Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Academy A"Bores"s 2012 Edition

A review of the 2012 Academy Awards telecast needs an image that's "Oscar" gold.  That's why I chose Golden Rose Circles as today's fractal cookie.  Because you demanded it (OK, you didn't demand it but I'm doing it anyway Alison) I'm going to give my take on this year's awards.  Now--on with the review!
-
I had the strangest feeling I'd inadvertently time-tripped (again) watching the latest Academy Awards show.  Billy Crystal was back for a ninth time (after being gone for I-don't-know-how-many years) and the lion's share of the awards went to a silent movie (The Artist) and a pic about the early days of film (Hugo) and a lot of old poops were up for awards.  (Meryl Streep and Christopher Plummer both took home awards.)  All in all it was a "nice" show: Crystal's hosting wore like a pair of old brown loafers (comfortable and easy to take but nothing to write home about) and there weren't any controversial moments to talk about.  Still, you gotta give him credit for being more animated than James Franco at last year's awards.  Yes, I suppose we could mention Streep upsetting Viola Davis to take the Best Actress Oscar but not even that was all to surprising.
-
WHAT I LIKED
Billy Crystal's opening film montage was wildly amusing (and I love the inside joke involving Justin Bieber).  He also had the best joke I'd heard in a long time: "nothing eases the pain of these tough economic times like watching millionaires give each other golden statuettes."  (It's funny because it's true!)  For me the best moment of the whole show happened on the Red Carpet when Sacha Bron Cohen spilled "ashes" all over Ryan Seacrest (who was NOT happy about it!)  I also particularly enjoyed Chris Rock commenting on the difficulty of doing animated film and Olivia Spencer's acceptance speech--probably the only truly genuine moment in the whole show.
-
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE
Most of the "bits" in the show fell completely flat: Ben Stiller fell flat in his skit with Emma Stone and the filmed bits didn't work at all (I'm thinking of the "focus group" bit).  There weren't any "best song" performances and that was a disappoint to me (although probably not a lot of other folk).  While I enjoyed the Cirque Du Soleil scene I found myself wondering what the hell it was doing in the show.  The speeches were all canned and there wasn't a bit of controversy to spice things up.  This year's fashion ranged from pretty good to pretty OK but all the looks had the same basic quality.  I found myself longing for a truly bad fashion moment.  (The looks were so uniform that the Fashion Police on E! didn't even have a "worst dressed" segment!)  Where were Tilda Swinton, Mickey Roarke and Helena Bonham-Carter when we needed them to bring the crazy?  Ah well--at least that gives me a transition to talk about what you came to look at the blog for...
-
THE FASHIONS
Jennifer Lopez packed ten pounds of "ah-OO-ga!" into a five-pound dress and was so smoking hot that even gay guys wanted to do her.  Of course it helps that she brought a little controversy with the "did she or didn't she?" have a nip-slip.  (She didn't.  Trust me on this one.)  To me she was far and away the best dressed of the night.
-
Cameron Diaz was vanilla fabulousness in her dress while Gwyneth Paltrow wowed in a white column dress and matching cape.  Octavia Spencer represented for the big girls in her beaded gown and Penelope Cruz looked amazing in slate blue.  Rooney Mara looked like a dominatrix-bride and what was up with the "boob awnings" on her dress.  You gotta give Viola Davis credit for showing up in the hair God gave her (instead of her usuall wig): she looked stunning in emerald green.
-
What was up with Angelica Jolie?  As usual she looked pretty darn good (this year in basic black) but I couldn't figure out what that pose was all about.  Was she trying to be funny?  Was she desperate to show off how good her muscle tone was?  Did she get a little sumpum-sumpum in the limo on the way over?  Was it a lingering case of jungle rot?  Inquiring minds want to know!  ANYway--Angie's right leg has over 15,000 Twitter followers--way more than J-Los nipple...
-
Michele Williams channeled her inner "lipstick lesbian" in an orange monstrosity that fashionistas went crazy for.  Me, I've thought she looked like a pencil with a lace doily around the middle.  Natalie Portman was a fashion DON'T in a vintage red-orange polka dot mess.  I probably bag on America's sweetheart Sandra Bullock but the black and white thing she was wearing looked like an ill-fitting potato sack.  Jessica Chastain looked like she'd stolen the curtains from a Gothic funeral home in her gold-beaded black dress but at least you gotta give her credit for being memorable.  I'm not sure what was going on with Kristin Wiig's flesh-toned chiffon-ruffled--THING but I really didn't like it.  No guys stood out as exceptionally good OR bad this year.
-
I couldn't comment on this year's fashions without mentioning Melissa McCarthy.  The fashionista crowd sandbagged her (as usual) but I liked the romantic blush gown (even if all the bejeweling was a bit much).  Still, somebody needs to take that girl and get her hair done!
-
Ratings were up (however slightly) this year but the show just didn't *CLICK!* with viewers and I don't know why.  Still, you can bet I'll be back next year with another awards show review.
-
'nuff said.

