The Incredible Burt Wonderstone wasn’t as incredible as I would have hoped. Only a few years after Steve Carell retired Michael Scott, the role he was born to play, he has remained relatively out of the spotlight. Partnered alongsideas his faithful best friend and partner Anton Marvelton and Olivia Wilde, his hopeful magician-to-be sidekick Jane, this trio face what it’s like to have to recover their once coveted Las Vegas stardom.

As young boys, Burt and Anton are inspired to become magicians after Burt receives his first starter magic kit as a birthday present from his mother.  Not only was magic a distraction from the hard life of being an outcast, but it sparks an enduring friendship that would soon lead them to Las Vegas stardom. After spending over a decade on the top of the Vegas show circuit, Burt and Anton are soon dethroned by stunt magic marvel Steve Grey, played by Jim Carrey.  Steve Grey’s street magic camera show “Brain Rapist” plays off of the ridiculousness of the new modern street magic craze made famous by the likes of David Blaine and Vegas’s own “Mind Freak” Criss Angel. In an age where magic has traded old-fashioned card tricks and top-notch illusions for over the top stunt work, Burt not only finds his outdated Vegas show plummeting to its death but is completely oblivious to it. Wonderstone, once a boy with a dream turned ego maniac, loses his partner, his assistant and the adornment of his fans.

Carell dives head first into the character but might have just missed the landing. At times when the movie’s magic tricks and wonderment were winning me over, the persistent nonstop, over the top antics might have hurt the movie’s chances of being a Carell classic. It’s obvious that he was meaning to make the role an extreme spectacle of a Vegas magician, but he took it a step too far and just became obnoxious. However, Carrey’s wit and humor tied very well with the mockery of today’s so-called magicians that simply do stunt work packaged up as magic. For someone who hasn’t really enjoyed Jim Carrey since Dumb and Dumber, I thought he did a fantastic job as the nemesis of Wonderstone. He was the perfect combination of theatrical and creepy, a la Criss Angel. There were a few really funny moments during the movie, but the majority of the joke attempts just fell flat. Maybe working with a better script would have saved this movie from itself.

All in all the movie had promise and I really did root for it to be a winner, but I left the theatre feeling like it was just average.

Sarah

More Posts

The first thing I thought of after seeing Mama was wow what am I going to write for my review??  and I don’t mean that in a good way.  I went into this movie with very high hopes. I am a self proclaimed horror movie enthusiast and the previews made it seem like it was going to be inventive and very scary. Also, Jessica Chastain is a fantastic actress (not to mention a Golden Globe winner), so of course she would only pick the best roles for herself, right? Wrong. On the outside, the movie’s plot summary has extreme potential. Two girls, Victoria (Megan Charpentier) and Lilly (Isabelle Nélisse), are left in the forest to live and survive (seemingly) on their own for 5 years, until they are found and brought to live with their uncle and his girlfriend Annabelle (Chastain). Except for the fact that the girls seem “outdoorsy” as Annabelle laughably puts it, the girls appear relatively normal given the circumstances. That all changes when they start talking about this person named Mama who was apparently with them for the 5 years they were missing. And it seems like Mama has somehow come back with them from the forest. Is Mama a real person? Is she a ghost? Is she a figment of their imaginations? This is the question that the movie tries to answer and entertain the audience with. Unfortunately, the writers decided to pick the cheesiest/”lack of effort” explanation of what “Mama” is. This movie had such potential to be a great scary movie, but unfortunately it falls way short.

The majority of the movie was just a complete miss in my opinion, but there were a few things I did enjoy. The cinematography was fantastic and the directors effort to have the movie display a creepy ambiance was extremely successful. There were a lot of “look around the corner” moments and I have to admit, I did close my eyes a few times for fear of what I would see on screen. Along with that, there were a lot of jumpy moments as well. However, the jumpy moments were met with audience laughter after we realized what it was that actually scared us. Case in point: the CGI/special effects used in this movie are horrendously laughable.  I don’t know what movie exec signed off on these poor excuses for special effects being included but they should be fired. Also, the problem I have with a lot of horror movies is that they use too many details for something that doesn’t even end up mattering to the plot. This movie was no different. An example is that Jessica Chastain’s character Annabelle is a 35 year old goth in a punk metal band. These details do nothing to further enhance the story, so they leave the audience wondering why they were even included in the plot in the first place. I feel like the writers of this movie spent a lot of wasted time on little unnecessary details like that instead of developing relationships between all of the characters.

