans as individuals, because a lot of the ones I know are outstanding.

When a large portion of people can't remember the basics of etiquette, how can we expect them to be mature about the concerns of society, such as allowing marriage equality for the gay community (not going to rant about that here, but long story short, stop denying that right to them!)

Due to the constant rudeness and ingratitude, it's getting to the point where I imagine inflicting pain upon people, and that's the closest feeling to joy that I experience. And really, that kind of scares me.

Using another Buffy reference, there's a scene from Season 3 I keep coming back to, in the episode Amends, in which Angel, the vampire with a soul, contemplates suicide. His line is one of the most amazing I've ever heard in any fictional story: “It's not the demon in me that needs killing, Buffy. It's the man.”

I often wonder the same thing about myself. By killing any sense of honour, any morality about myself, would I then be free of the shackles of my situation?

Or should I just remove myself from the planet altogether? Maybe I AM the demon myself.

There's a saying that everyone is the hero of their own life, their own story. But what if... what if I'm the villain? What if the people I know are really the protagonists, and I'm the dragon that needs to be smote? That would explain why I feel this way, and why the universe designated me as one of its many butt monkeys. Maybe I'm just a bad person, and I'm only just coming to terms with it now.

One of the biggest recurring themes in these past blog posts has been references to Batman, and I'm reminded of something Batman once said to his second Robin, Jason Todd, after Jason came back from the dead and became an anti-hero/villain (long story): “You're broken and I can't fix you”.

Maybe that's what it is, really. Maybe I'm just broken, and can't be fixed. Or it wouldn't be worthwhile to fix me.

I'd like to think I'm a decent person. But I spend so much time doing so much for people I don't care about, that I don't feel like I'm doing enough for the people I DO care about. Sometimes, I feel like I'm in a room that's far away from everyone else, with only a solitary window, and I see everyone I care about, but can do nothing for them. Story of my life.

So, where do I go from here? I guess I just keep going through the motions, waiting for something to give. Either me or my job. Won't be long until I'm in a padded room, I dare say.

As for the blog itself? Well, updates will probably be sporadic, mostly movie reviews to catch up on my long list. We'll have to wait and see.

To finish, another song reference, this one from Tears For Fears' “Mad World”:

“And I find it kind of funny

I find it kind of sad

That dreams in which I'm dying

Are the best I've ever had”.

Thank you and sorry to depress you. Even if it's probably just two people reading. And that's being ambitious.

Unchained And Unleashed

Going to try reviewing things in a slightly altered style, so that these reviews don't just look like walls of text (well, they still will be, but at least it might be more accessible).

So, let's jump right into Django Unchained.

Django (Jamie Foxx) is a slave, freed by dentist-turned-bounty hunter, Schultz (Christoph Waltz) to help him find the Brittle brothers. In return, Schultz offers to help Django rescue his wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), an endeavor that leads them to the affably evil Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCpario).

Rather than just things off paragraph by paragraph, jumping between good and bad, I'm just going to review this (and the movies for the next few posts) with a pros and cons list.

Pros:

• The acting. Oh my Lord, the acting is sensational. Jamie Foxx is just a badass, so stoic and determined, and fantastic with a gun. He's able to roll with the punches (figuratively and literally), but get him talking about his wife, and you can hear the devotion in his voice, and see it in his eyes. Jamie Foxx may not have been the first choice but as far as I'm concerned, he's the best choice.
  Leonardo DiCaprio... it's actually really hard to hate his character, despite being racist and despicable. He's just so charming, and even somewhat caring. I mean, he's still a bad person for his racist tendencies, but he's much less of a racist than any of the other antagonists (I know that doesn't make up for anything, but he's actually a really complex character). Hell, his manservant, Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson) speaks to him harshly, but Calvin treats him like sage council, and seems to have the utmost respect for him.
  Kudos to DiCaprio for adding layers to what otherwise would have been a stock standard villain.

But the one who steals the show is Christoph Waltz. Just about anything that comes out of the guy's mouth is hilarious, and he's always cool and collected under pressure. Aside from his general cool attitude, he's also a progressive thinker and loyal to a fault. As good as he was in Inglorious Basterds, he's even better here.

