Megamind is the titular hero (or villain in this case) of the movie, which takes a few of the superhero conventions and turns them on their collective heads. Megamind is the nemesis of Metro Man (read: Superman) who is the guardian of Metro City (read: Metropolis). They've been at it since the day their ships landed on good ol' planet Earth, until one day....well, the movie tries to answer the question, "What happens when the bad guy gets what he wants?"
I did enjoy the movie quite a bit, and enjoyed the workout that it gave my home theatre system. There were also a few comic book references that popped up here and there, which may lose some of those who may not be geeks like me ("Hal Stewart" anyone?). But that should not detract from anyone else enjoying the movie.
You may need to speak with your little ones after, though - they may start to think that being a supervillain is cool. But they may have megafun with this one.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Pellet Reviews: Ghost Stories (Panasonic Theatre)
"Are You Brave Enough To Book?"
Well, since it was a two-for-one sale, and since the TV teasers of recorded audience reactions really piqued my interest, I guess the answer was "yes". If anything, I wondered if I was going to wind up screaming like everyone seemed to do in those ads.
I did.
To say anymore might spoil the fun for anyone thinking of going (I think you can book up to the end of June), but suffice it to say that I found it quite entertaining. My hubby, on the other hand, thought it was lame. So - not for everyone. But I definitely would not recommend it for the young ones or those who might not feel too good after a few frights.
Bottom line: if you can find the extra few bucks for a fun night out, or get it for a bargain like I did, it might be fun to go. While I'm glad I didn't pay full price for it, I still had fun.
Well, since it was a two-for-one sale, and since the TV teasers of recorded audience reactions really piqued my interest, I guess the answer was "yes". If anything, I wondered if I was going to wind up screaming like everyone seemed to do in those ads.
I did.
To say anymore might spoil the fun for anyone thinking of going (I think you can book up to the end of June), but suffice it to say that I found it quite entertaining. My hubby, on the other hand, thought it was lame. So - not for everyone. But I definitely would not recommend it for the young ones or those who might not feel too good after a few frights.
Bottom line: if you can find the extra few bucks for a fun night out, or get it for a bargain like I did, it might be fun to go. While I'm glad I didn't pay full price for it, I still had fun.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Pellet reviews: Moon
Speaking of "The Source Code" in my previous review, I figured it would be great to watch the director's (Duncan Jones) previous foray into film. Luckily I had "Moon" sitting in my backlog to watch. It was either that, or St. Elmo's Fire on MPIX On Demand.
Anyone who knows me well enough knows that I love sci-fi. However, geeks 'round the world know that there are different flavours of sci-fi. Some go for the laser battles (think anything that begins with "Star"), while others go for futuristic ansgt stuff ("Blade Runner"). Moon falls more into the quiet, contemplative reflection of who we are ("Solaris", and no, I have not seen the original Russian version).
Sam Rockwell plays a worker on a moon base that provides a supply of energy back to Earth. One day, he gets into an accident, and wakes up finding.....another Sam Rockwell? Without going too much into the how's and who's, I would say that this was a brilliant turn by the actor who pretty much had to carry a one-man show (or is it a two-man show?). Watching the making-of documentary, you can really see how much thought had to go into every word, naunce, and movement to make you believe his/their performance.
But I digress. The film itself, as I mentioned before, is a very quiet piece that seeks to question how we are defined. The shots both in the base and on the moon's exterior truly try and emphasize the isolation that both men feel. It's one of those movies that you definitely have to be in the mood for. Unfortunately, I don't think I was quite in that mood tonight. As much as I love sci-fi and the heavy thinking that sometimes go into it, I found that it dragged quite a bit in places. I also think it was because I figured out what the "twist" was earlier on, so it didn't come as a surprise when the gradual reveal came. It was again a testament to Mr. Rockwell's performance that kept me emotionally invested to see it through to the end.
Would I have still watched St. Elmo's fire if I had to do it over? No, but the chances of me doing this film over again seems to be as remote as the moon.
Anyone who knows me well enough knows that I love sci-fi. However, geeks 'round the world know that there are different flavours of sci-fi. Some go for the laser battles (think anything that begins with "Star"), while others go for futuristic ansgt stuff ("Blade Runner"). Moon falls more into the quiet, contemplative reflection of who we are ("Solaris", and no, I have not seen the original Russian version).
Sam Rockwell plays a worker on a moon base that provides a supply of energy back to Earth. One day, he gets into an accident, and wakes up finding.....another Sam Rockwell? Without going too much into the how's and who's, I would say that this was a brilliant turn by the actor who pretty much had to carry a one-man show (or is it a two-man show?). Watching the making-of documentary, you can really see how much thought had to go into every word, naunce, and movement to make you believe his/their performance.
But I digress. The film itself, as I mentioned before, is a very quiet piece that seeks to question how we are defined. The shots both in the base and on the moon's exterior truly try and emphasize the isolation that both men feel. It's one of those movies that you definitely have to be in the mood for. Unfortunately, I don't think I was quite in that mood tonight. As much as I love sci-fi and the heavy thinking that sometimes go into it, I found that it dragged quite a bit in places. I also think it was because I figured out what the "twist" was earlier on, so it didn't come as a surprise when the gradual reveal came. It was again a testament to Mr. Rockwell's performance that kept me emotionally invested to see it through to the end.
