Stupid criminal movie with dogs that talk to each other doing fun tricks as the dogs thwart the criminals. The human story is warm, not too deep, but thoughtful and avoids the cheesy--unless you count the dogs' dialogue styles. Most of the humor is stupid criminal or slapstick style.
The movie is a decent watch. It'll fill the time of a movie okay.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Saturday, February 28, 2015
"Cloud 9" (2014)
It's a fluffy movie, at least at the beginning, it's a fluffy movie; but, it's a fluffy movie worth the time to watch it once. And it was nice watching a girl pull out the winning big move at the end instead of the boy. One plot surprise that wasn't surprising--I mean--I didn't see it coming, but when it happened it kind of rolled on by--it was in character--and therefore not surprising. Anyways, it's a nice family movie.
Have fun watching other people play in the snow while you stay inside warm.
Have fun watching other people play in the snow while you stay inside warm.
Thursday, February 26, 2015
"Fireproof" (2008)
While there are traces of decision theology within--mainly hinted at in one scene--this movie is really nice. There's not many romances that I warm up to--and even fewer that I'll watch more than once, but maybe they're like my books. For sheer numbers, the romance books that I enjoy are ones that God is in, too. And this movie does that. In fact, if I twist the words some, it says how can you truly love another human without having received God's love. Maybe that's how I look at it--how can you have a romance story without having the ultimate romance of God for mankind included? And even if such a story exists without God in it, only God's love and truly change someone, from the inside.
Movie has a couple of fire rescue scenes and lines from the firehouse that work to parallel the marriage journey.
Good to see Ken Bevel again. I've enjoyed both roles that he's played.
As for sound--must have done an awesome job underscoring and being invisible because I only remember it during the montages and the end credits, and it was great both places.
And fun moments? Taking the baseball bat to the computer, and reactions from the neighbors.
Movie has a couple of fire rescue scenes and lines from the firehouse that work to parallel the marriage journey.
Good to see Ken Bevel again. I've enjoyed both roles that he's played.
As for sound--must have done an awesome job underscoring and being invisible because I only remember it during the montages and the end credits, and it was great both places.
And fun moments? Taking the baseball bat to the computer, and reactions from the neighbors.
Sunday, February 15, 2015
"An American Girl: McKenna Shoots For the Stars" (2012)
I think if I had watched this 25 years ago or earlier, I totally would have loved this for what it is. And tonight, when I was looking for lighter fare, it fit the bill perfectly. The story had its ups and downs to it. There's a wide range of abilities, strengths, and challenges across the whole range of characters. Overall, a very pleasant movie and very enjoyable. I do recommend it.
If you hear a hint of hesitation in that, there is. And it's not due to the fact this American Girl was shot in Canada. I find that an interesting quirk, but nothing to get worked up about. And my hesitation shouldn't hamper any qualms about watching the movie--it was totally refreshing to watch a lighter movie without the ham-y or overdone acting that seems to pervade so many other children-centered movies and TV shows. It was sooo nice to see natural acting. Instead, it's something else that's needling me.
You know how you can watch some odd movie--pick any current day genre--and the cast seems to be predominantly male with a token female character or two? Those movies are annoying because it seems to me, for lack of a better word, "obvious" and insincere. In this movie, as much as I enjoyed seeing all the lead characters as female (and I did--honest), this movie world is in some ways (not all ways) idealized and almost does the exact same thing. Nearly all female cast, with a couple of token male characters. Even the classroom shots and crowd shots seem to be predominantly female except for a scattered male extra here and there. Although, I did appreciate seeing a dual parent family--father and mother--instead of just one or the other. That helped a lot.
Perhaps some might make the accusation: "You're just so used to seeing male-centered movies, you don't know what a female-centered one looks like." Perhaps. But God didn't make a world made of a single gender. He made two genders, each to serve the other in ways of His designing, ways modeled after the relationship between Christ the groom and the bride his church. Both. Together.
What that means to me from a critical, analytical stand point, is that I'm just as leery about this movie as I would with one with a token female character. Both miss the mark. However, this viewpoint is from someone who has been presented with feminist views. That changes a person's information bank. So, now looking at this movie...well...the only thing I can liken this reading inside is how I found Cathy cartoons funny before I knew what feminism was and I laugh less now that I've had more of the world presented for my consideration. And this is regarding a cartoonist who is trying to present the humor of a situation, not an academic diatribe. And I liked Cathy.
