Alice in Wonderland Review

Tim Burton is a visual wizard, and there is no denying that. He has taken the works of Stephen Sondheim, Bob Kane, Roald Dahl, Washington Irving, and now Lewis Carroll and has turned them all into wonderful visual gems. However, sometimes Tim Burton’s creepy, quirky, and sometimes just bizarre directing style doesn’t quite mix with the original works. It worked wonderfully with “Sweeney Todd”, “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”, and “Sleepy Hollow”. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for “Alice in Wonderland”, Tim Burton’s latest visual gem. Even though I would be the first to admit that “Alice in Wonderland” is gorgeous to look at (especially in IMAX) and the cast of actors is mostly excellent, the source material’s mood and attitude rarely shines through the clouds of Tim Burton’s weird yet very entertaining directing style.

Alice is now 19 years old. Her father has passed away and she’s about to be proposed to by a snooty aristocrat in front of many esteemed members of Victorian society. Just as her intended fiancé proposes to her, she sees a white rabbit with a waistcoat and pocket watch, and in typical Alice fashion she (predictably) follows it. And where does that lead her? Unless you’ve been living in a cave for 200 years, you know she tumbles down the rabbit hole. And unless you are a complete idiot, you know that Alice ends up in Wonderland (the real name of the place is actually Underland). In Wonderland, Alice meets many weird and bizarre characters such as the Cheshire Cat, Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the hookah-smoking Caterpillar, and of course the Mad Hatter. Alice is then told it is her destiny to fight the evil Red Queen and slay the Jabberwocky, and there her strange adventure begins.

As a warning for all you Lewis Carroll purists out there, stay away from this film. If you go into it expecting a faithful rendering of Lewis Carroll’s mad world, you are going to walk out of the theater pissed off. This is more of a Tim Burton film than a reimagining of Lewis Carroll’s universe and unless you are a big Tim Burton fan like me, you will have no idea what I mean. Half of the time the madness of Lewis Carroll and quirkiness of Tim Burton balance out wonderfully. The other half of the time, one element heavily outweighs the other and it’s always the wrong one. When a scene requires more of Lewis Carroll’s zany incomprehension, Tim Burton’s deranged style always overshadows the more important factor. When Tim Burton is needed to spice things up, we are left with Lewis Carroll’s bland taste in our mouths. But the times that the balance is perfect, the effects are truly remarkable. I felt a sense of true wonder and intrigue during those scenes. The script (written by Disney vet Linda Woolverton) captures a great deal of Carroll’s original vision during the first half of the film. But the second half could not match the brilliance and wonder of the first. The film ends safe with a typical CGI battle scene that isn’t particularly good, and how the battle is ended isn’t very rewarding.

One of the film’s greatest strength lies with its actors, and there are plenty of fine performances here. Newcomer Mia Wasikowska is a revelation as Alice. She perfectly captures Alice’s sense of adventure and presents herself as a strong female character and a more than worthy choice of taking on the lead role. Unlike so many other films with quirky characters, Wasikowska never lets herself become a backdrop for the cast of colorful characters. Whenever it seems she will become a backdrop, she provides a reason why she is just as interesting as the CGI characters. Helena Bonham Carter is an absolute joy to watch. I think I laughed out loud every time she screamed at the top of her lungs “OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!” She brings a cold, yet strangely appealing zest to her performance as the Red Queen and I almost forgot that it was Tim Burton’s girlfriend who was playing this role. I really felt like this role belonged to her, and she took it and owned it. Anne Hathaway is also very good as the White Queen, a cute yet deranged Glenda-like witch. The voice-acting is probably even better than the live-action performances. Michael Sheen is great as the legendary White Rabbit. Timothy Spall does a marvelous job as a heroic bloodhound. Matt Lucas is hysterical as both Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Alan Rickman is fantastic as the (heavily underused) Caterpillar. But the finest performance in the film comes from Stephen Fry who voices the Cheshire Cat. His wicked sensuality and incredible voice combine to make a compelling and thoroughly entertaining performance. I loved listening to the Cheshire Cat as much as I did looking at him, and that’s saying a lot.

