Delivery Man- Richard Roeper

This weeks review was done on Delivery Man staring Vince Vaughn as David Wozniak. It is about a irresponsible meat delivery man, that found out that he was the father of 533 children. This all happened because in the 90's a young David made over 600 deposits to a sperm bank. The clinic then at one point used his sample for all the patients that came into the clinic. Roeper liked the cast and Vince  Vaughn's comedy, but he felt that the story was not that great.  He also felt that the children didn't seem that they were really from NYC. He said they seemed like they were raised on a sound stage. He gave the film a grade of C+, he felt they could of expanded on the fact that David had 533 children. And how the clinic made such a screw up.

After seeing the film I can say that I can understand this review for the most part. It was kind of weird how he was able to make so many deposits, and how they used his sample so much. But I can say that I liked the way that the story flowed, even though it was a little outrageous how he had 533 kids. In all I would give the film a grade of a B, because it did keep me entertained. And I did like the twist and turns that the story took the audience through.  

Critic Watch Review: "The Counselor"

Spoiler alert!  Don't bother!!  Talk about a letdown!!  The Counselor was one of my most anticipated movies to see this year with it's all-star cast featuring the likes of Brad Pitt, Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem to name just a few.  The film starts off with an intense bedroom scene between Cruz and co-star Michael Fassbender- and any time Penelope is in a bedroom scene I'm all for it!  However her climax was ironically the climax of the entire movie as the film drudged on a pathetically predictable plot and in my opinion unsolicited and needlessly graphic scenes as you simply wait for character after character to meet their doom.  

I had such high expectations for this film based on the trailers and aside from getting to hear Penelope Cruz in the throes of passion and watching a very sexy-looking Cameron Diaz strut about and give new meaning to the common art of cleaning a car's windshield  (yes Cameron you can wipe mine anytime) I left the theatre feeling $15 poorer and thinking "I should have just had a glass of V8"    Don't bother but if you do save your money and wait for it on cable.

Critic Watch Blog: The Man of Steel

The critic I chose was Steve Persall from the Times. 

The review I read was about the recent new movie Man of Steel. Mr. Persall gave The Man of Steel a perfect score of 100. That being said he did bring up his critiques into why he did this. Mr. Persall says that this movie revitalized the Superman legend in tremendous ways. This is one point I have to agree with; This Superman was real, not in physics, rules of Earth's laws of physics, but of the realism of what it takes to live on Earth and the daily struggles many people have to deal with. Mr. Persall highlights that Superman didn't have to be super all of the time. That his Earth father played by Kevin Costner taught him to turn his cheek in the other direction so that he true powers can be a secret. A secret that needed to be kept that way because the society around him just would not understand nor accept this new reality that there is life beyond the stars. 

I could not agree more with that perfect score Persall gave this movie. I was instantly satisfied with the amount of work put into this movie. Persall brought up a great point and that was how this movie is similar to Christopher Nolan's remake of the Batman trilogy, which received great reviews. Persall stated that: "The movie projects an air of realism and myth expansion that Christopher Nolan's trilogy lent to Batman". That air of realism is what caught my attention and maintained it that way throughout the entire movie. I appreciate the fact that those who are 'comic bookies' are actually grown up and adults now and this movie is catering to them: an adult crowd. To see that even a young Superman went through what we know as a problem in our nation; bullying, was a way to relate to the audience and many out there watching this movie. Persall also made a good point about how this movie was not rushed. As per Persall: "Time is taken for conversations to go elsewhere than exposition and jokes don't come cheaply, if at all". This provided myself an ability to clearly understand what was going on. It was new to see first hand the origin of superman on film as in depth this movie did. No other Superman movie has done this. It clearly brought me in even more and I only left with a thorough knowledge and understanding on who Superman was and why he is indeed…Super. 

Critic Watch Blog #2: The Hunger Games- Catching Fire- Sean Cooper

Critic Watch Blog #2: The Hunger Games- Catching Fire- Sean Cooper

My critic watch blog entry follows Rex Reed’s slaughter-like review of The Hunger Games-Catching Fire. Reed starts his assault on the film right out of the gate with the following opening sentence,” Stale special effects won't lift this sci-fi thriller out of mediocrity”. I have not seen the film nor do I intend to. Not because of Reed’s review, but I’m not that moved by the franchise.

Reed makes clearly states his disdain for the film. There is no hint whatsoever of holding back what he thinks. As I stated in my first Critic Watch Blog, he is part of an older generation and his reviews are somewhat curmudgeon-like. In his review he uses terms such as “over-produced” and “utterly pointless” to describe the movie and refers to the original trilogy of novels as overrated.  He also explained that seeing in this film in IMAX was a better experience, but it didn’t help the movie at all.

Perhaps in an effort to stop the bleeding, Reed reminisces about how much he liked the original Hunger Games. He briefly goes over the premise leading up to where we are now in the second installment and restarts his assault on “Catching Fire”.  After explaining that Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) won the 74^th Hunger Games in the first movie they return home, but are told to return the start the 75^th Games and of course this all a trick by the evil President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland, to have them ultimately killed. Why? Reed writes it’s never really explained in the films narrative.

