Showing posts with label youtube funny videos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label youtube funny videos. Show all posts

The Informant! (2009)

The Informant!In 1992 Mark Whitacre, the President of Bio-Product division of ADM (powerful Fortune 500 company), became the highest ranking executive EVER to turn whistle blower. For three years he helped the FBI gather evidence of a multinational conspiracy to control the price of lysine. As a result, US government collected hundreds of millions of dollars in fines from ADM and foreign corporations, followed by prison sentences for three executives. These are events in real life as well as the movie. However, according to the opening credits, the film is not intended as a documentary and does depart from real life facts... The final, cheeky line of the prologue: "So there!", gives us a hint that, though the topic and the consequences suffered by many in this story are somber, what we are about to see is meant to amuse and entertain, as well as educate...

As promised, the chuckles do come often, but their source is not your typical one liners. Matt Damon is Whitacre, an inspired choice for the role. His plump, mustachioed and toupeed character comes across so harmless and ordinary you never question why his actions go undetected; even as his concealed recording equipment loudly malfunctions during a covert multinational executive meeting! You laugh at the bewilderment of FBI agents and the DA's office as they are led by the nose by Whitacre's increasingly outlandish antics. One could say "The Informant!" has the educational quality of an Aesop's fable: blinded by their desire to swallow a tasty morsel (ADM), the agents cross their fingers and fail to run even the most basic checks on their informant; checks that would immediately reveal inconsistencies in his stories (such as the true nature of his parentage, for example).

The film is not perfect. Based on the way it was being advertised, I expected something in the same category as "The Pink Panther". In reality, one would not be wrong to describe it as a combination of "A Beautiful Mind", "The Insider", and "The Duck Soup" (Marx Brothers). Sadly, "The Informant!" never quite becomes as touching, thrilling and funny as those films were, respectively. The makers allow it to drag on a bit in the second half as Whitacre's behaviour becomes absurd. The logical explanation for it all arrives only after our initial keen interest has already begun to dissipate. I also hear some grumblings about the film's muted lighting. Since most of the action takes place in offices and hotels, I believe the lighting is true to reality. Anyone who has spent at least one work day in a cubicle, understands how oppressive that atmosphere can be. Despite these possible faults, Whitacre's story and Damon's performance make "The Informant!" worthy of at least one theater trip. Depending on your personal approach, you will see a funny thriller or... a thrilling comedy. Either way, expect to be entertained!

PS: BRAVO! to the filmmakers for sticking to a relatively modest budget ($21 mil)! I am sick of paying to see worthless films with budgets that could bankrupt the economy of a small country.

Having grown up just a few miles from where the events of THE INFORMANT! took place (though I was just a kid at the time), I may be rather partial to the film; after all, Matt Damon and much of the supporting cast has the personality down pat, with a few aside-jokes that definitely capture the atmosphere of East-Central Illinois. But you don't have to be from here to appreciate the film's humor; you just have to be patient.

Why? Because THE INFORMANT is a slow burner. It's the story of Mark Whitacre, who decides to blow the lid on some illegal doings at the corn-processing plant where he works. Whitacre, however, is anything but the ideal witness--but it takes about two-thirds of the movie to find that out. Kudus to Joel McHale and Scott Bakula as the FBI agents in charge of Whitacre's case, and Soderbergh for actually making a movie of this; and a tip-of-the-hat to Matt Damon, who turns in a nuanced performance. But the character doesn't really build until the third act, which is the when the movie turns from humor to poignancy, and we realize the real tale here.

The thing is, it's just hard to forgive THE INFORMANT its slow build-up. Real hard. It's worth the effort; a lot of the humor is subtle, and the film progressively gets darker, until you realize this isn't a feel-good comedy after all. But it takes so long getting there, a large part of the audience is bound to stop caring. Thus, THE INFORMANT! is for patient fans of comedy (of which there are painfully few today). If nothing else, see it for Damon's spot-on performance; he and Bakula especially are taking this film and running with it, for better or worse (mainly better).

Buy The Informant! (2009) Now

Intro: This is a review of the movie as an experience. Look elsewhere if you want an overview of the story, or how well the movie reflects actual events and people.

For those who would be satisfied with a movie that was simply a collection of goofy and absurdist scenes, I expect that the pacing here is much to slow to be satisfying, although in the second half it becomes noticeably less slow.

For those expecting more, the basic problem here is with how the lead character Mark Whitacre (Matt Damon) is portrayed. It is immediately reminiscent of the William H Macy character in Fargo: A doofus in over his head who is flailing about. However, in Fargo there was a progression to that state--here it starts at that point and doesn't change much.

Even without the Fargo baggage, the Whitacre character is too big a goof to be sympathetic or funny. My first impression was that he was an incompetent bottom level manager. When he was identified as a top manager, I couldn't help but think of him as a fraud, thereby undermining everything that was to come. In addition to his being a fraud within the movie, it was a fraud on the audience: Such a personality would never have gotten a PhD (from Cornell), much less risen so high in a major corporation (most people forced to work with such a person would be screaming and throwing things at him before the end of the first day).