The acting from almost everyone involved was absolutely horrible. The only saving grace for this movie was the two actresses who portrayed Victoria and Lilly.  They were equally creepy and endearing at all the right times. The story itself started out very strong, but it is almost like the writers gave up their creativity half way through the movie and just decided on the first thing that came to their mind as an ending.  Let’s just say (without giving anything away) the ending can be summed up with a lot of moths, Harry Potter-esque music, extreme overacting, and an abundance of the oh-so-amazing special effects that I previously mentioned. When the credits rolled, I looked at my fiance and said outloud “that was probably one of the worst horror movies I’ve ever seen”. And let me tell you, I’ve seen a lot.  Yes there were some great scares, but it was nothing I hadn’t seen before. If you still want to see it and are intrigued by the movie itself, then by all means give it a try, but maybe try to lessen your expectations more than I did.

Sarah

More Posts

I have to admit that I am not very familiar with all of the works of Alfred Hitchcock. I know the basics of course: The Birds, Vertigo, Rear Window, etc and luckily “Hitchcock” is about the making of arguably his most famous film, “Psycho”, so I was already somewhat familiar with the storyline. However, I was surprised to see a lot of interesting facts brought out in this movie that I had never known before. The movie starts out with Hitchcock wanting to reinvent himself and make a picture like nothing he has ever done before. He comes across a novel called “Psycho”, written about the famous serial killer Ed Gein, and decides to pursue making it into a motion picture. I wasn’t even aware that “Psycho” was inspired by the story of Ed Gein, so that was my first little fun fact that I learned during the movie. I was also surprised to see that “Psycho” was almost never made and Hitchcock himself funded the movie, because the production studios wanting nothing to do with a “slasher film”. Hitchcock soared through the production difficulties with the help of his wife Alma, played amazingly by Helen Mirren. She was a spitfire woman who was the metaphorical backbone of Hitchcock himself. However, her efforts seemingly always go unnoticed by her husband as he is constantly smitten by the blonde actresses he comes in contact with. In fact (fun/awkward fact #3), he goes as far as to install peepholes so he can see into the dressing rooms of the actresses during filming of his movies. Who knew Hitchcock was such a pervert?? His non-efforts to appreciate Vera lead to many problems within their marriage, which creates discord within himself while he is trying to create his latest masterpiece. The movie does a great job of accurately showing all the trials and tribulations that Hitchcock and the entire production came across while filming and ultimately finishing the classic film.

I absolutely loved how the movie was filmed and directed. The costumes, the cinematography, and the overall feeling of the movie were very reminiscent of the 1950s. Scarlett Johannsen and Jessica Biel did fabulous jobs portraying Janet Leigh and Vera Miles, respectively.  Their method of acting really helped the audience believe we were truly watching something from that time period.

Although the movie was generally enjoyable, there were a few things I was not so crazy about. I am usually a big fan of Anthony Hopkins. I mean who doesn’t love him as Hannibal Lecter in “Silence of the Lambs”, but he definitely over-acted in this role. His facial expressions and the way he spoke were almost laughable at how over the top they were. Maybe that was his intention while acting in this role or maybe that is how Hitchcock was in real life, but it was very distracting as an audience member. Also, the pace of the movie approaches snail speed. I found myself bored more-so than entertained half the time. Even though the subject matter of the movie is something that interests me, the slow pace caused my loss of attention very quickly.  If you are a Hitchcock aficionado and have a strong interest in his life and how he produces his films, then I would say this movie is a safe bet for you. However, I think the “casual viewer” like myself who is somewhat intrigued by the inner workings of Hitchcock could maybe wait till it’s available to rent and you don’t have to spend the $10 to see it in the theater. It’s a movie worth seeing, but maybe in the comforts of your own home with a $1 redbox rental.

