Fireball

Lets get it out of the way, shall we?  Fireball is about a man released from prison who finds his brother is in a coma.  In his quest for answers he finds an underground ring, run by the local mob.  The game is basketball.  First team to score wins.  The catch?  The players are allowed to beat the living crap out of each other while they play.  Done laughing?  It’s actually a pretty good throwback to beat down movies of old.  Shot on an obviously low budget, the gritty street level view, and some brutal but not flashy martial arts give the movie some street cred.  And while the premise is goofy, solid acting and limited melodrama keep it from being stupid.  The action is good and plenty, but it suffers a lot from the “shaky camera syndrome” that seems to be the new black in fight films.  Though, I’m guessing it’s more from lack of a huge budget more-so than flashiness, so it’s forgivable.

Why I liked it:  Good old fashioned beat em up.  Sympathetic characters give the silly premise some depth.

Why you may not:  Not as fancy as some of the more popular martial arts fare.

Doghouse

Think back to all those movies where some girl is wronged and goes after the guy.  Sometimes is violent, mostly it’s a smart revenge, but the fellas are always evil.  Always.  So if you’ve been wondering where your “male empowerment” movie is, Doghouse is kind of an answer.  Straight from a frat mind.  Guys just can’t go hurting the women folk though, that’s misogynistic, and wrong.  But if said ladies were transformed into cannibalistic, blood-thirsty zombies?  Now we have a ballgame.  A group of friends, taking a buddy to a secluded village in the U.K. to help him forget his impending divorce, stumble upon a military training exercise that has turned all the females into monsters.  Taking a copious amount of notes from films like Evil Dead and Shaun of the Dead, Doghouse falls just short of top notch zombie comedy.  Despite its premise and its failure to compete with more respected films, it’s never unenjoyable.

Why I liked it: Good zombie effects, despite a low budget.  Funny and dark, like any good zom-com

Why you may not: Frat boy mentality.  Inevitable comparisons to previous films may raise expectations too high, leading to disappointment

Chocolate and Raging Phoenix

With Tony Jaa apparently losing his mind and disappearing for weeks during the filming of the awful Ong-Bak 2, someone has to step up until he regains his senses.  That someone is a she?  25 year old  Jeeja Yanin kicks ass and never takes names across these two films from the people that made Ong-Bak.  She’s got the skills and two movies in two years means she probably ain’t going anywhere any time soon.

Chocolate – A Thai gangsters girl and Yakuza honcho fall in love during a hostage switch, do the deed, and have a kid.  Yakuza guy has to go home or gangster will kill the mom.  So the two end up living alone in poverty.  The girl is not right in the head but shows an amazing gift of reflexes and can perform martial arts just from watching someone else.  When mom falls ill, the girl, aided by her cousin, attempt to collect on some old debts and Muay Thai butt kicking ensues for 90 minutes.

Raging Phoenix – A young rocker is saved from a group of thugs by a band of break dancing, drunken boxing, Muay Thai fighting bad asses.  She finds out that other girls were not so lucky and begs the group to train her so she can help them find the missing women.  The plot initially seems as if it is about the kidnapping and selling of women into the sex trade, which is a huge problem in Thailand.  It turns out to be something far sillier.  The action here is top notch, mixing a bunch of different styles.

I guess I’d have to say that my only real complaint is that neither film is as polished as Ong-Bak.  Those slow motion sequences weren’t saying “Look how cool we are”  they said “That guy really got beat up”  There is an oomf! that Tony Jaa can deliver that a 100 pound woman can’t, no matter how skilled.  So, there are a lot more noticeable cuts in the action and far fewer slow motion bits.  Still, Yanin is a marvel and a welcome addition to the genre.

Why I liked them:  Fantastic Muay Thai fighting back on display.  Tons O’ Butt Kicking!!!!!

