Posts tagged review
Jhootha Hi Sahi Movie Review: John Abraham’s good movie to watch
Oct 22nd
Jhootha Hi Sahi Movie Review: John Abraham’s good movie to watch
Jhootha Hi Sahi movie is released today. The movie was due for an 15 October release, but it released today.
John Abraham is the star of the movie. Abbas Tyrewala is the director of the film. Pakhi Tyrewala, Abbas Tyrewala has played female lead role in the movie.
The story of the movie is simple and good as it revolves around Sid or Siddharth (John).
Siddhartha is a sweet and adorable guy living in London. He is running an Indian Bookshop with his friend and neighbour Omar (Raghu Ram).
But, behind his sweet face their is a innocent liar.
Mishka (Pakhi) enters in the life of Siddhartha. Mishka’s heart was broken from a long five years relationship.
Mishka needs someone, who can pull her out of her shell and bring her back to her beautiful life.
And the whole movie is all about the Mishka and Sid.
Story of the movie is simple and good to watch.
Comments
NY1 Movie Review: “Inhale”
Oct 21st
The new film “Inhale” concerns a devoted father who travels to Mexico and is willing to do just about anything to find a pair of compatible lungs to save the life of his young daughter. NY1′s Neil Rosen filed the following review.
Illegal organ trafficking is the subject at the center of a new thriller that stars Dermot Mulroney. It’s called “Inhale.”
Mulroney and Diane Kruger play Paul and Diane Stanon. Their daughter has a rare, degenerative disease that requires an immediate lung transplant or she’ll die. But there’s a huge waiting list.
With their daughter’s life clock quickly ticking away, these desperate parents are willing to do anything to save their child’s life. So, Paul, an extremely honest, district attorney from New Mexico, decides to switch gears and heads south of the border.
Once in Mexico, Paul uncovers an organ harvesting crime ring where the donors are the victims. This once moral man now has to make a decision whether or not to expose what he’s found and in the process possibly save the lives of hundreds of innocent people, or save his own daughter’s life.
Director Baltasar Kormakur tackles a subject that’s certainly worthy of big screen treatment. But even though it might be a well intentioned project, it’s the execution of this theme that’s pretty poorly done. Everyone that Paul encounters in Mexico, at every level of society, is corrupt and on the take. The characters are badly stereotyped and there’s scenes of graphic violence that are thrown in gratuitously.
The dialogue is also often cheesy and some of the scenes you just roll your eyes and say to yourself, “You’ve got to be kidding me.”
The filmmaker tries to hold your interest by inserting over the top shoot ‘em up action scenes. But it doesn’t gel with his heavy handed and very manipulative, emotional hijacking, concerning the fate of the young daughter.
Mulroney performance is flat and unengaging, which sways his character out of credibility range. But the real problem here lies with the hackneyed direction and cliched screenplay. This will hold your interest for a while before it falls apart.
Neil Rosen’s Big Apple Rating: 1.5 Apples
Movie Review: Hereafter
Oct 20th
Movie Review: Hereafter By Matthew Huntley October 20, 2010
New at BOP:
- Comics Weekly
- Monday Morning Quarterback
- I Know What You Did Last Summer
- How to Spend $20
- iPod Tour
- It’s Kind of a Funny Story
- Overpaid Jerks
- New Trivia Question
- All site updates
Share & Save Print this column There have been several movies made about the afterlife and what happens to us the moment we die, but few have approached the material as seriously and directly as Clint Eastwood’s Hereafter. Here is a film that explores the subject of the afterlife without succumbing to conventions or gimmicks, which I imagine was hard thing to do since the material makes it so tempting to embrace lurid imagery, cheap scare tactics and supernatural devices. But Eastwood and screenwriter Peter Morgan present it more realistically and keep things on a believable human level. The result is sometimes slow, but also intriguing.
The film tells three separate stories that run in parallel, each linked by the theme of characters coming to terms with death and the afterlife. Story #1: A French television journalist named Marie Lelay (Cécile De France) is on a tropical vacation with her boss-lover (Thierry Neuvic) when a tsunami strikes. In a scene that’s just as shuddering as it is eerily convincing, Marie gets trapped in a road flood and is struck in the head. Before she’s resuscitated, she has what appears to be a vision of the other side, including other souls. The experience leaves her reflective, curious and strangely fascinated.
