Movie Review: PUSS IN BOOTS

PUSS IN BOOTS

PG
2011


"That's a lot of heel for a guy, don't you think?"
-- Kitty Softpaws

Puss in Boots is a 2011 animated film directed by Chris Miller that serves as a spinoff for the titular character who gained fame in the Shrek franchise. The film begins with Puss (Antonio Banderas) learning of the existence of magic beans that will lead to an enchanted castle in the sky which houses a Golden Goose that lays golden eggs. Puss has spent his whole life looking for these beans, but after years of fruitless searching, he had given up the quest. Now, however, he is told that two ruffians named Jack (Billy Bob Thornton) and Jill (Amy Sedaris) are in possession of the beans. When Puss goes to steal them away, he runs into another cat attempting to do the same. After a brief scuffle, he learns that this cat is named Kitty Softpaws (Salma Hayek), and she is working with an egg named Humpty Dumpty (Zach Galifianakis), with whom Puss has a storied past. He reluctantly agrees to help them find Jack and Jill, and the trio sets out to find their fame and fortune.

The talk for a Puss in Boots spinoff film has been going pretty steadily since his first appearance in 2004's Shrek 2, so it was only a matter of time until Dreamworks actually took the time to make the film. By waiting until after finishing the Shrek franchise (supposedly), they had the opportunity to distance themselves from the Shrek character while still bringing the nostalgia of having one of that franchise's funnier characters grace the screen in his own light. I was a strong proponent of the idea of a spinoff for Puss, but when I first saw teaser trailers for the film, I started to wonder whether Dreamworks could pull it off. Having bled the Shrek franchise for all it was worth (the first two films both scored 89% approval ratings on Rottentomatoes.com, but the third and fourth scored 41% and 58%, respectively), I was just a tad bit concerned that they'd be able to renew that energy with this film.

Thankfully, Dreamworks was able to deliver a well-made film that's sure to satisfy audiences. To reference Rottentomatoes.com once again, their critical consensus for the film reads the following:

It isn't deep or groundbreaking, but what it lacks in profundity, Puss in Boots more than makes up for with an abundance of wit, visual sparkle, and effervescent charm.

I'd have to say those were my thoughts exactly. It wasn't bringing anything terribly new to the table, but it was intelligent enough to keep me interested throughout its entire run-time. One reason the Shrek franchise proved to be so successful was the fact that it catered to both children and adults, offering a wide range of humor types in order to keep all audiences involved with the story. Puss in Boots follows that same vein, bringing enough slapstick comedy to keep the kiddies occupied while the parents can lean back and enjoy the wit and clever wordplay.

The cast rounds out relatively nicely as well. Banderas brings the same A-game he brought to the character in his first three go-arounds, but it's the supporting cast that helps bring this film to a higher level than the last couple of Shrek flicks. Hayek and Galifianakis share a great rapport with Banderas throughout the film, and the inclusion of Thornton is a pleasant surprise. Oh, and for those of you paying very close attention, we actually get a small vocal performance from Guillermo del Toro. So keep those listening ears on high alert.

Overall, Puss in Boots is a fun film that's good for a chunk of laughs. It's not breaking any barriers or bringing anything terribly new, and at the end of the day, the story is still a tad predictable and easy to figure out. Still, the animation is top-notch and the laughs are plentiful, so just sit back, relax and enjoy this one. Don't try to out-think it; you'll find yourself hating it. Just enjoy it for what it is, and I'd bet you'll have yourself a good time.

Movie Review Summary
Grade: B
1.5 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: THE HANGOVER PART II

THE HANGOVER PART II

2011
R

The Hangover Part II is a 2011 comedy film directed by Todd Phillips that serves as a sequel to the 2009 smash-hit, The Hangover. This time around, we're heading off to Thailand as Stu (Ed Helms) prepares to marry Lauren (Jamie Chung). As one can imagine, his best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Doug (Justin Bartha) are headed there as well, and a late addition sees the slightly-troubled Alan (Zach Galifianakis) also attending the wedding. Much to Stu's reluctance, he's talked into having a beer after a pre-wedding party, and fans of the original film will know exactly where the film is going. The following morning, Stu, Phil and Alan awaken in a seedy motel in Bangkok without any memory of the night before. The key difference, however, is that they haven't lost Doug; instead, they've managed to lose Lauren's sixteen-year-old brother Teddy (Mason Lee). As they try to piece together the events of the previous night in order to find their lost friend, they utilize the help of a familiar face in Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), whose status as an international criminal only muddies their plans.

After The Hangover raked in nearly $280 million in the United States and garnered a Golden Globe win for Best Musical or Comedy, anyone could've guessed that a sequel loomed somewhere on the horizon. Rather than take us back to Las Vegas, the screenwriters chose to take us somewhere a little more exotic. I personally think that Thailand proved to be a perfect choice, considering a lot of the stereotypes that we Westerners have concerning the seedy areas there. So as one can imagine, I had high hopes going into this flick.