The core of the movie's story is the revelation of a series of deceptions and lies. The typical dramatic treatment, whether serious or humorous, is akin to a roller-coaster: It elevates your confidence that you know what is happening, then suddenly puts you into free fall, adding twists and turns to increase your disorientation. You start to climb out of that, only to be hit by additional drops. This movie has no such drama: It just goes gently and slowly round and round, the tone being closer to enumerating the lies than to revealing them. Perhaps Whitacre was intended to be played by an improvisational comic who was expected to fill in such texture?

As a movie, the significant story elements should have been _seen_ and not merely commented on by characters. For example, Whitacre is presented as being maniac-depressive (bipolar), but we never _see_ that roller-coaster of emotions--the portrayal is very flat. At the very end, statements of various characters provide some evidence of this (Nigerian scam, compulsive over-consumption). Additionally, when part of the story is whether his underlying mental problems were triggered or exacerbated by his role as an informant, how could they not show this, but simply comment on it at the end?

The script has characters _saying_ that Whitacre is brilliant, but I remember only a couple of scenes where he _appeared_ even mildly clever.

We are _told_ that even after all the revelations of Whitacre's crimes and lying that some of the Feds (FBI and prosecutors) strongly advocated clemency for him, but from the movie, I couldn't guess why. And during the extended investigation, there is no sense of the passage of time--other than dates being flashed on the screen. Nor do we _see_ the stresses on Whitacre: The script trivializes his risks and sacrifices by consigning them to asides in the disconnected goofy scenes that constitute this movie.

This movie seems to have been intended to be both funny and interesting, but is neither.

Read Best Reviews of The Informant! (2009) Here

My daughter and I went to see The Informant, staring Matt Damon. We loved it. It was very entertaining. I have to say that we got a lot more out of it because we listened to the episode on NPR's This American Life about Mark Whitacre, the real-life character upon which this movie was based. The movie is not as detailed as the story, for obvious reasons.

The Informant's Executive Producer is George Clooney. Directed by Steven Soderbergh, The movie version of this true story manages to put a somewhat humorous spin on a very serious subject corporate corruption. Matt Damon does such a great job acting here, that you never really think of the character as Damon acting. He even gained a bunch of weight to get a middle aged spread for the role, a common thing for actors to do these days. The rest of the cast was excellent as well, including Scott Bakula and even the Smothers Brothers!

Imagine a corporate executive (Whitacre) who goes to the FBI (because his wife says she will if he doesn't) to turn in his colleagues at Archer Daniels Midland Company for price fixing. Whitacre becomes an informant for several years working magic for the FBI, completely fooling those who work in his company as well as business associates from around the world. But of course there's a twist. Whitacre is not being completely honest with the FBI, his wife or himself. Despite all this he is a brilliant and totally likeable guy.

You'll walk away from this movie saying to yourself, "OMG, this is a true story, and Mark Whitacre is a real person, a sociopath who has no trouble lying to the FBI!" You'll also be thinking about how much we don't know about the companies America relies upon for food and other essentials and just how corrupt corporations can be. Oh yeah, and you'll be pondering just how it is that a man's wife can bear to stand by him through a lifetime of lying and cheating.

So either read the book or listen to the NPR This American Life episode about it, and then go and see the movie. It will make you think a lot about corporate America, the stocks you buy and your hard-working corporate executive friends. Do you really know who they are?

FYI Children under 14 will likely not be too interested in this movie, unless of course they are fascinated by corruption or American business.

Want The Informant! (2009) Discount?

Ever in the mood for some decidedly offbeat entertainment? Sure; we all are, from time to time. How many shoot-'em-ups and car chases and rom-coms can we take to begin with? For an eccentric changeup I recommend the quirky THE INFORMANT!, a (slightly) dark comedy about an "Aw shucks" nerd who helps bring down an international price-fixing cabal (on food derivatives, for cryin' out loud). Based on a true story, this movie quietly entertains while giving the viewer a sound dose of corn pone (pun intended).

THE INFORMANT! is carried delightfully on the pudgy shoulders of Matt Damon, playing ADM junior exec Mark Whitacre. Good ol' Mark looks like someone you would rub elbows with at an ice cream social, and his sophomoric view of the corporate world is matched only by his cluelessness. Cooperating with the FBI (he gets wired) he gathers evidence to put his coworkers away. . .then expects his employer to reward him for his efforts. And Damon does all of this with a quirky, "gee willickers!" delivery that had me in stitches; as the movie grows even darker--with Whitacre growing ever more delusional--the jaw-dropping, disbelieving looks of his FBI cohorts (Scott Bakula and Joel McHale) are priceless. Four stars instead of five, due to needless meandering; THE INFORMANT! indeed proves that quirky can be good for you.