• The gunplay. Typical for a Tarantino film, there's a whole lot of talk, and a whole lot of action, both of which are most welcome. Unlike Gangster Squad, where the choice to use blood splatter to gore up a scene was head-scratching, it's not bothersome here, mostly because Tarantino is playing fast and loose.
  Hell, sometimes, it's downright hilarious, especially towards the end. Sometimes, it even resembles a rail shooter! I can't remember the last time I laughed at an action sequence. Though, I should point out, this was laughter of “Holy crap, what ideas ran through this mad man's head?!” kind, because it's off the wall, insane and I have not one single problem with it.
• My favourite scene, however, is actually quiet in terms of action, and is actually really heartwarming. In this scene, Schultz is telling Django a story about a knight named Seigfried, who rescues his wife Broomhilda after a long and arduous journey. Not only is it something that lifts Django's spirits, it's a nice little parallel to the movie itself (with the use of the name Broomhilda perhaps being the least subtle thing about it). Sometimes, in fast-talkin', fast-shootin' films, it's the quiet moments that prove to be the most effective.

Cons:

• Speaking of Broomhilda, let's go over to the character featured within the movie. Now, I have nothing against Kerry Washington, but her character in this film is basically a living prop. All she does is scream, or look scared or confused (up until the very end, where she does show different emotions) and even partly contributes to the plans not going... well, to plan.
  I can't really entirely blame her, the character is poorly written. Which is a shame, since Tarantino knows how to write a strong woman (see the Kill Bill films for many examples). On the plus side, if they ever do a Super Mario movie, she's got Princess Peach's mannerisms down (yeah, I know Peach isn't black, so what? Kingpin wasn't black in the Daredevil comics but Michael Clarke Duncan was the best thing about that movie).
• Ending fatigue. I'm sure I've gone over this before, but in case, I haven't, ending fatigue is when a movie (can apply to other mediums, but let's stay with movies here) looks like it's about to end, but keeps going, even though most of its loose ends are tied up. This is a criticism commonly thrown at films like The Return Of The King, the last couple Pirates Of The Caribbean films, The Dark Knight/The Dark Knight Rises and Transformers: Dark Of The Moon (that last one I'll definitely agree with).
  And, sorry to say, it kind of kicked in here for me. (Slight spoiler here). After a big shoot-out in Calvin's mansion in which Django is outnumbered and lacking in ammunition, Django is captured. What happens after that I won't reveal, since I think I've said too much already, but really, if Tarantino had changed a few things, and had that shoot-out be the end of it, I'd have been perfectly content. I mean, I don't hate what comes after, but once that part starts, you begin to wonder whether or not the movie actually IS ending soon. And since it concludes the way we expect it to, it's not like we actually needed it.

All in all, another solid offering from Tarantino, and an early contender for my top five for the year. Will it stay that way? Bit early to say, but either way, it's a Hell of a ride.

Take A Shot For Every Argo Reference

Well, the Academy Awards have rolled around again. Oh wait, no, they're pulling a Shazam! on us and calling it the Oscars. I have no idea why.

But anyway, much like last year, I'm going to post my brief thoughts on each of the Best Picture Nominees, and pick who I want to win in the major categories, and guess who will actually win.

This year's picks are a lot better than last year's, in terms of what appeals to me, and what I've actually seen (that is to say, not many, but some are only just getting released now). With two exceptions, if I haven't seen it, I'm going to, though whether or not it'll be by the end of this year I don't know.

So, let's see the Best Picture Nominees.