Story #2: George Lonegan (Matt Damon) is a lowly bachelor living in San Francisco. He used to work as a psychic but found that being a conduit between the living and the dead was too much to bear. As he tells his older brother (Jay Mohr), his ability is more of a curse than a gift. Now he’s a factory worker who attends adult education classes and listens to Charles Dickens books on tape. He lives a sheltered, lonely life, albeit a peaceful one.
Story #3: In London, twin brothers Jason and Marcus (Frankie and George McLaren) try to support their alcoholic mother (Lyndsey Marshal) so they won’t be taken away by Child Services. When Jason runs out to fill his mother’s prescription, he’s attacked by street hoodlums and killed by an on-coming car. Marcus is sent to live with foster parents and wants only to make contact with his deceased brother. He searches the Internet for psychics who claim they can help him find the answers.
Each of these stories is so thoughtful and earnestly told they could exist independently of one another, and most of the time, they do. For the greater part of the film, the narratives are linked only by common theme and it’s not until the very end when they actually intersect. To their credit, they don’t rely on contrived coincidences, meet-cutes or shocking twists to hold our attention. They also don’t depend on standard Hollywood sensationalism. Each is simple but engaging in its own right; we feel like we’re getting three good stories for the price of one.
What’s refreshing about Peter Morgan’s screenplay is it looks at each situation from a practical point of view, which coincides with one of the film’s main arguments – that discussions about the afterlife are not taken seriously in the media and that people automatically assume the topic is apolitical, unimportant or too outrageous to entertain. In one of the film’s best scenes, Marie visits a hospice where a scientist talks candidly about the possibilities of experiencing death before actually dying. The dialogue is bright, intellectual and delivered frankly, suggesting Eastwood is mostly interested in making a solemn drama with smart characters who believe they can reach solace through truth and discovery.
Continued: 1 2
Movie Review: “Red”
Oct 20th
“Red” centers on a group of Special Ops CIA agents who are betrayed and hunted by the CIA. The catch? They’re all retirees. Though the premise of “Red” sounds ridiculous, the excellent cast, fantastic action scenes, and the well-written script makes this movie a must-see.
Red (retired and dangerous) describes a specific group of agents who are over the hill, but still kicking. The story focuses primarily on the story of Frank Moses (Bruce Willis), the first retired agent attacked at home. There are explosions, perfectly executed action scenes, and certain flair to the scene that only Willis can add. Realizing then, that he’s a target, he kidnaps a government desk worker, Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker), who he’s fallen madly for over the phone, and tries to protect her by towing her around with him. Then, and this is perhaps the greatest part of the movie, he “gets the band back together.” Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman), Victoria (Helen Mirrin), Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich) join on the screen and together they figure out why the CIA is trying to assassinate them.
All the while, the Red team provides its audience with a barrel full of laughs, phenomenal action scenes, and a well-written script performed well by its critically acclaimed cast. The spy-like things they do are clever and innovative and the postcard transitions as they move around each state are positively charming. Each character is well developed, they maintain their own distinct personality, and keep you rooting for them to kill the bad guys.
The thing that perhaps makes “Red” falter, however, is the ridiculous and poorly executed love story. It seems though Ross was thrown in simply to fulfill the archetypal damsel in distress role. She constantly needs to be rescued and proves to be a weak character. Meanwhile, she’s perfectly fine to be kidnapped by her bald admirer and his cronies? It’s ludicrous and their story isn’t developed. Neither is the other surprise romance story woven into the movie.
But the action, script, and main cast overshadows the awful romance and puts Moses And Ross’ “love story” on the back burner. It’s just a shame that they picked the easy way out on many of the story-lines, ultimately cheapening and weakening the experience for the audience. Still, the laughs keep coming and the quirky characters keep their viewers enthralled. “Red” deserves to be watched and passes with flying colors.
Rating: 3 Stars
Movie Review: DeNiro’s ‘Stone’ should have been bolder
Oct 17th
I was expecting “Stone,” with Robert De Niro and Edward Norton as its stars, to rock my world. Instead, it merely tosses up bricks. And by the end, it feels like every one of those blocks has landed squarely on your head.
