Jurassic Park!

I remember seeing Jurassic Park in theatres the first time very vividly. When you're young and go to movies, often they can be ta bit forgettable. You don't have the brain for movie quotes yet and there are so many more important things to concern yourself with, like whether you're going to be able to convince your parent to get you popcorn AND candy. That was not the case with Jurassic Park. I was 9, and as the movie was rated PG-13, my friend's dad took us. I was going through my paleontologist phase; reading everything I could about them, laughing at my dad's feeble attempts to read their name (I mean come on, Parasauralophus isn't really that tricky is it?). Needless to say, I was beside myself excited to see this movie.
It scared the pants off of me. Don't get me wrong, there were so many amazing things about the movie, but the climax of the movie, at the time, was probably the scariest thing I'd ever seen.


These velociraptors definitely gave me nightmares when I was 9.

When I found out it was coming out to theatres again, I could feel myself getting all giddy again, so I, obviously, jumped at the chance to see it on the big screen again....even though it's been re-released in 3D and I think I have well-documented my loathing for that particular format on this blog. Actually, I'll get it out of the way right now, and tell you that the 3D was useless. There was no reason for it to be in 3D, but if that's the only way for me to see it on the big screen again, well then, I guess I'll take it.
The movie overall, however, most definitely stands the test of time. I'll grant you, the technology is super dated, but it certainly doesn't distract from the general awesomeness of the movie.
I have to admit, the CGI they must have used for the dinosaurs must have been lightyears ahead of its time. Because it still looks AMAZING. The brachiosaurs in the first scene, I don't even have words, just like the paleontologists in said scene.
When I was kid I wasn't quite able to appreciate how phenomenal the cast of this movie was, but it really is amazing. Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough, Wayne Knight (that's Newman folks!) and Samuel L. freakin' Jackson. Seeing this movie now, when I'm used to Sam Jackson being a badass all the time, I have to admit it's fairly entertaining to see him as this computer guy who can't quite figure stuff out and then *spoiler* have him devoured by one of the still terrifying velociraptors.
John Williams scored this flick, and the music is outstanding. He writes many a memorable score, and the one for Jurassic Park is definitely one more. The suite at the end of the movie as they ride away from the island in the helicopter is still one my all-time favourites.
I don't really know what else I can say about this movie. I loved it when I was a kid, and I love it now. I suppose it's a testament to good filmmaking, that a movie that's 20 years old really loses nothing in translation across the decades.
Last but not least does anyone else kind of wish they could go on the 'Mr. DNA' ride? It seems kind of random in the middle of the movie, especially after seeing REAL LIVE DINOSAURS on screen, but it honestly looks like it would be super fun.

John Carter

I know I'm quite late with this review, but I've been at a bit of a loss as to what to say about this flick... So, here's the thing with John Carter, Disney spent A LOT of money on this flick, like a lot a lot, like $250 million a lot. Aaaand as we're all painfully aware, nowadays if a movie like this doesn't "win the weekend" it has it's distributors scratching their heads. When it only makes $30M domestically, it's apparently considered a flop. So, needless to say, I came into this movie with a fair amount of trepidation. I'd seen the many trailers [Disney also spent a TON on marketing, to no avail it would seem], and I like Taylor Kitsch, I mean the guy's from Kelowna! Gotta support the locals! Also, the director is Andrew Stanton, the man who not only brought me Finding Nemo [my favourite Disney flick!] but Wall-E as well, all the ticks in the pro column were there for me. So, despite the negative reviews I decided to hit up a matinee.
The movie is based on Princess of Mars written by Edgar Rice Burroughs [yes, of Tarzan fame], which apparently has inspired many a fantasy and sci-fi writer throughout the years. And I guess I can understand why, it was pretty ahead of its time. It tells the story of an American Civil War soldier who, after his family is killed, defects from the army...which I understand is not a very good idea. After a series of getting caught and escaping from the army he gets transported to Barsoom [apparently that's what Martians call Mars]. Once there he gets entangled in yet another Civil War. He becomes a pivotal piece for both sides as he has super human powers on Barsoom since he's, well, human. Although, his main power seems to be that he can jump really high, but hey, I'd take it.
****returned and written at a MUCH later date****
Okay, I'm back trying to finish this review, and I think the main problem I'm having is that I was raised by parents who taught me that "if I didn't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". Which probably isn't that good a trait in someone who's writing reviews, but oh well. I mean if the movie was truly terrible I would let you know, but the fact of the matter is that John Carter is just one of those middle of the road family action movies. The effects really were wonderful, making the civilization on Barsoom come alive. The acting wasn't terrible, I mean, it certainly won't win any awards. I think the problem with movies with so many visual effects is that they often overshadow the actual actors, which may have been the case here. If you really want to see Taylor Kitsch act his pants off, DO NOT wait for Battleship [*eye roll*] to come out this summer people, watch The Bang Bang Club instead.
I think that's about all I have to say about this. So, to sum up, John Carter is a middle of the road family action flick that will probably do quite well come home distribution time because it IS a good way to escape for 132 minutes, but certainly isn't anything extra-special.

