Showing posts with label Mark Wahlberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Wahlberg. Show all posts

Friday, December 16, 2022

Uncharted

Indiana Jones was a scholar, an archeologist, and a professor. And, above all, he was a likable guy. These people? Not so much. It’s hard to get into a movie, no matter how well done are the action sequences, or even if there’s a decent story (or back story), if you just don’t have much reason to like the characters. Clearly, Tom Holland’s supposed likability was expected to carry a lot of weight here, but that never particularly worked for me in this film. (Personally, I find him a bit too lightweight in whatever context.) It probably also doesn’t help that this outing is based on a video game; that’s always a kiss of death for any movie. On the plus side, the action is very well done, and the movie overall has good pace, and the settings throughout are interesting and eye-catching. All in all, not a bad effort for a check-your-brain-at-the-door action flick; it just never really catches fire. If you want to go on a cinematic treasure hunt, you won’t find gold here. Finally, I note for the record that I named a fictional cat character Mr. Whiskers over two decades before this film was made, proving there truly is nothing new under the sun.

Saturday, May 19, 2018

All the Money in the World

What to say about this movie? Is it a well-executed piece of cinema? Yes, I'd say so. Are the performances good? Sure--nothing standout, but most of the principals are believable in their roles (though Mark Wahlberg comes across a little flat). Does it present an intriguing story? No doubt; kidnappings tend to be interest grabbers. So what's the problem here? The most striking thing about this story about the wealthiest man in the world--in the history of the world, as the narrative points out--is that, at this moment in time, when concentrated wealth is very much a part of the current discussion, this story seems oddly out of any context (other than its timeframe of the early 1970s). There aren't many resonances with current people and events, even though the subject matter seems custom-built for exactly that sort of resonance. The moral may be that all billionaires are just greedy misers with no further redeeming value--but that seems a bit simplistic even for the standard, two-shade, good vs. evil medium that is studio cinema. Overall, this is hardly a bad movie--just nothing near what one might have thought it could be.

Saturday, June 25, 2016

Ted 2

In familiar Family Guy style, Seth MacFarlane is not about to let a joke go without making sure to beat it all the way into the ground. While the original Ted was comedy gold, this one's closer to a bronze medal: a fairly steady steam of good laughs, but with just enough stupidities woven in--and recycled bits from the first--to take the overall quality level down a notch. And of course, in keeping with the flavor of both films, it probably helps immensely if you watch it when you're stoned.

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Ted

A ‘yeah, but...’ movie. It’s a lot of fun, most of the time; it’s more brazen in its humor than most movies you’ll see, and that’s very respectable. So yeah, it’s good. But, it does start to take itself a little too seriously at a certain point. I might have enjoyed it more if it was just flat out, balls out, crazy shit all the way through, but it kind of pussies out in the end. Still, it would be nitpicking to downgrade it just for that. It’s more than good enough, and we’ll leave it at that.

Friday, September 30, 2011

The Fighter

A revelation, gleaned from this movie: it actually helps not to be a fan of the real-life sport being depicted in a movie; that way, you don't already know the outcomes, thus heightening the drama. That's how this film played for me; I never knew if Micky Ward was going to win his big bout or not. Credit too must go to director David O. Russell for his canny decision to make the filmed fights look visually like the original HBO broadcasts, heightening still further the verisimilitude of the proceedings. Those facts, combined with terrific performances by Wahlberg, Bale and the rest of the cast, make for a deeply satisfying, deeply engaging film.

Saturday, July 9, 2011

Date Night

I was all set not to like this movie, but the combination of appealing lead actors and a well-rounded supporting cast--with one or two pitch-perfect cameos--put an otherwise run of the mill movie over the top.

Saturday, May 9, 2009

The Departed

The good news: Scorsese put together a hell of a cast for this film. The bad news: it was Scorsese directing them. This movie neatly exposes and sums up the Scorsese problem: a technically fine film that lacks something, or is off-putting in some crucial way. That aforementioned cast is a case in point: as in all this director's movies, everyone throws himself too forcefully into his role; you can practically see the actors look at the camera and say, "Check out how intense I make this scene." The effect is not one of intensity, but of actors trying too hard (at best) or chewing the scenery (at worst). And it's up to the director to reel that in and hit just the right note. As usual, Scorsese doesn't do that here. And the movie is consequently less than it should be.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

The Italian Job

Maybe there should be a Theory of Devolution, too. I don't know from the original, but this version of The Italian Job leaves you wondering why it needed to be remade. They certainly packed an awful lot of dumb in these two hours. Sure, the action sequences are technically proficient, but man, "Teh stupid, TEH STUPID! AUGH!"

Sunday, March 28, 2004

Three Kings

Morbidly funny, except when it's gut-wrenchingly intense, and it doesn't shy away from asking the tough questions about one of the defining events of our times (the 1991 Gulf War). Special props must go to George Clooney, Mark Wahlberg, Ice Cube and Spike Jonze for their remarkable performances as American soldiers caught between their own avarice and the palpable need to use their positions and power to do what's right. Very highly recommended. (Note: this would be a "Best Of All" inductee, except the standard criterion for BOA--a movie you want to watch again and again--can't apply here; Three Kings is great, but just too intense to want to watch again and again. Otherwise, it's in.)

Wednesday, February 26, 2003

Planet Of The Apes (2001)

Visually, about what we would expect from Tim Burton. But some of the "philosophy" got lost in the update, making the story a little too straightforward and shallow. And no, that ending doesn't make much sense without going into headache-inducing time paradoxes.