Movie: The Guest

"The Guest" is a somewhat violent 80's style a psychological-action thriller.

A mysterious former soldier who appears at the house of the grieving Peterson family as a consoling combat-mate of their dead son.

Director:  Adam Wingard  Writer:  Simon Barrett (The two also teamed up for the horror-thriller “You're Next” in 2011.)

Stars:  Dan Stevens (best known for playing  Matthew Crawley in the TV Series Downton Abby), Sheila Kelley (known for playing Carol Rhodes in the TV Series “Gossip Girl”), Maika Monroe and Brendan Meyer.

The Good

1. British actor Dan Stevens with his rock-hard abs and old-fashioned congeniality is especially good in his role. Sometimes when a movie has a really-really good character, people will say the movie is worth watching just to see that character. This is one of those movies.

2. The movie is paced nicely - a combination of expected and unexpected twist and turns right up until the end is complemented by a good music score.

3. In a small amount of time there is a lot of good character development- (this primarily because of good acting). Other than Stevens, the two siblings performances stand out- Luke (Brendan Meyer) and Anna (Maika Monroe).

4. A subtle political message to think about-

A.A. Dowd reviewing at the web site the “AV Club” writes: " For a few fleeting moments, the film appears to be taking aim at a worthy target—the way the American people silently condone savage military aggression when it suits their best interests."

(The Guest expertly blends everything from The Terminator to Halloween to Drive, By A.A. Dowd  Sep 16, 2014

http://www.avclub.com/review/guest-expertly-blends-everything-terminator-hallow-209230

6.  Film has noticeable similarities to films by James Cameron and John Carpenter. So if you're fans of those directors, you should like this film.

The Bad

1. The characters in the main plot are well developed but the second major subplot is

underdeveloped, as are the characters involved in that plot strand. This underdevelopment causes the secondary plot to be a bit confusing.

2. Category confusion. This could be a positive or a negative. The movie incorporates thriller and horror (though not extreme horror). Some reviewers felt that this `cross-over' - doesn't work.

Mick LaSalle at the the San Francisco Gate writes: "Yet as the crimes escalate, “The Guest” becomes less effective. It loses its tentative toehold in reality and becomes the equivalent of a monster movie."  

Movie review: The one guest you shouldn’t let in

By Mick LaSalle Updated 10:00 am, Thursday, October 9, 2014 http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Movie-review-The-one-guest-you-shouldn-t-let-in-5810748.php.

3. At the end you may not know what’s what.

Verdict-

Worthwhile watch if you like twisted somewhat violent thrillers.



WATCH IT NOW THROUGH AMAZON INSTANT VIDEO - Click Picture below

End of Watch 2012

INFO:  End of Watch is a gritty buddy cop movie set in Los Angeless.

Rated R, 109 min. Directed by David Ayer. Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Peña, Anna Kendrick, Cody Horn, America Ferrera, Frank Grillo, David Harbour.

THE GOOD:

1. What makes this movie a winner for me is the great chemistry of the two main characters

Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Peña.  Zavala (Peña)  and his wife are having their first child. Taylor (Gyllenhaal) is a high-strung Marine fresh from a tour of duty in Afghanistan, who is single but seeking a relationship. Their dialogue is quirky, youthfully innocent and believable. Their characters are well developed and interesting.

2. The film’s voice-over prologue read by Jake Gyllenhaal really sets up the movie. It's poetic. At first I thought it was meant to be sarcastic. But realized that it wasn't, it was meant as heartfelt. It's almost poetic.

3. Good Plot, The basic plot revolves around two beat cops, who while working, respond to the variety of cop-situations that come there way. Then there is the back story of their personal lives, as they play out. It's a good mix of tension and light humor.

4. The Films unusual perspective. In the beginning of the movie we learn that Taylor (Gyllenhaal) is taking classes towards a law degree (this is mentioned once and never mentioned or referred to again). He needed an elective course and he chose film-making. So he has decided to film his daily life with a video camera and additional cameras that he and his partner wear  clipped on to their uniforms. And, it just happens, that a   group of hyper-violent street gang-bangers whom they encounter also are engaged in filming (self documenting) their antics.   So throughout the film, we, the viewer see the street level perspective of the police, and at times the villi ans. Not all the time- the director weaves these perspective in and out. I personally found it effective, I thought it added intensity.


THE BAD:

1. Some do not like the filming method. Almost all the critics that found fault with this film were critical of the unusual switching between conventional widescreen establishing shots and the handheld camerawork. Some have pointed out that at times when we are watching what would be handheld camera work, that it is questionable who would be the one filming those shots - and at time who if anyone could actually be the filming those shots.