Sarah

More Posts

I love this time of the year. Pumpkins to carve, leaves to rake, and plenty of scary movies to entice a horror movie fan like myself. There has been “The Possession,” “The House at the End of the Street,” “Sinister.” and now “Paranormal Activity 4.” I have to admit that I have loved the “Paranormal Activity” series of films. I think they are very inventive and gave me something that I never really seen or experienced before. So of course I had high hopes for the 4th installment that is being released today in theaters. I sat down with my popcorn and tried to prepare myself for the frightening encounter I was hopefully going to experience for the next 2 hours. And I have to admit, I loved it. It had all of the elements of a horror movie that I love: funny, tension breaking dialogue, edge of your seat thrills, and an explosive ending. 

The first few minutes give a nice summary of the last 3 films and end by stating that this film takes place after all of the other 3, almost like “present day.” We meet a family that lives in a nice suburban neighborhood and seemingly have a great life, except for having to live by the new neighbors that moved in across the street: a woman and her “son.” I’m sure you can guess who they are if you have seen the 2nd movie, ie. demonic Katie and kidnapped Hunter. Now there is a slight twist on who the child really is, because he goes by Robbie. So maybe it isn’t Hunter, maybe it is. That is something that the movie tries to explain, but sadly falls short. “Robbie” befriends the family’s child Wyatt and the terror starts right away. Without giving away any spoilers, you will probably be thinking the same thing I was regarding who Hunter/Robbie/Wyatt really is.

This movie had a lot of the elements of the first 3, such as showing a scene and the audience having to sit there to nervously search the frame for what will happen next, leaving them literally on the edge of their seat. However, this movie had a lot more jumpy scares, like a character popping up in a frame or an object being surprisingly hurled towards the camera. This 4th movie definitely had my heart racing and my nerves on edge, more-so than the first 3. However, the scares themselves are a little more subdued and disappointing. The first 3 movies were so inventive, ie. all the cupboards opening at once, people being pulled down the hallway by an unseen force, etc. In this movie, the filmmakers almost seemed a little lazier. Like I said before, they were still very effective is causing me to hold my hands over my eyes the entire time, but I feel like they were nothing I hadn’t seen before. Now, the ending was brilliant. It was very fast paced and incorporated a lot of scary moments in about 5 minutes time. My nerves were definitely on edge for the last 10 minutes and I believe it was the best ending of the entire series.

This is definitely a must see if you love horror movies as much as I do. The acting is great and very believable and although the scares are almost “been there, done that,” they are still effective enough to make you jump out of your seat. It won over my fiance who hates horror movies, so I’m sure it will win you over as well!

Side note: Stay after the movie to see an additional scene from an upcoming sequel/prequel.

Sarah

More Posts

I am a big fan of scary movies, but lately there have been a lot of duds (ie. see my review for “The Apparition”). The plots seem so bland and the “scares” are over produced. Horror movie writers/directors have moved from a simple ghost story to creating this world of overused gore. So I should clarify myself; I am a big fan of gore/torture-free horror movies. Enter “Sinister”.  After watching the trailer, I had really high hopes. And it definitely did not disappoint. I should preface this review by stating that I brought my “I hate horror movies” fiance to the screening, and he left saying that it is his favorite horror movie that he’s ever seen. Although it isn’t my favorite, it is definitely up high on the list of most frightening movies I’ve ever seen (and I have definitely seen my fair share of them). The story is about a true crime novelist (Ethan Hawke) who moves his family into a house where grisly murders had recently occurred. Without giving too much away, he is writing a book about the aforementioned murders and is trying to solve a mystery associated with the crime. In doing so, he uncovers a decades long thriller that begins to consume his life.

The movie is a very clever take on the “found footage” phenomenon that has seemed to overtake the horror movie business. I have to admit, I’m a huge fan of those movies though. I loved Paranormal Activity, Blair Witch Project, etc. because there is an added fear while watching that what you are seeing is portrayed as a true story that could happen to you. Hawke finds various 8mm home movies in the attic that display horrible murders by an unknown assailant. The audience has to watch multiple people die mortifying deaths. And yes I was in the audience with my hands clasping my mouth in horror the entire time. The movie also had one of the most effective musical scores I had ever encountered in a horror movie. The little snippets of odd music during the home videos really climatized the horror that should be felt while watching something like this. These “videos” are done so well that after the movie was over, I remember saying to myself that it was one of the most disturbing horror movies I had seen. Not “disturbing” in a way that I felt morally violated, but “disturbing” in a way that the writers did their job very well in creating a great scary movie.