1. Amour- this literally only came out a few days ago down here (as of this posting), and it skipped my local cinema, so I have no choice but to wait for DVD. And it's not even a high priority. I mean, I do want to see it, but nothing about it screams “See me immediately!” Probably won't win.
2. Argo- this one is on the other end, in that this movie DOES command me to see it. I have the DVD pre-ordered, and it is due in a few days time. I will be reviewing it for the blog, but even though this is jumping the gun, can I say I want this to win? I don't care if I haven't seen it, this movie looks great. As much as I actually respect Ben Affleck's acting ability, if he had to be an actor or a director, and only one of those (exclusions made for the acting portion if he's also directing the movie), I vote he directs. Gone Baby Gone is excellent, and The Town is also damn good. One of the strongest contenders to win.
3. Beasts Of The Southern Wild- I know next to nothing about this one. Probably won't see it. Don't see it winning, either.
4. Django Unchained- finally, one I HAVE seen. This will also be the next review for the 2013 movies on the blog (we WERE supposed to get it December last year, pushed back for reasons unknown). In short, another great Tarantino effort. It'd be great if it wins, but I somehow doubt that.
5. Les Miserables- wasn't a high priority, will catch on DVD. Again, don't see this one taking the award.
6. Life Of Pi- see above.
7. Lincoln- like Django Unchained, an upcoming review. The most likely winner, and my pick for who will emerge triumphant (though I still want Argo to win. Nothing against Lincoln, it is a very good movie, and I give it my recommendation, for what little that's worth).
8. Silver Linings Playbook- probably my next review after Django Unchained (can you tell I'm a little behind in my movie reviewing?), but this could actually have a shot at beating Lincoln and Argo.
9. Zero Dark Thirty- … OK, I don't want to turn this into a huge rant or anything, or make some controversial statements, but the long and short of it is: I do not want this movie to win. I do not want this movie to exist. You know what, Flight should be here, Flight's a great movie (also an upcoming review). If any movie other than this wins, I will be happy (but I'll be even happier if Argo wins. I'll settle for Django Unchained or Silver Linings Playbook)

And for some reason, only nine movies, even though I could have sworn they were going with ten from now on. So... why not add Flight?

But anyway, besides one or two entries, a fairly solid list. Granted, Lincoln pretty much has this in the bag, since it's a biopic on a famous white man from back in the day but hey, at least it's not a World War 2 movie, right?

So, on to the next major awards, though without going into as much detail as I have above.

Best Director- Ben Affleck (OK, he's not nominated, but I want him to win. Also, WHY?! Why is he not nominated?!) I guess if I have to use the official list, I want Spielberg to win. Who probably will win, too.

Best Actor- Denzel Washington (want to win. Seriously, his acting in that movie is fantastic), Daniel Day-Lewis (probable win)

Best Actress- Jennifer Lawrence (both, actually. I think her role in Silver Linings Playbook was outstanding, and I think she has this locked in, especially since Meryl Streep isn't nominated this year)

Best Supporting Actor- ...argh, so many to choose! If I have to pick one, I want Robert De Niro to win, since Silver Linings Playbook is the best thing he's done in ages. Tommy Lee Jones will probably win, though I definitely do not object, he was great in Lincoln.

Best Supporting Actress- Sally Field for both, she holds her own in Lincoln.

Best Animated Feature- I didn't do this one last year, but this year's picks holds a few surprises. I've only seen two of them (Frankenweenie and ParaNorman, both I've reviewed already), but the other three (The Pirates! Band Of Misfits, Brave and Wreck-It-Ralph) I've been very keen to see for some time. Wreck-It-Ralph will probably win, and I want it to most of all, but anyone of these winning is something that pleases me.

I could be here all day, but I think I covered the biggest bases. I know that The Avengers and Skyfall have nominations for some of the technical awards, and more power to them.

On the subject of Skyfall, I haven't heard any of the other songs for the Best Original Song category, but Adele's Skyfall theme MUST win. Seriously, the love I have for that song, I'll never be able to do it justice.

As of writing, the Oscars are a day away. At the time they're on, I'll probably be sleeping, due to my nocturnal nature. So, I'll have to wait until I wake up to find out if my picks were right, and if Argo does win. Have I mentioned I want Argo to win?

Why Can't You Be Friends?

Well, Valentine's Day has rolled around again. You may recall last year that I posted a blog saying that love should be all year round, and not limited to one day.

Well, this year, I'm afraid I'm going to talk about something a little more negative. I admit, this is something I could talk about almost any time of the year, but given what I'm going into, something tells me Valentine's is when this crap will occur the most.

Recently, I learned of a Tumblr with posts from a site called OK Cupid,. A Tumblr devoted to self-professed “nice guys” bitching about being stuck in “the friendzone” with women they're attracted to, and feeling like they're entitled to something (a relationship or even just sex on its own) simply because they're “nice guys”. I'd share the link, but I believe it's had the plug pulled, though this article has an example of one said pic: http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-21/nice-guys-of-ok-cupid-the-scariest-tumblr-of-dudes-you-never-want-to-date/

People much smarter than myself have already weighed in on the issue, but I still would like to share my thoughts on it, and why these guys need to have a foot planted firmly up their arse, to greatly paraphrase Red Foreman. As such, I'll be breaking these down in dot point form, ranging from smaller nitpicks to outright criticism.