--D. Mikels, Author, The Reckoning

Save 37% Off

Rubber (2011)

RubberThis is a five-star movie all the way, but it will get a lot of bad reviews from people looking for a horror movie, which it is not. It is a movie about movies and about audiences, from an absurdist perspective.

With a premise about as ridiculous as anything SyFy has served up (you know, the people who gave us Dinopossum vs. Crocopillar... or something like that), I expected this thing to peg the old Cheese-o-Meter. C'mon... A tire comes to life and starts killing everyone in sight? Instead, what we have here is a very funny, very literate, and very absurd little film with some great performances.

I fear that explaining what goes on will ruin the pleasure of discovery for those who would appreciate this movie. So I won't.

I'll just say that if you're looking for a horror movie, or a cheesy horror movie, this is not the film you're looking for--go about your business elsewhere. But if the word "absurd" doesn't scare you off, give this movie a try.

Hollywood is full of adaptations, sequels, prequels, remakes, re-imaginings, reboots, and spin-offs. The bottom line is that most movies hitting the big screen are familiar territory. When something original does come along, it usually "borrows" elements from films that influenced it or pays homage to said influential films that came before it. Truth be told, at this stage in the game, technically everything has already been done. Everything has already been written about or filmed or drawn or created digitally. All that's really left out there is the really bizarre topics. The stuff that you either think up randomly one slow Thursday evening or is obviously the result of one of the heaviest acid trips in history. I like to think that Rubber falls somewhere in the middle...of all three categories.

Rubber pretty much had me at Lieutenant Chad's (Stephen Spinella) opening monologue. Hell, he gets out of the trunk of a car just to illustrate the point of "no reason." What makes this scene special is that it kind of breaks the fourth wall while also introducing the secondary storyline of the film. Lieutenant Chad explains what we are about to see to the camera and then it's revealed that there is a crowd of people there who are also about to watch what transpires on screen. Mind you, they're watching with binoculars and their fates are kind of questionable given the film's primary storyline, but it was one of the more unique ways to start off a film.

Rubber is Robert's story. Who is Robert, you may ask? Robert's a tire; a car tire, to be precise. He wakes up one day to find out he likes to roll over anything that gets in his way, but once something more solid crosses his path like a beer bottle is when things get even crazier. Robert discovers that he has telepathic powers and he uses this gift to make things explode. It starts with a beer bottle and shifts to animals. As Robert lives life to the fullest just rolling around the desert and blowing up whatever his little nonexistent heart desires, he eventually stumbles onto a road into town where he becomes fixated with a woman. Not only that, but we get to see how his special powers work on humans...

It's difficult to fully describe a film like Rubber. Its genius use of absurdity is practically overwhelming. The acting is a bit over the top at times, but really solid overall and fits the overall tone of the film like a glove. Stephen Spinella practically steals the show, but Jack Plotnick definitely has his moments. Okay, you got me. It's mostly the turkey scene and his heart to heart with the man in the wheelchair (Wings Hauser) that made Plotnick relevant. Rubber offers a little bit of everything though; comedy, drama, horror. There are a few seriously memorable one-liners buried in the film ("No, come on. It's not real life. Look at you, you have a stuffed toy alligator under your arm.") and it's kind of incredible how you almost come to understand the thought process of a car tire by the time the film ends.

Rubber certainly isn't going to be a film for everyone, but you pretty much know what you're getting into with the trailer. The people who hate it probably have justifiable reasons; it's ridiculous, it's unbelievable, it's impossible; it's the dumbest thing ever. It's hard to argue with any of that, but I loved it for all of those reasons. Some people may see ridiculousness, but I saw originality, creativity, and unpredictability. Isn't that better than most of the cliché tripe that somehow makes all this money at the box office?

Rubber is brainless fun covered by a veil of uncertainty. If you can accept the outlandish premise, then it's incredibly entertaining. Rubber has that same kind of vibe that Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans does; it's bizarre and eccentric on the surface, but kind of brilliant at its core. It'd probably be fair to call Rubber cheese, as well. But dammit if it's not some of the richest cheese I've ever tasted.

Buy Rubber (2011) Now

This movie had me laughing at the sheer absuridity of a tire that's alive, and blowing things up. LOL I figure this movie is at least a one time see. Just go into it with stupid fun in mind.

Read Best Reviews of Rubber (2011) Here

I wanted to like this film, I really did. I was enamored with the trailer and couldn't wait to give this one a view. Where it ultimately failed for me is the, in my opinion, ham-fisted delivery of The Plot, at the beginning of the film, by Lieutenant Chad. It wasn't enough for the viewer (i.e. me) to interpret this as art, absurdity and an exercise in "fourth-wall" mechanics. I had to be told this at the very beginning,while also being simultaneously told it is this very technique in story telling which makes a great film and style. Initially I assumed the speech to the viewer/spectator was something a producer insisted to help sell the film so it wouldn't be too abstract, but since the spectators were actually intrinsic to the plot (such that it is), I now assume this was not the case. This pretentiousness quiet simply put the whole film off kilter for me and I couldn't help thinking that the director really believed he was making a masterpiece of cinematic art. Something in which only time will tell. I freely admit, I could not get over this view.

