Killers Puts Marriage to the Test.
Killers is one of those movies that people either really like or really hate. The reason for this is not unlike any other movies any of us have seen. There are plenty of factors for liking a film and quite a few for absolutely despising it. Perhaps some did not like the story while others thought it was brilliant. Maybe the action was out of this world awesome to some individuals and to the people in the back row thought there was not enough. Whatever the reason, the new Ashton Kutcher/Katherine Heigl movie Killers falls into this category.
At least three of the reviews I have read were less than positive and one even recommended not to see it. After seeing the film myself, I can understand why it would get less than glowing reviews since the film is not exactly and action film and it is not quite a romantic comedy either. So, it is missing the high flying intense thrills of one and the laugh a minute antics of the other. However, even if Killers does not specifically fit into those genres; it is a story.
As such, the film tells us the story of Jen (Katherine Heigl) and Spence (Ashton Kutcher) who meet in France, fall in love, and get married only to have their marriage thrown into question three years later, when Spence’s past as a CIA agent-which was unknown to Jen-catches up with him and people are trying to kill him.
The story then continues as the couple dodges bullets and try to figure out who put the hit out on Spence, all while working out the future of their life together as husband and wife. This is where I think the narrative becomes lost on some would be viewers. Especially those who go in expecting something akin to say…True Lies, which was sort of an Action /Comedy, but more of an action movie with bits of comedy. Killers is more of a comedy with elements of action. Call it a dark comedy if you will. After all, there are people trying to kill Ashton Kutcher’s character.
My overall consensus on Killers is that it is not trying to be either an action, a comedy, or both. 
Killers is a film about the relationship between spouses and what happens when the trust between them is broken in a big way and instead of the usual “I slept with someone else.” or “I got fired.” Instead Spence explains it by saying, “Let’s just say I used to work for the blah blah blah and they gave me a license to blah.” To sum it up, Killers puts marriage to the test. The ultimate test. That of trust lost which must be regained. Something many of us can relate to even if we aren’t married.
Love it or hate it Killers is still a good story and it is worth the ride if you like god stories. If not, it’s got Ashton Kutcher, Katherine Heigl, Tom Selleck and Catherine O’Hara in it. Four reasons to go see it.
It’s A Wonderful Life, Shrek Style
That tag line pretty much sums up the premise of the movie, except that it isn’t Christmas, there is no angel named Charlie and Jimmy Stewart is not in it. However, the idea is the same.Like the late Mr Stewart’s character in It’s a Wonderful Life, our hero Shrek finds himself lamenting his life and wishing for the “old days” obviously taking all the good things for granted. As if mirroring that famous Christmas tale Shrek finds himself in an alternate universe in which he was never born. After that, the similarities cease.
As a matter of fact, Shrek doesn’t end up in the alternate version of Far, Far Away by some angelic magic, oh no. (Spoiler) Instead he gets tricked by Rumpelstiltskin into trading a day from his past in order to have a single day of nostalgia. Sure enough, Shrek gets his wish, but soon finds out exactly which day he gave up and to make matters worse, he only has one day to reverse it all. I’ll say no more of the plot as I don’t want to ruin the movie for those who have not seen it yet.
The film itself was as fun as I expected a Shrek movie to be. It had sight gags and the usual “punny” jokes, such as Donkey calling Puss a “Cat-tastrophe” and Puss retorting, ” And you? You are re-donk-ulous!” Honestly, it works in all its…um…cuteness. The 3D was done well and it added to the feel of the movie quite nicely. Overall, it is an excellent movie and a great addition to the quadrology-or is that Shrekology. Anyway, it is a lot of fun and great for a family night out.
My only critique of the entire film is that the ending is slightly anticlimactic. Everything ends as expected, happy ending and all. Not that I didn’t want it to end the way that it did, but it really would have been nice if there had been a bit more tension build up throughout the story so that it could end spectacularly. Maybe its just me and I prefer more drama in my films. Were I the director of Shrek Forever After I would have caused the audience to have a little more doubt in Shrek’s ability to succeed in his task.
In the end, Shrek Forever After does its thing and does it with true Shrek style and ultimately, the message is clear: It truly is a wonderful life, whether you’re Shrek, James Stewart, or just the average kid on the block.
This Isn’t Your Mother’s Robin Hood
Nor is it the Robin Hood we have all grown to know and love as a matter of fact. It isn’t the complete opposite either since director Ridley Scott chose to tell the story from a historically accurate point of view. Were you to compare this installment of Robin Hood with any of the versions from previous decades, it appears to be a completely different film.
