Viva Las Vegas!

So, I haven't had a lot of time to think about writing movie reviews. For one, I spent last weekend visiting family for a wicked Stag&Doe in Niagara.

Even more excitingly, tomorrow I leave for four days to LAS VEGAS! I've never been, and while the amazing weather (28 and sunny all days we're there), shows, and most importantly cheap alcohol is reason enough to go...I'm also excited to see for myself the mythic place known as the Las Vegas Strip.

Growing up as a TV/movie/pop culture kid, I have grown accustomed to seeing certain places immortalized on film time and time again. Places like Paris, New York City, London, Hollywood, etc. There is always a risk of being disappointed when travelling to these places too, because you never know if you'll love it as much as everyone seems to in the outside world.

Luckily, I've been to both Paris and New York and was surprised by how both of them not only met my expectations, but also far surpassed them.

For example, Paris really is as romantic, poetic and beautiful as you would think...

This was one of the first things I saw after arriving in Paris, and I've never had something take my breath away so profoundly.

  

...and New York City really is as big, busy, glamourous and fascinating as TV and movies would lead you to believe...

I was so obsessed with NYC as a teenager, that when we actually arrived and drove in from LaGuardia via yellow taxi, I started crying like a baby haha.

...but when I think of Las Vegas, I don't really know what to think. I think of a city notorious for gambling, the strip, celebrities who put on shows, and a whole lotta "entertainment". But mostly, I think about this:

Yes, it's the place where Kelly Kapowski and Zack Morris (my first love) finally got hitched. It's also where Slater and Screech dressed up as go-go dancers to hide from a hitman, and where (spoiler alert) Jessie Spano showed up as a bridesmaid at the last minute (missing her exams) because she had to be there to see her two best friends ride off into the sunset.

Ok, so maybe I don't expect to see any of the SBTB crew while I'm there...but one thing is certain: I'm going to have a fricken FANTASTIC time there. And considering this trip is just one big, fun, celebratory send-off for me and my baby sister who is getting married in August  - I can't think of a better place to be.

Have a great Easter weekend everyone and I'll be back next week with some new posts (movie reviews, another Grey's Anatomy update as it starts up from a four week hiatus next Thursday, and maybe even some other fun stuff).

RRReview #7: Source Code

This past weekend I was actually able to go to a movie theatre (in italics because it's pronounced thee-ah-tah...haha I joke), for the first time in quite a while. In fact I think the last time I went was in oh...December. For a cinephile this does not appear to make much sense, but I'll let you in on my reasoning: I generally don't like films that come out early in the new year.

As everyone knows, the 'big and important' films, aka the ones that are trying to generate awards-season buzz, are generally released during the months of September and December. This is so they can be considered for the 2010 Golden Globes, Directors/Actors Guild Awards, and of course the big kahuna - the Academy Awards. Due to this, in those four months there are more fantastic films than anyone could ever possibly see in a theatre. Seriously, you'd have to be a full time movie critic and even they don't see them all.

The trouble with this of course, is that the studios have caught on to this trend and now tend to release their dud films in the months of January to April(ish). They do this in the hopes that some good (but not great) film either succeeds wildly for no reason, or falls away into film obscurity and makes way for the great summer blockbusters.

To prove this point, check out some of the films that have come out so far in 2011:

• Season of the Witch (with Nicholas Cage, I think it speaks for itself)
• The Green Hornet (had a lot of buzz, but when it came out in January I knew it was bad)
• No Strings Attached (oh Natalie Portman, why have you lowered yourself to doing a sex comedy with Ashton Kutcher?)
• Justin Bieber: Never Say Never (don't hurt me Biebans, but I'm sure this was not a cinematic masterpiece on any scale)
• Beastly (a Beauty and the Beast remake with Vanessa Hudgens? ugh, just ugh)

See what I mean? Now, I'm not saying that all films that come out in this time period are necessarily bad, I'm simply saying that they hardly stand a chance of being good.

This little history lesson serves to explain why, when I went to see the new Jake Gyllenhaal action flick Souce Code over the weekend, I was not expecting much. 

Source Code

Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan, and the exquisite Vera Farmiga

Directed by: Duncan Jones (he's only done one other feature length film called Moon, which I haven't seen  but have heard excellent things about)

On DVD or in theatres? In theatres (released April 1, 2011)

Spoilers? I'll do my best to not give away the important parts.


