posted by dariane on Thu Aug 20, 2009 at 07:32pm FILM REVIEW: ‘Inglorious Basterds’ Screening at SDCC 2009

‘Inglourious Basterds’ had been in development by Quentin Tarantino for nearly 15 years.

Given the event at which I saw the film, the anticipation from the audience was through the roof.  The secret screening at the Gaslamp district during Comic-Con included fans waiting in line for tickets as early as 4am.

The screening kicked off with an announcement, that we were the first public audience in the United States to see the final theatrical cut of the film (shorter than what was screened at Cannes). Eli Roth introduced the film and watched with us.

In short, ‘Inglourious Basterds’ is a story about an alternate history of World War II in which a brutal military group collects Nazi scalps.

There are two main plots of the film.  The first follows the infamous ‘Inglourious Basterds’ led by Lt. Aldo Raine (played by Brad Pitt).  The conquests of the basterds are the stuff of folklore and legends, stylized as bad-assery by Quentin Tarantino.
The second plot follows the story of Shoshanna (played by Melanie Laurent), a young Jewish woman who escaped death and capture by Nazis in her childhood and later became the successful owner of a French movie theater.
Met with a unique opportunity to end the war once and for all, Shoshanna and the Basterds strategize on two very different and dangerous fronts to defeat the Nazis.

The film is headlined by Brad Pitt and features familiar faces such as Eli Roth, Mike Myers (Austin Powers), BJ Novak (‘The Office’) and Samm Levine (‘Freaks and Geeks’).  Melanie Laurent as Shoshanna and Diane Kruger as Bridget make extraordinary performances in their roles as empowered women.

However, my favorite performance is most definitely by Christoph Waltz as Colonel Hans Landa. His commanding presence onscreen makes his character all the more frightening.

Since I’ve seen the film, the most common question I’ve encountered has been how this film compares to Tarantino’s others. ‘Inglourious Basterds’ is divided by act with title pages—a signature Tarantino style.  It has the gore and violence of ‘Kill Bill,’ however where ‘Kill Bill”s action sequences were slick and graceful, IB’s sequences are rough and unforgiving.  IB has the potential to become a Quentin Tarantino classic on par with ‘Pulp Fiction.’

Verdict:  Popped!  Like a bustin’ a cap in those Nazis!

Other highlights:

  • How I was able to watch this screening… following @TheRealBasterds on Twitter and responding first to a Twitpic contest!
  • Screening tickets in the form of a dog tag = sick.  Still a long standby line at the door.
  • Who else was in the crowd: Elvis Mitchell, Dominic Monaghan, Elijah Wood, and Eli Roth
  • Free poster autographed by Eli Roth
Comments (View)
posted by dariane on Thu Aug 20, 2009 at 11:08am FILM REVIEW: Park-Chan Wook’s ‘Thirst’

This is the first film I’ve seen by Park-Chan wook.

It is a story of a priest who becomes a vampire through a blood transfusion. This transformation makes him question his values and beliefs, leading him to an immoral immortal life.

What intrigued me most about the film was the way the different themes were interwoven to tell a compelling story.  Faith, morality, love, family and mortality—Park-chan wook masterfully brings these themes to elevate the ‘vampire genre’ to a new level.

Walking out of the theater, we summed up this film in three words:

Awkward Vampire Sex.

There’s a lot of it in this movie.  It’s really awkward and uncomfortably long.

But one of my biggest gripes about the film was how excruciatingly long it felt and was. There were several moments in the film that felt like the end. Then after a half-second fade-to-black, the screen would light up again and proceed with the next act.

Overall:  This film is not for your average movie go-er.  If you’re into foreign arthouse type films, then this is for you.  If not, go and watch GI-Joe or something.

Comments (View)
posted by dariane on Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 08:00am FILM REVIEW: Funny People

This is my lazy attempt at a movie review post-Comic-con.  I got to see this film a couple weeks ago at a screening.  The trailers and ads don’t tell you too much about the film; it’s obvious they had somewhat of a hard time marketing for it.  Here’s how I sum it up:

- Funny? Yes!  Especially the self-deprecating jokes that nudge at their real-life selves.  It’s the Apatow flavor of humor you’re used to, only this time more tongue-in-cheek.