There is some good here, however. This film is actually beautifully shot and visually interesting despite its lackluster scenery. Quentin Dupieux has an eye for some simple and amazing visuals and this reason alone is why I lasted until the end.

This film will likely be loved by some and reviled by others, it is that kind of film. For me it was meh. Worth a viewing if you're curious or as an example of simple and quality cinematography.

Want Rubber (2011) Discount?

This movie definitely failed to live up to the trailer which piqued my curiosity. Thought it would be a cross between Reno 911 and Tremors. Honestly not enough humor, suspense, or story to keep this movie interesting. The side plot of the audience watching the filming also fell flat and was very distracting. Much rather would have seen a campy horror movie than this.

Save 41% Off

Sideways (2004)

SidewaysIt's always dangerous when you are late in coming to a small movie that has unexpectedly hit the big time -your viewing enjoyment may be hampered by the crushing weight of expectations. It's wonderful when you can be among the first to see small-budget classics like Stanely Tucci's "Big Night," but I didn't get to see "Sideways" until after the Oscar nominations, the critics' Top 10 lists, and so on. How could "Sideways" possibly live up to these awesome credentials?

Well, "Sideways" does live up to its billing, and it does so through one simple virtue -truth. "Sideways" is an extremely funny and insightful examination of two men struggling with their mediocrity -one who is all too aware of his shortcomings, and another who uses a pathetic Peter Pan syndrome to keep at bay the harsh glare of reality.

The self-aware guy is Miles (the lovable schlub Paul Giamatti), a recently divorced middle school English teacher who's having a difficult time getting his novel published . . . or even explained. Miles is awash in bitterness, but he knows deep down that he's a sweet guy once you get past the sour layers (of which there are many). The ignorant guy is Jack (Thomas Hayden Church), Miles' freshman roommate from San Diego State and a mildly successful actor. Jack is one of those guys who should be thankful for the successes he has, but is incapable of doing so because by accepting a given success, he is placing a ceiling on his dreams.

The "plot" of "Sideways" revolves around Jack's impending marriage. Engaged to a rich beauty and walking down the aisle on Saturday, Jack gets escorted by Miles for a week of freedom in the California central coast wine country. While wine, for Jack, is a means for getting drunk, it is a religion for Miles. Of course, it's obvious to anyone who spends five minutes with Miles that he uses his mastery of wine as a defense mechanism ("I appreciate great wine, so I must be worth something") thanks to the witty script, "there's just like the faintest soupçon of like, uh, asparagus," has entered our lexicon of pretentious criticism. Miles can use his focus on wine to avoid meeting people who could possibly reject him.

That's difficult on this trip, because Miles has met his soulmate, Maya (Virginia Madsen), who is a waitress at a wine country restaurant. Miles and Maya share a devotion to wine, and Miles is continuously surprised at the depth and character of this woman. The question of whether Miles can break out of his various layers of emotional armor to forge a connection with this delightful woman dominates the movie.

Unfortunately for Miles, Jack is as shallow as Miles is deep. In a classic self-destructive move, Jack gets involved with Stepanie (Sandra Oh), a vibrant single mother and good friend of Maya's. A pell-mell romance ensues, with the ever-so-slight complication that Jack hasn't told Stephanie about his impending marriage. Watching Jack skirt emotional ruin while selfishly justifying his caddish behavior is a gruesome delight.

Through it all, the script for "Sideways" puts believable, memorable lines into the mouths of these talented actors. Long narratives about wine reveal surprising details of the speakers, and each character receives a separate, distinct voice (this isn't a Quentin Tarantino movie where all the actors sound like Saint Quentin, or a George Lucas movie where all the actors sound like idiots). A "talky" movie, "Sideways" never runs out of steam.

There is plenty of humor in "Sideways," but most of it is reserved you will chuckle more often than laugh outright but there are a few gut-busting moments, as well.

"Sideways" is an attractive movie, but it is shot with a realistic eye -the California wine country looks great, but this is not an "eye candy" movie like "Under the Tuscan Sun," which looked sumptuous but had little else to offer. "Sideways" gets the balance of visuals and substance just right one can easily imagine Miles liking his own movie, and that is high praise.

I really enjoyed this movie. It's funny, awkward, and touching. It's got a *great* ending. But certainly it's not for everyone--this is a character-driven film--that is, the plot is about changes taking place within the characters' emotions, relationships, and understandings of themselves. If you're looking for high drama, big action, stunning cinematography--look elsewhere. But if you're interested in a small-ish film about real-ish people, real-ish situations--and genuine humor, give sideways a try.