Why you may not:  If you like martial arts movies and are used to silly story lines that are mere vehicles for the action, I can’t see why you wouldn’t

Adam

Forrest Gump kinda ruined the “mentally challenged guy meets normal girl” movie forever.  Any time you see one, no matter what the handicap, you’re gonna think of it.  So, when Hugh Dancy’s titular Adam points out to Rose Byrne’s Beth that he is not Gump, it ends up being one of the funnier moments in the film.  Adam has Asperger’s Syndrome.  One of the huge failings of the film is to adequately explain what it is (short answer – a mild variant of Autism).  Despite his odd behavior and seeming inability to not say what’s on his mind, she finds something sweet about him.  Rather than have this be a friend helping a friend movie, the writer felt the need to make it a romance.  It’s all saccharine sweet forced mushiness.  The redeeming quality of the script is the choice Beth faces when she has to ask herself if she can live a full normal life with a man who will never be normal.  Throw in a side story about her accountant father being indicted for fraud and you’ve got enough blah blah blah for a tearjerker.  The real prize here is in the performances.  Dancy is great and never overplays his part, and Byrne is a genuinely sensitive heroine.  The scenes where the two are not pushed into some ridiculous scenario and allowed to just act are top notch and make this one worth a watch.

Why I liked it: Great acting.  Some genuinely emotional scenes and a good dose of comedy.

Why you may not:  It’s an orchestrated tear-jerker.  Script’s premise is really silly, and unlikely, though it redeems itself a bit later.

The Millenium Trilogy (Pt. 1 and 2)

Based on a series of detective novels, the Millenium Trilogy of movies are a return to good old-fashioned, whodunit mysteries.  There are a bunch of different titles for these movies but the first two are known in the English speaking world as The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and The Girl Who Played With Fire.  The former is better known to the rest of the world as Men Who Hate Women, and with good reason.  The films, especially the first, are scathing indictments of Sweden’s misogynistic society.  The books apparently go deeper into this, and many people think the films could have done more to expose these deeds, but hey, there’s a mystery to solve.  A welcome return to the days of sleuthing, these films are expertly paced, completely convincing, and utterly believable.  The acting is top notch, especially Noomi Rapace as Lisabeth Salander.  Goth’d up, pierced, and tattooed, she could have easily been played as a cookie cutter punk princess.  Instead she is a dark, fierce woman who has obviously had the stuffing kicked out of her, yet still comes back for more.  Michael Nyqvist as Mikael Blomkvist, the other half, is also excellent as a reporter for a small magazine, “Millenium”, who just wants to expose the wrongs in the world.  The English language ad campaign for this movie is a bit misleading.  Apparently trying to pander to the Twilight crowd and those that like punk chicks.  Though not action heavy, these movies are not for the young, or those looking for a Da Vinci Code substitute.  Scenes of sexual abuse, including one graphic rape scene, permeates both movies.  The violence that does occur is also pretty graphic.  With very few shortcomings, I have to say that I loved these films, and I’m eagerly awaiting the third, and final chapter.  American remakes are already in the works, with talk of Quentin Tarantino directing.  Do yourself a favor, see these first.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo – Mikael, a disgraced journalist, is hired by the leader of a powerful clan to solve the 40 year old mystery of his beloved nieces murder.  Through chance he meets computer hacker and social outcast Lisabeth.  The two do some sleuthing!

Why I liked it:  Welcome return of good “Hey, this all actually makes sense” mystery movies.  Fast paced and well written.

Why you may not:  Sweden’s misogynistic society is on brutal display.  Scene’s of sexual abuse and rape are graphic and a bit prolonged.

The Girl Who Played With Fire – Starts as an investigation into the sex trade in Sweden and takes a much darker turn.

Why I liked it:  More mystery solving.  Even faster paced than the first.  Left me itching for part 3.

Why you may not:  More sexual abuse.  Definitely darker than the first.

Red Riding Trilogy

Originally a British T.V. series, but now receiving a limited theatrical run in America, Red Riding is a trilogy of movies about police corruption and brutality in Northern England, set against the backdrop of serial murders, including the Yorkshire Ripper.  The films, simply titled 1974, 1980, and 1983, all have 3 different leads and 3 different directors.  Yet, they are all connected by the events that are kick started in the first (and finest in my opinion) film.  Though, not quite as sprawling as something like The Wire, you can’t watch the films independently of each other.  They are meant to be viewed as a singular piece despite the diverse talent involved.  All of the acting is superb across the board.  The cinematography is all grainy and dark, very 80′s.  As powerful as the end result is, they are not without major flaws.  Characters that are bit players in one may become major forces in others.  Trying to remember who a background face was three hours later is rather difficult.  A lot of side stories are brought up that ultimately mean nothing and you have to wonder why they bothered.  In the first one especially, thick, northern English accents can be almost impossible to understand.  Despite everything the films cover, there are quite a few unanswered questions at the end.  In spite of all this, fans of gritty crime dramas and those tired of typical Law and Order “ripped from the headlines” type of script, will be well rewarded.

