Fun with Dick and Jane

It was not my intention to have fun with Dick and Jane in the first place, but when four girls went out frolicking in a day’s time, the cinema seemed like a good choice to waste a few hours in. So that’s how Dick and Jane slipped in to fill our 90 minutes in the evening, bringing their meaningless story and, okay, some old jokes.

Because I thought I was so smart, between Fun with Dick and Jane and Firewall, I opted for the former, mainly due to the fact that I believed we needed some good laughs, and Jim Carrey is some expert in the field of making people laugh. While he did deliver the funny part, the story is so shallow, it almost looked like two different stories pieced together just to complete the 90-minute time slot. Speaking of which, though painfully boring, it came to the ending so abruptly and unsophisticatedly, I almost cried out for the money spent on the movie. I mean, well, after the whole going bankrupt affair, the convenient bandit acts, I was looking forward to a well-plotted, slick let’s-steal-the-money-from-the-bad-guy plan, followed by, I hoped, a deft execution. Ah, nevermind. I’ll never figure out why a movie like this could reap over $100 millions in the box-office. Was it so funny? Hmm, the Clintons masks were kinda fresh, but mostly the entertainment value was delivered in the form of slapstick. Not entirely crude like Dumb and Dumber, though, it was just okay for me.

My friends paid for my ticket to this not-so-fun experience with Dick and Jane, so I’m really complaining. 2/5.

Oscar warm-up

Finally I get to write this entry!

Gear up to the Oscars next month! Without any option of live show available due to channels limitation, I think I’ll tune in closely to the Net to report winners and memorable moments.

The newly appointed host this year, first time Jon Stewart from The Daily Show, will take the stand, after last year’s Chris Rock refused to come back, and veterans Steve Martin and Billy Crystal both seem to be engaged someplace else. Personally I’d love to see comediennes like Ellen DeGeneres or Whoopi Goldberg being offered the job, but this doesn’t mean I don’t like Stewart. I watched his show before (aired in CNN, no Comedy Central in local cable here, thank you very much), and though I missed most of his political jokes, I kinda liked the guy. He’s fresh, and might not be as “radical” as Chris Rock. Seeing how serious their preparation is, I’m curious about how Stewart’s gonna lash out at Russell Crowe and the crews from Brokeback Mountain. Heheh, can’t wait.

In other headline, The Seattle Times has an interesting piece about more Oscar predictions, and what will be this year’s theme. Brokeback Oscar, you think? Hold back that thought because Crash may turn out to be the unexpected winner.

I don’t really have a favorite this year, thanks to technical issue like “oh, most of the movies never make it to local theaters”. I’ve watched Crash three times, and sure it means I loved it a lot, so I have no objections of it taking home the most awards. Brokeback will make it into my way in around two weeks’ time, but from all the buzz generated since late last year, I’ve got a pretty good feeling about it. Actually I’m feeling positive about all the nominations; my only gripe is the movie I thought should make it to best picture nom, A History of Violence, only gets two noms. Even smaller films, which I’m totally eager to see, such as The Squid and the Whale, Transamerica, Mr. Henderson Presents all seem to be really good.

Laws of Attraction

Even before I come to the rating part, I know this is gonna be a futile attempt to consider a crappy movie into a better one. Why do I bother to do it anyway? I’m just doing it for the fun. And, in the case of this particular movie, because I fall into the category of a “chick”, so I should at least try to write a nice review about chick flick, shouldn’t I?

Laws of Attraction, aptly titled for a romantic comedy about two divorce lawyers who battled each other inside and outside courts so often they ought to get married. Guess what? They did! Only it happened over a highly improbable event, which led them further to a high-profile marriage, which in turn required them to stick together for the sake of their careers, well, you know the routines. Basically they’re attracted to each other in spite of their opposite takes on romance: the guy’s charming and believes in marriage; the woman’s an independent smart lady whose faith in marriage is as pathetic as her social life. In the end, it’s always the twit who comes forward and apologizes. Old formula, same story.

