Da Couch Tomato

An attempt at a new layout, with horrible glitches, and very minimal knowledge of HTML.
Showing posts with label paul giamatti. Show all posts

Rock of Ages was basically Grand Theft Auto + Glee. The Vice City franchise, that is. Overall, it was entertaining. It'll make you forget, even for just two hours, about any problems you might have. Partly because the music is so loud you can't hear yourself think. And that's probably intentional on the part of the filmmakers. They want the music so loud so that you couldn't hear yourself think about how stupid you are for watching this.

"Should've watched Kimi Dora 2! Or Boy Pick-Up!"

1. The Love Story Was Meh

"All right, when I say 'action', just look at her teeth!"

What's the secret to a great love story? If you answered sex, sorry, that's not the correct answer, but I like the way you think. Anyway, the secret to a great love story is chemistry. The two characters supposedly in love should exhibit such chemistry, such fire, and such passion between them that no one would doubt they were really in love. But in this movie, the chemistry between Drew (Diego Boneta) and Sherrie (Julianne Hough) was... drumroll... zero. My dog and my cat have more chemistry, and they hate each other.

Zero chemistry even in wacky shots.


2. The Anachronisms

First of all, good job to me for using the word "anachronism" for the first time ever in writing. I've always wanted to use that word, but when you do use that word, you'd have to follow up with a discussion, because people will go "Huh?"

"Yeah... wha'ever, man."

An anachronism is basically anything that is chronologically out of place. I'll give you an example. At the start of the film, it is established that the events take place in 1987. Okay, so what're they doing singing "More Than Words", which came out in 1990? I would also include "Paradise City", which was released as a single in 1988, although the album it comes from, Appetite for Destruction, came out in '87. "Every Rose Has Its Thorn" too was released in '88, but since it's sung in the latter part of the film, it could be argued that a year has passed already since the start of the film, thus making it '88 in the film's chronology.

"Wait, I still didn't get that anachronism thing... "


3. The Gay Angle

"It's gay time!"

While I've got nothing against gays on film, in my opinion, the gay angle was totally unnecessary. It's just one of those Hollywood trends where playing a gay character will look good on one's resumé. That said, Russell Brand can be convincingly gay without even trying. Alec Baldwin, not so much. And the kiss, man, the kiss. It made me shudder.

Catherine Zeta Jones wants less kissing and more ball-squeezing.


4. Tom Cruise's Aging Body

Don't get me wrong─I loved Tom Cruise's performance. I just didn't like seeing his body magnified like that on the big screen. You could tell that Cruise already had old-man skin. Yeah, you know that when you touch his skin, it's probably soft. But it's not baby-soft. It's grampa-soft. You know what I mean?

"Come on! Reach out and touch it!"


I did love some things about the movie, though. I loved the mash-ups. I loved Catherine Zeta Jones and Mary J. Blige. I loved Paul Giamatti, and his clever decision not to sing too much. And I also loved the fact that everyone sang using their own voices. Including Stacee Jaxx.

Boo-yah.

If you want a more detailed review, you can check out this one from my friend at Inquirer Libre. Or you can watch the stage musical, which they are saying is a whole lot better than the film version. But don't take my word for it. Check it out for yourself.



Rock of Ages. USA. 2012.



Rating: Five out of ten.



Additional information from Wikipedia

Any English major can tell you what the title is all about. Or at least any Shakespeare buff. The title comes from the soothsayer from Julius Caesar's William Shakespeare. Oh, sorry... from William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. "Beware the ides of March."

So what does this film have in common with Julius Caesar? Nothing, except the politics. So that is what we shall discuss.

First, the campaign team of Governor Mike Morris (George Clooney) as he climbs his way up the electoral ladder. There’s Paul Zara, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, brilliant as always. So we’ll skip him.

"Yeah, you know I'm brilliant."

Then there’s his protégé Stephen Meyers, played by Ryan Gosling. Now Ryan Gosling has an all-American face, and he can act with it, especially with his eyes. But he can’t act very much with his voice. He always talks in a certain slow drawl, and is most of the time devoid of any expressions and emotions. I think he should work on that a bit. All right, after Gosling, there’s the slutty intern played by Evan Rachel Wood. Sometimes she looks pretty, and other times, she looks like a cokehead slut. As if I even know what a cokehead slut looks like.

