Archive
Movie Review: Under the Yum Yum Tree (1963)
Summary:
Robin is a sensible college student who firmly believes a successful marriage is about the science, not the emotions. She convinces her boyfriend David, who just wants to get married already, that they should live together without sleeping together first to see if they are emotionally compatible. Her aunt is not only her college professor, but also a recent divorcee, and Robin and David move into her old apartment. Unbeknownst to them, Aunt Irene moved out due to a messy break-up with the lecherous landlord, Hogan, who lives across the hall. Hogan is determined to craftily break up the couple so he can sleep with Robin himself, and David and Robin struggle to determine the right way to have a modern relationship.
Review:
Some in the modern audience would find the entire concept of this movie too laughable to be viewable, but if you’re aware of the situation of the sexes in the late 1950s and early 1960s, it was actually quite a progressive movie for the time period. Divorce is acknowledged via Robin’s aunt, Irene, and she is not demonized as a slimy divorcee. She is a woman who has learned that relationships are not always simple, but also what is important to bring to them. In fact, she gives the climactic speech of the film about relationships. Then there’s the fact that Robin’s and David’s sexual feelings are acknowledge, and David even questions how much it would actually hurt their future together if they were to sleep together before getting married. Robin worries that young people are rushing into marriages due to “glandular urges.” These are quite sensible concerns voiced in a climate in which “proper” people did not engage in premarital sexual relationships, and the characters’ feelings are actually highly relatable.
Of course, the film is not entirely a serious one. It address what was then a modern concern under the guise of slapstick. It also utilizes one of my favorite comedy techniques wherein one room has multiple doors and windows, and the characters come and go either just missing each other or only briefly encountering each other. One particularly delightful scene features a drunk Robin reciting e. e. cummings in an attempt to seduce David. If any of these types of humor are favorites of yours, you will find yourself laughing at this movie.
I should also mention that this film features Jack Lemmon in an early role, as well as Dean Jones, who frequently does push-ups. Talk about your old-time eye candy. It also has an opening sequence, used frequently in 1960s movies, wherein a young lady and man dance around to a song written for the film together. It’s cute and really sets the tone for the movie.
Also, cat lovers should be aware that there is a cat in this movie who plays a rather important role both to the plot and the slapstick humor. I love how older movies insert cats into the storylines in a way in which modern films just don’t anymore. Cats weren’t the props to crazy cat lady jokes. They were part of the story.
If you enjoy old movies, the questioning of society’s sexual mores, or slapstick humor, you will definitely enjoy this film.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: The Fly (1986)
Summary:
Seth Brundle’s future is looking up. He is on the verge of completing a teleportation machine and is dating the journalist who is chronicling his creation of this wonderful new invention. One drunken night brought on by unwarranted feelings of jealousy, he makes himself the first human test subject for teleportation. Unfortunately, a fly teleports along with him, and the machine merges their DNA, beginning Seth Brundle’s gradual, gruesome transformation into Brundlefly.
Review:
A horror movie hasn’t made me cringe and shriek to an extent like The Fly did in a long time. I love a good horror movie, and the filmmakers hit all the right notes to make a viewing a mind-tingling, gross-out pleasure. The urban loft sets are the perfect back-drop to the scientific horror. The 80s clothes and hairstyles enhance the visual appeals instead of distracting from it. The dialogue is ideal, having the characters say just enough to keep the story going but not too much to distract from the visual horror.
Seth Brundle’s gradual transformation is a terrific mix of his body gruesomely changing and him visibly losing his mind. Jeff Goldblum does a fantastic acting job, showing the remnants of Brundle’s human mind and the emerging of his Brundlefly mind. He manages to pull this off through the grotesque make-up, and it is this superb acting that really makes the horrific scenes read as real and not fake, B-movie material.
I have not enjoyed a horror movie this much in ages. If you’re a fan of horror or 1980s films, you absolutely must watch The Fly. I doubt you will be disappointed.
5 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) (Series, #2)
Summary:
The machines didn’t just send one terminator back in time; they sent two. The second is a T1000 made of molten metal that can morph into the shape of anything it touches. It’s out to get Sarah’s son, John, who is extra vulnerable since his mother is locked up in a mental institution.