I can see how De Niro and Norton were drawn to Angus MacLachlan’s dialogue-heavy script. It allows them to lavishly dine on the scenery in wildly emotive ways. Even better, it affords Norton the opportunity to sport cornrows and De Niro a chance to get naked with the lovely Milla Jovovich, who, true to the Hollywood double standard, is exactly half his age.
But what’s in it for us? Well, other than the chance to feast our eyes on Milla’s mammaries, very little. Not that De Niro and Norton are averse to a little chest puffing themselves while playing adversaries on opposite sides of the law.
Bob is Jack Mabry (an anagram for “my bra”), a parole officer just one case shy of permanently calling it a day. And that last client up for review is Norton’s Gerald “Stone” Creeson, a firebug who lit up his grandparents’ home after his equally charming pal killed Nana and Papa.
The basic premise is that deep down our combatants are very much the same, as director John Curran (“The Painted Veil”) shows us in the film’s harrowing opening scene, when a much, much younger Jack does his best Michael Jackson by dangling his newborn daughter out a second-story window. He’s threatening to let her fly, too, unless his mousy, zombified wife, Madylyn, reneges on her promise to leave him.
Ah, flashbacks –– don’t you just love ’em? Screenwriters certainly do, almost as much as they cherish preposterous plot twists like the doozy MacLachlan (the vastly superior “Junebug”) uncorks when he decides to have Stone’s horny wife (Jovovich) seduce Jack in hopes of … What? Blackmail? A quid pro quo of you scratch my back, you can scratch my wife’s? Who knows?
MacLachlan certainly never explains it. He’s too busy injecting allegory up the yin-yang. What is this, a movie or Bible school? God is truly everywhere in this production. So are discussions of redemption and reincarnation. And that’s on top of the religious zealot overheard on Jack’s car radio preaching about eternal damnation.
As for Curran, he doesn’t seem to do much of anything. His two diva-actors hijack the movie at the get-go, shamelessly hamming it up unchecked. Sure, it’s fun for a while. After all, when’s the last time you saw De Niro playing a damaged psycho? The problem is that Norton, who previously shared the screen with De Niro in 2001’s “The Score,” is too much of an egomaniac to cede the stage without a fight. Soon their initially riveting discussions evolve into shouting contests, with nuance emerging as the big loser.
Well, not as big a loser as Frances Conroy (“Six Feet Under”), saddled with the thankless role of playing Jack’s shell-shocked wife, who is about to literally light a fire under a husband who was always too busy watching the PGA to notice her wishing him dead. It’s a testament to Conroy’s talent that she’s able to keep Madylyn from devolving into caricature.
The same, unfortunately, can’t be said of Jovovich, whose overly earnest attempts at playing the femme fatale are more laughable than seductive. Could it be the queen of the “Resident Evil” flicks has been hanging around zombies so long that she’s become one?
At least she has an excuse. Norton doesn’t. Everything about his performance is wrong, from the silly cornrows to the made up accent that sounds strangely Southern, which might be acceptable were the film not set in Detroit.
Which reminds me: Why Detroit? If the intent was to integrate that city’s ghastly economic woes, Curran completely misses the mark. But then, the story could be set anywhere and would still be a “Stone” best left unturned.
Al Alexander may be reached at aalexander@ledger.com.
STONE (R for violence, nudity, sexual situations and language.) Cast includes Robert De Niro, Edward Norton, Milla Jovovich and Frances Conroy. Directed by John Curran. 1.5 stars out of 4.
![]()
Jackass 3D Movie Review
Oct 16th
Jackass 3D Movie Review
Jackass 3D was awaited by thousands of fans of the movie, Jackass 3D is already available on the internet. The movie has not got a fantastic response from the theatres as it was not such a great comedy movie; people were expecting that it will be a very funny one and they would spend the Friday night watching the movie in a theatre with their friends but after reading the review many of the people must have dropped their plan of going to the nearby theatre.