Unfortunately, Part II didn't really reach those expectations, at least for me. Everyone in my theater was rolling with laughter, and while I did laugh quite a bit, I couldn't quite see how any of it was different than the previous film. Aside from the locale, Part II seemed more like a remake than a sequel. A lot of the jokes seemed forced, and the best ones were the ones that directly referenced the events of the original film. Yes, some of the jokes are grand, but for the most part, it all felt a little bit stale to me.

Even the level of acting was a little below where it was in the original film. Our lead trio (Helms, Cooper and Galifianakis) should have been the most consistent, but only Galifianakis brings anything close to an A-game. Cooper and Helms are essentially carbon-copies of their previous personas, and while Galifianakis doesn't offer anything drastically different, his character still seems a little bit fresh. Ken Jeong is easily the best part of the film, bringing a much-needed manic energy that the rest of the actors somehow forgot to bring. I was completely glued to the screen whenever Jeong happened to grace it, and I only wish we could've gotten a little bit more. Oh, and Paul Giamatti makes a bit of an extended cameo, but I'm still debating whether it was entirely necessary.

(On a side note, those of you who read my breakdown of the film's original teaser trailer know that I said Liam Neeson would be making a cameo appearance in lieu of the preferred Mel Gibson. I can sadly report that neither of them appears in the film, so don't get your hopes up.)

Ultimately, The Hangover Part II just seemed a little bit off throughout its entire run-time. I think my sister put it best when she said that the original film offered a shock value that no one was really expecting. Because the first film had pushed the limits so far, we came to expect that the sequel would try to do the same. Yes, there's still quite a bit of shock value in Part II, but I think that the audience - and especially myself - was a little more braced for what we were about to see. And I think that works against the film even if it shouldn't. It's terribly difficult to make a sequel that outdoes the original, and Part II doesn't quite reach the level of the original. That's not to say it's not entertaining. I'll be the first to admit that I laughed quite a bit, but that pang of originality that surrounded the original film simply didn't translate to this one.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: B-
1 Thumb Up

Trailer Breakdown: THE HANGOVER PART II

If you read my review of the new film Hall Pass from earlier today, then you'll have seen the teaser trailer for the upcoming film, The Hangover Part II. Now, I don't know if Hall Pass was the first movie with which the trailer was played, but it was definitely the first time I've seen it. That being said, the teaser did raise a number of questions, so now, I'd like to issue my first ever "Trailer Breakdown" where I bring you those questions and give my thoughts. If people like this, I'll do more of them as trailers for big-time flicks arise, but let's stick with the present. Everybody saw and loved The Hangover back in 2009. They loved it so much, in fact, that it nabbed the Golden Globe win for Best Comedy or Musical of the year. It did so well at the box office that the Warner Brothers called for a sequel. Here's the trailer, in case you have yet to see it:

So, obviously, there's a few pressing issues (four, to be exact) that immediately come to mind. Let's talk about them, shall we?

1. Where the hell are the guys this time?
Actually, I didn't really think that when I was watching the trailer because I already knew the answer. The gang rocked Las Vegas in the first installment, but this time around, they're taking their talents to Thailand (Bangkok, to be specific). They're going from one end of the spectrum to the other, and to be honest, I'm pretty excited. There's so many stereotypes that go with male American travelers in Thailand that we should be in for quite a treat.

2. What's with Alan's (Zach Galifianakis) shaved head?
Normally, I'd assume that an actor would've just chosen to do their 'do in a different manner. However, this is Zach Galifianakis. The man's almost instantly recognizable because of the exuberant growth on his head and face. To have it all taken off the top is a tad bit shocking, so I'm thinking it has something to do with the film and its story.

3. On that note, what's the deal with the tattoo around Stu's (Ed Helms) left eye?
This also has to be a part of the story. Considering you can make a quick trip to the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) and find out for yourself, I'll just let the cat out of the bag: the gang is traveling to Bangkok for Stu's wedding. That means it's his bachelor party this time around. However, the tattoo also plays some significance considering some of the press from the film's shoot over the past few months. Originally, the film was to have a Mel Gibson cameo as Bangkok tattoo artist, but Galifianakis urged director Todd Phillips to reconsider the casting. As much as I think the Gibson cameo would've proven priceless, he was released from the film in favor of Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper's co-star from The A-Team. It'll be good, but Gibson would've been perfect, especially considering his recent problems. So, I'm assuming that Neeson will be the one giving Stu this tattoo, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

4. And finally, will the monkey be the new Baby Carlos?
The second I saw the monkey ambling along ahead of our three amigos, I instantly thought back to everyone's favorite sunglasses-wearing infant. He was the rock of the group that brought them together while keeping them from tearing each other apart! (well, maybe I don't really think that, but I had to add a little bit of flavor to this post, right?) So, now that Baby Carlos is safely with his mother back in Las Vegas (we're assuming), we need another small creature to please the girls we take to the theater. The monkey could totally fulfill the cuteness factor they so desperately crave.