There is no dashing handsome swashbuckler like Errol Flynn, a fox a la Disney’s Robin Hood(which, by the way is the most recognizable version around the world), or even Keira Knightly as a female offshoot of the legendary Robin Hood (Disney’s Princess of Thieves). Most especially it is not a certain Kevin Costner movie-what was the name? Oh Yes.-Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. The latter being the only one I know of to attempt a historical version of the story although the only historical aspect was that Robin Hood returned to England following his time fighting for King Richard in the Crusades.
In Ridley Scott’s take on the famous legend we learn much the same thing and that Robin Hood is known as Robin Longstride. An archer in the King’s army.
Perhaps the most notable and confounding thing in this version of Robin Hood is that Robin and his merry men are only seen stealing from the kingdom of England once in order to save the village of Nottingham. This action alone does not even make him an outlaw. As a matter of fact, Robin and his friends end up helping to save England from an invasion. At some point in the middle of the film I realized that I was not watching the story of Robin Hood the outlaw hero of Nottingham, but rather the story of how he became that outlaw.
In short, Robin Hood, starring Russel Crowe and Kate Blanchette is not a film about a man outwitting a corrupt English government, but rather the story of a common Englishman discovering his own history and rising up to protect his country and the people he loves ultimately becoming a hero of the people.
The film is entertaining and informative film at best yet not as emotionally riveting as I would have liked, but if by chance Ridley Scott gets his sequel we will see the hero Robin Hood we are expecting to see.
Iron Man 2 Shoot’s to Thrill
When I first saw the trailers for Iron Man 2 I was pretty thrilled to see that Mickey Rourke would be the villain and was slightly disappointed that Terence Stamp would not be reprising his role as Lt Col Rhodes. Before you correct me, a Lt Col is called “colonel” because it’s just easier to say. Every soldier knows that the silver maple leaf indicates the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. At least, in the Air Force and Army it does. I say slightly disappointed, because I think that Don Cheadle is a great actor.
What really does get to me about Iron Man 2 is the mixed reviews. I personally feel that the sequel is better than the first, while some weren’t so impressed. I won’t name names because they are entitled to their opinion and own personal experience.
So, without further delay I’ll tell you why I think it is so great.
First and foremost, the effects are spectacular. I am still in awe with the holographic computer interface that Tony Stark uses in his lab/
garage. Really, I hope that’s what computers are like in the near future. Imagine telling your Grandchildren; “We used to have these things called a mouse and a keyboard.” and they look at you completely clueless for a reference. Another thing about the effects that impressed me is showing Tony and Dusty with their face plates up while in the armor if I hadn’t already known about the effect I would not have been able to tell. Trust me, I have an eye for visual effects though I’m no expert at making them. That’s ILM’s job.
Secondly, the chemistry between Gwyneth Paltrow and Robert Downey Jr was fantastic. I was really expecting to see Pepper and Tony to have an all out fight. I’m glad they didn’t though because that would have added a bit more drama than was necessary. More precisely, the whole cast worked extremely well together. A testament to Jon Favreau’s directing ability.
Third, the characters themselves. From returning characters Tony Stark, Pepper Potts, Happy the chauffeur, and James “Rhodey” Rhodes who in and of themselves bring a plethora of entertainment; to Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), Natasha Romanoff/Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johannsen),Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) and Senator Stern (Gary Shandling) we get a very well-rounded cast who only help in creating the world of Iron Man. Let’s not forget Jarvis, Tony Stark’s well-mannered computer AI voiced by Paul Betanny who really adds to the awe I have with Tony Stark’s computer. In this installment, there are so many characters; including Nick Fury (Samuel L Jackson) that we can choose to either love or hate. Who else wanted to slap Senator Stern upside the head? I did. Sorry Gary, but you did your job and made a unlikeable character unlikable. Likewise, everyone else played their parts with equal skill and dedication. I want to see the movie a third time just so I can once again watch Scarlett Johannsen beat the tar out of…I think its seven security guards in the time it takes Happy to defeat one.
Other than the fact that the film is very entertaining with a splendid mix of humor, action and drama, Iron Man 2 gives us a better idea of who Tony Stark is; how he deals with his own mortality, the responsibilities of being a lover, a hero and heir to a legacy. The story also provides an almost teasing amount of information about S.H.E.I.L.D. Just enough to get wondering about this organization.