Buy Sideways (2004) Now

I realize this movie has come and gone but over the last year I've really grown to love it and after reading some of the reviews that this movie was so poor I felt compelled to give my opinion.

First, what's with the "boring" film thing, if you want exciting I don't know, rent something that's supposed to be exciting with explosions and Bruce Willis. Or if you find it morally ambiguous, consider what movies the director traditionally makes, Election, About Schmidt, these are somewhat dark, slow, depressing movies, rent something with Larry The Cable Guy if that's your thing; point is a little research prevents bad movie choices.

At 28 what I like about this movie is that it recognizes that life is messy and complicated. Considering my limited life experience I recognize that getting older doesn't automatically make someone perfect, responsible, and ethical. Cheating on spouses is not for me, but I've known couples (one of which many would describe as a good couple) who've cheated on each other. I'm not saying this is right but the point is I think people should be able to see some aspects of this story that are similar to their lives. Have you ever had a hard time getting over someone, or has one of your friends??? Ever know anyone who's unable to admit about a problem or won't admit they are in a rut?? I think lots of people feel like this, including myself; the point is there are those moments that give you hope. I'm speaking specifically about Miles in this movie, at one point in time he was much better, (though weak, he did cheat on his wife) Jack describes an entirely cheerier person. Miles reluctantly goes on this trip and is almost literally forced to recognize Mia as prospective relationship; this is ultimately positive, a reminder that opportunities for happiness are all around us if we choose to acknowledge that we are unhappy, in ruts, and are brave enough to follow them out. I know Miles does some despicable things, but somewhere he knows there is a person he wishes he could be, someone who does not just settle down, have a family, and eventually be married 50 years to their fat friend who they argue with constantly and live in there own worlds of denial. I feel I have hope for people in general; I look at the characters in the movie and think they want to be happy and hopefully they deal with the problems in their life.

Read Best Reviews of Sideways (2004) Here

The Film

What a great film. Sideways is one of the few movies based on a book that improves a good deal over its source material. And it is absolutely hilarious. The reason I like Sideways, for better or for worse, is I know both Jack and Miles too well. At one time or another, I've walked in both of their shoes. Alexander Payne reaches a zenith of sorts with his quiet eccentric style. The film blends friendship, the road trip and a party flick. The wine provides an interesting tenor to boot. Paul Giamatti and Thomas Haden Church are completely irreplaceable in their respective roles. They're sort of cosmopolitan R2D2 and C3P0 roadies.

The Blu-Ray

There's been a lot of complaints over perceived Blu-Ray quality over the standard DVD. I can tell you, the Blu-Ray is better. On a large 1080p screen, there is a noticeable difference. Cinematographer Phedon Papamichael created a unique look for the visuals to give the film a signature feel. All those smudgy light plumes, and glowing highlights come from diffusion and slight overexposure folks, maybe even a shot of digital grading to punch the highlights. None of those things lend themselves to the sharpest end products the end product is a vintage style soft image. The Blu-Ray IS indeed better. There is no way i would choose the DVD over this. If you don't have a big enough 1080p screen for it to matter, however, the DVD will probably suffice. But come on, at $10 for the BD, why choose the DVD?

Want Sideways (2004) Discount?

The medium of the cinema can be entertaining as well as educational, and when it's done well, a film can be both. Such is the case with "Sideways," directed by Alexander Payne, who also wrote the screenplay, which he adapted from the novel by Rex Pickett.

Jack (Thomas Haden Church), an actor whose "star" peaked some eleven years earlier and who now ekes out a living primarily doing commercials, is about to be married. With one week to go before the big day, his best man/friend/former college roommate, Miles (Paul Giamatti), has cooked up a trip to California's wine country, where he proposes a week of friendship, good wine, good food and golf as a send-off for Jack into that most blessed state of matrimony.

As is often the case with the hand that Life deals us, however, the week does not quite go as planned, for a couple of reasons: First, though Miles proclaims this week to be about Jack, Miles is battling his own demons of depression, which have plagued him for going on two years now, ever since his divorce from his beloved Victoria (Jessica Hecht). In addition to which, although he makes his living as an Eighth-Grade English Teacher, Miles is also an aspiring novelist, who happens to be waiting for a call from his agent, who has a publisher interested in the novel Miles has been working on for more than three years. So there is an ulterior motive for Miles at work here; a wine connoisseur, he's taking Jack into country that is not only familiar to him, but is without question a "comfort zone" for Miles, who desperately needs a temporary respite from his own cares right now.

The other problem is that Jack has an inflated ego and an overactive libido, a potent combination that quickly dictates an alternate plan of action for the week. Jack, it seems, is bent on sowing every last wild oat that remains, active or dormant, within him, before his impending nuptials scheduled for the following Saturday. Soon he is involved with Stephanie (Sandra Oh), who works pouring samples of wine for visitors at one of the first vineyards to which Miles takes Jack on their tour.