In my opinion, to make a good rom-com, first and foremost there has to be chemistry existing between the main characters. Take for instance Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan, Richard Gere and Julia Roberts, George Clooney and Michelle Pfeiffer, even Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton. Certainly not an ex-Bond paired with a former Clarice Sterling. They just didn’t have it. Brosnan might’ve pulled it off somehow, but he still wore his Bond personality. As of Julianne Moore, she was too rigid. I mean, okay, try picture a tough top NY lawyer dressed in killer suit, never lost a case before, eschews relationships, and suddenly she jumps into bed with him. Possible, just didn’t serve right to me. There, terrible plot line.

What’s refreshing, though, is that it’s actually quite fun to watch. The banterings, the beautiful (Botox-ed) mother (played by Frances Fisher), Judge Abramovitz, and the crazy couple whom they represented. Compared to last year’s 2004 disaster, the insipid Wedding Date, this one is made me laugh. If you’re still asking for more divorce comedy, watch the sizzles between Clooney and Zeta-Jones in the cleverly written (and aptly titled, I’d say) Intolerable Cruelty by the Coen brothers.

Even though I consider the dishelleved look of Brosnan worked like charms, Laws of Attraction is still a crappy movie. 2/5.

West Side Story

In one of those rare moments, I disapprove of critics’ rating for perhaps-the-best-musical-ever-made West Side Story. Involuntarily reminded of it last night while watching a video clip of Toto’s Rosanna playing on tv, my memory brought me back to a day in January 2006, when I’d had a full day and this movie was supposed to serve as a pleasure to watch. What transpired was a lot of “forward” clicks everytime members of The Sharks or The Jets started twirling or whatever the hell they were doing and singing some very old songs. My God, it was excruciating. What kept me on was the prospect of hearing perhaps-the-most-popular-musical-songs (aside from Andrew Llyod Webber’s tacky rock rendition of Phantom of the Opera) Somewhere and I Feel Pretty, which I’m quite fond of, by the way. Not halfway through the movie, I asked myself whether it was some kind of fake sequel or something from the real musical adaption. It turned out I just flatly despised it. In every way.

It would probably bring good memories to my mom; the dances, the outifts, everything. Myself, I’d rather watch Britney Spears.

1/5.

Underworld

Watching a brooding vamptress wrapped in a tight black (do vampires ever take a shower?) skinsuit jumping up and down, exterminating lycans a la The Matrix (with seemingly efficient handguns and in complete slo-mo somersaults), really, the question is: what more can a guy ask for? Luckily, I’m no guy. Instead of getting slobbery, the sight of that skinsuit, along with the attitude and that pair of fake teeth and that annoying curtain of black hair and Kate Beckinsale herself simply disturbed me. But look, I claimed I loved that movie. Whatever I was thinking then makes me laugh now.

Because I watched Underworld again last night in order to decide whether it’s worth stopping by the cinema to watch the sequel (yeah, I’m that desperate), I noticed several things about the movie that I missed before. I don’t know about other people, but the story line reminds me of soap opera. Selene’s family slashed to death by the guy who made her a vampyre and took her into care, ain’t it typical? OK, well, I don’t watch soaps much, but what about the reason behind the thousand-year war waged between vampires and lycans itself? Hah. Then what about the ridiculously spontaneous love shared by the lycan-vampire Michael and Selene, who, by the way, with the sparks(or lack thereof) flying around, might team up to produce little furry offsprings (are vampires reproductive?) that later could rule the underworld. And so on. Perhaps they could just make a tv series out of it.

Anyone who’s seen Kate Beckinsale’s recent movies can easily draw a conclusion that she seems to like working in movies like this. Please, her appearance in Van Helsing was torturing. To me, personally, her inability to act or at least speak proper accent can only be matched by another example of horrible acting by Ben Affleck in Jersey Girl. Likewise Charlize Theron should steer off roles as action figures like her improbable role in Aeon Flux, Beckinsale should stick to the cute, likable English woman, like Sara in Serendipity.

Looking at the box office number, I don’t understand why Len Wiseman bothered to write the sequel in the first place. And it didn’t seem like critics loved it either. If anything, they think the sequel sucks even more, though Evolution does cash in a little bit more than Underworld. I can only venture a guess that it serves a greater purpose toward the gothic community. After all, it’s the underworld.

Underworld, after second viewing: 2/5.