If you have some plans to watch Jackass 3D online then the movie is available to be watched. I wouldn’t recommend the movie for you to watch because firstly the movie has not got a very good response in its reviews and the second thing is if anyone of the readers actually wants to watch Jackass 3D online now you will not get a very good video quality copy of the movie. So it is better that you wait for better video quality copy to be uploaded by some one on the internet so you can watch Jackass 3D online.
http://watchjackass3d.com/, you will have to pay on this link to watch it. If anyone of the readers really wants to watch a good video copy then you should wait for a small period of time, because a better copy is not available on the internet.
Kichcha Huchcha – Movie Review
Oct 16th
After almost two years wait, director Gurudut’s Kannada movie Kichcha Huchcha has finally hit the screens across the state. It is a remake of Naren-Bhavana starrer Tamil movie Chithiram Pesuthadi. Although it is the frame to frame copy of the original, the director has made it suit the taste of local audience. The film is engaging and entertaining with its essential twists.
Kichcha alias Krishna Murthy (Sudeep) is a jobless youth. In a bid to look after his mother and sister, he joins a local rowdy’s (Suresh Chandra) gang. One day, he meets Aishu alias Aishwarya (Ramya), who is interested in social service activities. He develops a soft corner for her. In order to impress her, he tries to transform himself by being a normal guy. He quits rowdyism and takes up a job of selling toys on the street. This works out well and Aishu decides to marry him. But their romance soon runs into some roadblocks after Kichcha is arrested by the police in a brothel. How Kichcha manages to get her back facing against all odds forms the rest of the story.
All the characters are well etched and given the right backing. As angry young man, Sudeep impresses the audience and he has acted with ease in all fight, song and sentimental sequences. Besides him Ramya has also delivered wonderful performance. Like their previous movies, the on-screen chemistry between Sudeep and Ramya is a visual treat. Other actors like Srinath, Suresh Chandra, Giri, Narayanaswamy and Chandru have done justice to their respective roles.
V Harikrishna’s music for the film is another highlight of the film. Especially, two of the songs ‘He Preethiye Suchane Nidodilla…’ and ‘Udisale Sarigama Padanisa…’ are good to listen. Even Bianca Desai’s item song is a treat to watch on screen for pranksters. Srivenkat’s camerawork is another plus point of the film. Dialogues and editing works are also commendable.
If Gurudatt could have done little more homework on Sudeep’s character and comedy element, the movie would have been even more impressive. However, it is good time pass for this weekend.
Producer: K Manju
Director: Gurudut
Cast: Sudeep, Ramya, Srinath, Sureschandra, Narayanaswamy, Rangayana Raghu, Aravind, Sridhar, Rakesh and Chandru
Music: V Harikrishna
MOVIE REVIEW: Geezers plus guns equals plenty of movie fun in ‘Red”?
Oct 16th
EMAIL PRINT
WRITE LETTER TO EDITOR
CommentNo comments posted.
MOVIE REVIEW: Geezers plus guns equals plenty of movie fun in ‘Red”?
By Mathew DeKinder
Friday, October 15, 2010 7:08 PM CDT
“Hope I die before I get old.”
- The Who, “My Generation”
Frank Moses is a fairly typical retiree. He goes about his day puttering around his suburban home and he fills the lonely hours by reading and striking up a blossoming telephone relationship with the woman responsible for administering his pension checks.
We know this monotony won’t last long though because Frank is played by Bruce Willis, and where Willis goes explosions and carnage are sure to follow. It turns out that Frank is a retired CIA operative and when a team of dudes with machine guns and body armor show up at his house to do him in, he is even less surprised than we are. This is the setup for the movie “Red,” a flick based on a comic book that turns out to be way more fun than it probably has any right to be.
After taking out his assassins, Frank goes on the run, first rushing to collect Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker), the nice woman from the pension office whose seemingly harmless flirtations with Frank have put her in mortal danger.
Photo Galleries | Prep Sports Photos
Frank and Sarah then bounce around the country reconnecting with Frank’s trusted former colleagues, an elderly group that is much more comfortable firing rocket-launchers and uncovering international conspiracies than collecting Social Security or getting the early-bird special at the Sizzler.
As the movie unfolds, we are subjected to a plot that is as familiar as it is ridiculous, but none of that really matters as “Red” soars, thanks to some lively pacing, punchy dialogue and a brilliant ensemble cast.