Jack then successfully devises a plan that gets Miles involved with Maya (Virginia Madsen), a waitress at one of the restaurants Miles frequents on his visits to this part of the world. Maya also happens to be a recent divorcee who is working on her Master's in Horticulture at one of the local colleges, as well as being a wine connoisseur in her own right and a friend of Stephanie's to boot. All of which sounds like the makings of a good time for all, with one exception: Jack conveniently fails to tell Stephanie that he is about to be married.

Bad move, Jack...

In "Sideways," Payne has created a highly entertaining and emotionally involving film with characters and situations to which a broad cross-section of viewers will readily be able to relate and identify. Payne has an eye for nuance and subtlety, which makes his filmessentially a character studya succinct examination of the human condition.

Subtlety and nuance is exactly what Paul Giamatti brings to the role of Miles, as well. It's a performance that is so real it's almost excruciatingly so at times, but it makes Miles someone you can empathize with. Giamatti creates a sympathetic character you can't help but root for on this vast wilderness of a stage we call life; it's a performance that should easily have earned him an Oscar for Best Actor.

Haden Church does an exemplary job, too, as Jack. He imbues his character with such believable self-centered shallowness that you want to laugh at him and hit him at the same time. The rub is, Jack knows what he's doing, but simply can't help himself; so in the end you may find yourself sympathizing with him anyway, because Haden Church presents Jack as someone who just does not possess the intellectual capacity to do otherwise, which somehow makes you want to let him off the hook. You realize that this is just Jack honestly being who he is. And it takes a good performance to get you as a viewer to that place.

The striking Virginia Madsen does a good job, as well, as Maya, creating a character that is a perfect counterpart to the Miles created by Giamatti. And Sandra Oh, currently riding a surging wave of popularity due to her role on televisions "Grey's Anatomy," brings some definite pizzazz to her role of Stephanie, successfully displaying her character's spirit, while at the same time exposing a decidedly vulnerable side of her.

The supporting cast includes Missy Doty (Cammi), M.C. Gainey (Cammi's husband), Patrick Gallagher (Gary the bartender), Marylouise Burke (Mile's mother), Alysia Reiner (Christine) and Stephanie Faracy (Stephanie's mother).

A film that lends itself to repeated viewings, "Sideways" is one of those gems that makes you appreciate not only the artists involved, as well as the art of filmmaking, but the medium itself. I like this movie more every time I see it.

Save 44% Off

Hyde Park on Hudson (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2012)

Hyde Park on HudsonWhile I appreciate the expertise & execution of Mr. Solinas skilled review in his assessment viewing Hyde Park on Hudson as a boring biopic, ..... as one who was not alive during his administration, I appreciate the intimate "fly on the wall" look at one of this nation's (and the worlds) most iconic leaders his strengths, fears, and foibles as the world approached its second world war. I can't help believe that most people would jump at an opportunity to witness or learn what it was like for those involved and what was going on behind closed doors at such a fateful time. The movie was supposedly based upon a book written by a distant cousin who came to assist him during those difficult times only to become the latest object of his affections. It strips away the veneer that historic figures attain and shows such leaders are real people too not iconic cartoonish live action figurines. They are subject to same physical & emotional challenges, desires, fears, and inadequacies we all possess. Some of us achieve greatness, become leaders, and are viewed as heroes by some and the evil incarnate by others. We all try to envision what it was like to be such a person. In this peak behind the curtains we realize we were almost staring at our own reflection....not only our failings-but more importantly -our innate possibilities.

"Hyde Park on Hudson" stars Bill Murray as Frankin D.Roosevelt and takes place during a summer weekend in 1939 at his Hudson Valley estate when he hosted England's King George VI (Samuel West), who hoped to gain America's support in the coming war. At the same time, according to the film, Roosevelt was pursuing an extramarital affair with a distant cousin, Daisy Suckley (Laura Linney).

Richard Nelson's script portrays Roosevelt as both a master of political gamesmanship and a manipulator of the women around him -wife Eleanor (Olivia Williams), Daisy, and his private secretary, Missy (Elizabeth Marvel). Murray, who might not seem a first choice to portray Roosevelt, conveys both the President's charm and a dark side rarely seen in public. His Roosevelt is surely the ideal host, going out of his way to make his guests feel comfortable, happy, and welcome.

The film has a voyeuristic quality, with the audience as willing spectators checking out a Roosevelt who balances work and play while under enormous pressures from both his public responsibilities and private peccadilloes. It bogs down somewhat in a soap-opera subplot about Daisy discovering that she is only one in a long line of the President's lovers but, overall, the picture has a light touch and moves along briskly.

Bonus features on the Blu-ray and DVD releases include deleted

Buy Hyde Park on Hudson (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2012) Now

This review is from: Hyde Park on Hudson (Amazon Instant Video)

This is an unusual and remarkably private view of the life of FDR (Bill Murray). It is told mostly in first person from the view of Daisy (Laura Linney) his distant cousin and mistress. This story is based on her private letters and diaries discovered after her death. We have no reason to doubt them. As such the story is as much about her as it is FDR, a complex man whose multiple sides are now revealed to everyone. He was a nice philanderer.

