This Thanksgiving there were not that many options for films since many of them released were either R rated or on limited release. However, there was one flick that was released that didn't include depression("The Road") or blood everywhere("Ninja Assassin") and that was the John Travolta/Robin Williams comedy, "Old Dogs."
In this film, we meet Dan(Williams) and Charlie(Travolta) who have been lifelong best friends and successful business partners. We are quickly told the story of how, after Dan's divorce, Charlie takes Dan to "live the life." During this "living the life" moment Dan meets a girl named Vicki(Kelly Preston) and they have a one night stand. After that, they leave each other and Dan has had his second divorce in two weeks(you should already be picking up that this isn't a "family" film as it was marketed).
Seven years later, the two men are about to make the most important deal of their life and just when it's about to happen...Vicki is back in town. But, oh no, Vicki doesn't only say "nice to see you" but drops two surprise bombs on him. Bomb number one is that she is going to jail for two weeks. Bomb number two is that Dan has two kids and he needs to take care of them while she's in jail (this decision comes after Dan injures the babysitter). So now Dan, along with his pal Charlie, have to work together to help take care of the two kids because as Charlie says to Dan , " You're allergic to anything under four feet."
Sadly this film has more bad elements then good so to make this easier I'll get all of the bad out of the way. As you might have told yourself already, the films plot is completely unbelievable and just random. Let me quickly restate the plot in a different way: A guy and girl have one night together, leave for seven years, meet again, discus they have kids, and eventually the girl leaves her kids with basically a total stranger. Also, Dan is already deeply in love with Vicki when he hasn't seen her in forever and offers to take kids when he knows full well that he can't raise them. Does this sound like it could really happen? Only in cinema my friends.
The other thing with the plot is that it is unoriginal. This type of film is mostly seen in romantic comedies. The characters(in this case Dan and Vicki with her kids) meet, They don't know/trust each other at first but soon they adore each other. This has been seen countless times and is also unbelievable. No mother would leave her children with a stranger(unless they were on the crazy side).
"Old Dogs" is just below 90 minutes and today that is considered a short film. What makes this weird is that it seems as if they try to cram everything into the 90 minutes. The actors deliver their lines quickly, the scenes go by quickly, the events and actors themselves literally move quickly and it just comes across as weird. It was apparent that the editing is sloppy when you see the camera flashing back and forth several times in ten seconds of film.
Now I believe their is only one thing that makes this film a little enjoyable. "Old Dogs" is marketed as a comedy and it is indeed pretty funny. The main thing in this film is slapstick comedy. People getting hit, injured, and ran into is the kind of humor that "Old Dogs" relies on. Some of the lines are funny, events that took place are humorous, and pretty much the whole film kept me laughing and it keeps the film from being downright horrible.
"Old Dogs" is just not the most entertaining film that has been released this year. OK script, OK acting, bad plot, bad pacing, and finally good comedy. Sadly you saw that there was only one "good" element in the film and that's why "Old Dogs" gets a one and a half stars out of four.
"Old Dogs" had a running time of 88 minutes and is rated PG for some mild rude humor.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Happy Thanksgiving
Hello to all and Happy Thanksgiving. I hope everyone has a great holiday weekend. As for films action junkies can check out "Ninja Assassin", families can check out "Old Dogs"(although I heard that it was HORRIBLE!! However, I will still review it if time allows), and there are a few other films on limited release like "The Road", "Me and Orson Welles"(see this if you can), and "Fantastic Mr. Fox" is now playing everywhere. Have a great week!
Monday, November 23, 2009
The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Last November the vampire phenomena "Twilight"(based on Stephenie Meyer's hit book series) was released in theaters. Many teens loved it, critics hated it, I for one thought it to be one of the most poorly done films ever; but a guilty pleasure more or less. Now a year later, the sequel to the hit film was released and I thought it was going to be a tad better than the first but still nothing special. Well I was pleasantly surprised for what was shown to me in this action packed sequel, "The Twilight Saga: New Moon."