2. The big picture via the filming method.  Some critics found it hard to digest that this film could be made from `clips' from various participants cameras. This point was made by the (usually grumpy) reviewer Philip French in The Observer: "The film's weakness lies in its novel (but hardly truly new) visual style: most of the material is found footage supposedly shot by Taylor and Zavala (to make their own private documentary), fellow cops and various criminals. This is initially intriguing, then irritating, and finally both confusing and deeply annoying."

3. As I mentioned in the positive attributes of this movie that the poetic prologue really set up the movie - some critics though have found that the movie lionizes the police to an annoyingly saccharine level,  to the point that: "that you can almost believe End Of Watch has been bankrolled by the LAPD itself."

VERDICT: 
 
A decent buddy cop film.




Watch End of Watch
 on Amazon Streaming service now. Click HERE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extra Notes:

What else has the writer/director David Ayer written?

  In 2000 he wrote the screenplay for the film- U-571  About a U.S. Navy Captain and his crew are just beginning to enjoy 48 hours of leave when they receive word to immediately return to duty.
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Bill Paxton.

In 2001 he wrote the screenplay for the film The Fast and the Furious- the first in the franchise-with intense full-throttle action, awesome high-speed stunts, and full-on pedal to the metal intensity.
Starring: the late Paul Walker, Vin Diesel.

Also in  2001 he wrote Training Day about a mad dog narco cop who blurs the line between cop and criminal as he mentors an idealistic rookie partner during the rookie's training day. Starring: Denzel Washington and Ethan Hawke.

In 2002 he wrote the screenplay for the film Dark Blue, about an LAPD detective named Perry who tutors his rookie partner in the realities of police intimidation and corruption as they investigate a high-profile homicide case. But as the body count rises and the evidence just doesn't add up, Assistant Chief  threatens to end Perry's brand of "justice" if Perry's own demons don't destroy him first. Starring Kurt Russell and Scott Speedman.

In 2003 he wrote the screenplay for the film S.W.A.T. (2003)
,where uperstars Samuel L. Jackson and Colin Farrell team up with a dazzling cast to form a crack S.W.A.T. team aiming to take down crime in this pulse-pounding, high-octane, action/adventure.

In 2005 he wrote and directed Harsh Times, a tough-minded drama about two friends in South Central Los Angeles and the violence that comes between them. Starring: Christian Bale and Freddy Rodríguez.

In 2012 he wrote and directed the movie reviewed here.

Then in 2014 he co-wrote and directed Sabotage '14,about members of an elite DEA task force find themselves being taken down one by one after they rob a drug cartel safe house. Staring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sam Worthington, Terrence Howard.


In 2014, he also wrote and directed the much praised film Fury, about a battle-hardened army sergeant named Wardaddy (Brad Pitt) commands a Sherman tank and her five-man crew on a deadly mission behind enemy lines. Starring: Brad Pitt, Shia LaBeouf

Extra-
 Jake Gyllenhaal grew up with a talented older sister, Maggie, and they followed their parents into the film industry – both featuring in 2001's Donnie Darko
, the oddball time-travel movie and teenagers' favorite about A troubled teenager is plagued by visions of a large bunny rabbit that manipulates him to commit a series of crimes, after narrowly escaping a bizarre accident.

Battleship (2012) DVD Movie Review

Genre:  Action & Adventure, Science Fiction & Fantasy

Rated PG-13 for profanity and intense violence.

Length: 131 Minutes

Short and sweet Summery:

Inspired by Hasbro's classic naval combat game

The plot is simple. During a series of International Naval war games in the Pacific, an alien invasion force lands in the ocean around Oahu ( third largest of the Hawaiian Islands). It followed a signal that scientist had been transmitting from a series of satellite dishes based on the island. The aliens extend a force field around the islands and the surrounding ocean, trapping three naval ships within the boundary. Can the Navy defeat the aliens before they're able to call for reinforcements?

The Good:
It’s loud (if you like that sort of thing) Special Effects are good, but not spectacular.

Has similarities to Armageddon (1998), Transformers (2007) and Independence Day (1996) (if you liked those movies).

Filled with patriotism and fearlessness in the face of an overwhelming alien invasion.

Has a back story of a young guy who desperately needs to prove himself, first to himself, then to his older and more responsible brother, and then finally to win the girl he is in love with.

The Bad:

Movie starts off slow (first ten minutes).

Any scene with Rihanna.
Cliche line after cliche line

The aliens are really, really stupid.

Lots of holes and improbabilities.

Bottom Line:

It is not a memorable film.But it does have some redeeming qualities and at times is a  fun comedy style alien invasion flick.

What sex , and age group might best appreciate? 12- 14 year old boys.

