Inception (2010) (PG-13)

Inception (2010) (PG-13)

Directed by Christopher Nolan

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Ken Watanabe, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marion Cotillard

Daughter Says:

Ever since I saw the previews for this movie I’ve wanted to see it. No, I am not a huge Leonard DiCaprio fan. I’m a huge Joseph-Gordon Levitt fan. That and I like Ellen Page, but that’s beside the point. The director of Inception is just down right brilliant. He did an amazing job with both Batman movies, and he did amazing things with this movie.

Now, I know everyone is going to tell you that this movie was horrible. It made you think. If you are one of those types that want to just sit in front of TV screen and turn your brain off for a few hours then this is not the movie for you. Inception might make you have to think, but it is not that hard to follow. What’s so bad about movie’s that make you think any way? The Matrix makes you think, and look at what a huge hit it was. Or even Lost. (And don’t think about lying about that one. Lost was the most complicated TV show I’ve watched.)

Just like The Matrix, this movie was full of hard to believe stuff. Such as breaking into people’s dreams and stealing their secrets. That’s what this movie is about by the way. Leonard DiCaprio breaks into people’s dreams and steals all their top secrets. But he is faced with a very complicated job one day. Instead of stealing ideas, his new client wants him to plant an idea inside someone’s mind. This tactic is called Inception. The movie goes from there. I don’t want to give too much away, although I think the previews are rip offs. They don’t tell you anything. I want to know what this movie is about. The only real reason I went to see this movie was to watch Levitt in another five star movie. I fell in love with him in 500 Days of Summer.

It wasn’t the great acting that made this movie something else. Inception was just straight-out gorgeous. This movie had so many beautiful moments that were so out of this world. Certain parts did make me a little dizzy, but I really didn’t mind. Other moments scared me to death. I jumped many times during that movie. There were a lot of things I didn’t see coming. I won’t tell you what they are so you can go on the same adrenaline ride that I went on. I was on an emotional roller coaster through this whole movie. I felt the intensity in some parts, and leaps of joy in others. I was so strung out after that movie.

I must admit that I had wished there was an intermission in between the hours of this movie. I had to pee so bad when I got out of the movie theater it was awful. I didn’t want to leave during the movie. I was afraid I’d might miss something, and I was right. All the way through Inception my mind was getting filled with new information. Every second (of the 3 hours it took) there was something important happening. If you missed anything, you definitely would be confused the rest of the time.

Long story short, you need to see this movie. If you love either Lost or The Matrix, you will love this movie. Even if you don’t care for this movie you might just love watching all the special effects. Plus it’s not in 3D. That is always a plus. I hate that stupid invention.

Rating for Inception: *****.

Daddy Says:

I've seen all of Christopher Nolan's films (missing only his first, Following, and his third, Insomnia), and each time I've been impressed. I'm a big fan of his take on the Batman franchise, and the first two films in what could be described as his "puzzle" trilogy (Memento and The Prestige) were very fun mysteries to watch. Now comes Inception, a summer blockbuster that had the studio worried that it was "too intelligent" for audiences to enjoy. This is the type of movie that I live for, something different, something that I haven't seen dozens of times before. A movie that's original, instead of a tired remake.

The biggest weakness the film had for me going in was it's lead, Leonardo DiCaprio. I've never been a big fan of his work, to me it seems as if he's playing the same role over and over again. But he carries this film nicely. Ellen Page, as the dream's architect, also does an excellent job with her role as newcomer to the group. Her part is essential to the viewers, since she is required to ask the very questions that are going though our minds at the time, yet not seem like she's just there for exposition purposes.

As for the plot, I'll only say that it involves dreams within dreams within dreams, and when it's over you'll be talking about it for days afterwards trying to figure out what it all means. You can't turn your brain off while watching Nolan's films. He forces you to stay engaged in order to figure out what's going on at the time. I do wish the movie had been a bit shorter, since I needed to go to the restroom about halfway through and didn't dare leave for even a few minutes out of fear that I'd miss something amazing (that's the one thing I miss when I do, on the rare occasion, go out and see a movie in a real theater: a pause button).

And there is so much that is amazing. This is one of the most original movies I've ever seen. Most films I can point out a reference place or two, some piece of film history that's being copied, homaged, or outright stolen. With Inception, I never knew where the movie was going to go next.

I do have many unanswered questions about parts of the movie. But, like the recently ended television series Lost, a series like this film that forces viewers to focus on every detail to get the most out of it, I got the answers to most of the important ones. I'll be very surprised if this isn't taking home the Best Picture award next year at the Oscars.

Rating for Inception: ****1/4.

The 400 Blows (1959) (Not Rated)

The 400 Blows (1959) (Not Rated)

Directed by François Truffaut

Starring: Jean-Pierre Léaud, Robert Beauvais, Claire Maurier, Albert Remy

Daddy Says:

My cinematic experience with director François Truffaut, before watching this film, was limited to his performance in Close Encounters of the Third Kind. After watching this, his debut as a director, I can say I'm now interested in seeing more of his work.

The 400 Blows, which is a poor translation of the French title which roughly equates to "raising hell", has an autobiographical feel to it. We follow closely the life of Antoine Doinel, a troubled and misunderstood youth as he goes to his boys school, is picked on his teachers (now I'm wondering if this is what Pink Floyd were referring to in Another Brick in the Wall), tries to get his homework done in a small, cramped apartment with his parents fighting in the next room, skips school with a friend, etc. We get to know the boy almost better than the people who should be closest to him.