After all is said and done, Iron Man 2 does what it should. It entertains and wets our appetites for another sequel and does it superbly with style. To borrow from AC/DC whose music is in the movie, Iron Man 2 does unapologetic-ally “Shoot to Thrill”.
Kick Ass Rocked, Hit Girl “Killed”
Yes. I said it. Kick Ass did rock, and yes I did say that Hit Girl “killed”. There really is no pun intended, not really because the character Hit Girl did her fair share of killing bad guys. In fact, I think she killed the most. I’ll have to see it again to be sure. However, there is a reason I put the word in quotations.
Ever hear a comedian say that they “killed ’em” after a set? What they are meaning is that they did so good that the audie
nce couldn’t stop laughing.
So, when I say that Hit Girl killed it i mean it as a little bit of a pun, because her the character does literally kill; with great efficiency. However, she is also a satirical effigy of Batman’s famous sidekick, Robin who, in the late nineties comic book series Robin II and Robin III, was a twelve-year-old boy. It was obvious to me what the intent was. Why else have her be the sidekick of Batmanesque Big Daddy played by Nicholas Cage; who by the way, paid excellent homage to Adam West’s nineteen sixties Batman with his… Certain. Way. Of speaking.
Truly, Hit Girl(Chloe Moretz) has struck a nerve. Some reviews have been less than accepting of the character, perhaps because the idea of a twelve-year-old girl having to be more violent and foul-mouthed than the adults trying to kill her is hard to fathom. Yet, I can’t help but think that if children were able to protect themselves as effectively, without killing or course, would be kidnappers and child molesters would think twice least they get their sensitive area served to them or at the minimum, a brutal thrashing.
Personally, I don’t condone vigilantism. But, Kick Ass is not necessarily a movie about vigilantes. It is a story about that last straw, the one that makes a person stand up and say, “I’ve had enough and you’re not pushing me around anymore.” It is for that reason I like this movie and if you don’t have any qualms about seeing Hit Girl do her thing go see Kick Ass. If not, don’t.
Avatar, 2012, Alice In Wonderland
>Recently, I realized that it has been quite a few months since my last post or even my last review of any movies. Perhaps the culprit is the fact that going back to school and working full time has a unique way of sucking a person’s free time away. Fortunately, I have the ability to take a little time away from the rigor of online college courses and with some of that time decided to finally post a few thoughts about at three highly anticipated films released over the last four months.
Avatar had to be the most anticipated movie of 2009 and I was no different in my own excitement to see it. In my mind, the film instantly became a classic and will now be listed among director James Cameron‘s best films. Even by the third time viewing the film I could not help but be pulled into the world that Cameron created with its lush and awe inspiring visuals and storyline that parallels so many of the issues that exist out here in the real world. For this film enthusiast, there was no surprise in Avatar’s win at the Golden Globes. This is one title that I will certainly be adding to my home collection.
2012 was another film that was slated to be a huge hit at the box office, which it was and rightfully so, the special effects were nothing short of breathtaking as we watched Los Angeles literally fall to pieces and Yellowstone explode and yet, as I watched an epically gargantuan wave crest over the Alps and overwhelm a Buddhist monastery, I couldn’t help but wonder if this film was really about the disaster being depicted, or if it was more about survival of the human race. Without a doubt, the effects drew in the audience and may have been part of why we all remained glued to our seats, but it was the story of a family already struggling to survive having to overcome their differences and come together in order to escape what appeared to be certain death, that makes the film worth seeing.
The third film I’d like to mention is Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland. The film itself has earned a few mixed reviews; mostly from critics and that is perhaps due to the fact that the film is not a direct interpretation of the famous Lewis Carroll stories Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. Instead, we are given a story about a much older Alice who is now on the cusp of becoming a woman in society at the age of nineteen whom, when presented with the prospects of her expected future, takes a “moment” which turns into an adventure in Wonderland. Despite the mixed reviews, Alice in Wonderland is a spectacular film and Tim Burton as always, creates a unique vision of a world and invites us all for a ride and the 3D effects only help to immerse the audience in the experience that is Wonderland. If you have not seen this yet, go. It is well worth it.
With spring upon us and summer just a month or two away, I look forward to what the cinema has in store for us with such films as Prince of Persia, Avatar: The Last Air Bender and Robert Rodriguez’ Predators as well as the re-envisioned Nightmare on Elm Street. Hopefully, there will be much fun to be had at the movies this year.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png)
CinemaPeek 