Toy Story 3

When film historians write the history of cinema in the first part of the 21st Century, Pixar Studios will have its own chapter. When they're writing text books about the the art of film animation, Disney will hold a hallowed position as the first great animation studio but they will speak of Pixar as the best. It's amazing. Pixar's consistency, the freshness and verve of their storytelling and animation, their ability to speak to audiences of different generations is unmatched anywhere in the cinematic universe. They are just that good. The only disappointment is that they release just one film a year.
"Toy Story 3" starts with a huge action sequence meant to show those old familiar toys we love (Buzz, Woody, Jesse and the gang) in the prime of their purpose. They are being played with in the fullness of Andy's imagination, in this case a train robbery and subsequent chase. This is a toy's raison d'etre. Unfortunately the reality is that Andy has gotten older and is about to leave for college. The toys haven't really seen this kind of playful action in quite a while. With Andy gone, the central question of the third installment is "Where will the toys end up?". The trash? The attic? Or someplace even more sinister? Change is hard and frightening and loss is never easy. This kind of thematic treatment even in a film meant for adults is difficult to realize. In a story meant for audiences of all ages, it's a high flying act worthy of the Wallendas. The people at Pixar pull off another popular entertainment that respects the heart, the head and even the soul. They really are master storytellers.
Perhaps the only thing wrong with the release of "Toy Story 3" is that we don't get a Pixar original. It is after all a sequel. No rat as a master chef or love lorn robot or balloon powered house. Forget it. If all sequels where as good as this, there wouldn't be a stigma attached to the word. See it. Take the kids. If you don't have any, borrow the neighbor's kids. Or do what I did. See it at midnight without the kiddies but with a theater full of adults who stand and cheer at the end as if they were kids once again.
Oh, and one more thing. If you see it in a theater you'll also get to see the most clever, original and absolutely delightful short film you'll ever lay eyes on called "Day and Night". I won't even describe it here perchance to ruin the impact of your imagination at work. You'll just have to see for yourself.

The Karate Kid

Jaden Smith is no Ralph Macchio. Jackie Chan is no Pat Morita. This is a big part of the problem with the new version of the eighties classic "The Karate Kid". That isn't really that much of a knock on Smith and Chan. Movies that become classics do so for a reason and the first version owed a lot to its casting. Macchio was perfect in the role, played with a delicate balance of innocence and anger. Morita simply played the hell out of the role of a lifetime. Result? Icon status and an Oscar nomination. In my opinion, it really should have been an Oscar win. So Smith and Chan have a lot to live up to. And they both do okay, but just okay. Jaden Smith is talented and he physically dives into the role with feet flying. But he's like... twelve years old. He's a kid and he can't bring the kind of acting chops that Macchio had in his early twenties. That may seem like an unfair comparison, but that's what you get when you remake a classic. He's good. I won't go further.
Chan, on the other hand, has a different problem to contend with. When they rewrote this version, someone forgot to mention how funny the original character, Mr. Miyagi, was written. Chan has charm and charisma, but he doesn't have the one-liners. In the original, when Macchio needs a competition uniform, Mr. Myagi steals one. When Macchio asks where he got it, Mr. Miyagi deadpans "Buddha provides". Chan is stuck with the big emotional scenes that were handled so beautifully by Morita, but none of the humor. Chan, like Smith, doesn't quite have the chops.
The other huge problem is that every chance this film gets, it tries to milk emotion and melodrama from the script---mercilessly. Even the classic final battle seems forced and dishonest. The original, directed by John Avildson, handled that stuff masterfully. Remember, he's the guy who directed "Rocky". The gap in directorial skill level is obvious.
Here's what this film does have. China. The whole darn country. And boy does it use it. This film unveils a sense of everyday life in China that is rarely if ever captured in a non-Chinese film (even though the Chinese film office co-produced). You get a feel for how the modern Chinese actually live. At least the city-dwellers.
When Chan and Smith go to a mountain-top martial arts sanctuary, the visuals are just stunning. Breath-taking. And worth the price of admission. Combine the exotic local with really well done training sequences and you've almost got a movie. Unfortunately, there's the overlong opening, a silly juvenile love interest sub-plot and a corny and cliched ending. Too bad this two hour and twenty minute film wasn't forty minutes shorter. It's not, which means you may want to put it on your Netflix queue.