Antoine really has no role models to guide him. His attempts to guide himself fail miserably. He discovers Balzac and writes an essay about him as an homage, which his teacher accuses him of plagiarizing. A shrine he builds to the famous writer in his home ends up nearly burning down the entire apartment. He steals a typewriter from his father's office, then can't sell it, and when he tries to return it he is caught by the watchman. His best laid plans never seem to work out.

Yes, he makes some bad choices for himself. Claiming that your mother died and that's why your weren't in school yesterday is probably not the wisest decision. But he is really given no guidance on how to live his life. His stepfather isn't really interested in raising a son that's not his, and his mother wants to be more of a friend than a parent. His teachers are constantly tearing him down, and the fellow students are equally clueless on how to grow up in a world without role models.

There really isn't a plot to speak of in The 400 Blows. Truffaut's camera is content to simply observe Antoine's life, never criticizing or interpreting, leaving the viewers as the only people who may lay judgment on his characters. This is a film that stays with you long after it ends (on a freeze-frame of Antoine's face. Is he happy? Sad? We are left to decide for ourselves). There isn't really what can be described as a typical story arc. Things happen, people talk, life goes on. This is a movie that you can watch many times over and still discover new moments and feelings contained within.

Rating for The 400 Blows: *****.

Daughter Says:

The 400 Blows isn’t one of those everyday movies that you see. This movie was full of emotion and drama. There aren’t that many French movies I can say that about. I really haven’t found many French movies that I’ve liked. The last French film that I saw that I really enjoyed was Let the Right One In. I loved that movie. I don’t know why, but it was good. It was nice to see a good French film again.

The boy who played Antoine was great in this movie. He really pulled off a troubled child that was heading towards disaster. I must say I was very surprised that I liked this movie. It ended without a resolution, which is one of my pet peeves. I have to have a purpose for watching a movie and this one really didn’t. The strange thing is, even though it was unsatisfying, I wasn’t all that upset about it. The movie in itself had no point really and so I expected no point at the end I guess.

So what did turn me on about this movie? Well the beauty of it all was rather appealing. I really enjoyed watching every scene, even with the black and white and subtitles popping up on the screen. Every frame was shot perfectly to show what was going on in the moment. At one point, Antoine runs away from the school he was attending. The camera runs with him along the path, so all you see is Antoine running and the fields moving behind him. It’s a very long shot that has no cuts in it what so ever. It’s amazing how smoothly the camera moved with him.

Other than the camera work, there was the acting. I know a little French, so I didn’t have to read parts of the subtitles I didn’t have to read. This made it a lot easier for me to watch the movie and really enjoy it. I didn’t quite understand that the man living with Antoine and his mother was the step-father. I always thought that it was his dad, so that was a little confusing. But other than, I didn’t have any trouble following what was going on at all.

This movie is definitely a drama, so if you want to see an action packed film, The 400 Blows is not for you. People might say that this is a must see movie, but I don’t love this movie that much. If you want to see it go out and rent it, but I’m not going to tell you that you should watch it before you die. It’s not a must see film.

Rating for The 400 Blows: ****.

Our Hospitality & Sherlock Jr. (1923/1924) (Not Rated)

Our Hospitality & Sherlock Jr. (1923/1924) (Not Rated)

Directed by Buster Keaton & John G. Blystone

Starring: Buster Keaton, Joe Roberts, Ralph Bushman, Craig Ward

Daddy Says:

Our Hospitality is the first feature-length movie from silent film comedian Buster Keaton. It's the story of a generation's long feud between the McKay's and the Canfields. Keaton stars as Willie McKay, who was raised by an aunt far away from his feuding relatives, and only finds out that the feud even exists right before his trip home to claim a home left to him by his deceased relatives.

On a very funny train ride there (where it's easier to move the train tracks than it is to move a donkey blocking them), Keaton meets a very nice girl and is smitten by her. I'll give you three guesses as to who his new girlfriend's relatives turn out to be. Will true love win over a family feud? And does it really matter when the visual gags are coming fast and furious?

While Our Hospitality is very good for his first feature, I actually prefer the shorter Sherlock Jr. over it.  In it Keaton plays a movie projectionist who dreams of someday becoming a detective. When he is framed as a thief, he attempts to follow his instruction book to uncover the real criminal. When things don't go exactly as planned, and he returns to his day job at the theater, he dreams of jumping into the detective movie on the screen and solving the crime there.

This film, more than the other, really allows Keaton to work in some of his best gags and visual effects. When he jumps into the movie screen, the film keeps changing around him, constantly throwing him off-balance. Later we are shown that one of the balls on a pool table is rigged to explode. Keaton manages multiple trick shots to hit every ball on the table except the exploding one, although he comes within a fraction almost every time. It's great suspense and humor rolled into one.

Other gags I won't give away. They deserve to be experienced for the first time as you watch them. For anyone who's never seen a Buster Keaton movie, I'd probably start off with his best: The General. But this double feature makes for a wonderful follow-up.

Rating for Our Hospitality & Sherlock Jr.: *****.

Daughter Says:

There’s only two ways to enjoy a black and white/silent movie. One: It has Charlie Chaplin and two: it has Buster Keaton. Our Hospitality and Sherlock Jr. had the second part. I’ve always enjoyed watching Buster Keaton in all his movies. I find him amazing for quite a few things. For one, he does his own stunts, which is really cool. I love that he doesn’t have to depend on anyone else to make him look good. Another thing I like about Keaton is that he has such great facial expressions. I can always tell what mood he is in when handling certain situations.