* First off, while I have no idea who coined the term, don't drag the word “zone” into it! Zone is a cool word, that shouldn't be related to something negative! The Twilight Zone, the Phantom Zone, the Zones in the Sonic games, the Kenny Loggins song Danger Zone, all examples of coolness using the word zone! I think it's the Z, the Z makes it sound cool. Kinda like X. Point is, use another word! Not realm, realm's also a cool word.

* Second, women aren't entitled to give you anything at all. This isn't the days of old (and it was wrong back then too) so playing the “White Knight” and expecting a reward isn't what happens these days. But with society being over-entitled these days, maybe that's the root of the problem.

* Next, when did being friends with women become a bad thing? Friends are awesome! I like making new friends. I'd say “Make friends!” is my motto, but I have one above that one, and that's really the motto of the incredibly awesome Sarah Wilson, aka Pushing Up Roses (check out her gaming videos here: http://pushinguproses.com/ . And a lot of my friends are female, too. I've always gotten along better with women as opposed to men, and I think it's because a lot of men I see in public seem to communicate with grunts and as little dialogue as possible. Unless it relates to sport, drinking and/or women. Maybe that's just because I live in Australia, or maybe the type of people I want to interact with are elsewhere at the time.

* But the biggest point I have to make: if you're a “nice guy”, but you bitch about a friend just because she won't date you, you revoke any rights to call yourself a nice guy.

You know all those arseholes you complain about, the ones she may date over you? Well, moaning about that makes YOU an arsehole too. Except she won't date you once she finds out what you said. So really, you're digging your own grave there.

Also, are these guys really arseholes, or are you just painting them that way because “they're in your way of being in a relationship”? I mean, do you spend time with them, or have you already dismissed them simply because they chose to date your friend? Granted, it IS possible that their character is poor, but intervening when he does something questionable is what a friend is supposed to do, not someone swooping in to take his place as spouse.

Look, I've been here before. I mean, most of us have, right? Pining for someone who is in a relationship, wanting something more, while still being friends. The difference is, most of us don't go out of our way to make our friend's partner look bad, or spread nasty rumors about our friend behind their back out of bitterness. We accept things for what they are, and move on.

There are worse things in life for nice people than not being with the right person. Like being treated like a doormat, for example. I know a whole lot about that...

And that's all I have to say on the matter. So, to these “nice guys” out there: prove it. Be good and nice for the sake of being good and nice.

(On an unrelated note, I know I missed a lot of holidays last year, especially noticeable with a Mother's Day post but not a Father's Day. Can't say it'll be different this year, but I'll work something out)

The Gang's All Here

Right, I have no real creative way to start this... so, Gangster Squad!

It's 1949, and Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) is the kingpin of the Californian criminal underworld.

Sgt. John O'Mara (Josh Brolin) is picked by Chief to wage war against the boxer-turned-gangster and bring his empire to its knees. So he assembles a team of sharpshooting, hard-fighting cops and goes on the attack.

The most obvious film comparison people have made is L.A Confidential, and to be honest, I don't see it. I mean, yeah, that one's a period piece about crime and corruption, but that one was a little more... layered, for lack of a better word. I haven't seen that one in ages, so maybe there's more to the comparison than what I'm seeing, but for me, the most obvious comparison is The Untouchables, one of my absolute favourite movies. Both have a by-the-book cop assemble a team to take on a kingpin, one of those members isn't much for the violent side of things, there's an older, more experienced cop (who share similar fates, trying not to spoil that. Matter of fact, same thing happens to the team members whose expertise isn't with gunplay), both kingpins go to jail for the same thing in real life (Gangster Squad's changes the ending, for more action-packed fare I dare say).

But how does Gangster Squad hold up on its own? Well, it's a pretty good action flick. It comes in two flavours, shootouts and fisticuffs. Personally, as good as the shootouts are (particularly towards the end), I prefer the fisticuffs, it's more intense, more personal. And the end confrontation is no exception (slight spoiler), in what amounts to a no-holds barred slobberknocker. The entire fight is well shot, and it's what you'd expect between a driven man and a former boxer.

