Mini-reviews of 4-star movies may appear once in a while, but for the most part, anything to do with movies (and some TV shows) will show up in the comments of this post.

From DVD Talk:

In watching Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse again for the first time in a few years, I was struck by the sheer egomaniacal drive that spurred Apocalypse Now director Francis Ford Coppola forward — this is a man who, seemingly quite literally, went incrementally insane in the Philippine jungle… The overwhelming ambition and staggering scale of Coppola’s Vietnam-centric riff upon Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” are relics from another time, an era when filmmaking was a creative enterprise, not a corporate one.

From the linked DVD Talk review:

It’s easy to describe “Anvil!” as a real world version of “This is Spinal Tap,” and the comparison is incredibly accurate… While suitably absurd and prone to spotlighting rock cliché humiliation, “Anvil” is a far more reverberating and loving film than it seems at first glance… [It presents the core members of the band] as sensitive, generous, and terrified men nervously facing the rest of their life without the proper career explosion they deserve, and that potent tension turns “Anvil!” from a cheap laugh to a documentary that’s thrillingly heartfelt and extracts a genuine reflection on life that’s downright poetic.

I didn’t think I’d be interested in it, but it’s a good movie. A good story.

Alien — Seeing it in a theatre is the best way to appreciate it, even if you’ve seen it 20 times on DVD. The alien will still make you crap your pants.

District 9 — A one-of-a-kind science fiction movie that’s hard to watch at times because it seems so brutally realistic. I’ve never felt so much sympathy for such ugly creatures before.

Pontypool — The best idea movie I saw in 2009 and the most engaging. Language becomes a virus that turns people into zombies. I literally held on to the edge of my seat for half the movie.

Psycho — Another movie that is transformed by a theatrical viewing. Everyone in the theatre knew the shower murder scene was coming and it still made everyone jump. I can understand the criticism that Hitchcock’s movies feel dry, almost academic. Not this one. It goes for the jugular.

Star Trek — A re-imagined, action-packed Star Trek that almost anyone can enjoy. It has good actors (finally), good direction, excellent special effects and a story that respects the best aspects of the original Star Trek while elevating it to a whole new level. Star Trek used to be cheesy, goof ball fun with a message, but it was never this cool. I agree mostly with this review (turn volume down during intro):

I saw more new movies on DVD or through screener copies than in a theatre in 2009. Here’s a list of the highlights:

The Hurt Locker — A nervous movie about a guy working with an American explosive ordnance disposal team in Iraq defusing big bombs that could blow him to bits any second. The bravado is a bit too thick at times, but it’s a powerful movie. Intense.

Moon — A great example of what science fiction can be but hardly ever achieves: intelligent, exciting, empathetic and thoughtful storytelling. You don’t have to be a fan of science fiction to appreciate that.

That’s it. Honourable mentions (because I’m too lazy to write about them): Food, Inc., Milk, Planet Earth, Eagle vs Shark, The 400 Blows, Citizen Kane and The Fly.

Did you see any good movies this year?

UPDATE: James Cameron will never win an award for best screenplay. If you see the trailer, you know the story. There isn’t much to it, but there’s enough to move the action along so it’s never boring. I’m still not sold on 3-D movies. It’s a distraction more than an enhancement. I would have preferred viewing a regular 2-D projection of the movie. I felt like I could focus better, see and appreciate more when I removed the 3-D glasses during some scenes where the 3-D effect was minimal. It still feels like a gimmick to me. It distorts the picture and makes my eyes feel sore. I don’t like it.

So are the blue computer-generated humanoids and the world they live on with all its strange flora and fauna convincing enough to create some real drama? Yes. The CGI isn’t photo-realistic, yet it doesn’t feel synthetic. At times, objects like leaves falling from trees move in a way that seems not entirely natural, but it’s happening on a planet (or moon) that doesn’t have full Earth-gravity, so it kind of makes sense that objects would seem to float a little more. The CGI characters are fully expressive. Their eyes, their facial expressions — it’s all there. They don’t feel like creepy Polar Express people or cartoonish Star Wars characters. It’s impressive.