"Yes, a cokehead slut."

On the other side of the political fence, there’s Zara’s rival Tom Duffy, played by Paul Giamatti, who is kind of the opposite of Ryan Gosling in the voice department. Giamatti’s voice is annoying, to say the least. It’s whiny, and it’s nasal. But he’s a great actor despite that.

"We both got a problem with our voice, Gosling. Deal with it."

Other actors in the cast are Marisa Tomei, whose hair I don’t like; Jeffrey Wright, who I’m seeing a lot of lately; and Max Minghella, the annoying sidekick to the Winklevii twins in The Social Network.

I almost forgot to mention that this flick was directed by George Clooney himself. However, I only have one complaint, and that is regarding the character of Governor Mike Morris himself. I felt his character wasn’t fleshed out too well, especially since his character is directly involved in the film’s turning point. I hope Clooney doesn’t justify his lack of characterization with the fact that he was busy behind the camera.

"How 'bout I justify it with my
looking awesome instead?"



The Ides of March. USA. 2011.



Rating: Six point nine out of ten.




*some info from IMDb
pics from All Movie Photo

Basically, it's almost the same as The Hangover Part I. But instead of Vegas, it's in Bangkok.

Honestly, there weren't as many laugh-out-loud moments in here compared to the first one. This sequel in my opinion was kind of darker, more criminal, in a way. There were even Russian mobsters and a drug-dealing monkey. Also, a severed finger. Eeewww.

And I don't know when Alan (played by Zach Galifianakis) became such an asshole. I don't think he was that bad during the first film. Here, he's just a total douche. Funny, yes. But still a douche.

"Am I?"

Justin Bartha still doesn't get any action. Just like the first film. Though he's not the victim here. He's just a wuss. Or maybe because he's married. Which still makes him a wuss.

"You can tell I'm a wuss because my wife is taller than me."

Stu the dentist (played by Ed Helms) got his shining moments. He is, after all, the bridegroom. But at what expense? Putting the "cock" in Bangkok, that's what. It almost made me want to throw up.


Bradley Cooper=Man-crush. No words necessary.

Kaboom.

Jamie Chung didn't get that much screen time. Probably because she was the bride. And this is a guy flick. So don't expect any chicks in here.

Lovely.

Ken Jeong is back as Mr. Chow. Still as annoying as before. But he's still funny. That cameo from Iron Mike Tyson was entertaining, but at the same time, terrible. He already took singing lessons for his few minutes of screen time. But it was still pretty much off-key. No, not pretty much. Very off key. Paul Giamatti's cameo, on the other hand, was fantastic.

So this got me thinking: If they do The Hangover Part III, will it be Zach Galifianakis who gets married then? That would probably be a riot. And I hope they set it in Europe. Not in a city that reminds me so much of Manila.


The Hangover Part II. USA. 2011.


Rating: Six and a half out of ten.



*some info from IMDb
pics from YouTube, All Movie Photo, and I Heart Flicks



You may also want to check out the reviews of The Hangover from Sting Lacson and Cholo Mercado.

Just because a movie has Clive Owen, Julia Roberts, Tom Wilkinson, and Paul Giamatti in it, doesn't mean it won't be boring.

The thing is, it may be an espionage flick (which I love), and it may have spy-thriller editing, but the script, honestly, was a bit confusing. It's the type of film that you may need to watch twice or thrice to get the true plot.

This film was written and directed by Tony Gilroy, and the screenplay was all right, since Mr. Gilroy is already a veteran screenwriter. But something was amiss, and it most probably was the directing.

A real cinematic gem is something you can appreciate the first time, and like fine wine, gets better and better the more you watch it.

And since I didn't appreciate this film the first time...I'm sorry Mr. Gilroy. But I'll give you a passing score, if just for that slow-motion fight scene between Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson in the opening credits (see pic).


*some info from IMDb
pic from zap2it.com


Duplicity. USA. 2009.


Rating: Six and a half out of ten.
Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson's fight scene: Eight out of ten.
Premium Blogspot Templates
Copyright © 2012 Da Couch Tomato