Review:
This is a fan favorite, and people tended to be floored when they found out I hadn’t seen it yet, so I finally got around to watching it. It is deliciously 90s, and when I found out the special effects are phenomenal for the time period. In fact, I wouldn’t be too disappointed to see a movie made today with this level of special effects. The T1000 looks believable, and the fight scenes are dramatic and powerful.
I enjoyed the twist and new approach to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character. His accent is perfect for playing a robot, and this was truly great casting.
Anyone who knows me won’t be surprised that I disliked the mental hospital part of the plot. It presents a very false example of what mental institutions were like in the 90s and demonizes the doctors and other mental health workers. Obviously mental health workers aren’t going to go around believing people who claim to be visited by time traveling robots, but they will and do treat them kindly. Other scifi stories have handled similar plot lines much better, and I was disappointed to see such harsh treatment of a helping institution.
Also, the voice overs by Sarah Connor were completely unnecessary, overly dramatic, and full of cringe-inducing dialogue. It kind of reminded me of the voice over in Blade Runner. Blech.
These two negative elements did not take up much of the screen time, however. That mostly consisted of John Connor and Arnold Schwarzenegger both of whom were quite pleasurable to watch. If you enjoy action movies, you will definitely enjoy this film.
3.5 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Previous Movies in Series:
Terminator
Movie Review: Up (2009)
Summary:
Carl’s wife Ellie has died, and now he’s sitting in the house they shared biding the time until he can join her. An unfortunate conflict with the developers building all around him leads the court to order that he be sent to a nursing home. Defiant, Carl decides to take the trip to South America he and Ellie always meant to take by flying there–with his house. An 8 year old stowaway, a mysterious bird, and dogs with collars that allow them to talk all make for an interesting adventure.
Review:
I know, I know. How had I not seen this already? I admit, I thought the premise sounded dumb at the time it came out, and was surprised at how into it everyone got. I don’t entirely blame myself for this. The advertising ignored everything that makes this movie wonderful and instead focused on the balloon house.
This story showcases the problems faced as an elderly person. Other stories do this, but this is a cartoon, generally aimed at children, and it is frankly a delightful pairing. It’s an old wive’s tale that there’s an innate connection between the elderly and the very young, and this movie decidedly backs that up. Russell, the 8 year old, is lonely due to his absentee father, but in his youth is still full of energy and optimism. Carl, in spite of living a good life, is depressed and lonely without Ellie. There is no one who bothers to care for him. They only see a crotchety old man, which granted is the way he’s behaving, but maybe it’s for a reason? Kevin respects Carl, and this gradually opens him up to connecting with another human being even at this late stage in life.
In addition to the wonderful themes, the scenes are beautifully drawn. The colors are just the perfect mix of cartoony and realistic to make for a visual feast. Additionally, the comic relief of the talking dogs and the mysterious birds are handled with an expert ease that hits the funny button at just the right moments, but are still creative enough to be delightful.
If you happen to have still not seen Up, I highly recommend it. It’s not your average animated movie plot, and it is visually gratifying.
5 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Book Review: A Million Miles in a Thousand Years by Donald Miller
Summary:
In this memoir Donald Miller recalls how turning his previous memoir into a movie impacted his life. When working on the script, Donald learned what makes a good story and started applying it to his current life. He went from sitting on the couch all day watching tv to biking across the country to raise money for clean water in Africa.
Review:
This book could have been brilliant. It contains various clear information on what makes a good story that is quite useful to writers. It also is inspirational in asking us to stop watching characters live stories and live our own. Unfortuantely, Miller persists in plopping in his spiritual ideas, which tend toward the mainstream Christian variety. I don’t mind skimming over a few praise God’s. I do, however, get profoundly irritated when a writer goes from saying something meaningful like life is about what we learn and not about achieving something in particular to saying that the people with the worst lives have it the best because they’ll appreciate heaven more. Um, excuse me, what the hell?! It’s such an odd mental position to take. Can you imagine saying that to someone with AIDs or a starving child or someone who’s being abused? Then, to take the mental oddness further, he goes on to seek to help people better their lives. That’s great that he does that, but it seems that based on his theory that a rough life leads to a better after-life that he’s just stealing a good after-life from these people. My brain hurts just thinking about that mind-fuck.