When I wrote about Reed’s take on Gravity, with Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, he wrote about the special effects and CGI. In that film he explained that he liked it, but it just wasn’t a blockbuster. The CGI in Catching Fire seems to really aggravate him. His descriptions are curt, lending nothing to the imagination or even appreciation for 1. The fact that CGI is a symbiotic art form holds some major weight in the films of present day and 2. This is a science fiction movie.  

Since I did not see Catching Fire, I can’t say whether it was good or bad. At the same time, I have a hard time believing Reed’s take on every aspect of the film. He junks the premise, the CGI, 3-D, describes the acting as “uniformly awful”, and also laments the fact that there is a third installment in the works. This review is somewhat comical. I appreciate his success and realize he’s built his persona, though not entirely, on his witty sarcasm. I am looking forward to the next review.

Sean Cooper  

Critic Watch Blog - Review of 12 years a slave by Susan Wloszczyna

The critic I chose was Susan Wloszczyna from Rogerebert.com.

The review I read was for “12 years a slave” directed by Steve McQueen of Great Britain. Wloszczyna gave the movie a score of 88 out of 100 on meatcritc.com and 3 ½ out of 4 stars.

Wloszczyna seems to like the movie, but is not completely sold on the entire story. She says that 12 Years a Slave “is a somber, meditative, almost poetic film that delivers the horrors of bondage stripped down and head-on.”

However, she found the wife of the second slave owner to be too one dimensional and found it hard to believe that the free and refined Solomon Northup would ever have been tricked into travelling with two white men and then wake up (after being drugged) a slave on his way to the south.

I have to say after seeing the movie with my family that I disagree somewhat with her review. Wloszczyna seems disturbed, even offended by the horror that unfolds in 12 years. The scenes of slaves being whipped, one where the flesh is ripped off, seems too graphic for her taste. She says “Even Mel Gibson, whose unbearable 5-minute whipping scene in "The Passion of the Christ" set the standard for such graphic cinematic punishment, would be aghast if not envious of how British director Steve McQueen ensures that the audience palpably feels the flesh-ripping agony of every lashing and beating on screen.”

The brutality and cruelty of slavery is a truth that is depicted in the film quite realistically and often gut wrenchingly. I was hard to watch, but as a friend of mine said, I owe to my ancestors to watch. The nudity in the film was necessary to show how the slaves were dehumanized and not thought of as people, but property and things.

Although the reviewer gave the movie a relatively good rating, I think that her desire to make the feel less “harsh” is a self-serving position. It would be feel better for the film to be “easier” for us to watch, but that’s what makes 12 years so incredible, the honesty of it and that it’s not easy to watch.

http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/12-years-a-slave-2013

Critic Blog Watch: How I Live Now_Rex Reed

Critic Watch Blog: Rex Reed’s review of How I Live Now

I chose Rex Reed of the New York Observer. After reading his review of Gravity for our first assignment (Critic Watch) I appreciated how he, unlike many other critics, did not give Gravity the high marks that so many others did. Mr. Reed, who is 77 years old, maybe experienced at this craft, but he is also from a different era and perhaps, such high marks in film reviews do not come easy from this veteran reviewer. The chosen film here is: “How I Live Now” starring Saoirse Ronan. At the start, Reed highlights the film’s background and how Ronan, playing Daisy, a rebellious and Goth teenager, was transplanted from a very dangerous New York to the English countryside to live with her cousins. Reed paints a dysfunctional teenager uprooted from a modern, fast-paced life to the rural confines of a clutter-filled farm far away from her home. Reed also mentions the origin of the script, a 2004 award-winning novel by author Meg Rosoff, while explaining how the film is essentially divided into two parts: “Idyllic and lush” followed by “dark and terrifying” as the remaining government encapsulates the survivors of  nuclear war. Before Reed ends the review he gives examples of how the kids in this film (there are no adults in starring roles) must learn to survive and look after one another. It seems Reed is not necessarily enthralled with this film. Rather, he appreciates Ronan’s characters evolution illustrated by the sense of responsibility and determination she develops. This review is more about Ronan’s performance than the film itself. And while Reed agrees with the dangers of nuclear war and its environmental effects depicted in the film, he is more concerned with the trajectory of Ronan’s career.  

     

Throughout the review Reed portrays the main character and how she fits into the films story with her cousins. Though he is biased in favor of Ronan’s role he does give notice to her costars and the relationships they all develop. Another positive is that Reed tells his readers the story’s literary origin by giving credit to the author of the award winning novel, Meg Rosoff. By doing this he is concisely praises the authors work while reviewing the films adaptation of her novel. It is often said film adaptations are not always held in high regard or for accuracy. By doing this, Reed then goes onto explain what he dislikes the most about the film: That it leaves more questions than answers and an overall bleak picture is developed. But what’s cool about this review is this: You get a sense that Reed latches on to what he does like about the movie. He has high hopes for the career of Saoirse Ronan, an Oscar nominee at 13 years of age for her work in Atonement (2007). He parallels his high hopes for her career with the development of her character in How I Live Now. 

http://observer.com/2013/11/love-and-squalor-saoirse-ronan-is-a-luminous-presence-in-an-otherwise-gloomy-how-i-live-now/