First on the list is intelligence expert Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman), who is quietly wasting away in a retirement home in New Orleans when Frank tracks him down. Freeman is having such a good time in the movie he can barely keep the grin off of his face, of course, he’s probably just relieved he didn’t have to do any voice-over narration. Plus the dude can still pull off a black leather jacket.
Comic relief comes in the form of Marvin Boggs as played by John Malkovich. Marvin is unhinged, paranoid and right up Malkovich’s alley. He and Willis have great comedic timing and it is a hoot to watch them play off of each other. If they had a buddy-cop TV show, it would immediately become my favorite thing on television.
Rounding out the cast are Brian Cox, who plays a retired KGB agent and just might be the most consistently dependable character actor in the business, and Helen Mirren as MI6′s once most formidable assassin.
Bond’s got nothing on her as this grande ol’ dame handles a variety of assault weapons while putting the sexy back in senior citizen. OK, so maybe it wasn’t there to begin with, but it sure is now. Well done, Helen Mirren.
Ernest Borgnine even shows up in nice little turn as a CIA records keeper. The 93-year-old actor doesn’t get to kill anybody, but cut the guy some slack; he won an Academy Award for his lamentations about being middle-aged and past his prime in “Marty,” and that was 55 years ago! We should all be so lucky.
German director Robert Schwetke deserves a lot of credit for keeping the movie light and bouncy, while not being overwhelmed by the cast’s roughly 37,000 years of combined movie-making experience.
At first glance, the novelty of “Red” seems to be “Hey! It’s old people kicking butt!” In reality, it works because those old people are exceptional actors and they all seem to be having an absolute blast. Think of it like a silver-haired “Ocean’s 11″ or an invitation to a really great cocktail party. Well, a cocktail party with guns and explosions and maybe just a little Metamucil, cause even super spies gotta stay regular.
“Red” is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence and brief strong language.
Most Popular
- HOUR STORY: One with the homeless (4560)
- POKIN AROUND: Bar fight lawsuit dismissed; Rookies not at fault (1175)
- Former Affton High School building named historic site (849)
- St. Charles Main Street: Past to present (837)
- PHOTO: Pay up, Illinois! (741)
Most Commented
- Convention center tries to lure Archon back
- HOUR STORY: One with the homeless
- Historic house in Chesterfield opens door to scrap between mayor, landmarks commissioners
- MOVIE REVIEW: ‘Secretariat’ pulls up lame
- New Granite City theater battles sluggish movie season
Editor’s Picks
- St. Peters board to discuss funeral protests, spitting
- Hazelwood is concerned that new hotel could halt retail growth
- South City pianist gives memorial recital for father
- Festival to benefit The Child Center in Wentzville
- Contentious Collinsville rental ordinance on hold for now
No comments posted.
You need to log in to post a comment.
‘RED’: The Comic vs. the Bruce Willis/Morgan Freeman Film [Review]
Oct 15th
Written by Warren Ellis (“Transmetropolitan,” “Planetary”) the “Red” comic book was originally published as a three-issue mini-series from 2003-2004, under Homage Comics, an imprint of the soon-to-be-gone Wildstorm Productions. This mini-series featured a retired black ops killer named Frank Moses, an over the hill former operative who had been done with the wetwork game for years, wishing only to be left alone to have a quiet life and to try and forget the awful things he had done for his country. But when a newly appointed CIA director, a politician with no experience in intelligence work, discovers who Frank is and all the things he’s done, he decides it’s better to kill the retired agent rather than allow anyone to live with the knowledge that the U.S. would authorize dirty work. Unfortunately for him, “old” does not equate “out of shape” or “rusty” and Frank is easily able to defeat those sent to kill him. And now Frank Moses is on a quest to take out those who wouldn’t let him live in peace.
A very cool story concept. So it’s no wonder it made it into a film, which was released today, starring Bruce Willis as Frank Moses. But whereas the mini-series focused solely on him, the film has Moses fighting alongside several of his former colleagues, played by Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, Helen Mirren and Brian Cox. Joining them is Mary Louise Parker as a government pencil pusher Frank has developed a crush on and who unwittingly finds herself involved in his mission.
