Lockout

So I was trapped on a train for a while with nothing but an iPad and a flask full of Jameson. So I decided to find something that I wanted to watch for a while but would go well with a strong drink.  So half-assedly flipping through Netflix, I came across this 2012 -- apparently foreign -- action movie.  So I took a sip and hit play.

Netflix:  Well obviously, I just said that

Reviewer: Mad Stacks Mark

So when I picked this on Netflix, I was geared up for stupid fun.  Now I love Escape from New York; one of my favorite movies, and I know it’s kinda campy, but it’s just balls to the wall entertainment.  So when I heard that this was basically Escape from New York in space with Guy Pearce, I was curious but ready for a good time.  It’s essentially the same premise, just switch out some things, just a couple small things.  Instead of the President getting himself caught in a sticky situation, we find the President’s daughter, played by Maggie Grace, going up to a Super-Max prison, in space, on a humanitarian mission.  You know, cause we should care if the crazy killers are at least being treated well up there.  Needless to say she gets herself caught up in a bit of a mess, that mess being a riot and prisoner takeover, and it all needs to be sorted out by Guy Pearce’s Snow.  Yes , his name is Snow, but then again the lead in Escape from New York was Snake, so I wasn’t expecting Shakespeare here.  Actually, his name get explained (cause it needed to be explained for some reason) later on in a way that made me want to put my fist through my face.  But enough about my life.  Now Snow’s whole deal is he was trying to get a package of apparently immense importance from someone when that shit went wrong and he’s now been convicted of terrorism and murder and such.  Well that escalated quickly.  So in order to free himself, Snow is offered a deal: get the President’s daughter before the prisoners realize who she is and he walks free.  Yep, when it comes down to it, it is basically Escape from New York... in space.

And yet, I think back on this movie and can’t remember a fucking thing.  It’s the worst kind of action adventure movie; one that just seems to blur in my head and nothing stands out.  There are explosions, some fights, no blood (cause we don’t want to scare the average moviegoer, now do we?) shoe-horned in romantic feelings, and some witty one-liners.  And what gets me, is that this was brought to us in part by Luc Besson, the guy behind Taken, The Professional (Leon for some people), and District B13.  So I was expecting some good fight sequences that would at least keep me engaged.  As far as I can recall, there was one.  At the beginning.  The rest of the film is taken up by cluttered CGI, pretty terrible acting, and too much seriousness.  I’ll give it this, Snow had quite a few good one-liners.  If anything, Guy Pearce knew what he was in for.  He hams it up and makes Snow fun and entertaining when the rest of the movie is trying to be a serious action movie.  Which seems ridiculous when the bad guys, the top prisoners running the riot, are two thick-accented Scottish guys, one straight-laced, the other unbridled psychotic violence.  If this just ratcheted up the camp and disposed of any pretense of seriousness, this would have been great.  But the biggest problem is that the serious tone at points undermines the frenetic action joy that follows Snow throughout the movie.

This is a movie best served with plenty of drinks.  Drink every time Snow has a one-liner.  Drink every time you can’t understand the villains (this will get progressively more difficult as time and drinks go on). Drink every time you forget that there was some plot point about the package at the beginning.  Drink just cause.  This could have been much better if it just reveled in it’s apparent silliness, but instead we’re left with a competent movie with entertaining if forgettable action and bland characters aside from Snow.  I mean, I wasn’t expecting this to be amazing, but I was at least expecting to remember the fun of it.  But then again, that might have been the alcohol’s fault.

7/10

The Host

As scathing reviews pour in for the latest Stephenie Meyer book-turned-shitty-movie, The Host, Mark and I have stumbled upon a much different film that unfortunately shares the same title. Our The Host is a Korean movie from 2006. It was directed by Joon-ho Bong -- if that means anything to anyone -- and stars six or seven people that I have never seen or heard of before. (Though, upon closer inspection, one actress can also be found in Cloud Atlas). In this The Host, pollution of the Han River in South Korea creates a mutant creature that kidnaps a young girl. As the government and general population react to this event, the family of the girl try to track her down before it's too late.

Netflix: Seems to be

Pick: Durango Dylan

Dylan: It’s irritating that a Stephenie Meyer movie with the same title happens to be in theaters at the time that we’re talking about this film; they are worlds apart. Mark, I know you're usually the one who goes for the foreign films, but I have been wanting to see this one for a while. And I’m glad I watched it. I really enjoyed it and there is a ton of stuff I’m ready to talk about. But first, what did you think?

Mark: Well, it certainly wasn’t what i was expecting from what little about it I knew going in.  There were parts of it I liked more than others, but as a whole, I thought this was a well-done monster movie.  The problem with the Stephenie Meyer’s thing is that people will further forget this movie now that something more mainstream is out with the same title.

Dylan: I agree that it wasn’t what I was expecting. All I had really heard about it was that it’s sort of a modern Godzilla story. I felt like there are definitely some not-so-allusive pokes at the U.S. and it's role in South Korean society, but since I'm not well-versed in that situation, those references were mostly over my head. I thought the monster was unique and interesting. The story was pretty solid. The effects were much better than expected and certainly got the job done. The only movie that comes to mind in comparison is Cloverfield, but I think this one did a better job. Also, the family from The Host is now my favorite movie family. (Then again, the only other movie family I can think of is the Parr family from The Incredibles.)