The main point of plot interest is when the King and Queen of England come to America. England was headed for war with Germany and will desperately need our assistance. (Plot spoiler: We help the UK and win.) However they visit at a time when the President has mistress issues. They see him having to be carried from location to location. FDR has a way of charming, but at the same time humbling the monarchy. King Edward (Samuel West) was indeed remarkable and likeable.

There were several scenes I would stop and think. There is irony intricately laced within the dialouge of the scenes. I would find myself laughing at scenes after they had ended and I contemplated them for a moment.

The film whispers of old long debates of government vs. private sector, but stops short of making any overt statements. This is not your momma's fireside FDR.

It is a fascinating film for history buffs, and a bit of a chick film drama. I love how this film was intellectually crafted. Not for everyone. Laura Linney and Olivia Coleman (Queen Elizabeth) are Oscar nomination worthy.

Parental Guide: No f-bombs or nudity. There is a brief "hand gratification" early in the film.

Read Best Reviews of Hyde Park on Hudson (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2012) Here

I first saw this film,in the theaters, because of Bill Murray. But don't expect Peter Venkman from "Ghostbusters" or Carl Spackler from "Caddyshack" This is Bill Murray performing as Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The character needed some comedian in it and Bill certainly delivered. Is this a love story? Possibly. A comedy? Maybe. A history? Definitely. This movie is a total Gem.

Want Hyde Park on Hudson (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2012) Discount?

Bill murray did a wonderful job portraying roosevelt. The story told a version of roosevelt I never knew about, never knew he was a lady's man.

Save 43% Off

Lymelife (2008)

LymelifeI am still shocked that some reviewer wrote "laugh out loud funny" after seeing this film. Granted, there are moments where you might smile. But more than anything, this film is sad; depicting the genuine heartache that is wrought when a family falls apart.

Baldwin and Nixon both excellent actors are good, but not brilliant. I expected better. The acting performance of Emma Roberts is terrible that her aunt is Julia Roberts no doubt explains her being granted this role. Timothy Hutton, however, as the lyme-diseased, depressed husband who witnesses his wife's infidelity deserves the highest accolades. His performance in this film is flawless, portraying a man suffering from a disease that has rendered him incapable of functioning as the man he once was. I found his performance riveting and heartbreaking. Kieran Culkin is the next Sean Penn that is a given. His underscored performance as a love-struck, confused teen was excellent. And his brother Rory Culkin was also excellent. Hutton and the kids stole this film. I don't want to go over the plot but I do recommend this film. It is well-done, and well-acted....but it's not "laugh out loud funny" at all. Whenever children suffer, there is little to laugh at.

I admit that I picked this for viewing because of Alec Baldwin. The guy may have had his shares of troubles but he is quite a charismatic actor (well, in some movies more than others). Set in Long Island, N.Y., the time period is the mid-70s, and it also has two Culkin brothers in it. Rory Culkin portrays a 15-year-old, Scott Bartlett whose parents,real estate developer Mickey (Alec Baldwin in a wolfish and arrogant role) and passive mother, Brenda (Jill Hennessy) reflect the trappings of a successful life, but are not altogether happy in their marriage. Scott is however more concerned with the girl next door, attractive Adrianna (Emma Roberts of Nancy Drew) who sort of teases him, but has other romantic inclinations. Adrianna' mom, Melissa (Cynthia Nixon)works for Mickey, and portrays a long-suffering wife who has to deal with her Lyme-disease addled husband, Tommy (Timothy Hutton). Oh, and there's Scott's brother Jimmy (Kieran Culkin), who's on leave from the army.

The drama of the two families unfolds slowly, portraying the gradual unraveling of two marriages, whilst also delving into the sexual awakening of an adolescent boy who is tormented by his attraction to Adrianna, and also concerned about his parents' marriage. Rory Culkin does a credible job of playing the angsty teen, and grows on the viewer, eliciting one's empathy for the growing pains he goes through, without being overly melodramatic or sentimental. There's a good balance between the dark and light in this drama, and the ensemble cast does a great job in maintaining this balance, especially Alec Baldwin who plays true to type here.

The story is far from fresh or original,as there have been so many other movies made about dysfunctional families, and adolescence (one of my favorites is "The Squid and the Whale") yet it strikes a chord, and this is largely due to the heartfelt performance by Rory Culkin. Another well-made coming-of-age movie is The Education of Charlie Banks.

Buy Lymelife (2008) Now

3.4 stars

Ok, so it's a true story. The script is fair enough, direction too. The acting is uniformly decent, with Baldwin as usual stealing the show. The lead is likeable enough. So why didn't I enjoy this film?