In the film we return to the town of Forks, Washington where Bella Swan(the human played by Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen(the vampire played by Robert Pattinson) continue to live their happy lives together. We also see Jacob(the soon to be werewolf played by Taylor Lautner) who is still trying to win Bella's affection but for now is just sitting on the side as a friend. It's Bella's birthday and she travels over to the Cullen's home for her party where she accidentally cuts her finger. The blood causes one of Edward's brothers to attack her but Edward makes sure she isn't harmed. The next day Edward makes the decision to leave Bella so that she will stay safe from harm. Heartbroken, Bella falls into depression and cuts herself off from life until she decides to start visiting and eventually falling for her old friend, Jacob. This is where the movie truly begins.
Right off the bat I can say that almost every element in "New Moon" surpassed "Twilight" from the music, to the acting, to the CGI. While the three main actors, Stewart, Pattinson, and Lautner, still have a ways to go in acting, their performances have improved and are good enough to carry on the film. The best acting comes in the climax of the film where Bella and Edward meet the self-proclaimed vampire rulers know as the Volturi. These characters(who are presented as the antagonists) have the best lines and best scenes in the film. Actors/actresses that were cast as these roles included Michael Sheen as Aro, the main leader, Dakota Fanning as Jane, a guard that can torture others with illusions of pain, and Jamie Campbell Bower as Caius, one of the leaders. Theses actors also acted as "scene savers". For instance, when someone says something cheesy or if something awkward would happen, these characters save the scene from being bad.
"New Moon is packed with action which was something "Twilight" didn't have. Of course with the bringing in of werewolves you have to have several fights scenes showing what they can do. There are several fight/chase sequences with the wolves in which they fight vampires and even sometimes themselves. The CGI for the wolves is impressive however I would have enjoyed it more if the showed a little more detail in their transformation. However, when in their full form, they look very cool and add another interesting realm of fantasy to the film.
The CGI as already stated above was a large step up from the first film. In "Twilight" everything looked blurry, messy, and cheap(which it was). In "New Moon" you can tell that more money was put into this film. From the vampires to the werewolves everything looks better, however there is still plenty of room for improvement.
The only thing that is barely better than "Twilight" was the cheesy dialogue. Unfortunately the film is still stained with bad lines and awkward situations. Now as I stated this film is very good with saving the scenes that include bad lines. Most of the time when something cheesy happens, something cool or surprising would distract me. Another thing that would happen is when a character would say something that sounds much better than the line before it(this is the case in the Volturi scene). So because of this, the dialogue doesn't ruin the film.
"The Twilight Saga" is an action packed film that will surely please fans of the book and many other teens/young adults. As for adults, I'm not sure I can say the same. My parents personally enjoyed the film but said it wasn't truly special. For the most part this is probably a film that the young will enjoy. None the less, "New Moon" has good acting, action, CGI, and romance that gets me excited for the next film in the series. Two and a half stars out of four.
"The Twilight Saga: New Moon" has a running time of two hours and ten minutes and is rated PG-13 for some violence and action.
In the film we return to the town of Forks, Washington where Bella Swan(the human played by Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen(the vampire played by Robert Pattinson) continue to live their happy lives together. We also see Jacob(the soon to be werewolf played by Taylor Lautner) who is still trying to win Bella's affection but for now is just sitting on the side as a friend. It's Bella's birthday and she travels over to the Cullen's home for her party where she accidentally cuts her finger. The blood causes one of Edward's brothers to attack her but Edward makes sure she isn't harmed. The next day Edward makes the decision to leave Bella so that she will stay safe from harm. Heartbroken, Bella falls into depression and cuts herself off from life until she decides to start visiting and eventually falling for her old friend, Jacob. This is where the movie truly begins.
Right off the bat I can say that almost every element in "New Moon" surpassed "Twilight" from the music, to the acting, to the CGI. While the three main actors, Stewart, Pattinson, and Lautner, still have a ways to go in acting, their performances have improved and are good enough to carry on the film. The best acting comes in the climax of the film where Bella and Edward meet the self-proclaimed vampire rulers know as the Volturi. These characters(who are presented as the antagonists) have the best lines and best scenes in the film. Actors/actresses that were cast as these roles included Michael Sheen as Aro, the main leader, Dakota Fanning as Jane, a guard that can torture others with illusions of pain, and Jamie Campbell Bower as Caius, one of the leaders. Theses actors also acted as "scene savers". For instance, when someone says something cheesy or if something awkward would happen, these characters save the scene from being bad.