Maybe that's a topic best left for another time.
And I supposed I may have offended some for such remarks made for a very well done movie. I just think there's an in-between mark that a story can reside in that we have yet to hit.
Despite my hesitation, I did thoroughly enjoy this movie. And this movie has made up some ground to get closer to that target mark. As for me, this was pretty much what the evening called for.
If you hear a hint of hesitation in that, there is. And it's not due to the fact this American Girl was shot in Canada. I find that an interesting quirk, but nothing to get worked up about. And my hesitation shouldn't hamper any qualms about watching the movie--it was totally refreshing to watch a lighter movie without the ham-y or overdone acting that seems to pervade so many other children-centered movies and TV shows. It was sooo nice to see natural acting. Instead, it's something else that's needling me.
You know how you can watch some odd movie--pick any current day genre--and the cast seems to be predominantly male with a token female character or two? Those movies are annoying because it seems to me, for lack of a better word, "obvious" and insincere. In this movie, as much as I enjoyed seeing all the lead characters as female (and I did--honest), this movie world is in some ways (not all ways) idealized and almost does the exact same thing. Nearly all female cast, with a couple of token male characters. Even the classroom shots and crowd shots seem to be predominantly female except for a scattered male extra here and there. Although, I did appreciate seeing a dual parent family--father and mother--instead of just one or the other. That helped a lot.
Perhaps some might make the accusation: "You're just so used to seeing male-centered movies, you don't know what a female-centered one looks like." Perhaps. But God didn't make a world made of a single gender. He made two genders, each to serve the other in ways of His designing, ways modeled after the relationship between Christ the groom and the bride his church. Both. Together.
What that means to me from a critical, analytical stand point, is that I'm just as leery about this movie as I would with one with a token female character. Both miss the mark. However, this viewpoint is from someone who has been presented with feminist views. That changes a person's information bank. So, now looking at this movie...well...the only thing I can liken this reading inside is how I found Cathy cartoons funny before I knew what feminism was and I laugh less now that I've had more of the world presented for my consideration. And this is regarding a cartoonist who is trying to present the humor of a situation, not an academic diatribe. And I liked Cathy.
Maybe that's a topic best left for another time.
And I supposed I may have offended some for such remarks made for a very well done movie. I just think there's an in-between mark that a story can reside in that we have yet to hit.
Despite my hesitation, I did thoroughly enjoy this movie. And this movie has made up some ground to get closer to that target mark. As for me, this was pretty much what the evening called for.
Friday, February 13, 2015
"The Boxcar Children" (2014)
I read the book(s) ages ago as a kid. And for what I remember of the book, they did a good rendition of it in this animated movie. Even if I'd never read the book, this is a very pleasant story, something happy to relax to. And, yeah, I'd watch this movie all over again. :) And if you like family movies, I'd highly recommend this. And if you like stories and images that will prompt warm, fuzzy memories, this will do the trick.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
"Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters" (2013)
Okay, I admittedly overlooked the movie violence rating for this movie. I was just scanning the plot lines. If 10 is a perfect family movie and a 1 is the worst thing possible, I would put this at about a 2 or 2 1/2. So, if that turns you off right there, or raises a red flag for you (better than the rating did for me) then you can just stop reading right there and skip this movie.
For me, the funny thing is this is one of those movies I'll have to not give an overall rating because it's not possible. Here's what I mean:
NEGATIVES: I don't see a necessity in slipping in even an occasional cuss word. For me it continues to be a sign of either a lack of writing skill to be able to avoid or a cheap shot to get a higher rating. Then there's the gore factor to this film. Okay, fight scenes in action movies don't bother me, say, 8 times out of 10. But I don't want to see it--the splatters I mean--and I don't want to hear it. The visual and audio gore to this film are huge downers for me. And on that basis, I'd give the film a 2 out of 5 rating. And, oh yeah, the unnecessary nudity scene. Yeah, that's not needed. I did mention this wasn't even remotely something for families, right?
