Argo Or Not To Argo

Argo is a GO!  Wow, what an amazing film.  Expertly directed by Ben Affleck, Argo tells the story of the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979 when the American Consulate in Iran was stormed, and a few of the employees escaped to the Canadian Embassy.   Besides directing, Affleck also plays the CIA agent (Tony Mendez) who comes up with a plan to rescue the hostages by creating a fake movie and having them be the production crew.   The casting is stellar with John Goodman, Alan Arkin, Bryan Cranston, and Victor Garber in supporting roles that all make a huge impression.   What impressed me the most was the way Affleck directed the film.   It was suspenseful throughout even though I already knew how the film would end.    This is an Oscar contender for sure so see it while you can.

3D or Not to 3D, That is the Question...

I know a lot of people really like the 3D craze and enjoy watching any film that is created in 3D.  The movie studios and theater owners love it since they can charge more money for a 3D ticket than a regular one,  I however don't like this trend and where it is heading.  First things first, watching 3D films gives me a headache and I can't walk straight when the film is over as it really messes with my equilibrium.  Putting my physical limitations to 3D aside, here are the other reasons that I don't enjoy watching movies in 3D.
 1. It's too gimmicky.
     Years ago (back in the early 90's) they came out with an interactive film.  It was supposed to be the wave of the future but it only lasted for one film as far as I know.  The film was called Mr. Payback: An Interactive Movie, and it starred Billy Warlock as Mr. Payback (He was in the first few seasons of Baywatch as well as Days of Our Lives and General Hospital, just in case you were wondering).  Each seat in the theater had a remote control attached it and at certain times in the film everything paused and the audience was told to choose what would happen next.  It was multiple choice and as the film went on, people in the theater started yelling out their choices trying to get others to agree with them as the majority vote would always win.  It was like those Choose Your Own Adventure books that kids read.  It was a fun experience for one movie but if all movies were like that I would be bored with it very quickly.  3D feels the same way to me.  It's a cool experience to see one time but when all movies use the technology it becomes tiresome.
2. It's not all well done.
     Some movies, like Avatar, are filmed in 3D but most films that are touted as 3D were actually done in post production.  There is a huge difference between these two types of 3D formats and the latter does not do the medium justice.
3. It takes me out of the story.
     When the film is in 3D, I find myself looking at the 3D objects more than the film itself as a whole.  It removes me from the emotional aspects of the film and instead of immersing me in the film (which is part of the reasoning behind 3D) it removes me from it as I know it is a gimmick and I'm watching things fly at my face instead of how the characters are interacting.  The subtleties of the medium are lost when you are no longer focusing on the story but on the background.  Some action films that are not 3D do this as well when the special effects seem to become a character in the film because they distract the viewer from the plot (see Transformers: Dark of the Moon).    
4. The glasses are annoying.
     The glasses are much better today than they were in the 50's when they were made of paper with one blue plastic lens and one red but they are still annoying.  In fact, they may be the reason why my brain makes me feel dizzy and sick when I wear them.  Something else needs to be invented that allows you to see a 3D film without any special glasses for you to wear at all.

     Well, those are my thoughts, feel free to agree or disagree.  My hope is that the fad will end soon and become a rare experience to enjoy instead of the norm.
 

The Dark Knight Rises

     Wow, what an ending to an excellent trilogy by Christopher Nolan.  After the Aurora, CO shooting, I have to admit I was a little nervous about going to see the film and I waited a week to do it instead of seeing it opening weekend like I had originally planned.  Not that I really expected a gunman to be able to make it to the third floor where my theater was located but still, it unnerves me that someone was that deranged and no one knew it until it was too late.  I even caught myself looking at my watch during the first hour, waiting for the 30 minute mark to pass (signaling when James Holmes entered the theater and started shooting) so I could feel more relaxed.  So now onto the actual film...
     WARNING - SPOILERS AHEAD!!!  As usual all the major players were there preformed by exquisit actors - Gary Oldman (Gordon), Morgan Freeman (Fox), Michael Caine (Alfred), Christian Bale (Bruce Wayne/Batman).  We even got to see some old favorites from previous films, Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy along with some great newcomers, Tom Hardy (Bane), Anne Hathaway (Catwoman), and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Blake).  While it can't be denied that the late Heath Ledger was the best Batman villain to ever grace the screen, he was also so chillingly realistic that I have a hard time watching the film.  He made the Joker so disturbing that I always walk away from seeing the film a little scared about what might be around the next corner as well as in my dreams.  Bane is not that kind of villain for which I am grateful as I will be able to watch and enjoy this film repeatedly without the nightmares.  He is well played by Tom Hardy who doesn't even look like himself and the audio team needs to be applauded for making his Darth Vaderish voice distinct enough to hear over the explosions, guns and soundtrack.   Catwoman is also wonderful and her humor is a nice break in the drama that unfolds around her. I wasn't too sure about Nolan's choice of Anne Hathaway but she did an amazing job that made me completely forget her Princess Diaries character that has been stuck in my head for years now.   I especially liked when she pretended to be a damsal in distress as the police showed up at the pub and then she kicked butt whenever they weren't watching.  Blake, however, was my favorite character besides Batman.  His desire for justice and strong belief in Batman was intoxicating.  The reveal at the end of the film that he was going to be Robin and join Batman in the bat cave was the best part of the movie for me.  And I wished for a peek at a sequel involving the caped crusader and his sidekick after the end credits, but no dice, bummer.
     I love films with a happy ending and this ones delivers.  While it is violent, like all the Batman films, it has a strong moral center, surprising twists, and more than one hero to root for.

