The Blogtastic Blogfest That Is Getmeoutofthis.net!

I guess I watched Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, huh? Yeah, I kind of did. It’s the perfect sort of film for people looking for something like this!

It was also adequate.

That’s sort of the only feeling I got from the film. I had had pretty high hopes about the movie after the Half-Blood Prince film. It was really fantastic because the people who put the movies together took liberties and had the freedom to create an entertaining film, instead of being locked firmly to what the book did. Therefore, I was really looking forward to what they did with the seventh book, since I love to hate on it so much. Could they turn Tent Angst Time into an entertaining film? COULD THEY DO IT?

Eh, sort of.

They, rightfully, barely spend any time in the tent. Little scenes are expanded in order to fill the time, and are normally expanded with exciting fight scenes, which certainly make Harry Potter and Friends seem a lot more badass. For example, what I remember as being about a two second encounter in the diner turns into a dramatic firefight ending with the entire diner destroyed. It’s entertaining to watch.
Especially of interest is Dobby who, somehow, they manage to make seem kind of badass and cool. He keeps showing up, kicking ass, and spouting dramatic one-liners. When he, spoilarz, kicks the bucket, it did feel like an emotional scene. I was kind of affected. But then I remembered it was Dobby. Still, impressive to even get that far. I’m sure fans who care about the character more than I would have been really touched. Shauna, for example, seemed to be strongly affected. So that’s good on them.

Overall, though, they really stuck much more firmly to the plot of the book in this movie, which disappointed me. Harry and friends really are just kind of doing things at random and getting super lucky all throughout the plot of the book, and this isn’t explained more here. Decisions aren’t given much more weight. Sure, we get to see a ghostly Harry and Hermoine having hot naked makings-out, but is that something someone actually wanted to see? It was good to show that these characters are basically adults now, but still, it almost came off as silly, since the ghost people looked like they were made of plastic. After that sixth movie, I thought for sure they could jump in there and make the whole thing make a little more sense. It didn’t happen.

The movie is fine. If you like the books, you’ll love it. If you have a weird sort of love/hate relationship with Harry Potter, you’ll enjoy seeing it, but probably won’t be all impressed. By all means, give it a view. In the end, though, it’s still a movie that’s half of Harry Potter book 7, so… you know what you’re getting into.

The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra was a super-happy fun fun movie time. It was really hilarious, and had smart writing, and the actors played everything completely straight, which made it an experience to remember. My brother especially loved the movie, so when he heard there was a sequel, The Lost Skeleton Returns Again!, he had to give it a go. Luckily, I was also around to give it a go with him. It was kind of a team go-giving.

It wasn’t as good as the first movie.

Unfortunately, the entire film had a feeling of “done it before” about it. The idea had already been played out in the first film, and to great effect. Obviously, they tried to make it work by putting some returning character plots. Everyone in the first movie who died had a twin brother, of course, and you had cliches in there like Dr. Armstrong being all bitter and drinking, which he wasn’t very good at being. They eventually turned the movie into color, only that sort of low-quality color and old movie might have, and that was a thing, certainly, but I felt it lost some of the charm not being in black and white.

At the same time, the same brilliance in writing was still all over this movie. It was pretty damn funny, and I was laughing fairly regularly. Even the general setup for the film works in the ridiculous was the first one did. This movie is supposed to take place in the jungle, for example, but it’s obvious that the wilds they’re shooting in are the exact same locations as the first movie. Sometimes they remember to set up some ferns and stuff, but sometimes they don’t even do that. It totally works. The plot is also equally convoluted as the first one.

But yes, it’s suffering from sequelitis. The first movie is the sort that you want to own, and watch again and again. The Lost Skeleton Returns Again! was an entertaining view, especially for me, who loved the first, and got some in-jokes, but I certainly can’t see me watching it again. That’s okay, though. If you liked the first one, definitely check it out for a fun evening. Just, unfortunately, don’t expect the sort of awesome that the first film had. It just doesn’t hold up for a second go-around.

Cole kept pointing out Trailers for Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole. This is how I knew I would one day be called upon to view it. This day came.