"New Moon is packed with action which was something "Twilight" didn't have. Of course with the bringing in of werewolves you have to have several fights scenes showing what they can do. There are several fight/chase sequences with the wolves in which they fight vampires and even sometimes themselves. The CGI for the wolves is impressive however I would have enjoyed it more if the showed a little more detail in their transformation. However, when in their full form, they look very cool and add another interesting realm of fantasy to the film.
The CGI as already stated above was a large step up from the first film. In "Twilight" everything looked blurry, messy, and cheap(which it was). In "New Moon" you can tell that more money was put into this film. From the vampires to the werewolves everything looks better, however there is still plenty of room for improvement.
The only thing that is barely better than "Twilight" was the cheesy dialogue. Unfortunately the film is still stained with bad lines and awkward situations. Now as I stated this film is very good with saving the scenes that include bad lines. Most of the time when something cheesy happens, something cool or surprising would distract me. Another thing that would happen is when a character would say something that sounds much better than the line before it(this is the case in the Volturi scene). So because of this, the dialogue doesn't ruin the film.
"The Twilight Saga" is an action packed film that will surely please fans of the book and many other teens/young adults. As for adults, I'm not sure I can say the same. My parents personally enjoyed the film but said it wasn't truly special. For the most part this is probably a film that the young will enjoy. None the less, "New Moon" has good acting, action, CGI, and romance that gets me excited for the next film in the series. Two and a half stars out of four.
"The Twilight Saga: New Moon" has a running time of two hours and ten minutes and is rated PG-13 for some violence and action.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
2012 In A Nutshell
OK, so most people know that disaster films tend to suck right? Well I walked into the theater expecting nothing but special effects and death but fortunately came out happier than I expected.
In "2012" a father and his kids take a trip together to Yellowstone National Park(which is rumored to soon blow up). At the same time, it just so happens that the Earth's crust is breaking apart and people fear that the apocalypse is at hand. Because of this the government tries to devise a plan to keep everyone safe from harm by building giant ships that can hold hundreds of people and animals. Meanwhile, while the government is sorting out their plan, the innocent family at Yellowstone starts to witness signs of the destruction. This then leads to a number of disaster sequences that include thousands of people dieing and countless cities getting destroyed.
Now of course the special effects were sweet and were basically what made up the film. Other things I wasn't expecting included good acting, comedy, and heart. Sacrifice is immense in "2012". One of the not so swell aspects included the cheesy dialogue and situations. For example, the main character is in a RV that is about to plummet down deep into the Earth but at the last second...we see him crawl out of the giant crevice with no harm done. Bottom line, "2012" is probably worth seeing if you want a fun filled action film with kick-butt CGI. 2 stars out of 4.
In "2012" a father and his kids take a trip together to Yellowstone National Park(which is rumored to soon blow up). At the same time, it just so happens that the Earth's crust is breaking apart and people fear that the apocalypse is at hand. Because of this the government tries to devise a plan to keep everyone safe from harm by building giant ships that can hold hundreds of people and animals. Meanwhile, while the government is sorting out their plan, the innocent family at Yellowstone starts to witness signs of the destruction. This then leads to a number of disaster sequences that include thousands of people dieing and countless cities getting destroyed.
Now of course the special effects were sweet and were basically what made up the film. Other things I wasn't expecting included good acting, comedy, and heart. Sacrifice is immense in "2012". One of the not so swell aspects included the cheesy dialogue and situations. For example, the main character is in a RV that is about to plummet down deep into the Earth but at the last second...we see him crawl out of the giant crevice with no harm done. Bottom line, "2012" is probably worth seeing if you want a fun filled action film with kick-butt CGI. 2 stars out of 4.
Monday, November 9, 2009
A Christmas Carol
Charles Dickens's world famous novella has been retold and remade time and time again throughout the years. Famous actors have portrayed him such as George C. Scott, Patrick Stewart, and now Jim Carrey gets to add his name to the long list. This time however, this film has taken a new turn into the new world of CGI. So, once again, we get to be told the wonderful story that is, "Disney's A Christmas Carol."