I guess what made the book such a frustrating read for me is that I can see Miller being so close to a humanist view but then ruining his current life by pining for the after-life. He talks a lot about what makes a good story but I bet even he could see that a movie wouldn’t be any fun if a character spends the whole film pining for something that he isn’t sure is actually going to happen to the extent that he misses things happening right now.
That said, the book is well-written and does contain some memorable scenes and people. Actually, I wish the book had been about some of the people featured in it in lieu of Miller, such as the family that went around interviewing world leaders with their children or the man who went from a childhood in the ghetto to running a law firm to running a mentoring program. At least we get to hear a bit about them though.
On the other hand, Miller’s view of the world tends to rip you from the story and make you want to smack him upside the head. Like when he tells the story of how a man stole his ex-girlfriend’s cat and then told her on the phone he was going to hurt it if she didn’t come back to him then proceeded to squeeze the cat until it cried. Miller called this “depravingly charming” (219). Um, no, it’s awful! And Miller finds this story inspiring because the man “found Jesus” and “changed.”
It basically reads almost as if two different people wrote the memoir. One who recognizes we have one life to live and it’s better to live it doing things than sitting on the couch. The other spends his time with his head in the clouds hoping for the after-life and believing in the power of a dead man. If you can handle the cognitive dissonance in those two stances, you’ll enjoy the book as it is written well. If you find it as troubling as I do, though, you should skip it.
2.5. out of 5 stars
Source: Won from Minski of okay, peanut
Movie Review: Sherlock Holmes (2009)
Summary:
Detective Sherlock Holmes’ faithful companion, Dr. Watson, is retiring from solving cases to settle down with his soon-to-be fiancee, Mary. He just needs to finish up one last case. Lord Blackwell murdered five young women in occult ceremonies. Watson pronounces him dead at his hanging, but then he seems to come back to life. Watson and Holmes spring into action to solve the case, but things become more complicated when Holmes’ ex-girlfriend, Irene, shows up.
Review:
I’d be hard-pressed to not enjoy a movie Robert Downey Jr. is in, particularly one in which he does a bunch of fist-fighting. Toss in Jude Law, and you’d have to do an awful lot wrong for me to not enjoy sitting through the movie. When the mystery first came up, I found myself rolling my eyes at yet another Illuminati plot point. However, the resolution of the mystery made the entire story worth-while. It was actually a surprise and yet all still managed to make sense.
The feel of the movie reminded me a bit of Moulin Rouge, minus the music parts. So if you enjoy that sort of tongue-in-cheek period piece, you’ll enjoy the feel of this movie.
The only part of the film I really didn’t enjoy was the bit about Irene. It wasn’t explained well at all. I couldn’t understand her character’s motivation or really exactly what was going on with her at all. I like Rachel McAdams, but I felt that her appearance in this story was simply jarring.
That said, Sherlock Holmes is an enjoyable period piece romp with a brain-tingling mystery attached. If you enjoy mystery or period pieces with wit, you will enjoy this film.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (2009)
Summary:
Flint Lockwood has always been different. He’s a nerd, and that doesn’t go over so well in his sardine-fishing, blue collar coastal island town in the Atlantic. His mom was always supportive that he’d do great things one day, however, so the town has grown used to his experiments going awry. When everyone suddenly decides that sardines are gross, the town is facing an economic downturn. It appears that Flint’s latest experiment could bring them the tourism they need.
Review:
There is so much to love about this little film. The storyline about just being who you are and ignoring labels is heart-warming. On the other hand, the film is careful not to make the nerds out to be perfect or the non-nerds to be pointless. Everyone has their strengths, and it is important to use a critical eye when playing up to them.
The animation is quite good, and I imagine it must be spectacular in 3D. Everything is colorful, and the storm scenes in particular are rich and vibrant.
The characters are what really makes the film though. From Flint to his dad to his love interest, Sally Sparks a meteorologist, everyone is richly drawn. Then of course there are my two favorite characters, Flint’s monkey who is voiced by Neil Patrick Harris (“gummy bears!” “Steve!” “excited!”) and the town police officer, who is voiced by none other than Mr. T. Did you catch that? Neil Patrick Harris and Mr. T in the same movie. That is the definition of awesomeness.