Good question. Probably because it's just a little too realistic, meaning there's a lack of redemption, or whatever it is that makes art art and life not so art. I just found it all too bleak, in a very bland sort of way. Yes, the suburbs are full of deception and disappointment and dismay and d-everything. But that doesn't mean I want to watch them played out on screen...unless something really special and revealing occurs. And here, it doesn't.

Well done, but I'd recommend you watch American Beauty or Ordinary People or Kramer vs. Kramer or any of the many other superior suburban drams. Sadly, this one never gets there, despite good work all around.

Read Best Reviews of Lymelife (2008) Here

I expected a funny comedy, the DVD cover art says, 'Violently Funny,' 'Laugh Out Loud Funny, entertaining and moving,' 'Wonderful,' and 'Tender.' The film inside isn't exactly any of these things. It is a coming of age film set in 1979 with the backdrop of some incredibly dysfunctional adults. No, I'm sorry; I laughed a little at the beginning, but then was just left sad after the half way point passed.

The film starts off quirky and interesting. I love film that tries new things, sets up a different style, hides things from the viewer, and uses unusual music. All there in a wonderful mix during the first 30 minutes. At first I couldn't place the setting year (later in the film I discovered it is 1979, shown in a very pointed manner), so that was a bit unsettling. Two different families are shown and their relationship is unveiled slowly and wonderfully. There are a number of jokes that are genuinely funny. At about midpoint the film starts to devolve into lies, cheating, foul language, standard melodrama editing and filming, and the characters just become less and less believable and lose my connection with them (save the two lead characters, best friends Adrianna and Scott).

Sadly as this film lost my interest, I started to notice horribly sloppy editing and continuity. Normally these things just pass by, I enjoy a film, I'm engrossed in the story, and continuity, unless grossly bad, just slips past. Not here, the story line got so bogged down that I started noticing all these problems. I noticed way too many cuts where somebody would have their hand up to their mouth and an immediate reverse cut with their hand down; cigarettes that change length immediately; or facial expressions that change too quickly during a cut.

The cast. Rory Culkin (yes he has a famous brother) as Scott was good, as a more or less clueless teenager. Emma Roberts (Nancy Drew) as Adrianna was radiant, and did a wonderful job just snotty enough to her best friend Scott, and then just exactly nice enough. Alec Baldwin as Scott's father, was a pig, pretty much as he always plays he was a mix of Schwetty from SNL and his 30 Rock character. Jill Hennessy (Law and Order, and Crossing Jordan) as Scott's mother was decent. She was a little bit crazy, a little bit caring mother. Cynthia Nixon Adrianna's mother (Sex and the City) was sometimes amazing, sometimes just awful her New York accent slipped in and out a lot. Timothy Hutton as Adrianna's father was just so dirty looked like he never washed his hair the whole time. Bottom line, its more or less an all star cast. There wasn't a lot of chemistry between these characters, except Scott and Adrianna.

The film was too long by a good 30 minutes. The first 30 minutes were excellent. The last 15 were very well done. There was 45 minutes where the film kind of lost its way.

The film is rated R. There are sensuous moments with no nudity; a fair amount of strong language; and s small amount of violence. This film might be acceptable for slightly younger viewers. The themes are somewhat mature.

The DVD includes a fairly long list of bonus features. The alternate ending is just plain awful. I've never seen a DVD where the alternate is 19 minutes, where 18 minutes was exactly the same as the original film. There is 20 seconds that is new or different. The voice over with the director and a few others is just plain annoying. Clearly the director loved the script written version that is the alternate. Frankly, this is a huge waste of time, the released ending is exactly the right ending. There are a series of deleted scenes. Again, I had a hard time seeing what is different, other than extensions of what was included in the released film.

I was disappointed by this film. There are much better coming of age films. Adventureland, Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist, and Almost Famous come to mind. My expectations were maybe set too high, this is a coming of age film with a depressing back story.

Want Lymelife (2008) Discount?

I can finally see why the critics and audiences on Rottentomatoes.com alike gave this film 58% and 50% respectively for Lymelife. Like American Beauty, Lymelife is about the difficulties and growing pains of growing up in the suburbs. The problems is, too much of this film seems to have been carbon copied from American Beauty.

There is nothing wrong with filmmakers getting inspiration from another previously successful movie, especially one that has won so many accolades and acclaim as American Beauty. But Lymelife was trying too hard to derive the hell of suburban lifestyle, the growing pains of teenage youth, and difficulties of a marriage falling apart--all of it was taken directly from American Beauty. Even the ending was derived from American Beauty! Couldn't Derick Martini come up with a better ending?

A few acting performances do stand out to keep this movie from getting too predictable and lame. Rory Culkin as Scott Barlett, a teenager who is going through the usual growing pains of being a teenager, put on a solid performance. Timothy Hutton was good as Charlie Bragg, a man who has lyme disease, and had the unfortunate luck of witnessing his wife have an adulterous affair with her boss. And Adam Scarimbolo played the role of Scott's bully very well. But it is not enough to save Lymelife.

Save 25% Off