I know I didn't answer anything definitively, but I don't really think anybody could at this point in time. It's more just musings that we can think about until we get a longer trailer. Or until the film is released on May 26. Until then, ponder all you want, but I'm sure this'll be a smash hit just like its predecessor.

Movie Review: SUPER HIGH ME

SUPER HIGH ME

2008
R

Super High Me is a 2008 documentary in the mold of the 2004 documentary Super Size Me, which followed Morgan Spurlock as he spent thirty days eating only McDonalds. In this film, directed by Michael Blieden, we see comedian Doug Benson, an admitted pot smoker, spend thirty days in sobriety - he abstained from both marijuana and alcohol - before spending the following thirty days remaining as high as he could manage. The goal of the film was to see whether marijuana has any real effects on health, memory and cognitive thinking. In addition to Benson's adventures, which are interspersed with bits of his stand-up routine that deal with marijuana, the audience is given facts about the state of marijuana legislation both in California and on a federal level. We also get an inside look at some of the dispensaries around L.A. and Oakland, which are aptly called "Los Ganjales" and "Oaksterdam" throughout the film, respectively.

Let's just be up front: this movie is one of the funniest flicks about weed that you'll probably ever see. If you're a fan of Doug Benson, this is a definite must-see just for his comedy and his approach to this endeavor. That being said, I also feel like the movie was rather informative, giving enough facts here and there to make it more than just about a guy who doesn't get high then decides to get high again.

Now, I've never smoked nor have any real desire to do so, but I have been around marijuana for extended periods of time, so I've seen first-hand its effects on people. I probably know more about weed than I ever really wanted to know, but that's what you really learn in college, right? I've known stoners who were the coolest people around, but I've also known some who were the biggest assholes I've ever met, so I have mixed feelings about the usage of marijuana. I'm not going to get into a political statement here on this blog - I'm apathetic towards politics, in case you're wondering - but I think that Super High Me works both for and against the pro-medicinal marijuana movement. We see people that truly need medicinal marijuana, but I personally know people who abuse the system, so I can't be entirely sold on its effectiveness.

That being said, Super High Me is a fun documentary that's sure to have you rolling with laughter. Get ready for some awesome cameos from some very familiar faces. Be on the lookout for people like Brian Posehn, Jeffrey Ross, Patton Oswalt, Rob Riggle, Sarah Silverman and Zach Galifianakis. Other than that, just sit back and enjoy the THC-laced ride, driven by Doug Benson.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: B+
2 Thumbs Up
Addition to Awards

Movie Review: DUE DATE

DUE DATE

2010
R


You can watch the trailer here

There's a common concern that a comedy film's trailer may give away the funniest parts of the film. This tactic is used to draw audience to the theaters, but when the best scenes are, in fact, used in the trailer, it leaves the audience wanting for more. As much as I hate to say it, Due Date commits this most heinous of comedic crimes.

Our story, which was directed by Todd Phillips, is your standard "two guys go on a race-against-time road trip" tale. Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.) and Ethan Tremblay (Zach Galifianakis) find themselves on the no-fly list after an Ethan-created situation in an Atlanta airport. Afraid he is going to miss the birth of his son, Peter reluctantly agrees to drive to Los Angeles with Ethan. The two opposing personalities generate quite a lot of tension between the two as they make their way across the country, bumbling and stumbling along the way, all the while finding out more about themselves than they had already known.

The story just seems too run-of-the-mill. I mean, the concept of a road trip with dysfunctional people has been done before (the first movies that comes to mind are 2000's Road Tripand 2006's Little Miss Sunshine), and there's only so much you can do with it. The most you can do to separate a film about a road trip is create more and more outlandish situations to keep your audience captivated. That's where Due Date hits a speed bump: the situations that Peter and Ethan find themselves in aren't quite ridiculous enough. In a way, it all seemed so terribly predictable. We know exactly how the movie is going to end, and it just waters everything else down. There is a moment midway through the film where Ethan uncovers the potential for a severely dramatic twist, but even that doesn't pull through in the end (however, it's probably good that it didn't). The movie was just a little mundane.

That's not to say that the acting isn't good. If anything, Due Date is worth watching solely for Downey Jr. and Galifianakis. I can never say enough about Robert Downey Jr.; the man just has a knack for acting, and he commands the attention whenever he's on the screen. Galifianakis, who's novelty is starting to run a little thin, did surprise me with a couple of dramatically emotional scenes. I knew such bits were within his acting realm (see: It's Kind of a Funny Story), but it's always a pleasure to see a little bit of range. You should also be on the lookout for some small roles and cameos, including an Oscar nominee and an Oscar winner, that prove to be rather effective and funny.

Ultimately, Due Date does provide a few laughs, although I had hoped to have shared a few more than I did. It's not a bad movie by any means, but considering the potential it had, I just wished they would've given me a little bit more for my dollar.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: C+
Thumb... Slightly Up