And for those of you saying to yourselves “hey, Dr. Razak hasn’t mentioned Johnny Depp yet”, don’t worry he’s next. Unfortunately, I cannot say that I thoroughly enjoyed Johnny Depp’s highly publicized performance as the Mad Hatter. As many of you know, Johnny Depp is my favorite actor working in Hollywood today and he always brings a unique flavor and zest to each of his roles. For the Mad Hatter, he does bring a unique flavor and zest to the character but he’s not a compelling character. It’s the strangest thing. His performance contains everything I love in a bizarre Johnny Depp performance but for this kind of material, the way he plays the character is almost completely inappropriate. Now I’m not saying I hated Johnny Depp’s performance (he nailed the tea party scene), but it’s not as enjoyable to watch as his performances in other Tim Burton films. Another performance I didn’t particularly care for was Crispin Glover’s performance as the Knave of Hearts. He felt completely out of place and was nowhere near as interesting as the Red Queen and the Mad Hatter.

But the main attraction of “Alice in Wonderland” is the computer generated imagery, and let me tell you that the special effects in this film are absolutely stunning. I loved looking at “Alice in Wonderland” more than liked looking at Pandora. The landscape is so colorful and creative that I felt like I had completely left Earth and had been cast into Wonderland. Many of the sets are also incredible. The Red Queen’s castle is a sight to behold, and the White Queen’s castle looks like something out of a J.R.R. Tolkien novel. All of the CGI characters are animated beautifully. The Cheshire Cat looks fantastic, Tweedledee and Tweedledum are creepily charming, and the Caterpillar is wonderfully animated.

But the visual appeal of this film isn’t flawless. I didn’t like the way the Red Queen’s card soldiers looked. I thought they looked very clunky and not very cool to look at. A character exclusion that I found very disappointing was that of the talking doorknob. As a child, that was one of my favorite characters from the 1951 animated “Alice in Wonderland” and I was very disappointed that the talking doorknob wasn’t included in this film. A wonderful CGI trick performed in the film is Helena Bonham Carter’s large head. The way they enlarge her head to match her ego is hilarious and her first appearance is one of the best scenes in the film.

For those interested in seeing it in IMAX, it is definitely worth the hefty ticket price. The scope is so wide and expansive. You actually feel like you are tumbling down the rabbit hole, and I ducked when the March Hare threw a tea cup at the screen. It’s a great experience if you are willing to give up a well-spent $16.

Overall, “Alice in Wonderland” isn’t the great follow-up to “Sweeney Todd” I was hoping for and it’s certainly not one of Tim Burton’s best, but it’s still an entertaining film that took my breath away during certain moments. B

TOP 10 OF 2009

1. Up
2. Coraline
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Star Trek
5. Up in the Air
6. A Christmas Carol
7. District 9
8. The Hangover
9. The Hurt Locker
10. Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire

A Christmas Carol Review

There are many people who looked at the trailer for this and said “bah! Humbug!” I wasn’t a part of that crowd; I openly embraced the idea of re-imagining this classic Christmas story (hey, it beats running “A Christmas Story” for 24 hours on TBS on Christmas Day). I am also not a part of the crowd that believes that the performance-capture technology makes the characters look like soul-less zombies. I thought all the characters in “A Polar Express” and “Beowulf” looked fine and the attention to detail was off the charts. But I’m not saying that I didn’t have my concerns. Ever since they announced that Jim Carrey was cast as the three ghosts and Scrooge, I was excited but I was also thinking: “please don’t turn this into another Grinch”. And by that I mean the over-the-top and wacky Jim Carrey, as seen in “The Mask” and “Ace Ventura”. So went to see it today, and I walked out in love with this movie. I have seen the George C. Scott version, the Muppets version, and the Disney version, but I consider Robert Zemeckis’ version to be the best. It has everything that the other versions were missing and more.

The tale is timeless. It revolves around a selfish, grouchy old man named Ebenezer Scrooge who hates Christmas and pretty much anything jolly. But one Christmas Eve, he’s visited by three ghosts that are to help him realize the error of his ways and help him become a better man.