From the get go, the movie is different from the comic. While some scenes are very close to the original story, here Frank is not targeted for assassination because he’s living proof that the U.S. does bad things but because he knows too much about a particular operation that needs to be covered up. Also, whereas the comic book was called “Red” to signify Frank becoming an active killer again (as opposed to “green status” which marked him as non-active and retired), this movie states that “R.E.D.” is an acronym for “Retired, Extremely Dangerous.” Little touches like that, along with the fact that Frank has a crew, immediately tell you that this will be its own story.
So is this new story good? With comic book-based movies, I tend to look at it in two ways. First: how does it stand on its own? Then: how does it compare to the comic?
THE FILM ON ITS OWN
The movie “Red” is a fun action film with lots of banter and wit that underlines the fact that you’re not supposed to take the over the top action too seriously. When you have Brian Cox playing a former KGB agent who gets weepy when he realizes how long it’s been since he’s killed anyone, it’s an indication that you shouldn’t be asking yourself if Frank Moses (or any human being) would be physically capable of doing the things that he does without being hospitalized in the process. In the sense, it fits into the same basic genre of film as the “Lethal Weapon” sequels, the “Bad Boys” movies, or the fourth installment of “Die Hard.”
The movie is enjoyable. The cast is great and everyone bounces off each other very nicely. Mary Louise Parker gives us an entertaining journey as we watch her character Sarah go from unwilling hostage to someone who actually admires the combat skills of Moses and his comrades and who sympathizes with their plight. Yes, they are all killers and she’s very open about voicing her opinion that they’re all crazy, but she also recognizes that they retired for a reason and should have been left alone. By having her around, we remember that in this story Frank and his friends are in the right for taking on the CIA, especially when they discover that they are being eliminated not because they are dangerous but as part of a much larger conspiracy.
It may seem strange at first to take a mini-series focusing on one man and turn it into an ensemble cast, but that makes sense when you realize that the original comic book would have probably only taken up about 40 minutes of screen time if adapted word for word, panel for panel. That doesn’t make for a whole movie, so your options are to either add a lot of background, add a subplot or add characters.
Karl Urban is great as Cooper, a CIA agent attempting to hunt down Moses, unaware of just why his bosses want the man dead but initially not caring because this is his job. He comes off as a tough, deadly, determined foe for Moses but later on shows different sides to his character. His performance in this film encourages my belief that he will be interesting as Judge Dredd in the future.
Bruce Willis is playing a style of character he’s done before and I have no problem with that because he does it so well. His friendship with Morgan Freeman and John Malkovich (who steals several scenes with his bizarre one-liners) seem honest and fun.
Where this movie falls short of its own merit is the fact that we don’t truly have a villain. Yes, we have Richard Dreyfuss playing an unsavory character and yes, we’re told about a certain political official who has evil intentions as well. But for most of the movie, it’s not really clear who’s calling the shots against Moses and his crew or why. Nor do we see the truly evil people for much of the film. Mainly we see Cooper hunting down Moses and while that makes him an antagonist, it doesn’t make him a bad guy. He’s just doing his job and it’s understandable considering that he doesn’t have all the facts. With an action film like this, I think having a clear bad guy for us to root against would have made it stronger. Otherwise, it’s mainly our heroes attacking faceless, nameless CIA goons.
Will this movie melt your face off with its groundbreaking realism and plot twists? No. But it’s fun and worth seeing with a group of friends who want a distraction from life.
HOW DOES IT COMPARE TO THE COMIC?
The film and the comic are two very different animals. Whereas the movie is a fun distraction with characters to laugh with and root for, the comic is a much darker tale. Frank is someone you feel sympathy for because he wanted to be left alone, yes, but you aren’t allowed to forget that he is, by his own admission, a “monster.” He became a government killer when he was 19 and it took him decades before he decided he wanted out. He is not someone you think might fall in love with a girl who he is then able to charm. Even if he did develop feelings for someone (and there is some evidence to support that in the comic), the woman in question would not think to date him because it is clear in his eyes what kind of man he is. Frank is aware of this himself and is haunted by it. Even the sound of thunder brings back unpleasant memories of war and missions that bring a tear to his eye.