Spiderman, Take 2

This past weekend I went to see The Amazing Spiderman at the local theater.  As a fan of the original Spiderman movies, I was looking forward to this reboot of the series although it did seem a little too soon as the others hadn't been made that long ago.  The story of this new film is very similar to the first Spiderman film as Peter Parker loses his parents, lives with his aunt and uncle, loses his uncle, is bitten by a spider and becomes a superhero.  The differences are a new girlfriend, Gwen Stacy, a different villain and handmade web shooters instead of naturally occurring ones.  What impressed me the most about this new vision of Spiderman was the teenage humor/pranks that Spiderman employs during the film.  He seemed more like a normal teenager who was trying to have fun with his new gifts.  He mocked his villains when they couldn't keep up with him and seemed to toy with them like an older child does to a younger sibling.  The new Spiderman costume was also fantastic, props to the costume team for this great design.  Andrew Garfield was great in the role of Spiderman and I really loved Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy.  Unlike Kirsten Dunst (Mary Jane in the original Spiderman), Gwen Stacy was a strong female character who stood up for herself and willingly participated in the action to save the city from the Lizard.  Mary Jane shied away from danger and screamed most of the time as she always seemed to be captured.  Gwen, however, kept her head, hid from the Lizard and was able to create an antidote and deliver it to Spiderman, through her father, just in time.  The other supporting roles in the film fantastic as well.  Having Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Peter Parker's aunt and uncle was a stroke of genius!  I was moved by their performances and so saddened when Uncle Ben met his inevitable fate.  Denis Leary (Captain Stacy) and Rhys Ifans (Dr. Curt Connors/ The Lizard) were also well cast in their respective roles.  The only thing that was a little off in this version was the speed at which Peter Parker got used to his new skills.  I appreciated the effort it took Tobey Maguire's Spiderman to get used to swinging from his web and use his special skills.  Andrew Garfield's Spiderman was ready to go as soon as he received his powers.  Overall I like both Spiderman films and will continue to enjoy them both as soon as The Amazing Spiderman comes to DVD.

Time to vent again...

     So today I went to iTunes to download some movies that were on sale this week and on a whim I decided to see if Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2 was on sale or not.  IT WASN"T EVEN LISTED!!!!  Warner Brothers has removed most of the Harry Potter films from iTunes to support their push to Ultraviolet.  ARGH! It really angers me when companies decided for the consumer what format a film will be in.  If they want all of their films on the Ultraviolet format that's fine, but at least consider the customer first.  Most customers (like me) want media (film, music, etc...) in a certain format that works with our devices.  The iTunes format for digital content has been around the longest, therefore those of us who own a lot of content from that system would like any new content also in the same system.  One system, one place for storage and one place for the library.  By removing their content from iTunes, Warner Brothers is making the customer buy into its system but it isn't allowing transfer of previously purchased items into that same system.  For example, if I buy a song from Amazon, I can put it into Amazon's cloud player or I can put it into my iTunes library where every other song I own is stored.  This makes sense.  Amazon is allowing me to buy their content but I don't have to use their system if I don't want to.  When it comes to films and TV shows it seems that no one wants to play nice with the customer.  iTunes, Amazon and Ultraviolet all make you use their systems to use their content.  You can't buy it once and use it on any system you want.  Granted, a lot of these companies offer apps to be able to use their content on whatever device you have, but then you have content all over the place on your device.  On my iPad I have movies and TV shows from iTunes in the "Movies" app (which includes all the Harry Potter films except for the last one) and my Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is in the "Flixster" app.  Amazon doesn't even have a movie/TV app for the iPad so with them I'm out of luck which is why I can't purchase movies from them but at least I'm not forced to like with Ultraviolet.  It was the only option when I bought the DVD/Blu-ray pack.  If they would allow users the ability to buy a digital film or TV show and use it in any library/app they wish I wouldn't mind the different formats.  But as it is, it just makes me frustrated. ARGH! That is all for today, thanks for letting me vent!