It was pretty well what I expected.

Basically, what you have here is a children’s movie using very strong “children’s entertainment” themes, like the Power of Friendship. On top of that, it’s an adaptation of a series of novels. It’s a one-two punch of potential badness vectors. It basically succumbs to both. There are lines and moments in the film that are so, so “children’s movie cliche” that I just laughed, and Cole turned to me to ask what was so funny. I just couldn’t believe they’d be so blatant! Meanwhile, the movie introduces a ton of characters and doesn’t give any of them enough time to be anybody, a clear sign of a book adaptation. Eventually there’s this whole band of Owls with Mr. Main Character, and they’re entertaining, but you never really get the sense they get to know each other enough to be this unbreakable party the movie makes them to be.

I also just have to point out the visuals. They are so creepy! The owls are rendered realistic enough to look kind of uncanny valley. Especially when they talk, and it’s clear how hard it is to animate speech when beaks are involved. It’s just so… odd. I don’t understand why they didn’t try to stylize the art a bit. I mean, they’re owls wielding fucking swords and stuff, you’d think they’d go for a little art direction to make it more bad ass. I mean, not cartoony, perse, but just something.

I do have to comment on the moments of “sexual tension” in the film. Mr. Main Character meets up, early on, with a small-species owl girl. There’s a lot of “I’ll protect you, we’ll do this together, stay with me” sort of dialog which tends to indicate “love interest” in these sorts of movies. Then, later, both her and wacky comic relief owl are doing what I can only describe as snuggling with Mr. Main Character. Nobody thinks this is weird. Finally, they get to Ga’Hoole, and Mr. Main Character meets another girl owl of his species who says her name but never does anything else. He is smitten, and the little owl seems annoyed.
And that’s it. That’s your romance subplot.
I dunno, found myself wondering what was up with that.

Still, I can’t say the movie was completely awful. It was competent. I could see me getting much more behind it at a much younger age. There were also several character who were genuinely funny The running gag with the two slavers had me chuckling, for example. I also didn’t leave feeling like I had wasted my time. I mean, I can’t really recommend going and seeing it unless you have kids or something, but I felt like I got what I came for. It was competent. That’s pretty well the exact word for it. Competent. Also, containing owls. And music by Owl City. Which, when I heard it, made me groan. Cause they went there. Yes, they went there.

Brer really wanted to watch Batman: Under The Red Hood. He said it was good, and he wanted to see it. So I said I’d watch it with him, so he saved it. And then I stalled for weeks not wanting to watch it, because I’m awesome. Then, last Sunday, we finally watched it.

So how was it?
Eh, it was okay.

Apparently this is based off of a really famous story in the comic books, and it really kind of shows. The story itself is just all kinds of fan service for very rare characters in the Batman universe. People show up just because. It tries to do flashbacks, and has a few very awkward pieces of exposition, in order to catch people like me up, but it only kind of works. As someone who had only really known Batman through the animated series and Batman Beyond, it wasn’t particularly easy to follow.

Luckily, though, I have very vague knowledge of Batman history, and a boyfriend who will lecture on anything, so I was taught the important information, and could follow the narrative. What’s there, though, is both good… and also just kind of indicative of how stupid comic books are. The story is a basic, and strong one, based around Batman confronting another element of his past, but it’s tied up in so much shit. The Joker is there, because the Joker must be in everything. Ra’s Al Ghul is involved, just because. None of this is important to the actual character stuff, which is the core of the narrative. It’s just there because it’s a comic book, and continuity, and bleh.

This stuff comes with the territory, though, and if you can accept it, it’s pretty good. There’s some solid fights, and some solid confrontations. One must applaud John DiMaggio for taking up the shoes of being Joker’s voice actor. It’s hard to follow up Mark Hammil’s near-perfect version of the Joker, but he brings a very nice voice to it. Much more “cold-blooded murder” than “crazy person,” and I think it works very well. He gets extra props.