Would I have still watched St. Elmo's fire if I had to do it over? No, but the chances of me doing this film over again seems to be as remote as the moon.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Pellet reviews: Deja Vu
As you can see, I'm working through the movie library backlog. The latest one - Deja Vu - comes courtesy of hyperkinetic director Tony Scott and academy award-winning actor Denzel Washington. What starts out as an investigation of a terrorist bombing of a ferry in post-Katrina New Orleans turns into a sci-fi trip into space-time folds and time warping stuff. The title alludes to it ("haven't we met before?").
I'm a big fan of movies that you have to re-watch, because you want to re-take the emotional, visual, or intellectual journey of when you first watched the movie, or if you want to catch things you've not seen the first time around. This movie falls into the second category, although I would likely stop at the second pass. This is certainly not in Memento's league, and certainly does not have the sci-fi effects gallery that warrants a must-rewatch. However, there are a few tight action and suspense sequences that do keep you engaged, and a wonderful plot device that explains how people can watch the past like a movie (multiple camera angles and all) which helps in the suspension of disbelief.
This, for me, rates as a good popcorn flick on a night when your alternatives are the news and reruns of your favorite shows. The jury is still out as to whether this is a keeper or not, but definitely a "not" after a to-be-determined second viewing. Personally i thought "The Butterfly Effect" had more emotional resonance on top of the sci-fi premise. Maybe its current movie cousin - The Source Code - will have a better approach to the "Groundhog Day" genre.
I'm a big fan of movies that you have to re-watch, because you want to re-take the emotional, visual, or intellectual journey of when you first watched the movie, or if you want to catch things you've not seen the first time around. This movie falls into the second category, although I would likely stop at the second pass. This is certainly not in Memento's league, and certainly does not have the sci-fi effects gallery that warrants a must-rewatch. However, there are a few tight action and suspense sequences that do keep you engaged, and a wonderful plot device that explains how people can watch the past like a movie (multiple camera angles and all) which helps in the suspension of disbelief.
This, for me, rates as a good popcorn flick on a night when your alternatives are the news and reruns of your favorite shows. The jury is still out as to whether this is a keeper or not, but definitely a "not" after a to-be-determined second viewing. Personally i thought "The Butterfly Effect" had more emotional resonance on top of the sci-fi premise. Maybe its current movie cousin - The Source Code - will have a better approach to the "Groundhog Day" genre.
Pellet reviews: The Final Destination
This is one of those movies that I would watch when the hubby doesn't feel like taking in a movie in our home theatre (check out Facebook for pics). And after watching this one, I probably wouldn't disagree.
The fourth (and supposedly final - although rumors are that the cow still has some milk to give) installment of the Final Destination franchise continues the premise of the others before it. Basically, the film opens with a big disaster sequence (in this case, things going really bad at the racetrack) that turns out to be a premonition of things to come. Said premonition saves a few lives, but then later the survivors get picked off one-by-one in freak accidents (apparently orchestrated by Death himself) since it was their "fate" to die in the first place.
Great premise, worked well in the first movie, but then sadly had diminishing returns as the franchise progresses (much like the Saw franchise...more on that some other time). This movie is no exception. While the death sequences are quite creative (and sometimes gory), the mythology itself does not evolve. What makes the person so special so that they receive premonitions? Is there really a loophole ( this movie suffers from second endings - think "Poltergeist")? I came into this movie hoping something more would be added to the why's and how's, but sadly came away feeling like I had last night's leftovers.
I watched the blu-ray using the 3D version, using the enclosed 3D glasses. It was okay but nothing special. If anything, it made the movie a bit darker and less vibrant. If I had to do it again, I would likely just watch the 2D version.
If you are a fan of seeing different ways of how people can die in freak accidents, then this movie is for you. Otherwise, this ranks as a movie to watch with more people (and get the fun out of collective screams and gasps), or a "wait for on-demand".
The fourth (and supposedly final - although rumors are that the cow still has some milk to give) installment of the Final Destination franchise continues the premise of the others before it. Basically, the film opens with a big disaster sequence (in this case, things going really bad at the racetrack) that turns out to be a premonition of things to come. Said premonition saves a few lives, but then later the survivors get picked off one-by-one in freak accidents (apparently orchestrated by Death himself) since it was their "fate" to die in the first place.
Great premise, worked well in the first movie, but then sadly had diminishing returns as the franchise progresses (much like the Saw franchise...more on that some other time). This movie is no exception. While the death sequences are quite creative (and sometimes gory), the mythology itself does not evolve. What makes the person so special so that they receive premonitions? Is there really a loophole ( this movie suffers from second endings - think "Poltergeist")? I came into this movie hoping something more would be added to the why's and how's, but sadly came away feeling like I had last night's leftovers.
I watched the blu-ray using the 3D version, using the enclosed 3D glasses. It was okay but nothing special. If anything, it made the movie a bit darker and less vibrant. If I had to do it again, I would likely just watch the 2D version.
If you are a fan of seeing different ways of how people can die in freak accidents, then this movie is for you. Otherwise, this ranks as a movie to watch with more people (and get the fun out of collective screams and gasps), or a "wait for on-demand".
I know, I know......
So I checked in almost a year and a half ago, with every intention of keeping things up-to-date. What can I say, life got in the way once again. Many things have happened since, not the least of which is our big suburban move to Mississauga! That's right, the self-professed urbanites went the way of the Go drones and the big box stores.
There are a couple of other places where you can catch the latest goings-on, like Facebook (if you know who I am, you can find me) and twitter (follow @ajdornier). I'll keep blogger handy for long rants and big posts.
Here's to a great 2011!
There are a couple of other places where you can catch the latest goings-on, like Facebook (if you know who I am, you can find me) and twitter (follow @ajdornier). I'll keep blogger handy for long rants and big posts.
Here's to a great 2011!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)