Mark: I knew so little about this that I thought it was a tentacle monster, just basing it off the poster.  But I was glad to be wrong, because the monster was pretty entertaining, and I appreciate how well it was made to be just something in the local environment that had mutated.  Though I would have liked a bit more mystery to the monster; maybe not in the sense of Cloverfield where you barely see it, but then again, it helps the movie that within 15 minutes of setting up the family, shit just gets going.  And the strength of the film really was the family dynamic rather than the monster.  While it had parts about the government/US teams involvement in dealing with the monster, it was so much more about how one family deals with a situation such as a father losing his daughter to the monster.

Dylan: Okay, so since neither of us know that much about South Korea, let’s suffice it to say that there is some allegory here, but we can’t really describe its significance/relevance.

I kind of liked how the monster was revealed to us in its entirety right away. Because then it becomes a character. It’s not just a destructive force eating people and knocking over buildings for no reason. We know how it came into existence, how it grew. And through the movie we see that it, too, has motivations and needs. It is, for me, very convincingly a real living thing, which made me think about how it lives and how it fits into the ecosystem. 

It's not only different, visually, from other things we’ve seen; it’s so much more believable and interesting.

Sidenote: I also really enjoyed the way it used its tail to swing across bridges. The scene where the father and son just see this long thing come out of the darkness and start feeling around for something to snag.

That was so creepy and peculiar to me.

Also, each member of the family is three-dimensional; each one has a past and a personal story. There's the guy who loses his daughter, and his siblings resent him. He loves her more than anything, and the father explains why he’s a little slow. The sister, who is a champion archer, and has to overcome her hesitation. And the brother, who we learn before we even meet him is highly educated but has become an alcoholic because of his unemployment. The family dynamic is so legitimate and relatable. And yet they’re all dealing with the same reality. I have more to say, but I’m rambling. You go.

Mark:Yeah, rambling is one way to put it.  Well I agree with you about the realism of the monster; it seems like something that really could have mutated in the Han River.  Cause it wasn’t the size of a building or anything.  it was rather small in terms of monsters we’ve seen.  And you did a good job setting up the family, but for me, I found them more compelling by the second half of the film.  In the first half, I felt that it was pretty cliche how it was going about it.  They band together and go hunt the monster.  Yes, there was some characterizations for them, but it all seemed to be overshadowed by the monster and the hunt.

Now, when we hit the second half, things basically fall apart.  A major character is killed -- fairly horrible when you see it unfold -- and then they’re all scattered.  Suddenly the desperation goes up a bunch of notches.  We see the earlier characterizations put into effect.  It’s no longer about the monster or the governments; it’s all about the family and things become so much more interesting.

Dylan: I agree, for a little while it’s silly. Though the drama is still there. There were some scenes -- only one or two -- where I couldn't tell if it was deliberately trying to be funny. I wonder if maybe some dialogue and actions are lost in translation. However, I immensely enjoyed the scene where they’re all eating and they all sort of collectively imagine the young girl there, because the fact that she is trapped and hungry is weighing on all of their minds. They don’t talk about it; they just imagine her eating off of their plates. Very cool. Also, what did you think of the gore/violence factor? I really liked that the gore was really just assumed. It somehow made it slightly more terrifying. Like when the monster busts into that van, and all you see is bloody arms reaching out the opposite door. We never see bodies or a ton of blood, just a lot of people who aren't sure if they should run or not. It seemed like a pretty realistic reaction to the situation. And it was a long scene, forcing your terror to ratchet up as you watch, as if you're standing there with everyone else.

Mark: Yeah, I was glad that Joon-ho Bong decided to leave the gore to our own imaginations.  We can create much more violent things in our heads.  And one thing I really appreciated was that while the monster, at a point, seems like it's maybe not that bad, on the whole it's just a killing machine.  The movie didn’t try to rationalize anything for it.  I was afraid they were going to attempt the 'misunderstood monster' angle, but then it ended with that very entertaining final confrontation.

Dylan: Where the entire family pulls together. Wow, 'misunderstood monster' would have made me vomit. I am so grateful they didn't try that. But holy shit, I just remembered...the ending is not happy. That was a shock to me. I guess I can’t say any more about it without giving something away. But damn.

Mark: Yeah but it adds a more realistic angle to it.  And it shows how open the father’s heart is; the scene is sad for a moment and then touching in the next.  And we haven’t touched on the scenes with the daughter, Hyun-Seo.  I liked them, and they help lead to that ending, but I feel as though those were the times that lagged for me.  I know they were very important, but it was the rest of the family that held my attention; their hunt for her over their own safety.

Dylan: You mean the scenes of her trapped? They certainly built the intensity of her survival, while at the same time giving us the groundwork on which to speculate what the monster’s plan is. And while the scenes didn't necessarily captivate me because I was rooting for her survival, I was still disturbed each time the monster showed up with some new, horrific surprise. I kind of liked how some of the movie was in English. And I don’t know if you know this, but that doctor in the very first scene is Hershel from The Walking Dead, which definitely threw me for a loop when I started. I'm not sure what else to talk about though. What else ya got?

Mark:  Hyun-Seo's part was very important to the whole story structure, but the emotional center was the father and his siblings.  Overall, it was an entertaining monster flick, mostly because the monster wasn’t the main story element.  Yeah, it was there making trouble and fucking shit up, but the family and their struggles kept me going.  I really felt for them, even in such a setting.  And I could come up with some trivia, maybe.  But if you have anything to add, say it.  Say it now.