The storyline was complex. Although I was nearly certain everything would work out ok in the end (it is a kid’s movie after all), I still found myself on the edge of my seat rooting for the characters.
If you enjoy science, slapstick, or coming of age stories, you will definitely enjoy this film. I highly recommend it.
5 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: Shaun of the Dead (2004)
Summary:
Shaun is a 20-something loser with a dead-end job and a girlfriend who he only ever takes out to the local pub. She dumps him on the eve of a zombie outbreak. Shaun drags his job-less roommate through the streets, battling zombies in an attempt to save his mother and restore his relationship with Liz.
Review:
I couldn’t watch this movie and not compare it to Zombieland, which I watched last summer. I honestly think that anyone wanting to compare US culture to UK culture should just watch these two films. Shaun of the Dead takes an everyman who wants desperately to save people, but his only weapon is a cricket bat (btw, those things look like such a pussy weapon). Shaun stumbles about the city with his line of relatives, friends, and frenemies, and they all make witty asides to each other while maintaining some sense of propriety when battling the zombies. It’s wonderfully funny to watch, but not a point of view I, as an American, would imagine at all for a zombie apocalypse. My pov lines up much more with Zombieland where the characters swipe trucks and double-tap the zombies with guns. However, that’s what made Shaun of the Dead such a delightful watch, because it was a character study on top of the fun zombie scenes. There were some jokes that fell flat for me, and I wasn’t too keen on the ending, but I know some people will enjoy the ending for precisely the reasons I disliked it. However, Shaun of the Dead was still a delightful watch, and I recommend it to anyone who enjoys humorous apocalypse or zombie tales.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: The Dinner Game (1998) France Le diner de cons
Summary:
Pierre and his friends have a recurring dinner party where they each bring an idiot. The person who brings the best idiot wins. Pierre is excited that he may have finally found a winner in Pierre–a government worker who makes models out of matchsticks and talks about them incessantly. However, he throws his back out the night of the party, and his wife walks out on him, leaving him at the hands of the bumbling Francois.
Review:
This is the French movie that is being remade/Americanized into Dinner for Schmucks, which is being released this summer. This is what led me to watch it, and I must say I don’t know why I always forget how much I enjoyed the foreign films I watched in university. They’re such a fun way to immerse yourself in another culture.
The Dinner Game plays with that classic light-handed touch often found in French films. The wit is sly, not heavy-handed. The jokes build slowly, rather like American black-and-white classic films.
I found it delightful that the writers made the choice to make Pierre basically an unredeemable douchebag who you still end up sympathizing with. It takes talent to pull that off, and it is done quite smoothly.
The movie is quite short, though, ringing in at only 81 minutes. I wanted it to last longer! Additionally, the ending was rather sudden. People who don’t like to left guessing won’t enjoy that part of it. I also felt the set-up took a bit long, particularly given the length of the film.
If you enjoy light-handed wit and a good character study, you will enjoy this film.
4 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Movie Review: Monsters vs. Aliens (2009)
Summary:
Susan is about to get married when a meteor hits her, turning her into a giant. The US government quickly brings her to its monster facility, where she meets other monsters. Soon an alien invades Earth, seeking the material in the meteor that made Susan a giant. The monsters must fight the alien, while Susan tries to come to grips with her new life.
Review:
This is an awful movie. Down-right awful. It was so bad that even though it’s only 94 minutes long, I didn’t finish it. None of the jokes worked. The storyline made zero sense. I mean, the meteor landed on top of Susan. She definitely would have been crushed prior to being able to soak up any special substance. The way the monsters are handled completely misses all opportunities for humor. Omg they have super-powers but can’t seem to use them properly. Hilarious. *eye-roll* Then there’s the invading alien. I don’t even know if we were supposed to find him threatening or funny, but he was certainly neither. Dreamworks, how did you manage to go so wrong? Especially with the gift of such a talented voice cast including Seth Rogen, Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, and Stephen Colbert. This should have been epically funny, instead of an epic waste of time.
Save yourselves from this disaster, folks. There are plenty of other worthy animated movies out there to spend your time on.
1 out of 5 stars
Source: Netflix
Support my work with a tip or browse my shop for curated book club guides, how to guides, cross-stitch patterns, and more!
This work by Amanda Nevius is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Opinions of a Wolf 