Keaton certainly made these movies something else. I really enjoyed both of them. Our Hospitality was hilarious in many ways. The situations that Keaton was put through were funny, but at the same time ironic. The only way to survive was to stay inside the other family’s house. Keaton found the most creative ways to remain inside the house. I really enjoyed watching it a lot.

Sherlock Jr. was just as funny, but with more action. Everything that Keaton went through was interesting and creative. In one scene, he had to escape quickly so Keaton jumped through a window and appeared out the other end in disguise as an old lady. How in the world did he do that? I mean after all, he does all his own stunts. Keaton is just so creative and brilliant. (I know, I know. I’m a fan, but who wouldn’t be?) The one problem I had with this movie was the relationship between Keaton and the girl he was “in love with”. They didn’t seem to be together at all. The chemistry between the two just didn’t seem to connect with each other. But it is just a black and white movie and a comedy, so who really cares.

Even with the one flaw both of these movies were wonderful. The comedy was perfectly spaced out and the whole thing seemed to flow so well. So if you’re looking for a great comedy and a good laugh these are the movies for you.

Rating for Our Hospitality and Sherlock Jr. : ****1/2.

Kick-Ass (2010) (R)

Kick-Ass (2010) (R)

Directed by Matthew Vaughn

Starring: Aaron Johnson, Nicolas Cage, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Mark Strong

Daughter Says:

Kick-Ass is a superhero movie of a different kind. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like it. This movie definitely showed me why I don’t want to be a hero. I think the main character figured out why no one wants to be a superhero after all the things he went through. For all that don’t know what Kick-Ass is about, I shall give a summary.

One day this guy, who is low on the chopping block in high school, asked why doesn’t any one try to be a superhero? So he decides he wants to become a superhero himself. At the beginning, the kid stinks at saving anyone, but then he helps this guy out who’s being chased by a gang. A group of kids catch the action on tape, and now everyone is out to find the identity of the masked superhero.

But when trouble finds Kick-Ass, who is there to save him? None other than Nicholas Cage and his ninja daughter Chloe Moretz. I’ve always loved Nicholas Cage. He hasn’t been in a good movie in forever. The last good movie I saw with him in it was Face Off. I loved that movie. Him and John Travolta were amazing. I also loved Chloe Moretz in (500) Days of Summer. She was so knowledgeable about relationships, and so very funny in that movie. So when I saw the trailer for this movie I was all gung-ho for it.

This movie was another movie that had put a strange twist to superheroes around the world. Hellboy and Watchmen were other movies that did the same. But in their case, they tried to say that not all superheroes were wanted, and had as much drama as a soap opera. Kick-Ass was trying to show you what would happen if the average man tried to be Superman.

Kick-Ass did a pretty good job at what they were trying to put across. The only complaint I have with this movie is that they left it at a cliffhanger when they didn’t have to. After all you could have left at the first ending instead of going back and saying "oh by the way were going to have a sequel with this guy". I still suggest this movie if you’re sick and tired of the same old super hero movie. This movie is definitely a different sort of hero.

Rating for Kick-Ass: ***1/2.


Daddy Says:

Kick-Ass was arguably the most divisive film to be released in the last year. Many people loved it's comic book style. Just as many loathed its portrayal of children both dealing out and being the recipient of some very graphic violence. I tended to see both sides while watching it, and thus fall somewhere in the middle.

The best performance in the film is from 13-year-old Chloe Moretz playing the 11-year-old Hitgirl. With contagious enthusiasm, she throws herself into the role, completely believable as the little girl raised to be a murderous crime-fighting force by her "Big Daddy" Nicolas Cage. Cage, who I find mildly annoying in most of his roles, is quite enjoyable here playing an Adam West version of Batman to his little girl's Robin. I also liked that when he gets in his Big Daddy costume to go fight crime, he adds adhesive extensions to the mustache he wears in everyday life.

I'm a big fan of John Woo's films, with The Killer being one of my all-time favorite movies. Woo's name pops up when Hitgirl is being quizzed by her father, and the final showdown between Hitgirl and a slew of goons references his stylistic gun battles. The difference here, of course, is that the person doing the killing is a child. It's very easy to root for her to take out the bad guys. They're so broadly sketched that they don't seem like they're real people. It's also just as hard not to feel bad when things go wrong for her, because we've come to see her as a real flesh & blood little girl. I know it's supposed to be a "comic book" movie, but the film also tries to seem realistic for the most part so the message is mixed. If it looked more like a comic book, the way Sin City looked like its source material, I think it would have been easier to overlook the child violence.

I enjoyed the film for the most part, even with the child violence, so if a "graphic novel"-type movie interests you, I'd say you'll enjoy this, at least for a night's rental.

Rating for Kick-Ass: ***3/4.

Un Chien Andalou (1928) (Not Rated)

Un Chien Andalou (1928) (Not Rated)

Directed by Luis Buñuel

Starring: Pierre Batcheff, Simone Mareuil, Luis Buñuel, Salvador Dalí

Daddy Says:

Wow. Just wow.