Dylan: I agree, in that the movie accomplished something that most movies in this genre fail to do. It showed the broad scope of the situation -- the governmental response, the international response, the bystander's response, and the monster itself -- while still having strong, interesting characters that we can root for. I really enjoyed it and I’d happily watch it again. Also, I believe there is a sequel in the works.

Mark: Yeah I read there was a sequel in the works, but nothing much about it now, though I don’t know where they’d go, beyond having more of the monsters showing up.  But how about this for a trivia/question: is this based on a real story?

Dylan: I would love it if it is. I mean it’s not at all unbelievable that contamination to a water supply creates mutant creatures. It happens. We just don’t see them very often and they usually don’t survive very long. So I doubt there was a situation where a monster came out of the water and started eating people.

Mark: Haha well no monsters have been reported. Yet.  But in 2000, a U.S. army mortician ordered hundreds of bottles of formaldehyde poured down the drain, resulting in direct contamination of the Han River.  This had become a huge legal battle with South Korea and the United States, and the actual legal proceedings are fairly interesting as they stand.  But in terms of the movie, the very beginning scene is based, somewhat, on fact.

Dylan: Wow, that’s a bit terrifying. So yea, there is definitely a message about the U.S. in there, which I guess is mostly negative. In conclusion, you’d recommend this movie? And would you say it’s better, worse, or equal to Cloverfield (or any other movie you can think of in the same genre).

Mark: Yeah I would.  I had my issues with the beginning, but my overall feeling for the movie makes me recommend it.  It’s worth watching to see how a different monster movie is done where the monster takes a backseat to the human characters.  In comparison to Cloverfield, it's much better.  For one, no fucking shaky cam and the characters are so much more relatable.

Dylan: And in the next couple of years we are likely getting a sequel, a Godzilla remake, and Pacific Rim, so it looks like big destructive monsters are the next fad. We’ll see how well they hold up against this one.

Mark: Ah, Pacific Rim. Sons of Anarchy vs. Cthulhu. Now that's a movie!

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

What Mark's referring to is that Jackson and Clay -- recurring protagonist and antagonist, respectively -- from Sons of Anarchy will both be starring in Pacific Rim. More importantly is that Idris Elba will also be in it. And everyone EXCEPT Mark remembers him as Stringer Bell from The Wire. 

Our next movie will be Bernie, starring Jack Black. Neither of us have seen it or really heard much about it. All I know is that Black goes against his usual role as the goofy jackass. And that's enough to pique my curiosity. My quote this week has nothing to do with movies. "Winter is coming." And you all better be watching the season premiere of Game of Thrones tomorrow night.

Oz the Great and Powerful

At last, one of us has bothered to go to the movies. It's been a dull winter for theatrical releases. But never fear; we're getting into movie season, and between May and September, I alone usually average about 30 hours staring at the big screen. Now, when I first came up with the idea for the In Theaters section, I was envisioned it following our tradition of seeing and promoting lesser-known films. Unfortunately, I realize now that, American consumer that I am, I am more likely to go and see highly advertised big name movies than small indie films, especially at 15 dollars a pop. So for a movie like Oz, you can get a review pretty much anywhere. My only hope in grabbing your attention is to bring something new to the conversation. Which -- let's face it -- probably isn't going to happen.

The other drawback is that for movies in theaters, depending on how long it takes me to go and see it, you've probably already seen, have made up your mind not to, or it's no longer playing nearby. These are kinks we'll have to work out down the road. For now, hop in your air balloon and hang on tight, let's take a journey to the land of Oz!

Viewer: Dylan Dog
Time Elapsed Since Theatrical Release: 3 weeks

One thing I hate about movie reviews -- at least the ones I tend to read -- is how they tend to give a synopsis of a movie instead of just saying if it's good or not. I'm going to avoid this as much as possible. So let me get right to the point. Oz is not an awful movie. But then again, it's not really a movie, so much as an amalgam of other movies you've have already seen.

The most obvious connection is the deliberate one, and that's to The Wizard of Oz. The opening scenes are meant to completely emulate the style and feeling of the original. Instead of Dorothy we have Oscar, and the supporting characters from his reality end up being represented as people and creatures when he gets to Oz. These scenes go on longer than they should, and only seem to show that Oscar (Oz) is a failure and a conman.

Our first glimpses of Oz are big, bright, and beautiful. Whereas the original film had this effect simply by being in color, Oz uses 3D and CG to convey the same sense of wonder. In doing so, it becomes a combination of Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, and anything by Dr. Seuss. If by some chance you missed those movies, then you may find this one more unique. For the most part, I enjoyed the immense scale and ingenuity of the landscapes and scenery; I just couldn't help but feel like it had all been done before. And at least in Avatar, where Cameron wants us to see a planet inhabited with creatures that really live and interact with each other, Oz is filled with gimmicky creatures that don't really make sense or have a purpose, and James Franco just sort of fumbles through it, more like Alice. This is all well and good, given the source material, but the film never seems to figure out which side of the fence to fall on: is it a serious adventure or a playful remake of the original? It's not a musical. The flying monkeys are now aggressive baboons with bat wings. It seems darker and scarier at times. (The Little China Girl's entire race was destroyed, and she is a very intriguing character.) And yet, there are Munchkins and Tinkers, and Emerald City soldiers with clearly glued-on mustaches that completely take away any serious or suspenseful tone.