- Serious.  Although this film has some of the penis humor you’re used to from Apatow, the plot overall is a serious one. This may be off-putting to most viewers used to the loser-nerd statements from the likes of Seth Rogen.  But if you’re familiar at all with Judd Apatow’s work on Freaks and Geeks, you’ll know that he has the talent to balance belly-laughter and emotion.  This film is a great example of this balance.

- Seth Rogen delivers a heartfelt performance—his most serious to date. Without his facial hair and some pounds (he looks much thinner), we are reminded that Rogen is still very much a newcomer on the comedy stage at the ripe age of 27.

- Adam Sandler plays the veteran comedian diagnosed with a terminal illness, George Simmons.  Although this role is different from the regular family man character he normally plays, his performance lacked the bright-shiny acting chops we’ve seen from him in such flicks as Punch Drunk Love and Spanglish.

- Leslie Mann was fantastic in her role as George Simmon’s old flame.  Her performance was outstanding; it was probably the meatiest role I’ve seen her play.

- Cameos. Both good and bad.  Good because when you’re watching you get excited and think “Oooh look! There’s whats-his-face-famous-comedian!” But it’s bad because there’s a lot of cameos. You begin to think that this may be the highest form of ‘name-dropping’ someone could do.  We get it, Apatow. You’re mainstream now.  Get over it.

- Damn it felt long. Like, I wonder what’s on TV right now, long.

Comments (View)
posted by dariane on Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 12:00am HALF-KETTLE CONCERT: Coldplay at the Cricket Amphitheater - July 16, 2009

Dariane’s comments:

So my only prior experience to a Coldplay performance was this disaster on SNL back in October 2008 when Jon Hamm hosted. The NBC and SNL Producers showed that Coldplay was, in fact, too cool for school by giving them THREE songs to perform instead of the usual two. Their performance horrified me so much that I vowed that Coldplay would be the one band I would not want to see live.

Having said that, after hearing about an opportunity to attend their Chula Vista concert for free after volunteering with Oxfam, I joined biskeeee and whosdamike to attend. Free Coldplay concert? Sure, why not, I guess.

After volunteering for Oxfam, we were lucky enough to get great, comfy seats at the Cricket Amphitheater with probably the most perfect unobstructed view of the stage.

And in short, this Coldplay concert was by far the best concert experience I’ve ever had. Ever.


Highlights:

  • Met AWESOME people who volunteered for Oxfam.
  • Got parking really close by for FREE
  • Got to watch the concert for FREE
  • Amazing fold-out cushion seats just above the pit.
  • OMFGWTF Coldplay performed just a few feet away from us! (And if you don’t believe it, we’ve got pictures to prove it.)
  • Carne Asada Fries right after. <3 SD

WHOSDAMIKE:

The setting: July 16, 2009.

The place: Chula Vista, CA.

The band: Coldplay.

The result: Two solid hours of precision dosed adrenaline, pumped through incandescent butterfly cannons and full-spun moon televisions.

Afterward, gathered around a rickety old table with a full order of carne asada fries and a mixed Coke and Cherry slurpee, we tried to capture the experience. Words came up, misses and near-successes: Amazing. Awesome. Epic.

The band swept across the Amphitheater, loaded up on the latest in audiovisual holo-laser-balloons. Chris Martin was frenetic, demonic, at times doubling backward like a Matrix gunshot victim, and others leaping up as though he meant to dive into the surge and surf of a thriving, enthusiastic crowd.

At times, the band would disappear from the stage, slip off like shadows into the dark. Then a roar passing through the crowd in a great wave, a spotlight tracking the haphazard run of four figures, and suddenly they were there. In a heartbeat, we went from halfway between stage and nosebleeds to the best seats in the whole damn house.

Two mini-stages, set up at the nosebleeds and midway point. The band knows how to please the fans. Everyone got to have a little piece.

Technically, the show was amazing. I saw every piece of fancy stage technology I knew employed simultaneously. And then three extra ones, possibly ganked from Xenu’s magitech foo fighters of Area 51.

Fog machines. Multi-spectrum lasers. Rotating tele-spheres. Paper insect cannons, less like guns and more like geysers.

And the music? The personality? The presence?

Not amazing. Not awesome. Not epic.