This may be the first film review I've written that will take you longer to read than it would take you to actually watch the film being reviewed. Un Chien Andalou is a short film, only about sixteen minutes long. You may have heard of it, but unless you're a serious student of film (or amateur film critic like me) you've probably never seen it. If the picture to the left doesn't register in your memory, you've definitely never seen it. If you had, that image will never leave your memory again.

Un Chien Andalou is directed by Luis Buñuel, and was conceived by he and the famous artist Salvador Dali (the guy who painted the melting clocks). Their goal was to shock, and possibly offend, their audiences by creating images which had no rational explanations. In fact, that was their only criteria for inclusion: If it could be explained, it didn't go in.

What we get are images of startling power, even today 82 years after the movie was made. The movie opens with a straight razor being sharpened. The hands run the blade along the back of his thumbnail to test its sharpness. My own thumb started hurting in sympathy while watching. The man with the razor looks out the window at the full moon. A woman sits in front of a dressing table mirror. The man comes up behind her and opens her left eye as seen in the picture above. A quick cut to the moon being divided horizontally by a thin layer of clouds is followed by... me watching my daughter cover her eyes and exclaiming "oh my gosh, why are you making me watch this?".

Almost in entirety, the various scenes in the film have no connection to each other. Yet our minds persist in trying to make sense of the proceedings. We see a woman look out an upstairs window, then the film cuts to an overhead shot of something happening on the street below. But is it really what the woman sees? The normal rules of editing film would say that it is. But here the rules don't apply. When the film was being made, the actress wasn't told what she was looking at, so why should the answer be that easy.

Un Chien Andalou is a remarkable short film. Were it not for this movie, there would be no David Lynch, no Matrix, no Inception. It's a dream made real through the power of film.

Rating for Un Chien Andalou: *****.

Daughter Says:

This movie was sixteen minutes of torture. I couldn’t watch half of it because it was so gross. Who in the world thought it’d be funny to slice up an eyeball, animal or human? I’m starting to think Luis Bunuel (the director) is insane and so is my dad for thinking this was a good movie.

None of the movie made much sense. I felt like Bunuel was just trying to see how many people he could torture for sixteen minutes. Well, guess what dude! You did it! It was disgusting, creepy, and down right wrong. There was nothing going good for this movie. It started out with my three least favorite things I hate to see in a movie: silence, subtitles, and black and white. Then I saw the eyeball and I just couldn’t watch. (This isn’t fun at all.)

Once that part was over I thought I was free from all the gross stuff, or at least how could it get any worse. Oh, was I wrong about that. This film got worse and worse. You know how, in the movies, when someone’s day is just going all wrong and they say well at least it can’t get any worse. Well that happened to me when I watched this film.

I don’t speak much French, let alone be able to read it. I know one word that made me joyful while watching this movie: Fin. All the way through this movie I was hoping for that word to pop up on the screen, but the movie never seemed to end. It just kept going and going and going. This movie was the longest sixteen minutes of my life.

I can’t even start to describe the horrible feeling I felt while watching this movie. I nearly dropped dead when Dad wanted to watch it again, but this time with the commentary. I’m going to have to tell you to stay very (AND I MEAN VERY) far away from this movie. You can’t even really call this movie a movie, because it’s not long enough to be a TV show. But to be honest I’m glad it’s as short as it is. If it was any longer I might have to die.

What kind of name is Un Chien Andalou? There weren’t even any dogs in this film. I think this guy does crack or something.

Rating for Un Chien Andalou (An Andalusian Dog): zero stars.

The Runaways (2010) (R)

The Runaways (2010) (R)
Directed by Floria Sigismondi
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Dakota Fanning, Michael Shannon, Stella Maeve

Daddy Says:

The Runaways tells the story of the rise and fall of the 70's band of the same name. Growing up at that time, I'd heard of the band by reputation, but didn't get to hear any of their music due to their music getting such little radio airtime.

Only later in the 80s, after Joan Jett went solo, did I get to hear some of their songs. Being a teenage boy at the time, I developed a huge case of the "hots" for Joan Jett (this phase has yet to pass and I still have a poster of her on the wall in my home theater). I even took the girl who would later become my wife to see her in concert when she was touring in the early 90s. Even kissed her for the first time while waiting to get in the doors to hear the music I loved.

So to say my expectations for this film might be a bit high would probably have to be a big understatement. And to find out upon viewing The Runaways that the movie tells more of the story of Cherie Currie, the band's troubled lead singer, doesn't help. I suppose her story is the more interesting to tell, at least from what is portrayed in the film would lead me to conclude. And it doesn't help that Kristen Stewart is playing the role of Joan Jett. I know she is much beloved by many, and I'm not trying to stir up some controversy, but if someone could tell me just what makes her such a great actress I'd be happy to listen. To me, it seems like she plays the same role over and over, no matter what film she's in. I didn't mind her in Into the Wild, but since her role was somewhat small I thought that might be why.

The music in the film is wonderful, and if I'm lead to believe that it is the actresses themselves doing the singing, then I'd have to say I'm impressed. Both Dakota Fanning as Cherie Currie and Kristen Stewart do remarkably good impressions of the actual singers. Dakota Fanning does a very good job with her character, but the show is stolen in every scene he's in by Michael Shannon as the record producer Kim Fowley. I don't know if the real Fowley is like this in real life, but if he is I can see why he has influenced and made successful so many recording artists.

As a biopic, The Runaways is a disappointment. It doesn't go nearly in-depth enough, only skimming the surface of what could have been. But as a movie, it's an enjoyable time-waster with great music and a few good performances.