In any case, yeah, it’s a movie based on a comic book. The animation is fine. The voices are fine. The story is… comic book. I enjoyed myself, but I have no need to see it again. If you were thinking of watching it, go ahead. You’ll enjoy it. But it’s not something to sell to non-fans. You know if you’d like this before you actually watch it. That’s just how it is.

Scottingham Pilgrim has not the only movie I saw recently. If I had to pick another film I saw recently, it would probably be The Other Guys, because I saw that one in the theater a week or so ago.

It, too, was really damn good.

In a completely different way from Scott Pilgrim, though. I would describe Scott Pilgrim as “Awesome” while The Other Guys was “Hilarious.” Granted, there were moments of awesome and hilarious in both. That’s just the general feeling of the two.

I knew practically nothing going into this film, but apparently it’s one of the first films that really brought back together all the people who made Anchorman great, and it shows. The writing in this movie is excellent. There is a really smart comedic mind at work here, using things like refbacks and running gags in a completely effective and not annoying way. For example, the joke in the title is funny on it’s own (well, in context anyway, maybe not as a title) and only gets referenced one more time, to great effect. The movie doesn’t need to use the same jokes over and over again, because they’ve got plenty of them. They’re only bringing them out when they’re most effective.

It’s not all perfect, of course. The plot of this film is nearly non-existent. Anchorman had a plot, although a stupid one. In this movie, they’re trying to stop some sort of scheme, but they don’t know what, and you the audience don’t know what, and it’s incredibly vague. Doesn’t stop it from being entertaining, of course, but at the end of the film you may be scratching your head, wondering what exactly happened, now that you think about it. On top of that, the credits sequence is completely weirdly serious in giving you stats about actual white collar crimes, which is just strange and completely out of place. Did the makers of this movie really think they were being political in some way? I have no idea.

If you’re going to see one film in the theater, see Scott Pilgrim. It’s full of visual pizazz and pop that just looks great on the big screen. However, you really should see The Other Guys. It contains humor all the way through that won’t imbalance your humors. I was laughing pretty well constantly through the entire movie. It had been awhile. It felt great. It was a great film.

There was some point where Matthew Essner said that he was glad Scott Pilgrim was almost out, because it had seemed like the entire summer was building to it, and it was about damn time.

Well, now I’ve seen it. It’s been a summer of anticipation, and the film had a lot to live up to.

I think it completely lived up to it.

The movie changes many things about the plot of the comics, but almost all for the better. It streamlines the events to happen in a length of time that make sense with the whole movie covering the entire plot, as well as changing many of the battles in ways that just make more sense and tie all the events together. For example, many more of the fights are tied into the Battle of the Bands that Sex Bomb-omb is a part of.

The result of this is what people I’ve seen initially talking about the film call “removing the emotional core.” I kind of agree and kind of don’t. It’s true most of the relationships in the film are much, much shallower, and people only exist for their completely awesome jokes. For example, fan-favorite Kim Pine really doesn’t have a very big role in the movie besides throwing out some awesome lines. Scott and Ramona don’t so much have a romance as a meeting one night followed by some fights with some exes. The emotional content was one of the key parts of what made the comics something I stood up and took notice of, so it is kind of sad.
At the same time, Edgar Wright made exactly the right choice here. There was no way he could give these people enough backstory to make them deep characters in one film, and still put in all the key points of the story that people would come to see on the big screen, namely the fights. He decided to play up the comedy and action of the series, bring that completely to the front, and let it run wild, and it completely works. We root for Scott on a different level, one where he’s funny, and sometimes badass, and less because he’s the lovable loser of the comics.
Still, I don’t think it’s completely devoid of the emotion people claim it’s missing. Movie Scott is different from Comic Scott. The big lesson he learns at the end is to respect himself, and be motivated by himself. He’s fighting, in the end, because he wants Ramona, not because of “destiny” or “true love.” It’s selfish, sort of, but also completely realistic. It’s also not romanticized. When he leaves with Ramona at the end, it’s not for them to live happily every after, it’s because Scott wants to be with Ramona, so he’s going to try again. There’s no promise it’s going to work out. I’d actually probably bet it wouldn’t. But he wants to try again, and he does, because if he doesn’t he won’t forgive himself. That’s a realistic motivation. That’s a real character, to some extent.