Which brings me to my next movie comparison: the Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit. Peter Jackson couldn't decide if The Hobbit should have the same tone as it's predecessors, or be a more childish adventure. Because of this, it is difficult to get on board with the plot or believe in any of the characters. The same happens with Oz. Franco just sort of fumbles his way through Oz and eventually saves the day, when it's made clear to us (and him) that there is a whole lot of serious shit at stake. The whole movie ends up being way too long. The characters get old very quickly, and all you want to do is explore Oz more. Once you get tied down in the stupidity of the plot, you just lose interest.

Even the music seems to be taken from another movie. And in a way, it is. (Hmm, still sounds like I'm describing The Hobbit). Danny Elfman and Sam Raimi worked together on the original Spider-Man trilogy, and the music was noticeably similar to that of Spider Man 3.

All in all, this movie is just a big budget time filler. Not much originality, or groundbreaking story or technology. For a little while, it is nice to look at. But even that doesn't last long. (Also, one of the people I was with said it was completely contradictory to the show Wicked, which is also a prequel of sorts to the original movie. I can't vouch for this, but if you've seen one, you may find the other frustrating.)

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

Hm, perhaps these theater reviews need some sort of rating system as well. How about a checklist of sorts?

Would I recommend it: well, did you just read all that stuff I wrote? Decide for yourself.

Did I enjoy it: Mildly

Would I see it again: Definitely not in theaters. And I wouldn't bother with a DVD purchase or rental. Maybe if a group of us were going to watch something, but even then I'd suggest something else.

Maybe it should've been more like this.

Brick

Start your weekend off right. With some Back Row Critiquing. Today we look over Brick, a film by Rian Johnson (Looper), and starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and some other people.

Netflix: All signs point to yes
Pick: Minas Markul

Dylan: So, before I rant about this movie, I’ll give you five minutes to tell me...what the fuck this movie is supposed to be about.

Mark: Alrighty then.  Now understand that the first thing I bring up will sound like a spoiler or something, but it is shown in the first minutes of the film, so shut up, it’s fine.  Brendan (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) finds in a drainage tunnel the dead body of his ex-girlfriend Emily.  The movie, after lingering there for a few moments, effectively setting the tone for the film, jumps back two days to when Brendan receives a letter and then a call from the now not quite deceased ex.  What proceeds from here on out is Brendan at first trying to find Emily and find out what’s gotten her so distressed.  This leads him into an underground dope ring that somehow connects back to Emily.  Now, the most interesting part of how this is all framed is that the two days expire well before the movie is even halfway over, giving us a little time to understand the social settings Brendan has to deal with while also setting up the dark underworld of drugs he has to enter into to find Emily’s killer.  I mean, that was the best synopsis I could give to frame it for everyone without going too far, but let's hit this right on the head: what lost you in the movie?  Cause I found it pretty straightforward honestly.  Some very interesting twists and turns with the plot to keep it moving, but nothing that threw me for a loop.

Dylan: Haha, ‘loop’. Anyways, it’s not so much the plot that threw me off. It was just how incredibly strange and, in my opinion, unbelievable it all is. Okay, so all of the characters are High School kids. Except Brendan is and his buddy are like...mystery-solving, crime-fighting geniuses. And they speak in code that no cop show on the planet has prepared me for. Meanwhile there’s that chick (also a teenager) who has a mansion and throws lavish private parties. And another one is a drug kingpin, and another one is a murderer. There are no police, parents, or teachers (which is troubling, since much of the movie takes place in and around a High School) nearby at all, except for Pin’s mom, who serves juice to Brendan after the other guy beats the hell out of him. And the dialogue is so strange and out-of-place that for a while I figured I would understand the story better if I just muted it and pieced it together based on what I saw.

...I can tell this is a movie that you liked, and I didn’t.

Mark: Well right off the bat, Rian Johnson, the director, wanted to make a homage to the novels of Dashiell Hammett, who is best known for novels like The Maltese Falcon and The Glass Key.  These were hard-boiled detective novels, but he felt that no matter what he did, it wouldn't feel original, which is the reason it was moved to the High School setting.  The idea was to involve the students and play with the setting of their social atmosphere rather than the school itself.  And Brendan does have that conversation with the Vice Principal, so there’s one more adult for you.  And I didn’t get that they were so much “crime fighting geniuses”, but rather these two were the absolute outcasts in this social world.  By that I mean not that they couldn’t join a group, but rather that they knew everything about all the groups, which was something I found really interesting for Brendan’s character.  he stood out to everyone, but could still navigate it all so effortlessly.

And as for the dialogue, yeah, it’s is quite confusing, at first.  Maybe it came easier to me cause I’m more English-focused than you, but it took just some time to kinda decode the language.  But even beyond what sounds like something no one should ever have to do for a movie, it helps to really create a kind of microcosm, of sorts, for this school and students.  That they exist in some sort of world within the world.  And I think this is perfectly demonstrated with the Pin’s mother; as she treats all the teenagers, regardless of what crew they’re with, as teenagers.  All the while, in the scene, we know what else is taking place.

Dylan: Okay, yea, I definitely picked up on how the dialogue and story did not match the High School setting. And I’m not sure that really made it better, even if it was, perhaps, more original. And when you explain his role as an outcast, I can sort of see it a little better. But I still feel like I had to assume too much just to follow the plot. Since you mentioned that scene with the VP, I'll bring it up again. The conversation between the two of them would be better suited for a detective and his informant. And I guess that's the point. It's a noir cop drama that has been reimagined for High School. But for me, the effect was that the characters don't seem realistic (or likable) at all.