Kung Fu Panda 2

Oh kids movies! How I love thee! Oh 3D! How I loathe thee! Seriously. This is the dilemma that comes up EVERYTIME a new kids flick comes out. I adore kids movies, they're (usually) so imaginative and cheeky, and just plain fun to watch. However, these days it seems that every kids movie is in 3D, and I'm not going to harp on it AGAIN, but I think we all know how I feel about 3D and it's evil grip on the film industry these days. Now that's out of the way, Kung Fu Panda 2!
I loved the first one, to be quite honest, I was supremely surprised by how much loved the first one, so needless to say I was pretty psyched to see Po and the Furious Five back in action. I have to say when I first found out that the new baddie that Po was going to have to up against was a peacock I was a little apprehensive. A bird? Really? With fancy feathers? However, Shen [voiced by the always amazing Gary Oldman] turned out to be truly menacing, with metal claws and hypnotic spots on his plumage not to mention a psychotic need to be all powerful. Po has to unearth the secrets of his past to figure out how to stop Shen and his gunpowder powered weapons. 
I really loved in the first movie when we were first introduced to Po's dad, the little noodle obsessed goose. They have such a cute dynamic, although one that becomes strained as Po searches for his lost family. What really comes across in this movie is that parents love their kids, whether they're biologically theirs or not; they just want what's best for their kids.
One thing I find very interesting about both Kung Fu Panda movies is that they have all this amazing voice talent that just goes to waste. Don't get me wrong, Jack Black and Dustin Hoffman, who have the majority of the speaking parts are wonderful. Jack Black has a voice made for animation and Hoffman's gravelly tones are great in any format. But Dreamworks has gone out and hired an all-star cast that mostly, in my opinion, goes completely underused.   Sure, the story is about Po, and Jack Black, is well, loquacious, to say the least. But why hire Angelina Jolie, Seth Rogen, David Cross, Lucy Liu and Jackie Chan if they're all only going to get a line or two at most? I suppose it's so you can say they're in your movie, but only barely.
However, that being said, I think Dreamworks continues to impress. The animation in the movie was gorgeous. The characters look great and the backgrounds are just amazing. Not only that, but the story is well done, sure not overly original considering the first movie and all, but still pretty darn good. 

Welcome new readers!

Taking a brief reprieve from reviews [since I'm going to 'Thor' tomorrow!] I thought I'd do a post to address all you folks you seem to have started reading. Hi! Nice to see you here, thanks for dropping by and seeing what I have to say!

I've noticed a big jump in readership in the last little while, which I find both amazing and alarming. Amazing; because I have no idea who all of you are, [but am still super happy that you're here] and alarming because sometimes I don't think I'm doing the movies justice, and I have a tendency to ramble on about things that matter only to me. Although those things must matter to a few of you as well...like how 3D is the worst and I wish it would just go away already.