Rating for The Runaways: ***1/4.

Daughter Says:

I’ve heard of the Runaways and I’ve heard some of their music, but never had I thought that they were so deep. I follow after my parents when it comes to Joan Jett. I love her to death. I think she rocks and is really just cool. So when I heard that there was going to be a movie about them, I was super excited, but then I heard who was going to play Joan. I despise Kristen Stewart. I don’t think I’ve disliked an actress so much as I do Stewart. Her acting abilities drive me up the wall. She can only act one way to me and that is high and whiny. I’ve seen her in many movies and I’ve hated her in all of them except one, Into the Wild. The only reason I liked her in that movie was because she wasn’t in it that much and she got play her best part (being high.)

Other than her, I liked this movie. I felt like I got a taste of what the Runaways were like. Dakota Fanning did an amazing job as usual. But sometimes I find it hard that she’s growing up. I still remember when she was just a little girl. She was so little in Uptown Girls and still really young when she starred in Push. But now she’s all grown up and playing vampires that want to kill Kristen Stewart and her baby. (I wouldn’t mind too much if that whole series just disappeared out of sight forever.)

That’s beside the point. It wasn’t all Stewart’s fault. There was just something wrong with the whole thing. The movie is called The Runaways, but it really seemed to just be about Joan and Cherie. There was nothing about Lita Ford or any of the others. I thought that there were only four in the band, but apparently there were five. I wish they had covered everyone. I didn’t have any idea how they found the others in the band. Even at the end of the movie they covered where Joan and Cherie went after the end of The Runaways, but they didn’t cover anyone else. I mean we all know that Lita Ford went on to do so much more. I just wish there had been more to The Runaways then there was.

Rating for The Runaways: ***.

Grease (1978) (PG)

Grease (1978) (PG)

Directed by Randal Kleiser

Starring: John Travolta, Olivia Newton-John, Stockard Channing, Jeff Conaway

Daughter Says:

I’m sure that all of you know what Grease is about, but just to refresh your memory I’ll tell you anyway. Grease is about a boy and a girl who fall in love on the beach during the summer, but just won’t be able to be together because the girl lives in Australia and he lives in Rydell. But when school starts back up who could guess that those two would end up at the same school. Now Sandy and Danny have to face Rydell’s cliques and groups (You know the usual High School drama.)

This is one of the most original musicals. Grease, just like Mary Poppins, is a one of a kind film. No one has or can trump Grease. High School Musical has tried but failed, and even the second Grease was a disaster. Once you have created greatness it’s hard to beat it.

Before I’d seen Grease I had been a huge John Travolta fan. I started loving his acting ability in Pulp Fiction, so when I heard he was in Grease I just had to see it. Now I’m an even bigger fan of Travolta. He did such a fabulous job playing Danny. I also didn’t know he was decent singer too. I really enjoyed watching him dance around a car singing Grease Lightning. Olivia Newton-John did a semi-decent job playing Sandy too. Her and Travolta did such a great job working together. They really made this movie something else by putting their own personalities into their characters. It was great.

Now for the downers of the movie. Some of the songs didn’t really make much sense in the movie. I didn’t quiet understand how Beauty School Drop Out had anything to do with Sandy and Danny. It was kind of an odd scene too. I just didn’t quite get it. Another problem I had with Grease was that Sandy and Danny changed themselves to better fit each other. I find it wrong that either of them had to change to better fit the other person. If a guy doesn’t love you the way you are, he doesn’t really love you that much.

Other than that this movie was great. I really enjoyed watching this movie and if you haven’t seen it yet go get it. Grease is one of those movies that you should see before you die.

Rating for Grease: ****1/2.

Daddy Says:

I know I'm showing my age but I was only 13 when this movie came out originally, two years younger than my daughter is right now. I was too young to see Saturday Night Fever in its original "R-rated" version (I had to wait and see it in the highly edited "PG" form that was released in theaters later), and I can remember being very excited to see a John Travolta musical in its unedited form. Yes, I know that sounds very uncool these days, but back in Summer of '78 this movie was considered to be a big event. Does it stand up today, over thirty years later? Boy, do I feel old some days...

The answer is yes, it holds up remarkably well. I think a big reason it does is because it wasn't timely to begin with. Grease is a throwback to the '50s, but with modern (at the time anyway) dialogue and sexual themes. Some of the lines in songs like "Greased Lightning" still get censored when the film is shown on television even today.

Speaking of the music, with only a couple of exceptions, the music in Grease is incredible. There's a reason the studios are re-releasing this film in a "sing-a-long" format, and it's not just to make more money. Okay, it is just to make more money, but besides that, the songs are so much fun to sing along with. I can't count the number of times I found myself doing that very thing.

The casting for Grease is perfect. John Travolta is the epitome of cool, swaggering greaser youth, a dangerous bad boy, but not the kind you couldn't bring home to meet your parents. While I'm not a huge fan of Olivia Newton-John, she plays the role of good girl Sandy very well. Somehow over the years, the role that's grown on me the most is Stockard Channing playing Rizzo. Her spotlight number "There are Worse Things I Could Do" didn't really send me when I heard it the first time. My guess is that I didn't really hear the lyrics the first couple of times. Now, my eyes get misty every time she sings that last line.

The movie has an incredible energy that doesn't let up from the opening animated credits through to the all-out musical romp finale. It's a fun-loving view of life from a time long since gone, with an innocence that I don't think will ever return. Enjoy it while you can kids.