Directed By: Peter Berg
Written By: Jon Hoeber, Erich Hoeber Starring:

Taylor Kitsch - Lieutenant Alex Hopper

Alexander Skarsgard - Commander Stone Hopper

Rihanna - Petty Officer Cora Raikes

Brooklyn Decker - Samantha Shane

Tadanobu Asano - Captain Yugi Nagata

Hamish Linklater - Cal Zapata

Liam Neeson - Admiral Shane

Peter MacNicol - Secretary of Defense

John Tui - Chief Petty Officer Walter Lynch

Jesse Plemons - Boatswain Mate Seaman Jimmy Ord

Gregory D. Gadson - Lieutenant Colonel Mick Canales

Jerry Ferrara - Sampson JOOD Strodell

Adam Godley - Dr. Nogrady

Rico McClinton - Captain Browley

Joji Yoshida - Chief Engineer Hiroki

 Other Reviewers- One-Line- Opinions:

• Andrew Harrison of Q magazine called the film "crushingly stupid"
• Giving it a B+ grade, Lisa Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly also praised the story saying, "For every line of howler dialogue that should have been sunk, there's a nice little scene in which humans have to make a difficult decision. For every stretch of generic sci-fi-via-CGI moviemaking, there's a welcome bit of wit."
• The Washington Post gave the film a three-star rating out of four commenting it is "an invigorating blast of cinematic adrenaline". 
•  Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a "rotten" score of 34% based on reviews from 190 critics, and reports a rating average of 4.6 out of 10

Review by Paul Grant (follower of Basho)

You can stream the full movie now to your Tablet, Laptop or PC or even you Smart Phone for only $ 2.99 through Amazons Instant Video on Demand.
Click Here

Primal Fear: (1996) Richard Gere and Edward Norton

(trailer at end of review)

Summery:

Courtroom Drama: This 1996 movie stars Richard Gere as a flamboyant Chicago defense attorney who volunteers his services when a stray teenager from Kentucky (played by Edward Norton) who had become an altar boy in Chicago is charged with the murder of a Catholic archbishop.

Good:

1. Great acting, especially by Edward Norton. Norton was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor and won a Golden Globe Award in the same category for his career-launching role.

2. Gere is good too.  And I also especially liked Frances McDormand (the actress that played the pregnant cop in Fargo) who played a psychiatrist in this movie.

3. Good pace. I thought in my recent viewing that it started out slow, and seemed dated. But as the main story emerged things started moving faster, and complexities to the story seemed reasonable: sleazy lawyer, sleazy characters who run city government and sleazy church leaders all playing with the life of an inncocent ( as all are until proven guilty) young man. As Gere's character telling says at one point: "Why gamble with money when you can gamble with people's lives? "

4. If you think about this movie, it really makes you think.

5. It takes place in Chicago. (Always a plus with this reviewer.)


BAD:

1. For me the relationship with the city attorney trying the case (played by Laura Linney) and Gere's character was cliche,  Linney didn't have the lines she needed to round out her character.

In essence she is a good character with a job that she tries to perform with integrity. Neither her boss or her opponent (her former boss and lover) show any integrity.She is being played by everyone - yet she comes out as looking like the real bad guy.

Other reviewers opinion:

Primal Fear garnered positive reviews from critics, earning a 72% "Fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes

My Judgement 4/5
-------------------------

Rated R for brief grisly violence, pervasive strong language and a sex scene


Think about this after watching the movie:

How does the title relate to the film?

In the end does the boy get the correct sentence?

Trailer



Watch Primal Fear now on your computer through Amazon's Instant Video service for as low as $2.99

CLICK HERE

The Shawshank Redemption (1994) Movie Review

Movie quick summery:
Convicted in the late 1940s for the murder of his wife and her lover, banker  played by Tim Robbins is thrown into jail at the Shawshank penitentiary in Maine for two consecutive life sentences. In prison he meets and befriends another lifer, played by Morgan Freeman, who teachs him how to survive in prison.


The Good:1. The movie has excellent acting, excellent cinematography, and great music. Its one of those roller coasters of emotion movies that in the end leaves you feeling good.

2.  One of the best book to film transitions ever.

Stephen King's  may be best known for his horror writing but this is not horror. The movies success starts with the brilliant Steven King novel that it was based on ""Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption"". You can find the novella in a 1982 King collection, ""Different Seasons"", along with a story, ""The Body,"" that became the basis for the another top notch movie the1986 smash ""Stand by Me"".

3. It celebrates the triumph of the human spirit.

The Bad:
1. Bad title.

2. It is a prison melodrama, and it does contain violence, and suggest some horrible things - so if your not into that be forewarned...but at the same time it also contains almost no action.

It's not a simple feel good movie- there is a good deal of  brutality in it. As one of the characters explains: " this is no fairy tale world."

3. Some critics have felt that the movie is a little too sentimental, and a little two long (142 minutes).

It is about a 20 year friendship between two men in a prison (in my opinion). In telling that story the narrative highlights the memorable moments. The film is also about long-term imprisonment. The movie is not driving towards it's conclusion. A lot happens, and the film just seems to amble confidently along like the film's main character. The conclusion comes about as just another story among other stories. The story teller just saves the best story for last.

