• Love Actually
  
  
  
  Synopsis
  
  The lives of several couples intersect during a Christmas season in England. How each couple is effected by and reacts to love (romantic, familial, friendship, all kinds of love, actually) is the focus of the film.
  
  Pros:
  
  
  • Bill Nighy's performance is funny.
  
  
  • Stars, stars, big stars everywhere.
  
  
  Cons:
  
  
  • Bad writing.
  
  
  • Lackluster performances.
  
  
  • Nothing new, fresh or original.
  
  
  Generally:
  
  Maybe two out of five stars. Blah.
  
  Extended Review:
  
  A better name for this movie would be Long Actually. It's two hours and fifteen minutes long but somehow requires seventeen hours of your time to watch. But what it lacks in brevity it makes up for in incoherence.
  
  Love Actually is overstuffed with too many characters, none of whom have much to say or do, and none of whom ever really come to matter. There are a few laughs along the way, but the characters are all totally two dimensional, and if they're likable at all it's because they're all played by actors we've all come to love. The movie goes nowhere and ends bady, as the story lines are either left unresolved or else they're resolved in contrived and unbelievable ways. And, the ending sequence, utilizing the Beach Boys classic "God Only Knows," is just a reminder of how much more effectively that song is used in the closing scenes of Boogie Nights. Love Actually is bloated and hollow at the same time ... but other than that, it's just hunky dory. Pretty people, pretty scenes, all wrapper, no present.

  
  Trailer
  
  




---



• Pink Floyd Live In Pompeii: The Director's Cut
  
  
  
  Synopsis
  
  Concert footage, intercut with interviews and behind the scenes (kinda) scenes present the legendary rock band Pink Floyd in their mid-70's prime.
  
  Pros:
  
  
  • Great, great music.
  
  
  • Seeing the members of the Floyd young again is enough to put a smile on any rock fan's face.
  
  
  • Did I mention the music?
  
  
  Cons:
  
  
  • Needless new special effects.
  
  
  • A few faked scenes.
  
  
  Generally:
  
  Five stars for the music, two and a half stars for the movie in terms of cinema, and one star for the underwhelming sound mix. Better listening than viewing, but even the listening leaves much to be desired due to the mix.
  
  Extended Review:
  
  Pink Floyd's been on my mind lately, and it was high time I finally saw this film after having had the soundtrack for a while. This new (2002) cut of the 1973 concert film has much to recommend it, but it also has a number of flaws. The worst thing, which I consider unforgivable, is that the DVD doesn't feature 5.1 sound. The reason to watch any Pink Floyd performance is for the music, and hearing it in 5.1 would have really been outstanding.
  
  Still, the stereo track remains wonderful, even if most of the songs feature so many overdubs that it's almost fraudulent to call it a "live" recording. It's frustrating, though, to sit through a number of new special effects sequences, added for the 2002 recut, that contribute nothing of substance to the film. And it's frustrating to learn that the movie's sequences that feature the band working on the recording of Dark Side Of The Moon are disingenuous. The movie appears to present the band in the studio, giving birth to their classic album. Those scenes are, in fact, staged "reenactments" of the recording of the album. Dark Side... had actually been completed before those scenes were filmed. Still, for all it's pompous special effects and phoniness, Live At Pompeii features some music that remains wonderful after all these years.
  

  
  A bit of Pink Floyd, Live At Pompeii:
  
  




---



• This Film Is Not Yet Rated
  
  
  
  Synopsis
  
  A documentary that examines the real nature of the Motion Picture Association of America. Does it really offer a service to movie goers ... or does it serve another end entirely?
  
  Pros:
  
  
  • Interviews with film makers about their experiences with the MPAA are compelling and informative.
  
  
  • There's genuine humor and warmth in the film.
  
  
  Cons:
  
  
  • The movie flounders when it loses focus on the MPAA's flaws and pursues it's own agenda.
  
  
  • Some scenes feel contrived in that "Michael Moore" kind of way.
  
  
  Generally:
  
  Three out of five stars. For adults only, this movie will give parents (and others) a lot to think about in spite of it's occasional meandering.
  
  Extended Review:
  
  A documentary that vacillates between brilliant expose and frustrating propaganda, This Film Is Not Yet Rated must have really bugged the MPAA. You know that the MPAA is the organization that assigns ratings to films (such as G, PG, R and NC-17) ... but you might not realize that the ratings system itself is really nothing more than a marketing tool used by the big studios and the theater chains to make sure that they maintain control of the American cinema.
  
  Here's a snapshot of the MPAA's transparent agenda: Darren Aronofsky's brilliant Requiem for a Dream is an artful, spell-binding film with a strong message in opposition to drug abuse. Yet the MPAA originally slapped Requiem... with an NC-17 for it's frank portrayal of the dark descent of addiction. Meanwhile, Scary Movie is as stupid and pointless a film as has ever been made. For starters, it's a parody of Scream, which is a parody of horror films. A parody of a parody? No, that's called a rip-off. But I digress. Scary Movie, a movie with absolutely nothing meaningful to say, features male frontal nudity, gratuitous vulgarity, and perversely violent scenes involving a beheading, a woman's breast implant being cut out by a killer, and a man getting a penis shoved through his head. No, really. And yet the MPAA chose to give Scary Movie an R rating.
  
  Anyone who's seen very many films in America has certainly had the opportunity to ponder the apparent randomness of the MPAA's system. This Film Is Not Yet Rated argues convincingly that the MPAA's real mission is to ensure that big studio films get the R ratings that guarantee their mass release, while independent films get slapped with an NC-17 death sentence (theaters won't show them). Where This Film... fails is in it's own thin political agenda. This Film... seems to build the bulk of it's case against the MPAA on the supposition that the major studios are biased against homosexuals and that they go out of their way to suppress movies with gay themes and characters. That's laughable, and you know that if you've seen Brokeback Mountain or Kinsey or Capote or Philadelphia or any number of big studio films with sympathetic gay characters.
  
  No, the MPAA is not biased against gays. It's biased against art. Artful, intelligent films don't make as much money as big, loud, dumb "movies" staring Jessica Alba or Vin Diesel. The MPAA helps the studios and the theater chains make sure that the cash cows play for weeks in every multiplex, and people who make and/or enjoy thoughtful films are the big losers in the arrangement. When This Film... focuses on that truth of the MPAA, it's an engrossing and entertaining film. The sequences in which the movie's director, Kirby Dick, fights the MPAA over the rating of the very movie you're watching are the best scenes of all.
  

  Trailer:
  
  

  
  
  

Labels: Entertainment, Movie Reviews, Movies

Permalink -- Posted by Darrell at 12:19