1974 – An investigative journalist discovers some horrific facts while looking in to the rape and murder of a young girl.

Why I liked it:  Good old fashioned crime noir

Why you may not: Slow to get going.  Needed subtitles to understand what some people where saying.

1980 - A city cop is tasked with helping to solve the massively bungled Yorkshire Ripper case, all while under the watch of the local police force.

Why I liked it: Fleshes out the characters a bit more.  Paddy Considine is excellent.

Why you may not: Slow like molasses. Wastes a lot of time on things that don’t matter much.

1983 - A lawyer and a Yorkshire constable put together the pieces of a string of missing young girls.

Why I liked it:  The grittiest of the 3 films.  Brings everything full circle.

Why you may not: Hard to tell when the movie is flashing back in time, so, it can get confusing.  Doesn’t answer everything.

New York, I Love You

Pretentious, silly, dumb, funny, sweet, and smart.  In other words its NY.  A dozen or so shorts make up this movie about chance encounters and tiny moments between people in The Big Apple.  Sadly this movie leaves out even more than it manages to cram in.  The representation of people in the movie are all the kind of people that would go see a movie called “New York, I Love You”  On the upside, if you are not enjoying a particular story you only have to wait a couple of minutes until the next one starts.  It has its moments and it had parts where I had to stop myself from reaching for the remote.  Oddly, with all the talent assembled here to represent the greatest city in the world none of them have the name De Niro, Scorsese, or Woody.  Whatever you may end up thinking of this, there is one very good reason to see it, and most reviewers have agreed.  The 6 minute segment starring Natalie Portman and Irrfan Khan, directed by Mira Nair, carries enough emotional weight and wit for an entire movie.  Lucky for you it takes place in the first 15 minutes of the movie.

Why I liked it:  Has its moments of greatness.  Lots of great talent on display.

Why you may not:  No cohesive story, just a series of encounters.  Some of the stories define NY artsy pretentiousness.

Ninja Assassin

Guys.  Remember when you were a kid and you’d be playing with army men, G.I. Joes, Legos, etc…. and you would come up with these wildly fantastic set pieces and make the characters speak over the top dialogue?  Whoever came up with the idea for Ninja Assassin must have been watching you. Silly plot, stupid dialogue, and awesome set pieces.  A great movie if you’ve just eaten lunch and you wanna sit down for an hour and a half before you finish the day.

Why I liked It – Ninjas, throwing stars, swords, and BLOOD!

Why you may not – Silly, stupid, and juvenile.

Mother

New one from Bong Joon-Ho, director of The Host.  The monsters in this movie don’t have scales, though.  Do-joon is a grown man on the outside, but a child on the inside.  Dependent on his mother, who is also dependent on him.  After he is accused of murder, and tricked into a confession, she will go to any length to prove his innocence.  Takes place in modern times so the legal system in this small, South Korean village is infuriating.  On the bright side there is no way that the U.S. could remake and ruin this movie.  Great performances all around especially in the second half as the mothers search becomes more and more desperate.

Why I liked it:  Fantastic acting and a story that really pays off

Why you may not: A bit slow in places. The cultural differences can leave you scratching your head and even angry.

I Come With The Rain

It’s okay to admit it.  I too have been wondering where Josh Hartnett has been.  Surprise! In Asia!  That’s where I found him anyways.  Josh plays an ex-cop turned P.I. who is hired by a reclusive billionaire to find his son.  His quest takes him from the Philippines to Honk Kong, all while he is haunted by the memory of a psychopath that almost killed him.  The film wanders, seemingly at will, between serial killer flick and existential road trip.  There are a lot of things that are never explained, but if you can manage to stay with it, you get an art film with an ending.  Wouldn’t recommend this to most people, but those with really open minds may enjoy it as I did.  The whole movie is in English for those that are curious but don’t like subtitles.

Why I liked it:  Different kind of cross-cultural story, with some fine performances, and dark set pieces.

Why you may not: Very strange and at times very sloppy story telling.  Also quite brutal.