Oz The Great And Powerful

PROPER

Little self involvement time.  I haven't written a review in a while mainly because I've been busy preparing content for our monthly podcast here at Simplistic Reviews. (SELF PROMOTION DURING SELF PROMOTION...SO AWESOME)  Anyway, when the days between reviews started piling up, I became cautious picking the PROPER comeback movie to review next.  (I was this close to reviewing Parker there for a minute, so count your blessings.)  This week, however, I happened to go against my previous judgement and against many preconceived assumptions by the masses and watch a film that made me anxious to talk about.  The film is Oz The Great And Powerful.  A movie that I have heard maligned even before it came out.   A movie that certainly does not deserve it.

Oz The Great And Powerful is a....DUN DUN DUUUUN!!!...prequel to the 1939 cinematic classic The Wizard Of Oz.  And for those who have been hiding under a rock in a cave in Timbuktu, The Wizard of Oz is about a Kansas girl named Dorothy who is whisked away by a tornado and sent to a magical world where wicked witches are the norm, munchkins are a plenty, and lions are cowardly.  Dorothy journeys to find a supposed wizard who can send her back home.  That wizard...74 YEAR SPOILER ALERT...turns out to be just a man behind a curtain named Oz.  Oz The Great And Powerful fills in all the blanks on how he got there and why certain witchly characters got their wickedness.

Now maybe because I've had to rewatch Star Wars episodes 1 through 3 for my 9 to 5 job, I'm standing on a hyperbole soapbox here.  However, I don't regret saying that Oz The Great And Powerful is one of the greatest....DUN DUN DUUUUN!!!....prequels ever made.  My favorite, by the way is The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly.  When the familiar pieces of The Wizard Of Oz began to neatly fall into place in Oz The Great And Powerful, I got the same feeling I had when Blondie picks up that iconic poncho.  The same feeling I didn't get when Lucas clumsily dropped his pieces on the ground, brushed off and forced onto me at the last minute.  The Good The Bad And The Ugly sets up a world that, frankly, is pretty easy to set up.  The Wizard Of Oz is anything but.  It has enough oddly shaped moving parts to make an Ikea salesman blush. (Rimshot.  Nailed it.)  One day I'll have a discussion about how the land of Oz is just an imaginary place where one subconsciously goes to work out their inner issues.  A theme this film duplicates and also nails by the way.  However, for the sake of avoiding an even bigger monicker as an overly-analytical, auteur theory douche, I'll stick with the simple things that make this film work.

I was very surprised that Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland disappointed me.  I thought that his famously quirky style would be perfect for the material.  It is why I was worried that director Sam Raimi might stumble into the same pitfalls with Oz The Great And Powerful.  Alice In Wonderland and The Wizard Of Oz are two worlds that are terrific at hiding morose, gruesome, and inappropriate subtext under colorful, shiny, childish window dressing.  Burton brought more of the morose subtext to the light, thus dragging down Alice In Wonderland away from what it was intended.  Whereas, Raimi keeps the balance and tone of his film's predecessor.  I believe Raimi knew it was suicide to mess with a formula as delicate as The Wizard Of Oz.  Burton made subtext the focal point when he should have remembered it is the wonder the makes the world.  Raimi thrives here and never takes his eye off the ball.

Despite being an actor I very well should hate, I can't help but like James Franco.  Perhaps it is his 'in on the joke' personality and the fact he never takes himself too seriously that disarms me.  His talent, when he's trying, is undeniable.  This isn't Franco's finest work but I believe he's perfectly cast as Oz.  Oz is a failed showman.  A man with the potential for great things, but seems to never be 100% genuine.  A man you want to expose as a fraud not laud as a talent.  Franco seems to fit the bill.  Since Spider-Man Raimi has seemed to know how to use Franco's more unpopular tendencies.  His mugging for the camera never feels out of place in a Raimi film.  And his tender moments, ones that would be cheesy in any other film, seem right at home here.  Rachel Weisz and Michelle Williams stand tall, where other actors would sleepwalk.  That includes Weisz's great nod to, coincidentally Return Of The Jedi, and having a sorcery battle with Williams that rivals even that of Gandalf and Saruman.  But the stand out here is Mila Kunis.  She has been proving since That 70s Show that shes not just a pretty...pretty...pretty...damn she's pretty...face.  It is probably known to all her role in the film.  However, I won't spoil it other than to say she completely humanized and made me empathize with a character I thought would be impossible to.  