Rating for Grease: ****1/4.

Citizen Kane (1941) (Not Rated)

Citizen Kane (1941) (Not Rated)

Directed by Orson Welles

Starring: Orson Welles, Joseph Cotten, Everett Sloane, Dorothy Comingore

Daddy Says:

I've been waiting quite a while before watching and reviewing this movie with my daughter. And I'm not sure I waited long enough. We shall see.

Citizen Kane is one of my all-time favorite films. Its driving force, actor-producer-writer-director Orson Welles was a very young man when he made this film (about 24-25 years old at the time), and he became one of my inspirations for my own career (I chose to go into television instead of film). He was given complete control over his first project, an unheard of situation both at the time and today as well. The film he made was not a success at the time, but has since gone on to become one of the most celebrated films in history.

So much has been written about this movie that it's hard to know what to write about here. I'll begin with the sound. Orson Welles began his career in radio (you may have heard of a little play called War of the Worlds that stirred up some notice back in the day) and learned how to tell a good story using only sound. He transferred that knowledge to his first movie. Listen to the music cue that ushers in the first flashback to Kane as a young boy. The music is jolly and youthful, and it ends almost as soon as it begins when Kane throws a snowball at the sign that hangs over his home's front porch. It's so short that you may not realize what it is, which is a radio cue that the scene is changing. It's not really necessary in a movie, since we can see the scene change, but it works as a sound cue to ears that were more used to radio back then.

There are many other examples. When Kane and his wife are sitting in one of the expansive rooms in their home, the sound of their voices echoes in the huge space. When Kane strikes her face during an argument, we hear a woman screaming outside their tent. No explanation is ever given for the screaming, but it serves to audibly augment the emotions happening inside the two inside the tent.

Much has been made of the film's famous use of deep focus photography, leaving everything in focus throughout the scene, allowing the viewer's eyes to determine what they want to look at, so I won't go into it in great detail here. Suffice to say that it is wonderful and I really haven't seen it used to such great effect in many other films. I could go on and on about this film, but I'm really interested to see what my daughter has to say about it.

Rating for Citizen Kane: *****.

Daughter Says:

Citizen Kane was one of the movies that I watched when I was about my brother’s age. I didn’t quite understand it or even care for it. So when Dad said that I was going to have watch the same movie again but as a fifteen-year-old, I remembered that I didn’t enjoy it the first time. So I kind of already had a sour taste in my mouth about it. I was definitely not looking forward to Citizen Kane.

Citizen Kane seemed like a very artsy movie without anything interesting about it at all. At least that’s what I thought when I first saw this movie. But now that I have watched this movie again I appreciate it even more. This movie has a deeper meaning than just a spoiled rich man who got whatever he liked. Citizen Kane was about a man who had everything but nothing at the same time. As a little child I never really appreciated that meaning.

Yes, this movie is very artsy, but just like The Third Man it was more than just a director or a cinematographer showing off his amazing talent. They wanted to tell the story of Kane and his life as a millionaire. Everyone would have thought it bittersweet. He always got what he wanted and never needed anything, but this movie put a deeper twist to his life; the life he never had.

Some movies know how to pull off black and white brilliantly. This movie is one of them. Just like The Third Man, the cinematographer knew how to warp the shadows so, when needed, it gave the scene an eerie glow to it. The crew also did a brilliant job with the transitions. There are very few movies that can make an edit and jump in time from a small child to a young man in so few words ("Merry Christmas" says the young Kane - a quick cut to Thatcher as an old man who finishes the line "...and a Happy New Year", and just like that Charles Foster Kane is now 25 years old). The fluidity of this movie was so graceful it was breathtaking.

As a fifteen-year-old I feel like I understand this movie much more than when I was younger. So if you want your daughter or son to watch Citizen Kane I would wait until they have matured enough to understand the words behind the story. If your just looking for a movie that should be considered deep and meaningful, and also want to have a look behind a rich man’s eyes then this is the movie for you.

Rating for Citizen Kane: *****.

My Son Says:

Citizen Kane was one of the best movies I've ever witnessed. I love Citizen Kane so much. I recommend this movie to anyone who loves a good black and white film.

I love several parts of Citizen Kane because, as I'm sure Dad pointed out, are very brilliant. Take the beginning for instance, the castle that Kane lives in only gets bigger never moving or shrinking even though the camera is clearly moving.

Rating for Citizen Kane: *****.

Clash of the Titans (2010) (PG-13)

Clash of the Titans (2010) (PG-13)

Directed by Louis Leterrier

Starring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Jason Flemyng

Daughter Says:

Clash of the Titans (The 2010 version) is, well how to put it nicely, a better disaster than the original 1981 version. Now I’ve never seen the 1981 version, but I hear it’s as cheesy as Jason and the Argonauts, which I’ve seen part of and hated. This newer version of Clash of Titans is better than the older version, but it’s not a great movie.

I’m pretty sure every one knows the basics to this movie, but if you don’t, it’s like all the other god versus human stories you hear. Humans don't want to be ruled, but the Gods don’t want to give them control. Hades tricks Zeus into being mean to the humans and it blows up in everyone’s faces. But who’s there to save them? None other than Percy Jackson. Oh wait, that’s the wrong movie. It’s Perseus, a demi-god. His father is Zeus and his mother, well, is human. No need to be specific.