Mark: Ok, I’m gonna pull it back here and ask which characters did you find really unrealistic?  Now I’m not saying I went to school with thugs and drug lords, for all I know, but I felt that they weren’t unrealistic, but just their stereotypical nature pushed to the extreme.

Dylan: I went to High School. I don’t remember every student having some deep and cunning agenda. Specifically I’m talking about Brendan, Lauren, and Kara, who all seem to be playing an elaborate game of chess with each other over information. And I can understand how High School students would toy with each other and with people outside of their group. But there's a lot of drugs and murder going around, which somehow the adult world is oblivious to, and these kids are navigating it way too easily and fearlessly.

Mark: I guess I will cede that they are, in a way unrealistic, but that didn’t take away from anything, nor take me out of the movie.  Each of the main characters basically represented the epitome of their social circle.  Tug, the Pin’s main bodyguard of sorts, is incredibly aggressive in every way.  But in the sense of the detective novel, he has to represent the main physical threat to Brendan.  Ergo, he’s as violent and aggressive as he can be.  Kara, who is the socially manipulating head of the drama social circle, is the femme fatale, who, yes is playing a kind of chess game with Brendan.

Dylan: Alright, well I guess I didn’t see them as representing a social circle. They just seemed so outlandish (and, you don’t really see them with a group of people). And unbelievable characters aren't necessarily bad for a movie. I guess what I'm saying is, this movie had all the makings of one kind of movie -- let's say an indie mystery movie -- but then tries to be something completely different, a noir crime drama or something. It like deliberately doesn't play to its own strengths. 

But let me ask you this. Would you feel the same about the movie if you didn’t already know everything you’ve mentioned about the director and the star and the inspiration and what not? Because I went into it knowing nothing. And from all that, I probably wouldn’t watch it again.

Mark:  I never look things up for new movies before I watch them.  Never.  Like you, I want to go into it with fresh eyes.  And if anything, for me at least, I’d watch it again.  I thought the dialogue was very colorful in the fact that it had a life of it’s own.  Once I learned that he framed this around his love for Hammett novels, I can see where the hard-boiled detective lines are and his own slang is, for the most part.  I read that Cowboy Bebop was a source of visual influence for Johnson as well as for the character of Brendan.  For me, it blended entertaining dialogue with a good detective structure for the story.  I also really liked the use of sound and noise throughout.

Dylan: I will concede that the music and the sound effects were very fitting. It was the music that first made me realize it makes more sense to view the movie as a noir. At which point I started to enjoy it a little more. Other than that, I’m not sure what else I liked about it. As you know, JGL just kind of gets on my nerves. I don’t know if it’s his acting, or what, but I can’t quite take him seriously. And so his character Brendan didn't really do it for me. I wanted to know more about people like Tug. That’s just me.

Mark: I know you have a thing about JGL and he was pretty one-note as Brendan, but I think that plays into the fact that the main cast each represent their social circles.  Brendan is a misanthropic outcast, this is who he is.  Everyone, including him, is established as one thing and then that’s it.  There isn’t any character development for anyone.  Which in most cases can be bad, but I think for this, it’s not about characters themselves, but rather the story and how they’re all involved in this intricate web of lies and manipulation.  And just on the sound one last time, the best was the chase scene through the school; with the sound of shoe hitting concrete amplified.  At first it seems so out of place, but it’s explained through action so well why it sounds that way.

Dylan: Well, I would say there was some character development. For Dode and for Tug. Or at least, they are revealed to be completely different people than we originally see them as. But anyways, got any trivia?

Mark:  Yeah, I can scrounge up some things to question you with.  Alright, first off, what do you think the budget was for this?  And for the hell of it, give me a number.  It’s the Price is Right!  Let’s see what he guesses!

Dylan: The budget was low. Because JGL loves being in indie movies. And my number is 7. Did your question about the number have to do with the question about the budget?

Mark:  Well, yes. And I guess you’re right in that it’s a low number.  The actually budget was a whopping $425,000.  Received from a few backers, friends and family.  Funny, last time we do Following with almost no budget and we move up slightly with Brick.

Alright, here’s another.  We all know -- or, most people do -- that JGL is in Looper, which was directed by Rian Johnson, who did Brick.  But someone else from Brick went to Looper.  Guess.

Dylan: Ah yes, still leagues behind following, in which Nolan paid the actors in donuts. As for the Looper question, it's obviously the dead chick.

Mark:  Emily?  Nope, sorry that is incorrect sir.  In fact Dode, played by Noah Segan, comes back in Looper as Kid Blue.  Who, just for clarification, is the character with the Gat gun and main guy hunting down JGL character of Joe.

Dylan: Oh, right. Yes, I can see it now. Well, I can't say the depth of his characters has really improved at all.

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

I think this may be the first time Mark and I have heatedly disagreed about a movie. But hopefully that makes the whole conversation a little more interesting. And don't take our words for it! Go watch the movie and decide for yourself!

And we seem to have forgotten the part where we pick our next movie ahead of time. So again, I'll have to tell you to just keep an eye on Twitter for when we announce our next title. "Whoa, sheriff! We just missed him!" And I'll leave it up to my partner to figure out how that quote is connected.