Monday, February 27, 2012

No "Cookies" Today

Usually I try and bribe my "loyal readers" (ha!) with a fractal cookie for dropping by and reading my random ravings.  Sadly, there will be no cookies this time--for two reasons.  1) I couldn't find a fractal that seemed even remotely appropriate for a review of Wanderlust (and now you know what I'll be talking about) 2) this movie is SO BAD I didn't feel it DESERVED a cookie!  So--on with the review if you aren't completely turned off by the first paragraph...
-
I may not be a complete fan of "gross-out" comedies but I have a pretty high tolerance: yes I cringed at movies like American Pie and There's Something About Mary--but frankly I laughed my ass off while I was watching.  Judd Apatow is the uncrowned King of the Gross-Out Comedy: I laughed so hard my face hurt at movies like The 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up so I was kind of looking forward to Wanderlust.  Sadly, I was doomed to disappointment.
-
The basic plot goes something like this George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer Anniston) are a couple of desperate Manhattanites living successful, if unhappy, lives.  When their fortunes change and they lose everything they had off to Atlanta for a job with George's odious brother Rick (Ken Marino--who also shares writing credits for this travesty).  In need of sleep the pair pull off at the Elysium Bed and Breakfast--only to discover they've wandered into an "Intentional Community" (AKA a commune right out of the free-lovin' 1960s.)  George quickly finds he likes the place--but Linda not so much so when things quickly go sour with his brother he takes them back to join the group for good and all.  Now it's Linda who gets into  the groove while George finds himself on the outside looking in.  Add some complications involving the "spiritual center of the group Seth (played by Annistons' real life boyfriend Justin Theroux).  Eventually everything spins out and (almost) everybody gets their happy ending.
-
There are many problems with the movie--start with cardboard characters that are none-too-likable and give them a script that's very long on gross and critically short on funny.  (You know you're in bad shape when NOBODY in the entire theater is laughing.)  I found it particularly telling when I'm watching one off the outtakes at the end of the movie where Paul Rudd is doing a bit in a mirror (that is as long and painful as it is unfunny).  He ends up saying "I'm grossing myself out!"  Sorry guy--you grossed us out long ago--and we weren't laughing with you!  There's plenty of full-frontal nudity--but sadly none of it you want to see.  The language is frankly strong (even by my standards and I have a pretty good tolerance for strong language).  Far too many of the situations are cringeworthy--and I could have handled all of that if only the movie had been FUNNY!
-
Ordinarily I'd note that I was the only one NOT laughing in the theater (like when I went to see The Hangover) but this time nobody in a half-full theater was laughing.  Don't waste your money on this crap--don't even rent Wanderlust when it comes out on video (probably some time next week).   This isn't the worst movie I've ever seen but it sure comes close.
-
FINAL GRADE: F 

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

This Means BORE!


I wasn't sure what image I was going to use for today's review.  I thought about Ares (since I'll be chatting about This Means War) but that seemed a bit obvious.  Then I considered maybe something like Blast or Ka-BOOM! since there are so many explosions in the film but that seemed rather obvious as well.  I finally settled on MixIt mainly because the movie tries to mix the action and romance genres.  How well did that work?  You can probably guess from the title.  Ah well--on with the review...
-
It must be unbelievably hard to be Reese Witherspoon's character Lauren in This Means War.  Poor thing has had to move from Atlanta to  Los Angeles where she has a job she's both good at and really enjoys not to mention a truly fabulous loft.  Of course, she was cheated on by her oh-so-cute boyfriend and she's down in the dumps.  But that's OK, very soon she meets two cute guys--FDR (played by Chris Pine, AKA Captain Kirk in the latest Star Trek incarnation) and Tuck (Tom Hardy who was in Inception) and hits if off with both of them!  Both guys just happen to be CIA Agents AND best friends and both of them really like her as well!  (They are in the midst of dealing with a murderous arms dealer out to kill both of them.)  Will Lauren choose womanizer FDR who is secretly a wounded puppy inside or Tuck the sweet, sincere divorced dad?  Will the guys have their friendship strained as they both pursue the girl?  Will Heinrich the arms dealer end up capturing the girl to draw the guys to him where she finally chooses the right guy?  You can probably already guess the answers to these questions without even setting foot inside the theater.
-
You can probably guess I had some real issues with this movie: it's impossible NOT to love Reese Witherspoon in full-on "cutie-pie" mode but it's a bit annoying when whatever choice she makes is the right one.  Chris Pine has the  "cheeseball womanizer with a heart of gold" part down pat but you have to wonder how tatted-up Brit bad boy Tom Hardy ever got into the CIA!  His character Tuck seems awfully intertwined with FDR's family (he's almost a surrogate brother but that's never explained.)  Still Hardy manages to balance sweet guy and badass with equal finesse.  I also wondered how these supposedly-dedicated Agents could use CIA Spy Tech to spy on Lauren and each other to further their relationship.  The action bits were don well enough but there was nothing particularly new or unusual to be seen.
-
Honestly I could have gotten past the clockworks plot but the action and romance never quite mixed (like oil and water).  All the secondary characters exist merely to move the story along and the performances are pretty cardboard.  Yes, it's a nice-enough little movie to enjoy as a bit of an escape but a dip in This Means War won't even get your feet wet.  Not that there's a lot else out there to see (other than Oscar contenders) but you could easily wait until it comes out on video.  Also--if you miss it, you haven't missed much.
-
FINAL GRADE C-