Many have complained about the fact that this film is way too frightening for small children, but what many of those people don’t realize is that “A Christmas Carol” was not written to be a Christmas tale, it was actually written as a horror story. What’s so great about this version is that Zemeckis nails bringing the horror elements to life, but he still manages to tug at your heartstrings with the Tiny Tim situation. Also, a lot of the story’s famous scenes are presented in a whole new way through stunning CG and some of the best usage of IMAX 3-D I have ever seen. Some of the scenes in this film are jaw-dropping, such as when Scrooge meets the Ghost of Christmas Present. Scrooge walks in the room and he enters a giant, lavish room decorated with Christmas items and the room sparkles with gold, green, and red. I was stunned beyond my wildest dreams, because I was not prepared for such a breathtaking sight. There are also rollercoaster ride scenes in the film that are actually quite amazing and don’t distract you from the original story. One of those rollercoaster ride scenes is when the Ghost of Christmas Past flies Scrooge through a snow covered forest and the city of London at night. Both scenes make you feel like you’re being lifted out of your chair and your soaring around the theater (especially in IMAX).

But on the other hand, the horror elements of the story are present and are quite frightening to watch. There are moments where I jumped out my seat, and ones where I felt really, really creeped out. There was a 5 year old boy with his father sitting next to me and during one frightening scene towards the end, they left the movie. “A Christmas Carol” is rated PG for scary sequences and images, and therefore many 1-6 year olds will not be able to handle this movie. I’m not insulting your kids, but there are some scenes in this film are pretty fucking disturbing. And if you see it in IMAX, it will probably be twice as frightening (since I saw it in both regular and IMAX presentation). Many people will read this and say: “it’s A Christmas Carol. It is appropriate for my 4 year old. How bad can it be?” For your four year-old, pretty bad.

Another great feature of the performance capture is the transformation of the actors. Jim Carrey is absolutely amazing as Scrooge and the three ghosts. With Scrooge, Carrey uses Scrooge’s physicality to his full advantage. He lurches forward, creepily moves his fingers, and talks in a bitter fashion. You forget it is Jim Carrey after 30 seconds. He also plays the three ghosts brilliantly, especially the Ghost of Christmas Present. Gary Oldman also does an incredible job as Bob Cratchit and the ghost of Jacob Marley.

Now, there is one particular scene from the film that I did not like. When the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come chases after Scrooge, Scrooge is shrunken and then has the squeaky voice. That scene is played for laughs but I did not care for it. I felt it was unnecessary and it just wasn’t that funny.

Overall, “A Christmas Carol” delivers on everything I wanted from the film and it gives me a new sense of appreciation for the classic tale. The performance capture technology and the IMAX 3-D make a great combination, and it takes you on the ride of a lifetime. Although it’s not for the little ones, this movie will delight both older kids and adults. And people, see it in IMAX. This is one of those films that needs to be seen in that format. A

The Invention of Lying Review

I love people that take chances and try something new. Without people like that, the film industry would suck. If filmmakers just played it safe, some of the greatest films ever made would never exist. It’s a bold move to roll the filmmaking dice and see what your new ideas get you. Unfortunately, “The Invention of Lying” craps out. This never looked like a good movie to me. Every time I saw the trailer, I thought it looked boring and unfunny. And now I feel the exact same way after actually seeing it. I admire its fearless ambition to try something new, but the pay-off really sucks.

The plot of this film involves an alternate reality where everybody tells the truth, and nobody ever speaks a lie. For example, if you’re on a date, the girl will tell you that your suit is gay and your breath stinks. And when she breaks up with you, she will say “it’s not me, it’s you”. But a writer named Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais) tells the world’s first lie and learns how to lie to use it for his own personal gain. To many people, that would sound like a very interesting and intriguing plot, but to me it sounds completely uninteresting. That’s exactly what I found this movie to be: boring and uninteresting. I did not care at all what was going to happen. And even though I had never seen a plot like that before, it didn’t engage me at all.

Ricky Gervais is a very talented guy. I (personally) am not a big fan of British comedy. I don’t get most of the humor and it just doesn’t strike me as funny. I have seen one of Gervais’ stand-up shows and I thought he was actually very funny. He is the best part of this movie. Even though I didn’t care what was going to happen plot-wise, it was always very amusing playing this character that learns how to lie. But besides Ricky Gervais (and an appearance by Fionnula Flanagan), the acting in this movie is terrible. I thought Jennifer Garner was very boring. She acts like she has no emotions and you see the look on her face that tells you she’s only in it for the check. After “13 Going on 30” (one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen), “Catch and Release”, and “Ghosts of Girlfriends Past”, she should just stop doing these light-hearted comedies. She was a bad-ass motherfucker in “Alias”. Please God, do something like that again!