The Faculty

The only reason this movie is on the drunken recap page is because it is more entertaining with a drink in hand. Mind you, I also watched it by myself, when one could definitely enjoy it with some friends, with or without any booze.

In actuality, The Faculty is a classic and quintessential 90's movie (1998, to be exact). Remember when the first Scream was unique because it sort of parodied itself by toying with the rules of the slasher movie, while at the same time rebooting the genre for a new generation? The Faculty has similar goals, as it combines heavy high school angst with the paranoia of an Invasion of the Body Snatchers-style alien takeover. I would describe it as The Thing meets The Breakfast Club. A group of high school stereotypes -- the jock, the geek, the outcast, the cheerleader, the new girl, and the junkie  -- discover that the high school faculty, and the community, is steadily being controlled by aliens, and they have to band together to save the town.

Netflix: Does the pope shit in his hat?
Viewer: Dish Soap

First off, let me just say that The Faculty is a great combination of familiar faces that you'd never expect on the same screen. The cast includes Elijah Wood, Josh Hartnett, Jordana Brewster, Usher, Salma Hayek, Jon Stewart, and several others. In fact, fifteen years later, the high school setting resonates even more when you see this group of youngsters that is now all grown up. Like looking in a yearbook, you say "well, he went on to Lord of the Rings, she does Fast and Furious, that guy is a famous singer, whatever happened to her".

Which brings me to my main point: what I love about the story is how relatable it ends up being. First off, you have characters that, even though they are all high school archetypes, are multi-dimensional personalities. Each one is hiding a part of his or her self. The junkie is actually a brilliant chemist, the jock wants to quit sports and focus on his studies, etc. And in high school, who hasn't hid their true identity from everyone else, for fear of what others might think of them? It is an unwritten high school rule that you either conform to a cliche, or be cast out. It's interesting, in the open scenes, how we get a view of the high school setting that seems a bit extreme, but when you think about it, is pretty accurate. Characters calling each other names for bumping into each other in the hallway. A couple that is violently arguing every time we see them, but remain together for no reason. As the junkie, played by Josh Hartnett, is selling his new drug to some goons in a bathroom stall, the geek (Elijah Wood) is crying in the stall next to them after being bullied.

And as for the faculty being aliens. What high school student (although I probably felt this way more in middle school) hasn't wondered if his teachers, or even the other students, are all a bunch of aliens plotting against him. That is the period in your life when no amount of friends can make you feel less alone and awkward, trying to understand the thoughts and motivations of the people around you. This movie perfectly exemplifies that fear and paranoia, only instead of being a teenager's nightmare, it's real.

That's the beauty of The Faculty. The premise is of course one of science fiction, but you can't help but throw yourself into their shoes, because in your mind it's pretty much what high school was like. The director is Robert Rodriguez, which I did not know until looking it up just now. He is known for Sin City and the Desperado series (oh, and Spy Kids. What?). So it may come without saying that the movie occasionally gets rather bloody and violent (I did say it was like The Thing), but it isn't very excessive, and it adds plenty of scares.

All in all, I definitely recommend this one. Chances are, you already caught bits of it a decade ago when it was frequently on TV. But it's worth a revisit, if not to conjure up all those uncomfortable high school memories, then at least to get a good scare. You don't really need to drink to enjoy it, but hell, it couldn't hurt.

Beer rating: 1.5/10

Goon

Reviewer: Marco Polo
Netflix: Yes, yes, and a whole lot of yes

So I finally got around to seeing this movie, and I geared up with a good load of liquor for it.  I mean, everything about the setup of this movie tells me that it’s gonna be a good one to get drunk to.  First off, it’s written by Jay Baruchel (the scrawny guy from Tropic Thunder) and Evan Goldberg (the co-writer of Superbad and Pineapple Express).  That right there got me ready for what would have to be a whole lot of vulgarity, fat jokes, and the frequent odd penis reference.  Then the fact it’s headed by Seann William Scott, who I have never really seen outside the American Pie series.  So I just set myself for seeing Stifler on ice.  And then the synopsis on the back of the case (yes I own it, I got it as a gift) ended the whole thing with the mother of all cliffhangers: “all he needs to do is learn how to skate.”  I didn’t even care about the rest of the plot; that Doug Glatt, Scott’s character, is in a dead end job as a bouncer, gets the chance to do something with his life when he gets asked to be an enforcer for a minor league hockey team.  That line prepared me for just terrible jokes about not being able to skate and then in the end he’d prove himself and save the day.  I sat back, took a shot, and prepared myself for the worst.

Damn, I couldn’t have been more fucking wrong.

Goon is a great little film.  And right off the bat, that whole business with the “not being able to skate” stuff, gets dealt with in minutes.  And that bit was preceded by Glatt getting into a punch up with half his new team.  This movie is so much more than what the synopsis set it up to be.  Yes, Glatt gets the shot to be something as an enforcer on a minor league team, but they leave out what makes Glatt so compelling.  He’s impossibly kind-hearted; apologizing after he hits someone and, for the most part, being a bit of a pacifist.  But he knows that his greatest strength is his, well, strength.  Seann William Scott blew it away by really showing how awkwardly sweet Glatt can be, while also showing how absolutely determined he is to be somebody as an enforcer.  Also, when he begins his time in Halifax on the team, he meets Eva, played by Alison Pill, who he becomes infatuated with.  And what makes this little romance really interesting instead of feeling tacked on or unnecessary, is the combination of the romantically awkward nature of Glatt and Eva being very blunt about how she’s a terrible person, since at that time, she’s cheating on her boyfriend with him.  It makes watching this interaction engaging. (And that bit with the boyfriend is played out really well later on.)  And the raunchy humor?  Well that comes from his teammates, but primarily from Jay Baruchel's character of Pat, the foul-mouthed, hockey-loving best friend of Doug.  And he’s the one who pushes him to take the opportunity, showing very well how their friendship works.  From there, the story goes nowhere but up.