Acting-wise, Josh Brolin reminds me so much of a young Tommy Lee Jones (and for the record, I haven't seen Men In Black 3 yet) and really, that's a good call for a cop film. He's determined, unrelenting and shows great leadership.

Sean Penn, I can't remember the last time I saw him in a film. His character is kind of unbalanced and skittish, but that only helps reinforce how dangerous he can be, the kind of quality you need in a gangster, and he does a superb job.

Ryan Gosling... well, it's almost like he took his character from Crazy Stupid Love and traveled back in time with it. His character loves the ladies (and himself a little) and a good time. But when he's called into action, he gets right into the thick of it.

Emma Stone is the other big player in this movie, playing Mickey's girlfriend, who has more depth than it may seem at first. I'd say she has great chemistry with Ryan Gosling, but since she too was in Crazy Stupid Love, and involved with him there too, it's kind of obvious.

If there are flaws in this movie, it's a couple of minor things.

First, some of the comedic moments feel really out of place, almost taking away from the seriousness of the situation.

Secondly, the blood splattering. Now, obviously, when bodies get riddled with bullets, it's not going to be clean. But the way the blood splatters, you'd think you were watching a particularly gory horror movie. I think I saw less blood in the head-exploding scene from Scanners.

So, all in all, an enjoyable action romp. 3.5/5

Sorry for the less meaty blog post, I'm considering revisiting a couple of these films on DVD later in the year.

Behind Every Great Man...

Sometimes, there are movies you are very keen to see, but then they disappear off the radar for a while, only to pop right back up and announce they're coming out soon. Hitchcock was one such example for me, ever since I found out Anthony Hopkins was involved (OK, I'd have probably seen it regardless, but that's still a big incentive), and for a while, I thought the project had died off.

But no, it was actually being made all this time, and the release date just surprised me. So, naturally, I made it a priority to see.

What's it about, exactly? Well, it details the making of Psycho, his most well known film, but it's also a look at the relationship between Alfred and his wife, Alma (Helen Mirren).

Really, that's all you need to know. It's not a “from birth to death” style biopic, although I wouldn't object to that. This will end up being a short blog, because whether or not this film works boils down to one question: do we have the right cast for the job? The answer is yes, yes we do.

There really isn't much Anthony Hopkins can't do these days, he's a magnificent actor. He embodies the pomposity and snarkiness Hitchcock was said to have had, and he has the look down-pat.

If there's anyone who comes close to outdoing Anthony, or even outright outdoing Anthony, it's Helen Mirren, stepping in with firm support and a quick wit. The amount of work she did on Psycho can't be denied either, and she is the one who suggested the famous musical cue during the shower scene. The two compliment each other well, being able to one-up each other with dry wit. Even when Alfred confronts Alma with accusations of adultery, he never disrespects or diminishes her dutiful work, and that is a huge plus with me. She is portrayed as every bit an equal as Hitch, and maybe even more so.

That doesn't mean the supporting cast aren't great either. In fact, I'm ashamed to say I didn't recognize a couple of them, and they're actresses I like a lot! Jessica Biel and Toni Collette disappear into their roles as Vera Miles and Peggy Robertson respectively, and Ralph Macchio's in this, too! Seriously, I only just found that out now! Yes, the Karate Kid himself!

Scarlett Johansson was as classy as I've come to expect as Hitchcock's leading lady Janet Leigh, and she continues to be one of my favourite actresses currently in the industry.

And Kurtwood Smith, despite his very small role, well, it's always great to see him.

I was also fascinated by parts in the film in which Hitchcock appears to be talking to Ed Gein, usually in a dream sequence, or the like. Goes to show how devoted to his work Hitchcock was, how obsessed he was, and, on some level, maybe how eccentric and borderline crazy he might have been. I mean, we all go a little crazy sometimes...

So, yeah, short blog, probably not very informative, but that's often the thing with a biopic. The casting is often the most important thing, or else the project falls apart. Luckily, we have a stellar cast on hand. 4/5

If only this could be a TV series, and we could see the process behind all his films. Can this happen? Please? I'd love to find out what happened behind the scenes on The Birds.