Mediocre at best. Not a complete waste of time, but still hardly worth it. Let’s have a look at some details, though. My first thought of the movie was: Jonah Hill is getting too old for these roles. Not that those deadbeat character comedies rely on credibility or have an age limit, but still, it’s getting hard to believe. The kids are okay, well they’re kids. And each of them has a small little problem, which gets solved during the course of the movie, to give them reason to be there, aside being part of the main story. But that’s it, every time a small conversation and it’s over. Most of the characters are semi-entertaining, with Sam Rockwell being the one that sticks out the most, even more than Jonah Hill, which is bad for a leading character. Which brings us to the main question of a comedy review: Is it entertaining? Yes, somewhat. You don’t find yourself laughing all the time, but it does mostly have a slightly funny feeling. Then again, it’s lacking originality and you might just smirk, because you knew what was coming.

Deutscher Titel: Bad Sitter
Links: IMDB: The Sitter, IMDB: This Review

A comedy drama with several storylines connected through Ned. Now, unlike the mix of comedy and drama I saw a few weeks ago (50/50), this one is focussing more on the comedy part. Actually this is like a romantic comedy, that’s stronger on the funny side and swaps the romantic for drama, while also keeping some of those romantics. Complicated? No, it’s just to show how indifferent I am about this movie. I’m not saying it’s bad, but it’s not really good either. It’s nice to watch, but doesn’t show anything new. Actually you know the side-stories from many other romantic comedies, just shortened down to the basic stuff. Again, that makes me indifferent, for it makes those stories more bearable, but then again it’s leaving things out and still makes it predictable. So my general recommendation for this movie is: Meh.

Link: IMDB: Our Idiot Brother

The movie starts out as a spy thriller, at least looks like it, but soon turns into a mixture of Escape from New York and Die Hard in space. The story is about as deep and predictable, but this ain’t the kind of movie you watch for the story. Instead, you watch it for some fun and action. And this is what you get. While the action in the beginning (spy thriller part) is the best of the movie, you can enjoy some shootings and explosions later. The characters on the other hand are very swallow; especially the main protagonist is very one-sided. He’s making up for his lack of emotion with funny comebacks and one-liners, though. And by that I mean about every single line he had in his script. But it’s okay; it’s not turning the movie into a comedy, but still adds a good part of fun to it, just gets a bit annoying every once in a while. I should also mention that this is a Luc Besson movie, which means that it’s quite good for what it is. But a thing that really bugged me was the pace. Things often go fast from one thing to the next, so you get the feeling things are left out or the movie could’ve at least been better with a few more minutes spread over the entire flick, just to slow it down a bit here and there. This is also one of the reasons they actually blow the only semi-deep moment that tries to carry a message. Maybe you have to wait for the Directors Cut to get this. Which brings me to the conclusion: If you like to see a good action flick on the big screen, go for it, it’s really enjoyable. If you just add flicks like that to your time killer list, wait for the DVD and hope there’s a Director’s Cut version of it.

Links: IMDB: Lockout, IMDB: This Review

This movie is inspired by a true story, the story of the writer Will Reiser, and Seth Rogen was really his friend in those hard times in real life. Now, combining drama and comedy is something difficult to do, but the director Jonathan Levine and writer Will Reiser manage to keep it at a good balance, at 50/50 if you like, without melodramatising it or turning it into a laughing stock. The story may pick up slow, but gets really good, revealing the difficulties Adam has to face and the friendship he receives. What I also like about the movie is the lack of romance. Sure, there is this thing going on, but it’s really subtle and the movie would be about the same without it. They are not ruining the touching plot with a cheesy love story. On the story downside, there are a few things that seem neglected, like Adam’s job or his old greyhound Skeletor. They are not important for the story, but the way they are introduced and sometimes mentioned, you get the feeling that there should be more to it. Levitt’s acting is really good and you can feel all the different moods and stages his character goes through. And I’m really surprised, that Rogen cannot only play the funny parts, but the serious ones as well. It’s also mainly thanks to his contribution, that the movie avoids drifting into a depressing one and can keep its drama/comedy balance. The characters are likeable and generally played well. Overall quite a good movie to recommend. So, unless you prefer mindless action flicks or stupid comedies, go see this one, I enjoyed it.