In the film, it’s understandable that Frank has to fight the CIA because they’re tracking down not only him but his friends. In the comic, Frank is alone and it’s implied that the reason he’s doing this is not out of fear that he will have nowhere to hide from the CIA but out of anger that they broke their promise to leave him in peace. This is about personal retribution.
The comic book mini-series is also very much a political commentary. It is emphasized that the CIA director is only targeting Moses because he is politically inconvenient. He not only wants the American people to trust that their government is honest, noble and principled in all respects, he wants to erase all evidence that it was ever any other way. And this selfish short-sightedness is what brings about so much death and destruction later.
Writer Warren Ellis also includes comments from Moses and others that the CIA director is just a symptom of a larger problem in the U.S. where elections and political campaigns are given more consideration than pragmatic solutions. It is pointed out that the CIA director was appointed because it is no longer to put an intelligent or military officer in charge of a branch of government that deals with military intelligence and that this absurd logic is what leads to events such as depicted in the comic. Ellis paints a grim picture that, although witty in a few small places, is not meant to make you laugh nor is there any hope for a happy ending.
So it’s up to you. If you wanted exactly what you got in the comic, you’re just looking for an excuse to get upset. If you want a movie that’s fun and lively and that Warren Ellis himself enjoyed, then grab a ticket and a date and get moving!
‘The Social Network,’ movie review
Oct 15th
Despite centering on one young man’s quest for vengeance, “The Social Network” represents the unlikeliest of thrillers but the early favorite for the Oscars.
And “The Social Network” is especially thrilling, considering the blah title and that most of the “action” consists mostly of college-age dudes moving money and files around while pounding beer or pouring back shots. There are far more lines of code than of coke, and the “T&A” factor represents mostly tech and algorithms.
Further complicating matters is the antihero at the center: The film eventually finds Facebook founder Mark Zuckerman the subject of two lawsuits from former friends and flashes back and forward to reveal how he arrived there and how the suits resolve themselves. It also reveals the Harvard student who defined the social network as we know it as a graceless and awkward social presence.
Actor Jesse Eisenberg (whose cousin works with the real Zuckerberg at Facebook, according to the Internet Movie Database) plays the Facebook founder as a cipher. As Zuckerberg, Eisenberg presents little more than a profile for a personality, whip-smart but behind a firewall of caustic comebacks. (In the opening scene, the 25-year-old actress playing his girlfriend compares dating the prickly Zuckerberg to using a Stairmaster.)
Oscar has recognized the blurry border between genius and mental disorder before, naming “A Beautiful Mind” (2001) Best Picture and Best Screenplay; it has also recognized scriptwriter Aaron Sorkin before, with a Best Picture nomination for “A Few Good Men.” With his trademark sizzling dialogue (“The West Wing” and the sitcom-that-wasn’t “Sports Night”), Sorkin was the ace in the hole to adapt “The Accidental Billionaires” by Ben Mezrich after Hollywood botched Mezrich’s “Bringing Down the House.” (The film resulting from Mezrich’s Cambridge-kids-counting cards-caper was not the Queen Latifah-Steve Martin debacle with which it shares a title, but the resulting film, “21” wasn’t much better.)
As a result, “The Social Network,” where the “eureka” moment is Zuckerberg’s epiphany to add relationship “status” and “interested in” to Facebook profiles, crackles with life, excitement and intensity. Yet it’s not heavy-handed: Every sarcastic one-liner belies an unpleasant truth, and the closest thing to comic relief “The Social Network” has going for it is a pair of blue-blood alpha-male twins that director David Fincher, in his lone bit of CGI gimcrackery, cobbled together from one actor and one stunt double.
Instead of wink-wink, nudge-nudge stunt casting and self reference, “The Social Network” trades in sly allusion: Justin Timberlake plays it straight as Napster founder Sean Parker, real-life Harvard grad Rashida Jones (Quincey’s daughter) is Zuckerberg’s seemingly sympathetic lawyer, actress Natalie Portman (a Harvard student at the time) dished on campus events for the scriptwriters, and Sorkin himself makes a cameo appearance. Even the year’s second-best “Lady or the Tiger?” ending feels unforced.