Get Him To The Greek

The Seven signs of the Apocalypse are upon us. They are wearing sweaters in Hell. Frogs are raining from the sky. OK get ready for this. You may never see this in print again. Ever. Sean Combs and Russell Brand are excellent in the very funny and sometimes poignant "Get Him To The Greek". (AHHHHH! The Frogs!!)
I can't stand Russell Brand. I can't stand the type of performer he is. All hype and flash and no substance. I wouldn't cast Sean "Puffy" Combs to play third dog catcher from the left. Last night the Apocalypse came.
It is still a mystery why I even went to this movie. Late night show, hoping for a laugh. I had low expectations. What a pleasant surprise. The dialogue between Hill and Brand was snappy and grounded by the realty of the characters. Hill struggles to get his footing at first but as soon as Brand's Aldous Snow enters the scene he relaxes into it. Eventually they end up as a raunchy version of Abbott and Costello, only this time the fat guy is the straight man. They play off each other perfectly. But here's the twist. By the end of the film, it feels almost like a character study of an aging and irrelevant rock star. Brand softens the gimmicky stuff in favor of some honest emotion. I'm not sure why, but it works. And just like in the best Abbott and Costello movies, no one lets the plot get in the way. Storyline-wise, everything you need to know is in the title.
Don't get me wrong. It ain't perfect. The women's roles are underwritten and that's being generous. If you're looking for it, you won't have any trouble finding a streak of serious misogyny. And there's a scene in which Hill, Brand and Elizabeth Moss attempt a threesome that has to be one of the most uncomfortable things I have ever seen on film. And I mean like watching "91/2 Weeks" with your grandmother uncomfortable. Should have been cut. This movie is also unapologetically raunchy in terms of language, sexual situations and overall demeanor. Believe the R rating. But it has its sweet side too. Best of all it's genuinely hysterical.
So if ya like it rough and funny with a splash of heart, buy a ticket to the Greek.

So Far

Here's a list of the films that I've blogged about so far in 2010. Some are from the tail end of 2009. Go back and check them out.

The Book of Eli
Funny People
Valentine's Day
Public Enemies
Fish Tank
Creation
How To Train Your Dragon
Green Zone
Greenburg
Taking Woodstock
Date Night
The Ghost Writer
Sherlock Holmes
City Island
Iron Man 2
Robin Hood
Edge of Darkness
The Prince of Persia
Shrek Forever After
Kick Ass (Guest Blogger)
Sex And The City 2 (Guest Blogger)
Oscar Contenders 2010 1 (Upcoming films)
Oscar Contenders 2010 2 (Upcoming Films)

Guest Blogger-Sex And The City 2

If ever I needed a guest blogger for a film it's this one. I wouldn't know Jimmy Chu from a Charleston Chew. But I knew the perfect guest writer. Linnea Dakin is a friend, screenwriter and big fan of the series. She speaks with an authority I do not possess.Take it away Linnea....

(Full disclosure- I loved the TV series)
I loved this movie. Is it perfect? Of course not, but it’s damn good in my opinion.
Underneath the clothes and handbags this is a great story about 4 women. One is struggling with a committed relationship, once all the “newness” wears off. (i.e., the honeymoon is over) One is dealing with being a mom of 2 young children, and the guilt of not always liking being a mom (and mind you, it took her years to get the children). One is dealing with a crappy job and balancing that with being a mom. (and her trying not to feel guilty because she likes working!) And one is dealing with how her body is betraying her as she gets older (menopause). And as an athletic woman who at 38 is finding my body is changing no matter how well I take care of it, I empathize with that!

There are some who are upset by the Middle East story line. They think this movie is too frivolous to deal with such a heavy issue. But I wonder if they have stopped to consider that more people watched the midnight showing on the first night than have probably watched all of the numerous documentaries on the subject of women's rights in the Middle East... Remember, only the court jester could tell the king the truth without fearing his head cut off. Sometimes laughter is the best way to tell someone “tough news."

And visually seeing the contrast of women from the U.S. versus the Middle East was very impacting, in my opinion. If just one person starts googling and reading up on this subject, isn’t that a good thing?

I loved the obstacle that Samantha was given, her very essence and nature – literally breaks the law in Dubai. Forcing her to embrace who she is and continue to accept herself, menopause and all. (Even if “everyone else” doesn’t always like it) I think it was kind of brilliant to put the women in this situation, that is, the Middle East. I did NOT get it from the trailers, but seeing it played out - it made perfect sense.

I've heard a few people were bored by the gay wedding that opened the film. And it was definitely over the top. But that was the whole point. And if they were listening, there were second meanings in the characters' lines right and left. Just because two men are getting married, doesn't mean the complexity of marriage goes away. Heterosexual people struggle with the same issues...

I actually think this movie may be a little better written than the last one. Kudos to all involved. Well, okay, Ms. Patricia Field, the costume designer, may have gone a little crazy. Ms. Field, may I respectfully remind you that when I’m busy trying to figure out when they had time to change outfits, much less how the characters are not hurting themselves from their clothes, it’s a little distracting. I’ll give you creative freedom on what they wear, no matter how nutty your stuff may be, but at least can you give me the logic of when they leave the hotel and then come back they are still in the same outfit? Please? Thank you. Peace out. ---Linnea Dakin