Oz The Great And Powerful isn't the greatest film you'll see this year by a longshot.  But it knows what it wants to be, it knows what it has to be, and accomplishes these things nearly perfectly.  Don't believe me?  Close your eyes and imagine for a moment what you deem a PROPER...DUN DUN DUUUUN!!!...prequel to one of the most classic, iconic, and 'out there' films in almost the last hundred years.  Click your heals three times, open your eyes, watch Oz The Great And Powerful...then tell me I'm wrong. 

Read More

London Calling: Children of Men

Children of Men - Captivating

Lately in film, especially futuristic sci-fi fare, the preferred city of devastation is London.  It used to be that Godzilla would stomp Japan into oblivion, but of course we all know that giant lizards bred out of nuclear irresponsibility is completely far-fetched, right?  But putting fantasy away, London has been a hub the past decade or so for apocalyptic visions of the future.  From Rage viruses to an infertility pandemic, I'm not sure "Keep Calm and Carry On" would be enough for even London's strongest citizens to get behind.  This brings me to 2006's "Children of Men" one of the most captivating sci-fi films to be released in recent memory.

Here's the scoop; we visit London in the not too distant future where there hasn't been a reported new birth in nearly 18 years.  Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse, the youngest person in the world, lovingly named Baby Diego, has just been murdered.  With the world in mourning, we follow happy-go-lucky Theo, played by Clive Owen.  Theo is the type of guy that loves to get high with his hippy friend Jaspar and get kidnapped by a terrorist group called "The Fishes" led by his former activist wife, Julian, played by Julianne Moore.  The plot thickens when it's discovered that Theo is carrying some precious cargo, namely a baby in the belly of a young refugee girl named Kee.  With the government, crooked cops, and members of the terrorist group hot on his heels, Theo has no choice but to protect Kee and try and deliver her to The Human Project, a mysterious group researching why humanity become infertile so many years ago.

"Children" went largely unnoticed during its theatrical run, which is odd for how good this film really is.  The acting is spot on, the setting couldn't feel more real, and the message is relatively universal.  Sure, there are some preachy moments, and even some of the imagery and names are obvious, case in point, the young girl Kee, (even though it's technically pronounced "chi") who just might be the "key" to civilization's survival.  But those are minor quibbles.

Directed by Alfonso Cuaron, who some might know for "Y Tu Mama Tambien" or to an even wider audience as the director the best Harry Potter film installment "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban."  Some might disagree with that assessment of the "Harry Potter" franchise, but it was the moment that the series went from light-hearted and childish to dark, brooding, and serious.

Cuaron lends that trademark style to "Children" and creates a dystopian London where all hope seems to be lost, refugees are treated like Jews during World War II, and ethnic tensions are slowly coming to a head.  With all of that being said, Cuaron is still able to capture small glimmers of hope in a hopeless world, and some humanity in some of the more monstrous characters.  But the highlights of the film revolve around the long take action sequences which last upwards of 6 minutes.  Even though it has been debunked that these scenes are not one long take, the fact remains that these scenes highlight the film and create the most memorable moments in "Children."

Despite the fact "Children" was critically praised, the fact it didn't bank more at the box office was a crime in and of itself.  It's also a movie I'm always shocked people have never seen; at that moment I slap them in the face, hand them the DVD, and bid them Godspeed.

Fun Fact:  In the Bexhill block scene, Theo can be seen wearing a London 2012 Olympics fleece jacket.

Read More

The Simplistic Reviews Podcast Late Edition: February 2013

Like the old cliche; "better late than never" The Simplistic Reviews Podcast is back, and we're just as cliched as we were back in January.

In this February edition we wax poetic on the failings of non-Marvel Studios films, pass judgement on Bruce Willis' latest John McClane adventure, "A Good Day To Die Hard," and rip Seth MacFarlane a new one.