Deutscher Titel: 50/50 – Freunde fürs (Über)Leben
Links: IMDB: 50/50, IMDB: This Review

They’re back. And yes, they really did get most of the cast back, even the side characters. Unfortunately they didn’t really learn to act in all those years, but then again, no one is watching American Pie for the high-quality acting. The characters have developed, but haven’t really matured. Some gags are good, some are not that good or a bit stupid, while others are tasteless. For example, I really didn’t need to see Jason Biggs’ dong, the joke would’ve even worked without it. And that’s one of the things I never liked about the American Pie franchise. They have some quite good and funny parts, but blow it with grossy grade-school and/or fecal humour. But I have to admit, the movie isn’t that bad. Well, at least it’s way better than everything else that came after the first movie (which isn’t that hard, because everyone was worse than the predecessor). And here’s the controversy about the tightrope walk they had to do with this movie. They want to get back all the old fans of the movies, which should’ve grown out of this kind of movies, while also pleasing the new generation of movie goers, who want that kind of humour. So we have all the “old” characters/actors, who are familiar to the old fan base, while targeting the humour of today’s teenagers. And I have to admit, they do this actually quite well. So yeah, if you’re an old fan, you can get a bit nostalgic and won’t be disappointed by American Reunion. And if you’re young and new to the franchise, you can have a good time as well. But if haven’t seen an American Pie movie before, you should at least watch the first movie, to get to know the characters, since they don’t get much of an introduction. And if you don’t like American Pie, this movie won’t make you love it, since it’s basically the same old stuff.

Deutscher Titel: American Pie – Das Klassentreffen
Link: IMDB: American Reunion, IMDB: This Review

Well, a crime-comedy with the obvious romance. I’m left with mixed feelings about the main character. Is the role written inconsequent or was Heigl’s acting bad? I have to admit, that I’ve never read the book, but my problem is, that the character is shifting between being anxious and being tough. I mean if Janet Evanovich wrote 18+5 books (so far) about a female bounty hunter, I would expect the heroine to be quite tough or dead by the middle of the second novel (unless she’s an anti-heroine, in that case the movie is even worse). I do understand that a character has to get used to new life situations, but all that jumping seems awkward, especially with all the stupidity that sticks to her till the very end. Anyway, aside that, the overall acting was on the same level as it is with most romantic comedies, which is, let’s say, not that good. But one can like the characters, leading and supporting, they just play a lot of clichés. The story is nothing new (as in: full of tropes), has a few flaws (as in: full of holes), but is overall enjoyable.

Okay, all that was a bit vague. I’ll tell you what I think that movie is good for. It’s good for dates. Men and women can watch it, without being appalled, since it’s not bad, gives some romance, gives some action and gives some comedy. Since the story is easy to follow, you don’t need to pay full attention to it and can focus on something or someone else. And if you don’t have high expectations, you can’t be disappointed (still talking about the movie, but I’ll leave the wider interpretation to you).
And maybe you want to watch the movie if you like the books, but that’s just a wild guess, since I don’t know for sure how off it is compared to them. In any other case, if Heigl’s side-boob is not enough reason for you to watch it, go watch something else.

Deutscher Titel: Einmal ist keinmal
Link: IMDB: One for the Money, IMDB: This Review

Warum nur eine (Fast)Filmkritik? Nun, weil ich nach einer halben Stunde gegangen bin. Das lag sicher nicht an Christian Ulmen, der seine Rolle ganz gut gespielt hat, auch wenn es schon leicht groteske Züge hatte. Aber insgesamt war der Film einfach langweilig. Ich habe nach dieser halben Stunde immer noch nicht ganz den Sinn des Films gesehen, bzw. keinen erfrischenden, der mich reizt zu bleiben. Habe ja nichtmal wirklich gelacht bei dieser tragischen Komödie (dafür andere im Kino, muss also an mir liegen). Es wurde eben ein Klischee nach dem anderen aufgegriffen, die Resultate diverser Aktionen waren absolut vorhersehbar und ich war nicht wirklich optimistisch, dass sich dies ändern würde. Spekulieren wir mal ein bisschen in die Runde. Was könnte denn noch unvorhergesehenes passieren? Eine Romanze von Radost und dem neuen Mitschüler? Dass das Geheimnis um Brunos verminderte Intelligenz an die Schulöffentlichkeit kommt? Mobbing, Gefährdung der jungen Liebe, Probleme mit den Eltern des Knaben, Entfremdung von Vater und Tochter, Probleme mit dem Jugendamt und schlussendlich ein Happy End aus dem alle Seiten gestärkt hervorgehen?