I believe this is a movie for the masses. Whether you enjoy horror movies as much as I do, or are usually a little reluctant with them, I’d say give it a try. It exudes the theme of old school horror with not needing 200 gallons of fake blood to portray a great scary story. With this being Halloweentime, it’s a great start to a scary season!

Sarah

More Posts

I am a true horror movie fan. The fan base has been given a lot of great ones over the last couple years, such as “Paranormal Activity,” “Insidious,” etc. and I did have my hopes up going into seeing “The Apparition.” To put it bluntly, I was very wrong. “The Apparition” is a classic case of a supernatural horror movie concept capable of so much, but over shadowed by a cast that wasn’t capable of pulling it off in the first place.

It is a story of a couple who begin to notice that their house is haunted; and although there is a backstory involving seances and conjuring up spirits, the main focus on the movie is on this one couple. There was so much potential for this movie to flourish, but found itself only flourishing in the areas of teen eye candy. I mean, how many horror movies do we need to see with the heroine running around in her underwear? Is that necessary to the plot of the movie? No. Do true horror movie fans care about that stuff? No. “The Apparition” did have its scary moments, but after all was said and done the couple in the movie wasn’t selling the fear enough. The wrong people were getting all the screen time. For instance, “Harry Potter” alum Tom Felton gave an excellent performance, however the bulk of the movie was given to the couple, “Gossip Girl”‘s Sebastian Stan and “Twilight”‘s Ashley Greene. Now, I am not a complete idiot and did not give much hope to them pulling off a great performance, but I definitely thought they could have done a much better job portraying a haunted and scared couple. Their reactions to situations and banter back and forth was so overly dramatic that it almost felt like they were poking fun at how horror actors and actresses should act. When the entire theater is laughing at how dramatic their acting and dialogue is rather than being scared, you know you have a problem.

Also, there was too much screen time spent on useless dialogue rather than elaborating on a really cool movie concept. Why not make this an awesome ghost hunting movie? Why not focus on what kind of spirits were trying to cross over? Why not let the one good actor in the movie really spread his wings and fly this movie higher than was allowed? The only story there was, I was completely lost on because the writers did a horrible job of developing it. All we were given was about an hour and a half of the main couple running around their house, looking pretty and being scared. I think the writers and producers felt that bringing members of “Twilight” and “Gossip Girl” into the movie would attract a teen crowd. Well I’m not a “teen crowd” and I would have liked to have seen a horror movie that didn’t cater to only that demographic. Instead of discussing how scary the movie was, I found myself asking the question of would those jump-out-of-your-seat moments been more effective if the story had developed any other way than it was written?

If you truly want to see this movie, it is definitely a “renter” in my opinion. Don’t waste your $10; save it for one of the more hopeful horror movies coming out like “The Possession” or “Paranormal Activity 4.” Hopefully those movies will live up to the hype they are receiving because this one did not.

Sarah

More Posts

On the outside, “The Campaign” looks like a movie that can do no wrong. Will Ferrell and Zach Galifinakis poking fun at the government: what’s not to like??  The trailer itself is hysterical, so I had high hopes for the movie. Well I’m happy to say that it does not disappoint.

Centered around the election race between a seasoned congressman Cam Brady (Ferrell) and hopeful newcomer Marty Huggins (Galifinakis), the two go head to head in a battle for a congressional seat that has always gone to Brady, as no one has run against him in the past. Brady has all of the delightful attributes of a previous POTUS who shall remain nameless (*ahem* GEORGE W *ahem*) and Ferrell does a great job of depicting that, right down to his southern accent. Now it isn’t stated definitively whether Brady is supposed to portray Bush, but it is definitely hard not to see the uncanny resemblance. Huggins on the other hand plays a well-mannered, soft spoken hopeful, who (to the audience) seems like he is going to be immediately crushed under the overpowering heel of the empire of Brady. Huggins seems so naive to the political game that the majority of the audience has a “let’s go for the underdog” reaction to the story, but almost to a point where we feel he would be the lesser of two evils, because they are both hilariously and obviously unfit to help govern the nation. (If you are familiar with Galifiniakis’s past work, his portrayal of Huggins reminded my fiance of a character called Seth Galifinakis that he does during his standup routine.)