POSITIVES; The problem is there are parts of this film I really like, parts that normally I would rate very highly. The mixture of present day qualities and characteristics thrown into a mostly medieval world is a fun mixture. There's the star-crazed "I'm a huge fan of yours" fan, hand-drawn missing kids' pictures on medieval milk bottles, guns are present yet cooking is done by open kettles over fire, and other here and there medieval style gizmo's and gadgets--the hand-pumped defibrillator or watches/timers.
Another positive is the story line. I enjoyed the twists and turns and the guess where we're going next. Hansel and Gretel have equal fighting billing--and it's as brother-sister instead of romantic hero and romantic heroine. (Not pushing this female around, but she's not any more over the top in her fighting than Hansel is--like I said, equal "billing"--and the fighting seems in keeping with this style of movie.)
Finally, the lead characters--one has an "Achilles heel"--it's the medieval-witch equivalent of being diabetic (for lack of a better word and because despite rewinding the movie, I couldn't make out the term being said). It added a little suspense to the action, added character to Hansel's character, and made him just a tick off of perfect; lead characters that aren't perfect, that have that Achilles heel, and that is worked in throughout the story is usually a HUGE draw for me. These positives together would normally lead me to give the movie a 5 out of 5 rating--a rating that is hard to come by for me.
So there you go. Equally a 2 and a 5 means I don't rate it at all.
Do I recommend the movie? Guess it depends on what you're looking for. Too bad they don't have more of this well done storyline and humor at a violence/sexuality rating that's a little less graphic. Too bad. 'cause I really liked some of those story scenes.
For me, the funny thing is this is one of those movies I'll have to not give an overall rating because it's not possible. Here's what I mean:
NEGATIVES: I don't see a necessity in slipping in even an occasional cuss word. For me it continues to be a sign of either a lack of writing skill to be able to avoid or a cheap shot to get a higher rating. Then there's the gore factor to this film. Okay, fight scenes in action movies don't bother me, say, 8 times out of 10. But I don't want to see it--the splatters I mean--and I don't want to hear it. The visual and audio gore to this film are huge downers for me. And on that basis, I'd give the film a 2 out of 5 rating. And, oh yeah, the unnecessary nudity scene. Yeah, that's not needed. I did mention this wasn't even remotely something for families, right?
POSITIVES; The problem is there are parts of this film I really like, parts that normally I would rate very highly. The mixture of present day qualities and characteristics thrown into a mostly medieval world is a fun mixture. There's the star-crazed "I'm a huge fan of yours" fan, hand-drawn missing kids' pictures on medieval milk bottles, guns are present yet cooking is done by open kettles over fire, and other here and there medieval style gizmo's and gadgets--the hand-pumped defibrillator or watches/timers.
Another positive is the story line. I enjoyed the twists and turns and the guess where we're going next. Hansel and Gretel have equal fighting billing--and it's as brother-sister instead of romantic hero and romantic heroine. (Not pushing this female around, but she's not any more over the top in her fighting than Hansel is--like I said, equal "billing"--and the fighting seems in keeping with this style of movie.)
Finally, the lead characters--one has an "Achilles heel"--it's the medieval-witch equivalent of being diabetic (for lack of a better word and because despite rewinding the movie, I couldn't make out the term being said). It added a little suspense to the action, added character to Hansel's character, and made him just a tick off of perfect; lead characters that aren't perfect, that have that Achilles heel, and that is worked in throughout the story is usually a HUGE draw for me. These positives together would normally lead me to give the movie a 5 out of 5 rating--a rating that is hard to come by for me.
So there you go. Equally a 2 and a 5 means I don't rate it at all.
Do I recommend the movie? Guess it depends on what you're looking for. Too bad they don't have more of this well done storyline and humor at a violence/sexuality rating that's a little less graphic. Too bad. 'cause I really liked some of those story scenes.
Friday, January 23, 2015
"Zoom: Academy for Superheroes" (2006)
Okay, I've pretty much conceded that they just don't make movies with my sense of humor (sigh). That being said, I know comedies are tough! And awards get-ups should acknowledge the differences more. Think about it. When action movie people want action, or want more action, they add more action--many times dictated by the kind of genre being written. Same goes for mysteries and dramas. But for comedy, you have so many different kinds of humor that it takes real talent to add all of them in there. While this movie pretty much doesn't have my kind of humor, it does a nice job of balancing a number of other kinds.