What worried me about the film was more than just the fact that it was released in the bad period. I was also worried that it starred Jake Gyllenhaal. Don't get me wrong, I love his puppy dog eyes and wide, flashy smile as much as the next person - but poor Jake has not impressed me as of late.

Of course I loved, loved, loved him in Brokeback Mountain one of my favourite films of all-time. And he was equally fantastic in films like Zodiac, Jarhead, and the cult classic Donnie Darko. But lately, there have been the unfortunate films. Ones like: Love and Other Drugs (horrendous) and Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (shudder).

To my surprise though, I really enjoyed this film (including Jakey-poo). Sure it's not going to win any awards but it was definitely entertaining and actually made me think a bit, which is about all I can ask for out of a popcorn movie.

The plot centres around American army helicopter pilot Colter Stevens who wakes up mysteriously on a commuter train in the outskirts of Chicago. He has no idea how he ended up there, and added to this he's being recognized as someone else. When he tries to explain himself, he ends up coming across as a nutbag. He finds himself sitting across from a girl named Christina (Monaghan) who appears to have known him for quite some time. He looks at himself in a bathroom mirror, only to be shocked that he looks like someone else too to the outside world. Then, just when he's trying to figure out what the heck is going on - the train explodes.

When Stevens comes to, he finds himself suspended in a dark pod, being spoken to via camera by an army official named Goodwin (Farmiga). She eventually explains that Stevens is part of an army mission and the train he was on is not real, it is a re-created vision of the past (stay with me). The mission is to continue sending him back to the past until he is able to determine why the train exploded and who was involved, in the hopes that this will lead them to find the terrorist responsible and stop another impending attack in downtown Chicago. Sounds easy enough right? The catch is that he only has eight minutes each time he is sent back before the train explodes again. Kind of like the movie Groundhog Day on steroids.

Obviously this film requires a certain amount of suspension of disbelief. If you can accept the science they use to explain why he can continue to go back into this alternate universe, then you might stand to really enjoy this film.

Monaghan and Gyllenhaal getting cozy in Source Code. I'll give you a toonie if you can identify the guy in the background.

What ultimately works though about this movie and why I ended up liking it so much, is both the script and the acting. Gyllenhaal is quite good here as Stevens, equal parts confused soldier and lovable action hero. I definitely believed he was capable of the things he did, whether running around on the train knocking people down or coming up with clever ways to find the bomb and save the day. Monaghan was pretty decent too as Christina. She is not given much to do other than be a love interest for Stevens, but she does manage to convey the sympathy and sex appeal needed to make it believable. There is also a a bit part by a certain well-known Canadian comedian, pretty much acting like himself but it's good nonetheless.

The exquisite Vera Farmiga as Goodwin.

Special attention must be paid though to Vera Farmiga's performance. You may recognize her name from 2009's stellar Up in the Air and she's oddly just as good here as Goodwin. Now, I'm not going to lie that I'm a sucker for a beautiful woman and Farmiga is certainly all that and a bag of chips. But she really is a great actress; she's compelling, endearing and entertaining to watch all at once. Given that Goodwin is sitting down for 3/4 of the film in front of a small TV screen, Farmiga somehow manages to believably convey all the impossible things going on.

As I said, I also loved the script. Writer Ben Ripley has a really interesting mind, and I love how he tries to get the viewer to consider the unimaginable. This idea of alternate universes and versions of ourselves that might exist in infinite other dimensions, is an interesting one.

Why is Colter Stevens able to go back into the past and alter his behaviour? Might he be able then to go back and save all of those people on the train before it explodes, even though it has already happened? Is it possible to be lucid enough in an alternate dimension to carry forward into an alternate future? Is it actually possible that alternate dimensions exist?

Trippy questions, yes. But the way the movie poses them is intelligent and actually quite beautiful. I would love to go into more detail about this, but I don't want to ruin it for you. If you're looking for a fun, thought-provoking popcorn movie to see this weekend - I would definitely recommend checking it out. Oh and to Jake - maybe I just misunderstood you after all...but I'll reserve judgment until your next film is released.

My favourite Rotten Tomatoes critic's quotes about this film:
"A concept that might raise doubts about how well it could work. All the greater reason to praise the skill that shaped it with such brisk force and loving hands."

"The surprisingly moving Source Code boils down to a simple love story, with complicated strings attached."

"Jake Gyllenhaal is the movie's great asset. He exhibits an artful ability to humanize his character in a dehumanized world of gamesmanship."