The movie plays out like a retaliatory back and forth between the 2 characters, as most elections often do: just turn on the TV and you can see various commercials of Romney .vs. Obama. For viewers like me who are sick of that form of politics, this movie gives a great tongue-in-cheek version that brings the laughs rather than the typical groans of this election season. The jokes are seemingly non-stop, which instead of feeling overbearing, actually helped move the pace of the movie along. I hope to see Ferrell and Galifinakis do another movie together, because they played off each other very well. This movie is definitely a must-see for comedy fans and political fans alike!

Check out the official website for the film and don’t forget to follow @MartyHuggins and  @CamBrady on Twitter!

Sarah

More Posts

“Pete” from The League, “Nick” from New Girl, and “April” from Parks and Recreation all in one movie. What’s not to love already?? I’m sure the actors would not like reading that I am labeling them as their most popular roles, but let’s be honest, those are some great role predecessors to their characters in “Safety Not Guaranteed”. Of course, I was interested in seeing it right away. The plot speaks for itself: a man puts a personal ad in the paper seeking a worthy partner to join him on his journey back in time. Yes, travel back in time. He even states specifically to the reader that whom ever chooses to respond need to bring their own weapon in case they run into any danger and closes his ad with “Safety Not Guaranteed”.

In the sometimes-awkward Craigslist-era, most of you would be screaming, “Don’t answer the ad! He’ll probably be a serial killer that wants you to put the lotion on the skin!”, but I assure you, there is no Buffalo Bill action here. The real issue we encounter is whether this “time travel” is real and how much we let our ability of just believing in something affect our own outlooks on life.

Not wasting any time, the story delves into the issue of why Kenneth wants to time travel in the first place.  This gives way into the true center of the meaning of the movie.  Mark Duplass plays the quirky, somewhat socially awkward, “time traveller” Kenneth, who whole-heartedly believes that he can, and has time travelled.  His honest and straight forward performance does an effective job of convincing our characters that he can, and will time travel.  Aiding in the role of comedy relief, Jake Johnson departs from his bartending sidekick role in New Girl to take the helms as Jeff, a magazine journalist hell bent on creating a funny story about Kenneth, which will ultimately make a mockery of this very strange, seemingly crazy ad he has put in the paper. He brings along Darius (Aubrey Plaza), a jaded intern at the magazine to go off on a quest to investigate Kenneth and his motives. With Jeff bringing the cynicism and Darius bringing the open-mindedness, Duplass was able to create a very likable character who implores the viewers to become completely intrigued and cheer him on as he attempts to put his time traveling plan in motion. Darius immerses herself in Kenneth’s belief that he can time travel and becomes almost immediately attracted to the way Kenneth lives his life. An instant bond is formed by Kenneth filling in the holes that Darius has been feeling since adolescence. From there on, the movie displays themes of love, willpower, and the prominence of an open mind to live a full life.

Indie/”limited release” movies don’t usually have the best track record with me. For instance, I didn’t understand the point of “Blue Valentine”, was bored through “Martha Marcy May Marlene”, and almost fell asleep durning “Young Adult.” I know that they are filmed specifically to convey a deeper meaning and usually have a slower pace on purpose to marinate a center point which almost always allows for long winded discussions on plot points and cinematography strategy following the film. All in all, they are just not my cup of tea.  However, I absolutely loved “Safety Not Guaranteed”, regardless of its “indie” label. The tone of the movie was lighthearted enough that when the serious moments came, it allowed the viewer to feel comfortable between the transition. But as you can probably guess, the movie is not all about time travel. It’s about companionship, regret, love, and loss. I think we all could get on board with the idea of going back in time and change certain aspects of our life. It’s an exciting thing to think about! Although “Safety Not Guaranteed” definitely gives heart to that notion, it also plays on the fact that even though the idea of changing the past is appealing, sometimes we just need to let the past be the past and learn to live and be happy in the now.

Sarah

More Posts