Link: IMDB

Learned (again): Being nice doesn’t pay off. We did interviews for trainees the week before, but one candidate couldn’t show up due health reasons. Since we couldn’t really decide on a candidate right off the bat, we thought we’d invite the other guy a few days later, so he gets a chance as well and we maybe an option more.

Still not completely healthy he showed up on Tuesday and on the weekend I was sick as well. Joy! I’ve been wondering where the heck I could’ve get that infection, till I finally remembered about that interview on Sunday.

(And we decided on another candidate, but that had nothing to do with the sickness.)

Sneak flick: The Woman in Black – Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) is a young lawyer who lost his wife during childbirth. He leads an overshadowed life ever since, which also rubs off on his son and his job. Been given one last chance by his boss, he travels to a remote village to ready the papers needed to sell off an old manor. But people around here are not happy about this and strange things start to happen, leading to the death of a young girl.

For a horror movie, that one wasn’t so bad. While it uses quite a lot of jump scares, it does not rely on them. In fact, the movie manages to keep up a certain tension most of the time. And even though I’m not sure if Harry Pot… Daniel Radcliffe is playing his role very good or just can’t act, I tend a bit more to him playing it well. So again, for being a horror movie, that one wasn’t so bad. And I am not a fan of horror movies. So if you actually like movies like that, you might spend your money well here.

Favourite quote: Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. – Cato the Elder (234 BC– 149 BC)

Fitocracy points: 4066 [400 from quests, slow week, no real workouts on Wednesday and Sunday] (Will be posting this to keep track of it for personal curiosity.)

Regarding this Blog: Well, first off, this is also a test for including my posts here to Facebook. I will not copy comments from one system to another, dues to privacy issues, but every once in a while I want to post a link to this blog and I found an easy way with Add Link to Facebook.

Also decided to repost some older entries. I put effort into them, would be a shame to lose them.

Quite good movie, but mostly because of Travolta (who does way better villains than heroes) and Washington (a bit miscast, cause he plays the diplomat so often, he didn’t seem out of place, but still great acting). The script was predictable, the negotiation gave nothing new and the final showdown could’ve used a better/deeper dialogue. But aside that, a well made flick that I enjoyed.

Links: IMDB

If this sound’s a bit strange to you, that’s okay. You’re in good company. “A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members.” So they say. In fact, with this movie they throw over several facts that already exist due other movies and the series. Sometimes it makes you wonder if J.J. Abrams was just fast-forwarding through some Star Trek DVDs, picking up a few ideas, but since he didn’t understand them, turned them into something different. (And I’m not talking about the fact that new shows of the elder stuff look more enhanced. That’s strange, but okay, since today’s stuff looks even better than in TOS.) Of course, some things can be explained by the time travel stuff, but some other stuff just makes you think “someone” pulled the ideas out of a monkey’s rectum. Overall they try to explain that all this fits well into the established timeline, but let’s just stick to “no”. And with a chronicle of the early days of some characters, you would expect some character development. But actually they just throw the bunch together, give them one or two signature lines and that’s it. Quite shallow. Even Kirk is far from having an interesting development. The acting itself could be generally better. Another thing are the settings. While the bridge, the transporter room and the hallways are well made, most of the lower decks, where the infrastructure like the engine room resides, are just shots made in huge factories and storages. I.e. they all look like a big waste of space and far from being a realistic starship interior, especially in the clean Star Trek universe. This makes the settings inconsistent and unrealistic. The special effects are good, as expected, and the space combats look more interesting and dynamic than most others of the Star Trek franchise. There are some fun scenes as well, so overall I did somewhat enjoy the flick. I don’t mind changes to a certain degree, change is good and telling the same story again and again doesn’t make it better. But with this movie they try to tell a new story and fit it into an old story, which leads to some big logic bugs. So, from a semi-neutral point of view, the movie kinda sucks, even if you think of it as a reboot, like some people call it. J.J. Abrams is know for being mysterious about his projects, hyping them and f*cking them up in the end. For me, he’s just proceeding as usual.

Links: Movie at IMDB, Movie Homepage