Dec 17 2009

Taking Stock 12/18/2009

We’re trying something new this week, and if it goes over well, look for it every Thursday. Here we give our purely speculative opinions on whether you should see each of the movies that are being released this weekend. Let us know what you think.  Also, make sure you take a look at all five films after the jump.


James: My anticipation for this film started high about two years ago, when I found out that it was made by James Cameron. James Cameron, in my opinion, has never made a bad movie. Unfortunately as the hype builds and the ads begin to come out, I’ve become increasingly worried that there’s just now for it to live up to the “it will revolutionize film” type claims. I still have faith that it will be a really good movie, and will be seeing it opening weekend.

Benn:  This film is supposed to revolutionize film making.   Given that this kind of thing tends to be James Cameron’s forte, I’ll buy into the hype.  Besides, Cameron has always delivered good storytelling along with mind-blowing effects.

Dylan: I really liked the idea of “Avatar,” back when it was a secretive, pet project of James Cameron no one knew anything about. “He’s going to revolutionize film making as we know it!” Then the story came out. Not so excited by that, but the visuals look very promising. If you’re going to see it (which you should), go for broke and see it in IMAX 3-D. Cameron is the sequel God, so we can only hope.

Fil: Well, I’m not quite to the fever pitch of excitement for this movie, mostly because I’ve tried to avoid watching YouTube videos of it, but I’ve got to say I’m decently interested in watching this. James Cameron is a Sci-Fi GOD. Totally going to see this movie Friday night with James. And that’s only because he doesn’t do midnight showings. Pussy.

Did You Hear About the Morgans?

James: Take every romantic comedy cliche, combine it with a couple who seemingly has no chemistry, and you have a movie that I don’t want to see and pity anyone who does.

Benn:  No thank you, I’d rather not hear about how Hollywood’s favorite go-to English guy and Horseface save their marriage due to under appreciated  Middle American values.  Are these banal rom-coms  put together on an assembly line or something?

Dylan: Such a predictable rom-com: estranged couple forced to live together in BFE, Alaska, the two start having feelings for each other again, but Grant realizes he’s with Horse-Face and takes off into the wilderness to find himself. And so begins, “Into The Wild: Part Deux.” Actually, I may see that movie instead.

Fil: Ugh. You couldn’t pay me to go see this movie (not true, I’d watch it for money – I’m so poor.) And this coming from a guy who thinks Hugh Grant is funny.

Nine [limited]

James: Okay at first I thought that remaking 8 1/2 as a musical was the weirdest idea ever, even though I’m a big fan of Fellini’s work. No that I’ve seen the trailer for this, I’m really digging the music, the cinematography, and the presence of Daniel Day-Lewis. It’s now one of my most anticipated films of the winter.

Benn:  Bottom line: Daniel Day-Lewis is the best actor around, so I’ll see anything he does.  “Chicago” didn’t really wow me much; all razzle dazzle and not much else.  Still, quite the twist on an interesting subject.

Dylan: Beautiful women, DDL, flashy dance numbers, done. Oh, and it’s a sequel/adaptation/whatchamacallit of “8 1/2?” Stop. You had me at DDL.

Fil: Well, I have a thing for musicals, but only comedic musicals. And this movie has the added pretentiousness of being associated with 8 ½. So my initial thoughts on this are – maybe I’ll like it. However, Daniel Day-Lewis is the best actor ever and also knows how to pick good movies. So – I’m totally seeing this.

Crazy Heart

Crazy Heart [limited]

James: Watched the trailer today, and am not sure what to think. Jeff Bridges’ performance look good, but I think it will take some serious Oscar buzz to make me feel any need to see it, this one is on the backburner.

Benn:  Broken-hearted musicians with nothing to lose or live for are pretty common, but Jeff Bridges looks as though he’ll give an earnest performance, and that just might breathe new life into this genre of film.

Dylan: It looks like four-time Academy Award nominee Jeff Bridges really wants that Oscar, bad. The premise of the film, and the trailer, reminds me of last year’s performer-down-on-his-luck picture, “The Wrestler” (loved it!) Probably not going to see this one though.

Fil: Man, this movie looks like just about every other down-on-his-luck musician film I’ve ever not seen. I dunno, maybe I’m just bored with reality. Good cast, BORING premise. If I had to guess, people would love this movie. I doubt I’ll see it willingly.

Young Victoria [limited]

James: My first thought upon seeing this movie was that Emily Blunt looks way too young to play Queen Victoria. My second was that I have no interest in seeing a movie about Queen Victoria.

Benn:  Well James, it is called “Young Victoria”, although my objection is casting someone so attractive; wasn’t Victoria one of England’s frumpy queens?  It looks good, but it resembles “The Duchess” with Kiera Knightly way too much.

Dylan: It’s like a yearly tradition that at least one film has to be about the Queen. Unless Daniel Day-Lewis shows up with some awesome dance number, give this one a pass.

Fil: So this movie is about a young queen coming into her own in England. I don’t think I can come up with anything that I could relate to less than this movie. Marie Antoinette, maybe. Yeah, I’ll watch this if it ends in an alien invasion or human sacrifice.    Otherwise, I won’t lose any sleep over it.

Leave a Reply