Full-on, unadulterated, NPH LEGENDARY.

photos taken (poorly) by whosdamike


biskeeee’s comments:

I’ve been going to shows habitually for about 10 years, but darn it if Coldplay at Cricket Wireless Amphitheater wasn’t the best rock concert I’ve ever experienced. Seeing them for free was great - volunteering with Oxfam was fun and easy (unless you don’t like people), and we were rewarded with seats valued at ~$100. $100 is a lot for a concert - I usually hate spending more than $25 - but with Coldplay, you get what you pay for. Grandeur, spectacle, pyrotechnics, costumes, a million tissue-paper butterflies… but also tender moments where they made me feel a connection not only with the band, but with the brotherhood of man in the crowd… moments that left me believing in truth and beauty and all that stuff I’m supposed to be too cynical to go for. Coldplay’s music is beautiful, but listening to the recordings never made me feel what I felt at the concert. I believe the point of a live show is to convey experiences beyond the capabilities of a recording… and by that measure, the show was excellent. Even if I’d had to pay for the ticket, I wouldn’t hesitate to see them again.

Comments (View)
posted by whosdamike on Thu Jun 11, 2009 at 01:00am FILM REVIEW: The Hangover

Last week, a few of us - hopped up on popcorn and doing tokes of butter off discarded theater cartons - cavorted into the AMC Century City Fifteen.  Through a combination of conspiracy and consumerism, we stumbled upon The Hangover.

What happens when Old School director Todd Phillips tackles that most ineffable of undeniably deniable assault-rites of manhood: the bachelor party?  You get the greatest Vegas trip ever, remixed like a Memento record clawed up from the grime and piss of a strip club’s backalley.

The instant I saw Zach Galifianakis’s gorgeous visage, like Michelangelo chiseled from marble and hairball, I was hooked on this film.  That was months ago, when I first caught wind of it via printed advertizz-ment, also known as a “post-or.”

The reviews you may have heard or read about (or watched or dreamed or concocted) are all correct, insofar as they all agree that this is the funniest movie of the year.  This is the sort of film that makes it unfair for all the other comedy flicks in the world - nay, the UNIVERSE.

Is it vile?  Naturally.  Is it gratuitious?  Hell yes.  Is it vulgar beyond your wildest imaginings?  I doubt it.  You look like one sick son of a beachball.

You can think of it as one long, continuous commercial for look how awesome Vegas is, and if that sounds like something you don’t want to watch, then you, my friend, need to pick up three vices and call me when you’re in Barstow, because it’s Vegas time, baby.

Swingers was the perfect flick to capture the wild, shallow insanity of a town run on spitshine and silicone.  This is not at all like The Hangover, except that Heather Graham proves she’s a banging hottie in both flicks.

What The Hangover accomplishes, however, is a seamless one-hundred-minutes of distilled grain neutral hilarity.  It’s like the producers deadbolted half a dozen of Hollywood’s funniest jackasses into a room with nothing but booze, pornography, and a five-foot-high stack of National Lampoon DVDs.

The beauty of The Hangover is in its stitch-perfect weaving of every bullshit tall tale to ever come out of Vegas.  That time your buddy’s cousin jacked a cop car.  The story about your old roommate’s sister’s boyfriend getting kidnapped by the mafia.  Or remember when your neighbor’s kid’s great uncle got shitfaced and had a 24-hour neon chapel wedding?

The Hangover remembers, even if its cast doesn’t.  And what a fucking cast: Ed Helms is flawless as a yuppie locked down in a life he doesn’t want.  Zach Snuffleupagus deadpans awkward, natural as a three-legged dog crashing a Greyhound race.  Bradley Cooper holds his motley crew together, but Ed and Zach steal the show - they consistently and effortlessly hit their marks, knocking out punchlines like pianists (heheh) tapping to a metronome.

If you’re looking for heart, check out Up.  For action-packed nostalgia there’s Star Trek.  Or if you want to take a hatchet to your brain for an hour and change, there’s McG’s Terminator.

But if you want to see the funniest film of 2009, the movie that will barrel its hijacked baby-on-board police cruiser off the screen and into your hearts, then plop that ten bucks down at the box office and settle in for a fully unforgettable Hangover.

Verdict: Popped.  Like bubblies in the champagne room.

Comments (View)

Page 1 of 10