The Bottom Line:
It can be as much a spiritual experience as it is a simple movie.

I remember reading a review about the movie when it came out where the reviewer was upset that the ending was too clarified.WOW - I found it- Washington Post September 23, 1994: "" And leave it to pandering, first-time director Frank Darabont to ensure no audience member leaves this film unsure of the ending. Heaven forbid a movie should end with a smidgen of mystery!"
No one I have ever talked to has felt that way about this movie- just the opposite, they have theorized about what this film means ...is it an disguised story of Jesus?...a simple tale of friendship?...a tale of corruption?...a lecture on faith and 'holding on'?...or is the main character not who we think it to be for 3/4 of the film? ... and what really is the redemption?

Extra Information:
The film was nominated for 7 Academy Awards (including best picture), 2  Golden Globes, USA, 2 Screen Actors Guild Awards, and a Grammy Awards - and didn't win any.

The original movie did not do well in theaters. But once released on video it became recognized. The Wall Street Journal ran an article about how the video version ""Shawshank"" groundswell in April 1999, at the time it was occupying first place in the Internet Movie Database worldwide vote of the 250 best films; it's usually in the top five.
----------------------------------------

Director: Frank Darabont
Writers: Stephen King (short story "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption"), Frank Darabont (screenplay)
Stars: Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman and Bob Gunton

Elite Squad 2 (2010) review

~I am writing this on the night of the Academy Awards (Kings Speech wins best picture.)


I have just watched one of the best movies I have ever seen- Elite Squad 2 (2010).


I had refrained from watching this, though I thought Elite Squad (2007) was brilliant- because I find that most often the sequels are lacking the intensity of the original (think Matrix). This movie is better in my opinion than the excellent original (you need not see the first to fully appreciate this movie -this movie stands on it's own.)


I watch a lot of movies and review very few. Time is limited. To be a movie `critic' does not necessarily mean that you need to criticize a movie. I try to review movies that I like.


(The reason I watched this movie had everything to do with the reviews on the Internet Movie Data Base http://www.imdb.com/ .)


Brazil put the film "Lulu, the son of Brazil" - up to represent the country at the Academy Awards, and why not push for a positive depiction of your country with a rags to riches story? --" The true story of a working class boy who moves to the nation's financial capital at a young age and becomes one the most influential politician in Brazil's history." I have not seen that movie yet. the movie did not get selected as one of the five in consideration for the award. "In a Better World"  from Denmark won, which was a huge upset for critic favorite Biutiful, which hailed from Mexico


Elite Squad 2 is much more `intense' than it's predecessor ( by the same director). It, like its predecessor, is described as an "action, crime, drama, thriller". And it succeeds in all those areas.


The IMDB gave the movie "Kings Speech" (based on collected criteria) an 8.4. And this sequal " Elite Squad 2-   an 8.6. 


It might be possible to argue, that as an United States citizen that I cannot fully understand the psychological depth of this movie. I would have to agree. But for me, because of how well it was .. choreographed --the film transcended it's location - and simply was a great film.


However it for some was more than just a `movie'. There are references in other reviews that it was almost a `truthful' documentary about the state of affairs in Brazil. It definitely touched in the pulse of that country= "about 11.1 million paying viewers made Elite Squad 2  the most seen movie in Brazilian cinema history. It also became the highest-grossing film of all time in Brazil, beating Avatar(2009)'s record."


Consider this review: 

"I saw the film in its world premiere in Paulinia, São Paulo. 1,500 people in the audience. Perhaps, 1/3 industry members and 2/3 non-industry members. It was a collective catharsis, I only remember a group experience of the same intensity watching Crouching Tiger in its Cannes premiere. 

The audience applauded the film five times, the last a standing ovation." 

(Emphasis mine)

------


So what is it all about? No spoiler.


A man, who is the leader, of what we in the US would call SWAT, is involved in a prison uprising that gets out of control. He is the narrator of the film. He is divorced. He has a young son. His wife has remarried a very left wing professor . The two major social problems (the plot of the movie) that the government seeks, through its police to eradicate, are drug dealers and arms dealers. 


With that short scenario you can predict both violence and emotional conflicts, which the movie provides.


The director and writer of the film José Padilha has made several documentaries- thus there certainly, in my opinion- at times, a documentary feeling  within the film (though not boring). Padilha  studied business studies, politics and economics in Rio de Janeiro, followed by English literature and international politics in Oxford.


The star is Wagner Moura  who seems to me as an unlikely choice, but who he makes his role work (he is also the narrator of the movie) by his personal intensity.

--

How does it end? - Open, in my opinion, for further development, ( I hope so) but not necessarily. It is a full movie, and what I here consider a possible open ending, might actually be to let the future of the story be considered by the viewer.