The whole thing moves quickly from a really useless hockey team to a real minor league team of the Halifax Highlanders.  It’s there we get to see some of the most interesting characters in Doug’s teammates, including Xavier Laflamme, the hotshot Doug was brought on to protect.  And through Laflamme, we get to see two conflicting personalities collide, creating more character development all around.  But the best of the members of the Halifax Highlanders is without question their coach Ronnie Hortense (played hilariously by Kim Coates, well-known as Tig from Sons of Anarchy).  But what about tension or an antagonist, you ask?  What’s the point of the story of an underdog if there’s no real threat to him?  Well shut up, I’m getting to that.  Cause that’s where Liev Schreiber’s character of Rhea “The Boss” Ross comes into play.  Ross is the preeminent enforcer in the NHL, and Glatt’s idol.  But a truly nasty hit lands him in the minors, putting him in the same league as Glatt.  Thus creating a sense of tension; as Doug “The Thug” Glatt rises in popularity, more and more people talk about the epicness of the fight between Glatt and Ross.  But that’s not all; the reason Laflamme is in the minors is because he was knocked out in a game by Ross three years earlier, which in turn destroyed his self-confidence and makes his shy away from oncoming players. All of this creates a very tight knit story of characters that is a joy to watch unfold.

And the last thing I will speak about is that this is a bloody film.  The fights are made to be as graphic as possible, but not by going into the absurd.  They do a good job showing you how violent this line of work really is.  But they never glorify the violence, rather just play it straight; that this is a very real part of hockey.  And the eventual confrontation between Doug “The Thug” Glatt and Ross “The Boss” Rhea is wicked bloody, but it’s the culmination of the whole movie building up to it, and it fucking delivers.

So, in the end, I wish I wasn’t nearly as drunk as I was for this.  This movie is good with a drink or two, but it deserves your full attention.  Seann William Scott’s heartfelt performance, the strength of the supporting cast, the well-executed humor, both raunchy and not, and the overall story of a dead-end Boston bouncer getting the chance to be someone and excel at his strength as an enforcer in minor league hockey makes this movie worth every second of your time.

1/10 (Which in case the explanation wasn't good about this, means it was very good)

Equilibrium

Okay, the boss has been getting on my ass about pumping out some of these drunk reviews. For my first, I chose the Christian Bale masterpiece Equilibrium. It came out in 2002, directed by Kurt Wimmer, whose other credits include...well, who cares?

Netflix: Yup
Viewer: Dipstick

Let's see...the premise is not very original. In a dystopian future, after WWIII, emotions are outlawed and punishable by death. Culture and innovation and life are all a hindrance to productivity and efficiency. It is pretty much the setting of Brave New World or 1984 (that's right, I read, too). Christian Bale is a samurai cop of sorts -- called a Cleric -- and he is in charge of finding members of the 'resistance', people who live outside the main city and fight to overthrow the Fascist regime. He is an expert in the martial art Gun Kata, which involves clearing entire rooms of bad guys with absurd gun swinging, ala Wanted. After he finds out that his partner, played by Sean Bean, has become one of the resistance, Bale, too, stops taking his emotion-suppressant medication and begins to feel. Yada yada yada, he becomes a member of the resistance and kills all the bad guys.

This is a mindless action movie with a tiny bit of imagination. It tries to be smart and poignant, but doesn't seem to realize how unoriginal it is.

The main thing I didn't like about it, is that despite being a mindless action movie, it doesn't have a whole lot of mindless action. So much of the movie is devoted to Bale's nonsensically profound awakening as he discovers emotions for the first time. Rather than see him laugh or smile -- which I perceive would be the most fascinating and awkward instinctive gesture to have for the first time in your entire life -- we interpret Bale's new sensations by watching him listen to Beethoven, look at a snow globe, rearrange stuff on his desk, and hold a puppy, all with an emotionless face. I guess we're supposed to be shocked at how inhuman the world has become, while relating to the protagonist's revelation. But the movie is too black and white (literally, Bale wears all black and when he becomes the hero, he wears all white) to really care. On that same token, his adversaries/former colleagues are cartoonishly villainous; they find the Mona Lisa and set it on fire, they kill all of the aforementioned puppy's friends, and they incinerate Bale's wife for 'sense offense'. They're basically mindless drones, so we really don't care when they all die.

My only other complaint is how wasted the made-up Gun Kata is. If you want a better explanation of it, Cracked.com does a pretty good job. The idea is, a single guy in the center of a room is a more effective assassin, taking a power stance and whipping pistols over his shoulders and around his back, then, say, the twenty guys aiming at him with assault rifles. It's pretty nonsensical, and gets even more ridiculous when they try to explain it. Every time we see Bale use this technique, he gratuitously shoots or pistol whips a handful of bad guys way more times than necessary and with way too much spinning. The final shootout is relatively brief and boring, and is not as dramatic as the filmmakers want it to be. Bale is captured, his weapons taken away, and he is seated in a room, surrounded by bad guys. Yet, despite knowing he is a Cleric, and a master Gun Kata, no one realizes that he has two more guns, literally up his sleeves, with which he executes every single bad guy without breaking a sweat. And when he fights the main villain, we are treated to three full minutes of them swatting each other's arms out of their faces until one of them gets shot.