I enjoyed the movie. At times, I did get caught up in the drama and the action, but I think I would have got into it more if I’d seen it without the distraction of the 3-D effects. If you’re going to see it, it should be in a theatre where the beauty and the spectacle of it all can be viewed up close and personal. I recommend it just for that. I can’t say I was blown away by Avatar, but it’s a good movie for what it is, an action-packed, science-fantasy drama. If I could see it again in 2-D, I think I’d appreciate more.

UPDATE #2 (Jan. 15/10): I saw it again but this time in the last row where the 3-D effect wasn’t as distracting or as hard on my eyes. I was able to focus better too. So if you’re going to see it, I recommend sitting near the back. I still don’t think the 3-D is necessary because it’s visually impressive enough already. It’s not a great film, but it’s fun, simple and effective. And it’s pretty damn cool. (Except for the Celine Dion cloned song at the end. James Cameron must have the lamest CD collection at home.)

I could always appreciate it for its technical achievements — it’s difficult to find a movie even today that matches the innovation involved in just about every shot in Citizen Kane — but the story didn’t grab me. It grabs me now, though. And there’s not much I can say about it that hasn’t been said before, so I’ll just say, “Wow.” Citizen Kane is a powerhouse. What a great movie.

(The DVD also contains an audio commentary track by Roger Ebert, whose commentaries are exceptional, well-worth checking out.)

I will eventually write a gushing fanboy review of the movie, too, because I love it. I saw it three times in the theatre and was disappointed I didn’t get to see it a fourth time. It’s an exciting, re-energized Star Trek finally with good actors, good direction, excellent special effects and a story that respects the best aspects of the original Star Trek while elevating it to a whole new level.

(Via Jim Emerson who seems mostly annoyed by the new Star Trek movie.)

The story focuses on the lives of a large affluent family in Sweden, particularly the pains and joys of two children in the family. It’s strange, funny, surreal at times, philosophical here and there, entertaining and compelling. (The opening sequence in the trailer is a bit slow, but things pick up once all the characters are introduced.) Definitely one of Bergman’s happier films and one of the few Xmas-time movies I enjoy watching this time of year.

From the linked DVD Talk review: “Dark Days is an alternately humorous, saddening, touching and fascinating picture that is a masterful documentary of the lives these people lead and the hope in their hearts for a better life… This is a powerful, emotional picture that is an amazing effort from director Singer. It’s definitely a must-see film.”

I wish I’d seen it in a theatre.

The story appropriately takes place in a small town rural radio station where we can’t see what’s happening but we hear live reports from a guy in the street witnessing the mayhem of people slowly turning into zombies — and this is where your imagination goes nuts. As most people in radio will tell you, sound is a visual medium. The audience is engaged by listening, hearing the story unfold. Then we watch the reactions of the people at the radio station. There aren’t many zombies in the movie, but we don’t need to see them to feel their presence. Then comes the question, “How do you prevent the spreading of a verbal disease when you can’t talk about it, especially when you work at a talk-radio station?” The possible answers to this question are intriguing and entertaining. Although not a perfect movie, Pontypool succeeds so well at engaging the imagination to scare the crap out of you, while providing plenty of laughs along the way, it’s a perfect movie for the Halloween season.

“Pontypool” is based on the book of by Tony Burgess.

Eastern Promises tells the story of a doctor, Naomi Watts, who delivers a baby from a woman who works in a brothel. The mother dies and the doctor tries to track down the baby’s family and subsequently gets tangled up with the Russian Mafia — and those guys don’t fool around. Viggo Mortensen, as one of the Russian henchmen, has sympathy for her and tells her to go home and forget about it. But she doesn’t. And from there on in it’s, Oh, jesus, what the hell’s going to happen now? I was surprised at the emotional and moral complexity of the film. Eastern Promises is a thriller with a conscience, and the best I’ve seen from Cronenberg.