The script is also very unoriginal, because most of the jokes and sub-plots fell flat. Even if I wasn’t going to be blown away by the plot, I just wanted some jokes to ease my appetite. There are a ton of scenes where they could’ve had some great jokes, but those opportunities were destroyed by the moronic script and the dreadful execution of some of the scenes, especially those with Jennifer Garner. On the brighter side, there are a couple of moments that out a genuine smile on my face and I felt like I was enjoying myself. But there are very few of those moments.

Overall, “The Invention of Lying” is a very boring film that has little entertainment, and lots of unnecessary story. Seeing this at the theater is a waste of your money but if you really want to see it, wait for it to show on cable. C-

Jennifer's Body Review

SORRY FOR MY REVIEW BEING SO LATE. I MUST BE HONEST, I’VE BEEN VERY BUSY LATELY AND HAVEN’T HAD THAT MUCH TIME TO WATCH MOVIES. I MANAGED TO SEE THIS FILM LAST WEEKEND BUT I DIDN’T HAVE TIME TO WRITE MY REVIEW. SO NOW THAT I’VE HAD SOME SPARE TIME, HERE’S MY REVIEW FOR “JENNIFER’S BODY”.

To the all people going into this movie hoping to see Megan Fox naked, I must deliver some very disappointing news. There is absolutely no nudity in this film. Not from Megan Fox; not from Amanda Seyfried; not from anybody. That’s also one of the reasons why my grade for “Jennifer’s Body” is lower than it could’ve been. No I’m not a pervert, but when the filmmakers promised nudity and went back on their promise, that was just mean. So sorry guys, no Megan Fox nudity, but this would’ve been the perfect movie for some too. Then again even without the anticipated nudity, “Jennifer’s Body” actually turns out to be good entertainment. This film was written by Diablo Cody who won an Oscar for her screenplay for “Juno” 2 years ago. While “Juno” is a far superior film, “Jennifer’s Body” is funny, creepy, and devilishly sexy.

As seen in the trailer, the film revolves around Jennifer (Megan Fox) being possessed by a demon who then goes off seducing and killing boys. One of the best things about the film is the fucked-up friendship between the two main characters, Jennifer and Needy (played by “Big Love’s” Amanda Seyfried). They are complete opposites, yet you the sense that they are incomplete without each other. Needy being the nerd and Jennifer being the bitch, the two characters play off of each other and those scenes are even better when you have good dialogue. Hats off to Diablo Body for creating some truly original and funny dialogue.

Now individually, Seyfried is the better actress. She already proved she can act with her great performance on “Big Love”, and she delivers a hilarious performance. She is extraordinarily convincing and she brings out the emotions and uses them full charge. Megan Fox on the other can’t do shit without Seyfried by her side. She sucks at acting and like I’ve said before: if it weren’t for her looks, she would not have a career. She displays no enthusiasm or emotion when reading a single line and I felt no sympathy for her when she goes through some seriously ugly shit.

There is also a decent supporting cast in the film, with the highlight being J.K. Simmons. He is a great actor whose screen presence always brightens my day. He is a truly charming man with a sweet undertone and is hilarious at the same time. The same cannot be said for Adam Brody and Johnny Simmons. I have heard a lot of positive reaction to Brody’s performance, but I thought he was just as bland as Megan Fox and he was painful to listen to. Johnny Simmons is also boring to watch. When we are supposed to laugh for him and feel sorry for him, I wanted to beat his face in with a crow bar.

The film also has some truly stunning special effects. When Jennifer turns into a demon, I almost jumped out of my seat. Surprisingly, there are also some really cool kills in this film and a good amount of gore. On the very negative side of the film, the soundtrack is very annoying and tedious. Even with one great song (one by Panic! At the Disco), most of the songs all sounded the same and are truly unoriginal. The soundtrack kills the horror film vibe and it makes it even more obvious that “Jennifer’s Body” is another one of those hipster films.