First off, they have the politically correct number of super heroes--two boys, two girls, two teenagers, two kids--totaling a team of four non-adults. And as such, they have the token romance--okay double romance. They have what I call the "stupid humor" scenes that others so love--and that I'm guessing must appeal to kids more. After all, if you're going to have little kids, then you've got to have the humor that tends to appeal to them--or at least must seem to appeal to kids, because they sure build a lot of kids' movies and kids' TV shows with that style of humor.
So, this movie has a nice balance of characters, of humor, of story parts for the super hero genre, is pretty family-friendly, and has an overall story line geared for family watching. It does fit into superhero movies on the perimeter--it wasn't the line of story I was hoping for--but it was interesting enough that I watched all the way through and quite enjoyed about 96% of it--which is a nice high percentage for me.
As for any "accusations" along the line of "What's wrong with the movie?"
First, nothing. I've mentioned the humor. The humor's fine. I personally don't go for the "stupid humor" scenes (most of the 4% I took off), but it wasn't overbearing and I know a number of folks like it. So, the humor is fine. I won't say no complaints (I have high standards for personal tastes), but nothing worth going on and on about.
Second, if I can't find the movies I want to see, then I really should work on honing the skill to write the scripts for such. I seem to remember reading something about Toni Morrison saying that's part of how or why she started writing novels--she was tired of not reading what she wanted to read. So, really I should do the same thing. If I'm tired of not watching what I want to watch, maybe I should work on writing it. (Publishing it or producing it is obviously a whole other matter.)
Third, if this movie were to hit the "100% and I totally loved it!" mark, then the movie would maybe be less light in places which then would feel like missing the mark for some folks' definition of a "good" family movie. And I don't want it to miss the mark for them. I'm just spending a lot of time searching for movies to hit my mark. (Okay, I'm spoiled by great literature and I know what intrigues me about stories. What of it?)
I often have grudges about how a movie starts and ends, but this was at least well-rounded (for lack of a better term). I can live with that.
Another sign this was a decent movie that I enjoyed? I want to know if there will be a sequel--or TV show spin off.
The "Cindy"/"Princess" character was great! And I liked what the story line spun for "Dylan"/"Houdini".
First off, they have the politically correct number of super heroes--two boys, two girls, two teenagers, two kids--totaling a team of four non-adults. And as such, they have the token romance--okay double romance. They have what I call the "stupid humor" scenes that others so love--and that I'm guessing must appeal to kids more. After all, if you're going to have little kids, then you've got to have the humor that tends to appeal to them--or at least must seem to appeal to kids, because they sure build a lot of kids' movies and kids' TV shows with that style of humor.
So, this movie has a nice balance of characters, of humor, of story parts for the super hero genre, is pretty family-friendly, and has an overall story line geared for family watching. It does fit into superhero movies on the perimeter--it wasn't the line of story I was hoping for--but it was interesting enough that I watched all the way through and quite enjoyed about 96% of it--which is a nice high percentage for me.
As for any "accusations" along the line of "What's wrong with the movie?"
First, nothing. I've mentioned the humor. The humor's fine. I personally don't go for the "stupid humor" scenes (most of the 4% I took off), but it wasn't overbearing and I know a number of folks like it. So, the humor is fine. I won't say no complaints (I have high standards for personal tastes), but nothing worth going on and on about.
Second, if I can't find the movies I want to see, then I really should work on honing the skill to write the scripts for such. I seem to remember reading something about Toni Morrison saying that's part of how or why she started writing novels--she was tired of not reading what she wanted to read. So, really I should do the same thing. If I'm tired of not watching what I want to watch, maybe I should work on writing it. (Publishing it or producing it is obviously a whole other matter.)
Third, if this movie were to hit the "100% and I totally loved it!" mark, then the movie would maybe be less light in places which then would feel like missing the mark for some folks' definition of a "good" family movie. And I don't want it to miss the mark for them. I'm just spending a lot of time searching for movies to hit my mark. (Okay, I'm spoiled by great literature and I know what intrigues me about stories. What of it?)
I often have grudges about how a movie starts and ends, but this was at least well-rounded (for lack of a better term). I can live with that.
Another sign this was a decent movie that I enjoyed? I want to know if there will be a sequel--or TV show spin off.
The "Cindy"/"Princess" character was great! And I liked what the story line spun for "Dylan"/"Houdini".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)