Anyway, the movie is fantastic, end of story. You should see it. I’m probably going to see it again today, after I finish writing this bloeg. It is great, great stuff, and I can’t wait to buy it on Blu-Ray and play the vidjeo game and all that stuff. Scott Pilgrim, man. Scott Pilgrim.

Inception was a fantastic film.

When seeing previews of it, I was kind of bleh on it. I mean, it had nice visuals, but it really wasn’t giving me any indication of what it was about. There was a lot of hype around it as well, due to the director apparently being awesome. It was only when Essner went and said that it lived up to the hype that I took notice and knew I had to watch the movie. And when I did? Well, I was highly entertained.

The movie basically has one concept, the idea that you can hook people up to share one dream using this little machine in a briefcase. Doing this, you can trick an unwilling dreamer into sharing all kinds of secrets. However, if you’re bold, or daring, or just a bit insane, you can attempt to plant an idea into someone’s subconscious by going layers deep into someone’s mind.

Basically, the movie takes this idea, sticks with it, and creates a fantastic heist movie around it that’s elevated due to the premise and mind-games built into the premise. It is a ton of fun, and has some great acting within it. It is highly recommended.

But hey, here’s the spoilar line.

SPOILARZ START HERE.

Yeah, I guess what people are talking about is the ending. It almost seems… gimmicky. I mean, it’s not out of place to me. It is a perfectly valid way to end the movie that makes you think. In the same way, it just feels a bit tacked on because you have to have some sort of “twist” or something at the end, right? It really didn’t seem to have the impact that I thought the people making the movie thought it would have.

Then I listened to Overthinking It, and a bit of their discussion made me realize why it works better than maybe it seems initially. The point of the ending is less that “MAYBE IT WAS ALL A DREAM” and more “he no longer cares anymore if it’s a dream or not.” This is an interesting change, since so much of his own personal holdups were based around determining reality and fixing his reality. At the same time, at that point in the movie, he’s dealt with the issues that were keeping him from enjoying the dream world. He’s not going to be haunted any more. He can see his kids’ faces now, at the very least. It isn’t so bad anymore. I don’t know. It’s just an interesting flip-flop. I don’t think it’s completely out of character, but it is interesting.

Hm.

Anyway, go see Inception. Go on.

As tends to happen, when trolling for a movie to rent, Essner pulled a movie that I had never heard of, but that friends of his had. It was called An Education, and was described to me as a “female Rushmore.” I don’t really think that description is very accurate at all, but it is a very entertaining and enjoyable movie.

Taking place in the past, a high school girl catches the eye of an older gentleman, who gives her all kinds of fantastic things and helps her to “live” life, instead of just being bored through it. He takes her to all kinds of exciting places, they drink fancy alcohols and smoke fancy cigarettes, they generally have a grand old time. Then a fairly predictable twist happens.

The characterization in this film is actually really good. You really feel like you understand the main character as she’s swept off her feet. She’s not an idiot, not by a longshot, but she sees an escape and decides that her life is annoying enough to take it. She’s out to enjoy every second of it, and it works. Similarly, the older boyfriend is also pretty believable. He’s awkward at times and completely suave at others. He’s generally creepy, as one would expect for an older man dating a 17-year-old, but not creepy enough that you completely write him off. Of most surprising are the characters of the parents, who start out seeming like stereotypes, but it soon becomes clear they’re much fuller characters than that. A speech by the dad near the end of the film is really touching, and really realistic, for example. It’s these characters that carry you through the narrative and make you enjoy it.

I also appreciated the fact that the movie didn’t hand the main character a happy ending on a silver platter. She fucks up in some ways, and the film makes her face up to that. Sure, she does get her happy ending, but we see her having to work hard for it there at the end. A lot of films would gloss over that. It’s really nice that An Education decided not to.

It’s not a perfect film. The same characterization that’s so good sometimes has moments of awkwardness, probably where the movie is sticking really strongly to the memoir on which it was based. The ending, especially, is going along so well, and then ends with a completely out-of-place and never before seen voice-over, which really kind of keeps the movie from ending with a bang. These issues don’t really stop it from being an enjoyable watch, though. It had me entertained the entire way through, and that’s good enough for me.