Overall, “Jennifer’s Body” is good fun. While it is very disappointing that there is no nudity, there are enough laughs and thrills to justify the matinee price. B-

9 Review

Anticipation can be such a pain in the ass sometimes. Sometimes it pays off (“The Dark Knight”), and other times it just destroys you (“Public Enemies”). Now when anticipating a film based on the trailer, there are two things that the movie can be. First, it could be a really bad movie with all the decent parts being shown in the trailer. On the other hand, the trailer can just be a tiny preview of the enormous entertainment that the film has. The trailer for “9” is mind-blowing, featuring some truly bad-ass shots and a great song to go with the trailer (“Welcome Home” by Coheed & Cambria; seriously get this song on your iPod). Unfortunately, this is one of the times where the trailer is much better than the movie itself. “9” isn’t terrible, but it’s not good either. The simple story is really stretched out and the characters are extraordinarily underdeveloped. But, it is also a gorgeous-looking movie with breathtaking animation and some big “holy shit” moments.

The story is very simple: nine living rag dolls fight against Terminator-like machines that have destroyed all humanity. That’s it. I’m not kidding, there is nothing else. For a movie that could’ve had a very complex and intriguing story is replaced by a very simple and predictable one. There have many complaints about the runtime of this movie (it’s 80 minutes), and I’m one of the complainers. We get no time for character development or thoughtful insight on the war, or the rag dolls, or even the machines. I would’ve loved to seen more machines than they had in the film, and the coolest looking machine only has a 5-10 minute appearance. I felt absolutely nothing for these characters and I really didn’t care what was going to happen after I knew the whole story. I pretty much predicted who was going to die and what was going to happen, and they even show one major death in the trailer.

The film feels like its building up to this stunning finale and it’s going to blow me away. The sad part is it ended in such a boring and uncreative way. At the end of the film, my friend and I literally said at the same time: “that’s it? Don’t tell me that’s the end.” As for running time, many people have already criticized me about that saying that a short film can be a very good one. I think “The Nightmare Before Christmas” is shorter than “9”, but when I watch “The Nightmare Before Christmas” I actually feel extremely entertained and it doesn’t have any moments where something just falls flat. But also, “The Nightmare Before Christmas” feels like a 2 hour movie to me, but “9” felt like it was 45 minutes. Another big problem I have with the film is that the chain of events is started by the stupidest thing. I won’t spoil it, but it really does cheapen the story even more.

On the positive side, this film is stunning to look at. The animation is incredible and the attention to littlest details is off the charts. The world that the director has created is great and it feels alive and genuine. The character designs are also dead-on beautiful and machines are very creative (despite there being so few of them). I honestly couldn’t have cared less who voiced the characters, but they all did a really good job. Christopher Plummer gives another great voice performance (he was also Charles Muntz in “Up”), and so does Elijah Wood. Oh, so does John C. Reily, Martin Landau, and Jennifer Connelly. The film also some very good “holy shit” moments, such as one really disturbing image seen when 9 first wakes up and goes exploring.

One word warning: take the PG-13 seriously. This film is far more violent and intense than most of the animated films being released these days. There are some pretty disturbing images and scenes, and the machines (including my favorite one) will scare the hell out of younger kids.

Overall, “9” is a beautifully animated movie that is far too simple and criminally underdeveloped. They could’ve had so much more depth and story, but the movie is simple to a fault. I don’t recommend you pay to see this in the theater, but see this when it comes out on DVD or plays at a $1 theater. C

All About Steve Review

For all of you people that loved “The Proposal” and said that Sandra Bullock still had that magic comedic tough, I have one thing to say to you: you were wrong motherfuckers. Absolutely, horrifyingly, positively wrong. There is only one way I can describe Sandra Bullock’s character in this film: she is Jar-Jar Binks, times a thousand. I’d rather listen to a Jar-Jar Binks comedy routine than ever hear a single syllable come out of Sandra Bullock’s character’s mouth ever again. I am mad as hell that I saw this movie. I don’t want to write a long review about it, so I’m just going to keep this short. Do not pay a single goddamn penny for this movie. If you’re smart enough to listen to me, you will have avoided wasting precious time and money. Don’t even go to a free screening, and you will have saved yourself seven months of mental restoration. “All About Steve” gets TWO GIANT MIDDLE FINGERS UP! It’s almost the worst movie of the year, but it’s still a fucking mess. Fuck this movie. I want it to be locked up and thrown into the ocean where I never have to hear about it again. F