Now to get into the general disaster of this movie. This version of Clash of the Titans is better because it has better acting. I mean who didn’t already fall in love with Sam Worthington in Avatar or in Terminator Salvation. He rocked those movies and he rocked this one. He could seriously pull off being a god much better than Liam Neeson who happened to be Zeus. Another great actor in this movie was Ralph Fiennes. But he’s always great plus he got to play an evil man again. He can be such an awesome creeper. I still get chills thinking about all the evil things he pulls off with the best script.

Now for the bad part. You’d think with the great technology we have today that they’d try to do their best. Or not. Lord of the Rings pulled off the newest technology amazingly, so why couldn’t Clash of the Titans? I guess they just didn’t have such a brilliant set up as Lord of the Rings did. It felt like the effects artist decided just to go crazy and show off all he knew. It gave me the impression that they just wanted to show up the older version with all their newer technology. Another problem I had with this movie is that I had a really hard time telling apart everyone. The only people I got straight were the women, Perseus, Zeus, and Hades; and that’s just because they had such unique looks. The soldiers and the king looked alike so I couldn’t tell whom I was supposed to cheer for. I really liked two of the soldiers but when all of them got together I was confused on which one was my favorite anymore and who was a jerk to Perseus. (Don’t worry about it Sam, they’re just jealous of your smashing looks.)

I’m having a hard time telling you to watch this movie. If you’ve seen the 1981 version then maybe you should watch this movie just to compare it to what you grew up with. But if you haven’t seen either then maybe you should watch both. That’s what I hope to do one day. Until that day comes, I guess I’ll just have to wait.

Rating for Clash of the Titans (The 2010 version): **1/2.

Daddy Says:

Sound and fury, signifying nothing. I mentioned it in my review for Tokyo Story, and I could have been referring to just such a movie as this. Clash of the Titans is a remake of the 1981 film of the same name. It's a film adaptation of the myth of Perseus, half son of Zeus, and his quest to battle Medusa and the Kraken monster to save the princess Andromeda.

I'd like to say that the special effects are quite good, but then that would be misleading. If you can tell immediately when something is onscreen that it's a special effect, then has it really done it's job? Pretty much everything Perseus faces is augmented by a computer in some fashion, so the entire film is basically one big special effect. My biggest problem with the effects is not how they look, so much as that I can't really see them very well. When the soldiers are fighting off multiple giant scorpions, the action is so fast and close-up that it's hard to tell where anything is in relation to anything else. Many times one of my kids spoke up and said "oh, I guess there's two of them", soon to be followed with "oh, I guess there's three of them". A nice long establishing shot would have done wonders to help us figure out what was going on.

I'll also mention that the script for this remake is particularly bad. The dialogue caused me to roll my eyes several times, particularly when a new character named Io spoke. There were several changes made to the original film's plot (the loss of the romance subplot between Perseus and Andromeda isn't missed), and one cute moment when Perseus picks up Bebo the robotic owl from the original film, only to be told to leave it it behind.

I may also get some heat for saying this but Sam Worthington is not my idea of a great leading man. In both Avatar and this, he has not impressed me with any kind of real acting talent. I suppose if all you're looking for in a lead is someone who looks good then he's your man, but he fails to bring any real emotion to the parts he plays. If he hopes to go beyond doing these types of sci-fi quickie blockbusters and step into a real dramatic part, he's going to need some work.

Rating for Clash of the Titans: *1/2.

Tokyo Story (1953) (Not Rated)

Tokyo Story (1953) (Not Rated)

Directed by Yasujiro Ozu

Starring: Chishu Ryu, Chieko Higashiyama, Sô Yamamura, Setsuko Hara

Daddy Says:

This is the Japanese movie with subtitles that I was going to watch with my daughter before she went off to summer camp. I held off and waited until she got home to watch it for the first time. And I've got a feeling that our views of this movie will be very different from each other. Perhaps she'll need to revisit this film after she becomes a parent someday.

Tokyo Story follows two grandparents as they plan to go to Tokyo to visit their grown children. When they arrive, everything seems fine. There are no arguments, everyone is very polite to each other. But we gradually see that the arrival of their parents has put a strain on their children's lives. The adult children feel the need to show their parents around and do things with them, but their lives are just too busy. The person who shows the most feeling for them, and takes the time out of her own busy schedule to spend time with them, is their widowed daughter-in-law. That a person who isn't even a blood relative is the nicest to them isn't lost on the elderly couple. They see their own children as disappointments, but take pleasure in the fact that things could be worse.

Then a tragedy strikes. It is the kind of tragedy that brings people together during a time of need, but again due to busy schedules, not all of them are able to be there. After spending so much time with these people, the loss has a profound affect on us as we watch the different ways the family deals with it. This could easily sound like the movie is some kind of soap opera, but at no time does it play like one.

I had never seen a movie by director Yasujiro Ozu before this one. I've since read that he likes to film his movies with a stationary camera positioned about the height of a person's waist, and that's true for this film. Only once did I notice the camera make any kind of movement at all, and I believe Ozu did this intentionally. It comes at a time when the couple make the decision to leave Tokyo and return to their home. They walk off the beach and the camera dollies along with them, following them on this new direction.