Plus, this time Matt is in the hot seat with another edition of "Word Association."  From Harrison Ford to breast milk, nothing is off limits to Matt's rage, while Justin and DJ have their feelings hurt by our cybernetic robo-babe, Julie.

All this and much more in our "late" February podcast, right here on Simplistic Reviews.

Click on the link below to download the podcast and enjoy folks!

Show Notes

Boycotting Non-Marvel Comic Films
A "Good" Day to "Die Hard"
Why Seth MacFarlane Sucks

FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY.

Click HERE to listen to podcast

Check us out on Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest

Read More

The Simplistic Reviews Podcast: 2013 Oscars Special

 

In this very special edition of The Simplistic Reviews Podcast we break down the 2013 Academy Award, this Sunday, February 24th.  Will "Argo" make The Academy rue the day they didn't nominate Ben Affleck for a best actor award for "Gigli?"  Will another French Revolution occur with "Amour?"  Will we ever get to see the SyFy Original movie, "Zero Dark Thirty-One: The Return of bin Laden?"

All of this and much, much more in our special Oscar edition of The Simplistic Reviews Podcast.  Below are the categories we cover in the podcast, with our favorites BOLDED.

Best Animated Film: FRANKENWEENIE

PIRATES: BAND OF MISFITS

BRAVE

PARANORMAN

WRECK IT RALPH

Best Screenplay Adapted: CHRIS TERRIO-ARGO, 

LUCY ALIBAR & BEN ZEITLIN-BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD

DAVID MAGEE-LIFE OF PI, 

TONY KUSHNER- LINCOLN

DAVID O. RUSSELL-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

Best Original Screenplay: MICHAEL HANEKE-AMOUR, 

QUENTIN TARANTINO-DJANGO

JOHN GATINS-FLIGHT

WES ANDERSON & ROMAN COPPOLA-MOONRISE KINGDOM

MARK BOAL-ZERO DARK THIRTY

Directing: MICHAEL HANEKE-AMOUR, 

BEN ZEITLIN-BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD

ANG LEE-LIFE OF PI

STEVEN SPIELBERG-LINCOLN

DAVID O. RUSSELL-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

Best Supporting Actress: AMY ADAMS-THE MASTER

SALLY FIELD-LINCOLN

ANNE HATHAWAY-LES MISERABLES

HELEN HUNT-THE SESSIONS

JACKI WEAVER-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK.

Best Supporting Actor: ALAN ARKIN-ARGO

ROBERT DENIRO-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

 PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN-THE MASTER

TOMMY LEE JONES-LINCOLN 

CHRISTOPH WALTZ-DJANGO UNCHAINED

Best Actress: JESSICA CHASTAIN-ZERO DARK THIRTY

 JENNIFER LAWRENCE-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK 

EMMANUELLE RIVA-AMOUR

QUVENZHANE WALLIS-BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD

NAOMI WATTS-THE IMPOSSIBLE

Best Actor: BRADLEY COOPER-SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK 

DANIEL DAY-LEWIS-LINCOLN

HUGH JACKMAN-LES MISERABLES

JOAQUIN PHOENIX-THE MASTER

DENZEL WASHINGTON-FLIGHT

Best Picture-AMOUR, 

LIFE OF PI

ARGO

LINCOLN

BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD 

SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

DJANGO UNCHAINED

ZERO DARK THIRTY

LES MISERABLES

Click on the link below to download the podcast and enjoy folks!

Show Notes

Official Academy Awards Site 
Django Review
Silver Linings Playbook Review
The Master Review
Zero Dark Thirty Review

FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY.

Click HERE to listen to podcast

Check us out on Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest

Read More

London Calling: V For Vendetta

FORGOTTEN

With the Oscar season here and the summer movie season fast approaching, I wanted to talk about a film I think fits into both.  Now comic book films are usually shrugged off as just popcorn fluff.  Most times, they are.  To this day, however, there hasn’t been a comic book film that has challenged me intellectually more than V For Vendetta.  It is one of the most intelligently made, beautifully shot, well performed films of the genre.  But sadly for some reason, it is FORGOTTEN.