Another little thing I wanted to address is the tendency for my reviews to be generally favourable. There's a good reason for this, and it's not that I like every movie, far from it. But since I have no financial backing for this little project other than my regular job, I really only go to see movies that I think I will like. I mean, think about it, would you really shell out $13 to sit through something you already knew you weren't going to like? If the answer is anything other than no, you're some kind of crazy masochist. Sure, sometimes movies disappoint me, but those trailer making people can be very tricky.

With all that being said there are A LOT of movies coming out this summer that I'm really looking forward to seeing, and I'm sure all of you are as well. So hopefully you folks will be stopping by ye olde blog to see if a movie is worth your time or not, and if you have similar tastes to me I will be sure to let you know! And I know not everyone has the same taste as me, but isn't that what makes life exciting!? So, if you disagree [or agree!] feel free to throw a comment down in the comments section, let's get our conversation on!

Upcoming posts this week will be my late [as per usual] April trailer wrap-up and my review for 'Thor' which I will be seeing for my matinee tomorrow, who knows, maybe I'll see you there!! Until next time, Happy Mother's Day!

Rio

Yet again I'm a little behind schedule getting my post up, I have a couple of excuses, first of all work's been a bit exhausting this week, plus the Stanley Cup Playoffs [GO CANUCKS GO!]have been diverting a lot of my attention these days, however, I think the main excuse when it comes to the review for this particular movie is that just wasn't that great, so I don't have that much to say.

I didn't hate it, but I most certainly didn't love it. As I've previously mentioned I'm actually a huge fan of animation, and I really thought that 'Rio' would be a good one, but I was disappointed. It certainly had it's moments, the colours are gorgeous, and the carnivale scenes are pretty fantastic. Jesse Eisenberg is adorable as a neurotic macaw and Jemaine Dupuis [from 'Flight of the Conchords' which is awesome] was hilarious as the evil cockatoo, but other than that the movie was just kind of blah.

I went to the movie on Easter Monday, and I have to admit, I forgot it was a holiday. I was promptly reminded when I got into the theatre, that was packed with kids and their parents. And as the movie went on I started to feel bad for those parents. Sure, I paid to be there, and to see it in my old nemesis, 3D, but I don't ever buy snacks at the theatre, so my expenses are down to just the ridiculous $15.5o to get in. However, the poor parents around me had to pay for not only themselves, but also their munchkins [again, for the terribly overpriced 3D]. And all of the kids around me had those snack packs, I'm not sure how much those are running these days, but I'm sure it's not cheap. And after shelling out the big bucks they had to sit through a movie that didn't offer anything for them. I've found in the past that watching kids movies with kids in the audience often improves the watching experience, they laugh at silly things and really get into it, which helps me get into it. Not this time. There were a few '3D moments' that they 'oohed' at, but that was about it, even the kids weren't really into it, which lead to me just being a bit bored.

I really don't like putting out bad vibes for movies, especially animated ones, but I was really hoping for more from 'Rio', and was sorely disappointed. I also have to admit that we seem to be sitting in a little movie lull here. I honestly have no clue what I'm going to see on Monday. I'm not really excited about anything that's in theatres right now. The awards season movies are all gone and the summer blockbuster season doesn't start until 'Thor' comes out on May 6th [which I'm super psyched for]. Sure, 'Fast Five' came out this week. I'm sure anyone who's perused this blog before will remember my absolute astonishment that yet another movie is being made in this franchise. Let me just add that both Rotten Tomatoes and Entertainment Weekly, have given this movie favourable reviews, I expect to see pigs flying past my window any minute now. These are both places I usually check to see if a movie is worth seeing if I'm still on the fence, they have let me down. So, no, I won't be seeing 'Fast Five' on Monday, if anyone has any suggestions, bring em' on!