"A top-notch time-bending sci-fi thriller that deftly avoids many potential paradoxes."

"Source Code is high concept filmmaking done the way it's supposed to be."

Have you seen Source Code? Do you agree/disagree with my take? Why is Jake Gyllenhaal so appealing to so many people? Let me know in the comments :)

RRReview #6: Made in Dagenham

I'm baaack. It only took me a week to get far enough out of my Grey's Anatomy musical episode coma to come back to film reviews. For the record: the episode was fan-freaking-tastic and I have watched it 12 times already (yes, I have an obsessive nature). Anyway, the next episode doesn't air until April 28th so I guess it's back to films for now.

Last weekend, I watched a couple of films. First was a repeat viewing of 127 Hours...and I loved it just as much as the first time. Still haven't seen it? Check out my review of that here.

Then, my best buddy and I cued up Made in Dagenham, a great little British film that I had heard great things about. Here's my take on it.

Made in Dagenham
Starring: 
Sally Hawkins, Bob Hoskins, Miranda Richardson, Rosamund Pike and a whole host of other awesome Brits

Directed by: 
Nigel Cole (other films include Saving Grace and Calendar Girls)

On DVD or in theatres? On DVD and Blu-ray

Spoilers? Not many.


Well, finally! After seeing a bunch of bad movies lately...I get to see a good, satisfying one. Added to this, it is British and I loves me a good British flick.

The film stars the formidable Sally Hawkins. As always she is completely and utterly compelling here. Seriously, if you have not seen her in Happy-Go-Lucky get thee to a DVD copy of it NOW.


The story is based on real-life events and stars Hawkins as mild-mannered Rita O'Grady, the woman who almost single-handedly kickstarted the women's equal pay rights movement in late '60s England. O'Grady and 187 other women at the time worked for the Ford auto factory in Dagenham, England. Not only did they work in deplorable conditions, but they were severely underpaid in comparison to the men who worked for the factory (including her husband).

This film follows their story; of how these 187 hardworking women worked to change the system at a time when women working, let alone getting paid, was still seen by many as unnecessary.

Now, the film is a tad formulaic. There is nothing new or incredibly adventurous about the way it is shot or edited. But I don't think that was the goal of the filmmakers here anyway.

We basically get to see the beginnings of the movement as the women fight first to go on strike for a day (which had never really been done at the time), and then as they take their fight further when the chauvinistic big-wigs at Ford don't take them seriously.


Bob Hoskins, while pretty good here, will unfortunately always be this guy to me:

Yes, it's Smee from "Hook". Haha.

He plays Albert Passingham, a representative of Ford, and the one man who seems to actually understand why women deserve to get paid the same as men. Other performances of note are Daniel Mays as Rita's supportive but confused husband, and the always lovely Miranda Richardson as British Minister Barbara Castle who helps the ladies with their cause. Also of note, actress Rosamund Pike who I have seen in a few other British films. Not only is she wowza gorgeous, but she plays the role of housewife-intellectual-turned-crusader very believably.

The lovely Rosamund Pike in "Made in Dagenham".

Aside from all of this though, the movie is worth seeing if solely for the performance of Sally Hawkins. I find that she has a very enigmatic quality about her in every role she plays. In this film, she somehow manages to carry off the complexities and fierceness of this character while still having her come across as a sweet and very loving mom who ultimately just wants life to be fair. There is a scene towards the end of the film when she makes an impassioned speech to a room full of union men, and it is so good I dare you not to think she is adorable.

The film rarely falls flat, but there are two side-stories that, while I understand their inclusion, did not really get to me emotionally as much as I'm sure was intended. One is of Rita's co-worker, a girl who longs to be famous and lets that naivety almost take her down the wrong path. The other is of Rita's picketing partner in crime Connie (played by Geraldine James), who is dealing with a husband with PTSD due to being a soldier in WWII. Both of these storylines exist to serve the purpose of explaining what women had to deal with in the late '60s, but for me they don't really work.


Ultimately this is not the type of film you go on about at length. It's really just a sweet, funny little film, and a great lesson in appreciation for Western women of the millennium generation  (like myself) who really do take their gender equality for granted most of the time. I recommend this if you're in for a good British film, with all the biting wit and fun references you'd expect.


Have you seen, or even heard of Made in Dagenham? Is it something that interests you? Have you seen anything else really good recently that you might like me to review? Hit me in the comments :)