V For Vendetta plot revolves around a knife wielding masked terrorist/freedom fighter trying to take down an oppressive British government in the not too distant future.  I put terrorist/freedom fighter because the film blurs the line between the two.  It makes you question the difference and presents the perspective of people on either side of the chaos.  Some would argue that the character of V is clearly the hero and the government is bad.  However, when you really get into the specifics of V’s acts, it is hard to paint him as a true blue hero.  Even an antihero for that matter.  Robin Hood robbed from the rich and gave to the poor.  V is out for vengeance, admittedly so.  He kills in cold blood.  He kills innocents.  He kidnaps.  He tortures.  He does whatever it takes to accomplish his goals.  You might say the ends justify his means, but his acts seen through a different spectrum can easily be construed as terror.  That is why I love this film.  It can be dissected and analyzed even to this day.  The Avengers is my favorite comic book movie of all time, however, V For Vendetta is much meatier when it comes to substance.

Comic book legend Alan Moore is famous for angrily dismissing and disavowing any adaptations of his work.  This is thanks primarily to the abysmal League Of Extraordinary Gentleman.  I wish he’d take a slightly lighter stance on this though.  It might be easy for me to say but, films aren’t bad solely because the filmmakers take liberties with the source material.  I detest Michael Bay’s Transformer films and Marc Webb’s Amazing Spider-Man not just because they changed things.  I detest them because they are poorly written, horribly performed, lowest common denominator catering tripe.  Their changes weren’t done to add anything new or stimulating to the material.  They were made for convenience sake.  The same cannot be said for V For Vendetta.  Yes, V is a warmer character in the film than he was in the comic book.  However, I think that makes him even more complicated when compared to the coldness of his methods.  Yes, the fascist vs. anarchist theme was more liberal vs. neo-conservatism.  However, that is a lot timelier for today’s political atmosphere and still has the nod to the fascist's ideas of purity from the comic book.  My point being that the alterations made in V For Vendetta do not weaken it as a story.  It merely updates it. 

The Wachowskis, the source material meddlers in this case, exist in a weird place for me as a film fan.  I was highly disappointed with their conclusion of The Matrix trilogy, but still respect the fact they always take crazy chances.  They entrusted the directing duties to long time collaborator James McTeigue, while staying on to write and produce.  However, their fingerprints are still all over this picture.  Finding and concentrating on the heart of their cinematic worlds is a common Wachowski m.o..  Where a film like V For Vendetta could have just fallen into the basic action vehicle cliché, the Wachowskis don’t let it.  There are genuinely moving moments in the film that still stun me.  The action scenes are terrific, but always serve as a tool to tell the story.  Not the other way around.

Before The Dark Knight came along, V For Vendetta was my choice for best ensemble cast performance in a comic book film.  Strange category, I know.  However, it is always a relief and a thrill for me when I see great talent trying to do great work in a genre film such as a comic book movie.  It thrilled me in History Of Violence, it thrilled me in The Dark Knight, and it thrilled me in V For Vendetta.  It is still a common misconception that the genre should be treated the way Schumacher treated Batman.  But there can be some amazing work turned in with the cape and cowl subset.  For example, this is by far my favorite performance by Hugo Weaving.  Yes, even more than his iconic Agent Smith.  Odd, seeing as we never see his face and that he was a last second replacement for James Purefoy.  Despite his Oscar, I’d put Weaving’s V right up there with Ledger’s Joker.  To accomplish the subtleties of V’s rage, anguish, humor and theatricality through an emotionless mask with only a voice is no small feat.  Portman, who I’ve loved since Leon: The Professional, seems to be playing a stereotypical damsel at first.  Much like she did in Thor.  However, Evey has the strongest arc in the film.  Her performance highpoint happens during the film's big twist.  Her emotional journey during the four minute long scene hints at the Oscar caliber performance she had in her in the years to come.  Other than the leads, you have stellar supporting performances from John Hurt, Stephen Fry, Roger Allam, and the unsung anchor of the film, Stephen Rea.  There is absolutely no phoning it in here.