In the end, Bale is a pretty shitty hero. He let's his wife be executed. He tries to same a few members of the resistance, but then turns his back on them. He watches all the dogs get slaughtered, saves one, and then we don't see the dog again for the rest of the movie, so I can only assume it's dead. He falls for Sean Bean's girlfriend, goes to save her, and then let's her die too. He doesn't really save anyone, actually.

All that being said, there are much worse movies out there than this one. I guess if you and your friends want a movie that's easy to follow to drink to, this is a good choice. Just don't get your hopes too high.

Beer Scale: 2/10

(Now if I'm understanding the rules correctly, the lower a movie is on the Beer Scale, the better it is. It means I only required a couple of beers in order to get through this movie. So all in all, I'm saying it wasn't that bad.)

Sukiyaki Western Django

Well hey all.  I’ve realized that while my colleague and I have been trying to get this old site up and going with some legitimate reviews, we’ve neglected the drunk section of it.  And that just can’t do, I mean there are plenty of films I’ve seen lately while imbibing one thing or another.  And I know Dylan has seen a bunch of films and knowing how much of a lush he is, he’s got to have a couple to write about.  So the idea for this is to do recaps of films we’ve seen.  Still reviews, just shorter and more concise than the other ones we do as a duo.  So without further ado, may I present, our obituary.  Or rather the Drunken Critic Recaps.

Netflix: Not anymore
Viewer: Mark the Martian

Sukiyaki Western Django

Jesus, the things you find late at night; which is surprising since most of it just becomes porn.  But no, I found Takeshi Miike’s (Audition, Ichi the Killer) Japanese western set in the fictional town of Yuta, Nevata.  No I’m not kidding.  It is essentially a Japanese reimagining of Sergio Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars: a lone gunman with no name comes upon the town of Yuta, which is under contention by rival gangs Genji and Heike, color coded white and red respectfully, if you happen to forget what the fuck is going on.  That’s not to say the story is confusing, it’s rather simple: Genji want to kill the Heike, Heike want to kill the Genji, the gunman is asked by a prostitute to kill them all cause the Heike leader killed her husband and now she’s a prostitute for the Genji, but there is also some indication of another gunman named Boody Benten involved somehow, and... ok no, it does get convoluted. And it didn’t help that for some unknown reason Miike decided to direct this whole movie in english even though only a few of them can speak it fluently and that I was getting progressively drunker. So subtitles wouldn't hurt in the least with this one.


That’s not saying this is all bad, not at all.  The action sequences are great, with brilliant shootouts and plenty of impossible kills.  While the movie isn't nothing but action, the times when the guns come out, are always exciting, if a bit eyebrow raising. How is it while when some guys in a scene get shot in the head, it's just blood, but one guy gets feathers blown out the back of him? These are not the questions we mere mortals are meant to have answered. Best just roll with it and enjoy it. The set design as well are gorgeous; Miike creates a very real and vibrant town but plays with the colors so much that everything gets a more surreal feeling.  The final fight, for me at least, was pretty awesome, albeit short.  The snow, which actually comes out of nowhere without reason, creates this stark background for the fight between... well you’ll see, but like I said, it’s pretty intense.  And there is the ever hilarious aspect of Quentin Tarantino’s role as an aged gunman.  The two scenes are relatively brief, but just absurd when they happen.


And yeah it is kinda entertaining knowing now how he made Django Unchained and he was once in a movie involving Django.  But unfortunately, that’s about where I stop with all the praise.


Aside from the story being rather difficult to follow with the aforementioned ridiculous english, none of the characters are all that engaging.  They just exist, do things, and for the most part, die.  There is no sense of character growth and no one I really cared about.  Now, while I was rocking down my whatever number beer, I will say that the Genji leader is a badass.  He’s a terrible person, but he’s a katana wielding sharpshooter who kicks ass like, well, like someone who kicks a lot of ass.  The action from the characters is really all that makes them entertaining, as what they have to say didn’t do a lot for me.  A few have some unique quirks, but on the hole, none of them stand out.  Also there is the juxtaposition of the light and dark tones in the film.  Now that might be a big word to think of while drunk, but you can understand it when it shifts from two wounded characters reaching for each other in the midst of the war torn town, to the schizo sheriff trying to figure out how and why he's got a big fuck off cross impaled in his back.  It's kinda hilarious, but it takes away from the tone of the moment, and that's just naming one scene. The movie can be funny, touching, violent, insane, and confusing, and unfortunately sometimes all at the same time.  But I’ll stop now, this is but a quick recap for all ya’ll. 

So at the end of the night, I rather enjoyed myself.  This was because I got sufficiently drunk, but still.  While the story can become convoluted and drag at points, and the tone shifts unexpectedly now and again, the gorgeous setting and kick ass action can help push you through it.  That and a few brews.  So relax, crack open a cold one, and enjoy a movie that you won’t know what’s going on, but you’ll enjoy watching it.

5 beers outta 10