There are many times throughout the film where characters have a conversation in a room, then exit the room, while the scene stays on-screen for a few more seconds. While that would seem to go against the traditional rules of editing (i.e. cutting when the scene is finished), by leaving us in the room for a few more seconds, it makes us feel like we are really in the room, not just watching scenes unfold in front of us. We become a part of the family by lingering in an empty room where seconds before something was happening. It's a neat trick, and I enjoyed it quite a bit.

E.E. Cummings is quoted as saying "I would rather teach one bird how to sing than ten thousand stars how not to shine". It's one of my favorite quotes, and I'm not sure I understand all of its meaning. But I get a feeling from it, and I get that same feeling from certain films I watch. So many movies are all about "sound and fury, signifying nothing" to quote Shakespeare. Tokyo Story tries to teach one bird how to sing.

Rating for Tokyo Story: *****.

Daughter Says:

First off, I must say that this movie was obviously not worth anything above a four, because I couldn’t stay awake long enough to see the end of the movie. Maybe that’s why I don’t care for this movie, but it was awful. I don’t think it could have made my opinion any different, but oh well.

Tokyo Story was a disaster to start with in my opinion. It had two of my least favorite things in this movie: subtitles and zero color. Tokyo Story is a black and white drama in another language. I was having trouble understanding the film before the movie even began.

If Tokyo Story wasn’t already on my bad side, it was straight out confusing. I couldn’t tell who was who in the story line. I got as far as figuring out who the mom and dad was, but other than that I didn’t get it. Apparently, some son of theirs died and so his wife is their only memory of him or something. It was just a really screwed up family.

Another problem I had with this story was the dialogue. It felt very awkard. It gave me the impression it was being read and not felt by the actors. The characters and what they were saying just didn’t seem to match up. I don’t know if you know what I’m saying but it just didn’t flow right. It might have just been me. After all I did have to read the dialogue.

It wasn’t just the dialogue that drove me crazy. The actors' faces didn’t match up to the story line either. Like one of the relatives was always smiling when she was depressed. Whenever they talked about her dead husband she never showed sadness. It didn’t really make much sense to me. I also couldn’t quite grasp when someone was being rude or generous. I couldn’t figure out how I was supposed to feel about what was going on the screen.

So, I’m not going to say I enjoyed it because that would be a lie. It wasn’t one of the best movies I’ve watched in the past. If you like odd foreign films that you have to read to really understand then this is for you. It has no action or comedy so, if you like those kinds of things then don’t check this film out. But it’s really up to you.

Rating for Tokyo Story: *1/2.

Mary Poppins (1964) (G)

Mary Poppins (1964) (G)
Directed by Robert Stevenson
Starring: Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke, David Tomlinson, Glynis Johns

Daddy Says:

Yay! My daughter has returned from summer camp, just in time to review another movie this month. She's gained a slight tan from being outside for two weeks, and seems a bit tired, but will her tastes have changed? We shall wait and see.

I picked this movie to watch because I remembered it being pretty good the first time I saw it, a long time ago, and also to perhaps see what my children thought about it, to see if they liked it as well. Mary Poppins is a modern fairy tale, with some great sets and very well choreographed dance numbers, the film is a visual delight.

There are some amazing special effects, which stand up quite well in this age of anything goes when you've got CGI to work with. I was also reminded that Who Framed Roger Rabbit wasn't nearly the first film to have live actors interact with cartoons. There is an extended scene where Dick Van Dyke dances with a chorus line of animated penguins that is a really fun moment. If they had only animated some shadows for the penguins, the effect would have been even better.

The songs, for the most part are incredibly catchy. I found myself humming "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down" long after the movie ended. The movie won two of its five Oscars for music (best original score and original song "Chim Chim Cher-ee") and rightfully so.

There are, among other good performances, two standout performances by Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke. Most people remember the Academy Award winning performance by Julie Andrews as the "practically perfect" title character, but I had completely forgotten just how good Dick Van Dyke is in not one, but two roles. If you've never seen the film, I won't spoil it, but stick around through the end credits for a delightful surprise.

This was the first Disney movie nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award. While it may have lost out that award to My Fair Lady, it most certainly deserved its nomination. Mary Poppins is a "practically perfect" children's film, and a joy to watch.

Rating for Mary Poppins: *****.

Daughter Says:

Mary Poppins is definitely a magical ride that everyone loves to watch. I would happen to be one of those people that love this movie. I don’t think that anyone could have made this movie any better.

It has almost everything a musical could need. One of those things would be the great music. I love all the songs in this movie. (Which I’m sure you all know of) The music department that was hired for this film was brilliant. I think the songs are what made Mary Poppins a classic.

Not only were the songs amazing but Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke were awesome. How many people can you say do a brilliant job at jumping into chalk paintings and dancing with penguins? Not many. Andrews really brought Mary Poppins to life. She’s nearly perfect in every way with her beautiful voice and rosy cheeks. So is Dick Van Dyke with his creative jobs and great imagination. Him and Mary Poppins make quite a pair. I always thought that those two should have been together forever at the end of the movie. (Oh well, It has a happy ending all the same.)

But they probably couldn’t have done it without the help of the crew. All the dance choreography was something special. Everyone involved went perfectly in sync with the songs. The cartoon parts were pretty good for that era too. The whole thing put together was pretty creative for that time period. This movie should have definitely made it on the must see list.

If you haven’t seen this movie yet, don’t wait another second. It is a must see for all. Mary Poppins isn’t one of those one time fun things to see. It is one of those types of movies that makes want to watch it over and over again.

Rating for Mary Poppins: *****.