I went into Toy Story 3 being told that I would cry, and, honestly, it didn’t disappoint in that regard.

In some ways, it almost feels like “cheap” tears, though. The movie does this by pulling on YOUR nostalgia, not really any respect or love of the characters in the book. It makes you recall your childhood, and uses that against you. Still, I think it was a completely legit ending. All of it was. It was a really fun film that did really fun things. I’m not sure that a Toy Story 3 was needed, but Pixar, once again, took the idea and made something great out of it. They know how to write a good movie for adults and children.

There were a lot of genuine funny moments in the film. I feel like a lot of them revolved around Ken. If I wanted to get all down on the film, I could try to cast some sort of “laugh at the gay” kind of argument, but it really isn’t that. It’s more sort of the… idea that Ken is just like Barbie because they’re the same sorts of toys. He cares about fashion, clothes, and looking good, and is in many ways stuck in the past. It’s humorous because it confirms what we “suspected” about Ken while he continues to deny it for most of the film. In the end, though, he embraces it, and it works out fabulous for him (was fabulous a bad choice of words there?) and that makes it all alright. Everyone is still a bit uncomfortable with it, but that’s fine. They aren’t mean, and he’s happy. Everyone’s happy! Huzzah! Compare that to, I dunno, my rambling about how Mr. Fox and company treats Ash in Fantastic Mr. Fox, and you can see how this comes off feeling a bit better.

There were a few weird choices in the movie. Why does Andy have an incredibly shitty cell phone when he’s clearly using a MacBook? I heard Scott Kurtz and Kris Straub discuss the lack of Andy’s dad for awhile, which isn’t really all that important, but seems to become an actual plot point, at least a little, in this film, and it makes it very clear that the dad is missing. Significant? Probably not. Just dumb things I noticed.

Is Toy Story 3 some super masterpiece? Nah, not at all. But it is completely fantastic and a very enjoyable film. I’m glad I finally go out to see it… In 2D, thank you. After Spaeth didn’t get to see the Pixar short before Up when he saw it in 3D, I have absolutely no need to ever see a Pixar film in 3D. Plus, Night and Day was pretty awesome. One of their best shorts, I think, with a fantastically creative premise.
Got distracted. Anyway, Toy Story 3 is great. The end.

The Road is a fine film.

This is mostly due to it being based on a fine book, but it was also put together with love. I see that, back then, I was very doubtful that the movie would be any good. I think I was both right and wrong. The Road is a good viewing, but it does lose a bit of something that makes the book so good.

That basic lost feeling is that of desolation, despair, and constantly running time. You get the feeling of how long it takes to get anywhere, and how horrible and pointless it all is in the book much, much more than you do in the movie. Little montages between key scenes just don’t display that quite as much as the long descriptions in the book, and it’s that feeling that really helps to add to the hopeless atmosphere of the book.

The other thing, and one we talked about a lot while watching it, is how Hollywood loves to put in a major female character, even in a story without one. They really do play up the man’s wife in the movie, much more than in the book. However, none of it really felt out of place. He is described as having flashbacks while dreaming all the time. It makes sense to play those out in the movie a bit more in movie form. They worked. They didn’t detract.

Other than these changes, though, it was really accurate to the book, and it made for a good film. All the actors did acting, and did it well. The boy was played by a really good child actor who pulled the difficult role off well. It hit all the major beats of the book, and was very true to them. It was also depressing as fuck, just like the book. Basically, it was exactly how you’d want such a book adaptation to be. Anyone could “get” it, and it was true for fans.

That makes for a boring review, I guess, but it was true. That’s how I felt about it. It was a really great adaptation. It didn’t make me jump up and down for joy, but I appreciated that it was put together well. That’s all I could ask for, and I’m glad I checked it out. If you liked the idea of the book, but don’t like all those words and lack of quotation marks, then you’re good to go on watching this. Go right ahead. I don’t mind at all.