V For Vendetta doesn't get nearly as much love as it should.  Even from it's creator.  It seems to get misplaced amongst it's lesser comic book movie brethren   For me, however, it is a film that shall never be FORGOT.  Remember, remember...to watch it....then tell me I'm wrong.  

Read More

London Calling: The Great Muppet Caper

The Great Muppet Caper - Whimsical

My first exposure to The Muppets wasn't any of their movies, it was actually "Muppet Babies" which for me, still goes down as one of my favorite cartoons of all time, and the best cartoon of the 1980s.  There was nothing wrong with it; it had "Star Wars", "Indiana Jones", and pretty much any pop culture reference that you could think of at the time.  It was smarter than the kids that were watching it, and for my money, still holds up pretty well.  The Muppet movies didn't really come around for me the first time around, in fact I remember watching most of them on VHS when my dad recorded them for me.  Think about it, "The Muppet Movie" was released in 1979, and to say the least I was the last thing my parents had on their mind at the time.  However, when I was old enough to know how to operate the VCR and go through the stacks of VHS recordings that we had in our house, it was that fateful day I popped in 1981's "The Great Muppet Caper" starring all of your favorite Muppets; from Kermit the Frog to *John Cleese, yes, John Motherf*ckin' Cleese is in this movie.

Like most Muppet fare the plot is going to include plenty of hijinks, celebrity cameos, and humor that goes well over the intended audiences heads, including one in "Caper" that refers to a guy cheating on his wife.  Jim Henson had some balls on him.  Any who, we open "Caper" with our three heroes, Kermit, Fozzie, and Gonzo in a hot air balloon talking about the opening credits.  Next thing they know their balloon is going down right in the middle of a crowded street which breaks out into our first musical number.  Further hijinks ensue that involve a case of mistaken identity, stolen diamonds, and a love triangle between a frog, pig, and Charles Grodin.  Good clean family fun.

What stands out, like most Muppets movies, are the songs.  The highlight is "Happiness Hotel" that has the sound of a blues, zydeco, and a big band mash-up that works perfectly and will be stuck in your head for days.  Some of the other songs get a little sappy, but there's still a whimsical element to the music that can appeal to the young and old alike.

While the setting of the movie takes place in London, it could really take place anywhere.  This isn't "The Muppets Take Manhattan" where the city is almost as big a star as The Muppets, but you still get a chuckle from some of the dry British humor we all know and love.

If you've only seen 2011's "The Muppets" with Jason Segel and Amy Adams, which is fine in it's own way, do yourself a favor and treat yourself to "The Great Muppet Caper" that has plenty of mad-cap antics and no cheap Disney tie-in's.

*Disclaimer:  Of course I know John Cleese isn't a Muppet, but he might be the king of silly walks.

Fun Fact:  Score one for the U.K.  "The Muppet Show" premiered first across the pond, September 5th, 1976.  It premiered 22 days later on the 27th in the U.S.

Read More

Hyde Park on Hudson

Hyde Park on Hudson: Mixed

(2012) 94 min  -  Biography | Comedy | Drama 


The film is good. I found it mixed thou, do to the films focus. 

The issue here is we're presented with almost two different stories in a short 94 minute film. In the beginning we start with the relationship with FDR and Daisy (his sixth cousin) and that's fine. But then King George comes to Hyde Park (First time a King and Queen of the United Kingdom visited America) and that's fine too. But the two just don't seem to mix well. Sure the story between FDR and Daisy is okay, but to me the fun parts are with FDR and King George. Here we have two of the world's most powerful people, and they both have disabilities.

King George has issues speaking and FDR can't walk. At a time of world war this is a story that is simply amazing. So I found the relationship between the two a hell of a lot fun as these two men find out that they're more similar then they would of thought. Then the film goes back to Daisy and I just kept wanted it to head back with King George. This kept happening and I kept thinking why couldn't the whole film be about FDR and George. I enjoyed the way the film looked but the script I thought lacked focus.

Bill Murray was awesome. I really enjoyed him
playing that of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I also thought Samuel West as King George VI was good too. The rest of the cast was pretty good but like I said FDR and King George's relationship is the best thing about this "mixed" film.

Read More