First of all, if you don't know the story of Ebenezer Scrooge then I would highly recommend you going to the bookstore and buying a copy since it's one of the most famous Christmas stories of all time. But just to refresh your memory, "A Christmas Story" is a tale about a grouchy, greedy old man named Ebenezer Scrooge(Jim Carrey). Scrooge, after the loss of his business partner name Jacob Marley(Gary Oldman) works his counting house with no other thoughts in mind but money, greed, and more money. The only other man he has to work with is his underpaid clerk Bob Cratchit(also played by Gary Oldman) who Scrooge treats like filth. Scrooge hates just about everything in life but one of the things he hates most is Christmas. This hatred eventually comes back to haunt him(no pun intended) when he is visited by the ghost of Jacob Marley. Jacob has been forced to carry around chains in the afterlife because of his greed and selfishness he had in his life on earth. Jacob tells Scrooge that a way to avoid this fate is to be haunted by three spirits in order to help him realize his faults and to embrace the spirit of Christmas.
Director Robert Zemeckis has been famous for his animation in which the actors actually act out their roles in CGI suits which allows the makers to create the CGI around them. This has been seen in past films like "The Polar Express" and "Beowulf". The same thing is seen in this film and the animation is astounding. First of all, Jim Carrey doesn't only play old Scrooge, but young Scrooge, and all three of the ghosts that haunt him. Garry Oldman also plays several parts that include Jacob Marley, Bob Cratchit, and even Tiny Tim. This is one of the factors that attributes to the creativity of this kind of CGI. It is very interesting to watch these two actors play the different characters. The animation was beautiful , descriptive and wonderfully detailed.
Now most versions of "A Christmas Carol" aren't too dark or scary but that's not the case with this new film. This remake is much more dark and frightening then all the others and actually made me jump in couple scenes(most would call them cheap thrills). I was imagining a young six year old going to see this film. Sure the kid's parents would say its a fun Christmas story but if I was that young, I'd have nightmares for weeks. With all of this said this telling of "A Christmas Carol" is definitely not for the young ones. I was very surprised at the cheap thrills, scary content, and dark thematic elements that this film included.
Out of the several "Christmas Carol" renderings I've seen, it seemed to me like this one was most like the book in terms of what happened and the dialogue. Most of the script seemed like it was taken straight from the book and placed into the film from start to finish. Also, some of the ways that events happened in the film reminded me more of how the book described them. For example, the way the spirits were portrayed(preferably Jacob Marley and the ghost of Christmas past) seemed like a more accurate portrayal then what other films have tried to show(This also means that some of the traits/actions of the spirits are a little creepier then we've seen before). There were only a few scenes included in the movie that the writers took artistic license on. For example, to add a little action to the film, there was a chase sequence shown where Scrooge tries desperately to flee from the ghost of Christmas yet to come(the more demonic of the three) where we see zombie-like creatures rising from the ground trying to slow Scrooge down. While scenes like this one added a little excitement to the film, other scenes included pointless action that I could have done without.
"Disney's A Christmas Carol" is a delightful tale of a hard-hearted man who gets taught the lessons of repentance and humility and in the end it becomes a story of a wonderful transformation that is sure to warm the hearts of all movie goers. Robert Zemeckis has created a visual piece of art that makes the classic story feel more magical than it's predecessors and welcomes us warmly to the upcoming holiday season. Two and a half stars out of four.
"Disney's A Christmas Carol" has a running time of 95 minutes and is rated PG for scary sequences and images.
First of all, if you don't know the story of Ebenezer Scrooge then I would highly recommend you going to the bookstore and buying a copy since it's one of the most famous Christmas stories of all time. But just to refresh your memory, "A Christmas Story" is a tale about a grouchy, greedy old man named Ebenezer Scrooge(Jim Carrey). Scrooge, after the loss of his business partner name Jacob Marley(Gary Oldman) works his counting house with no other thoughts in mind but money, greed, and more money. The only other man he has to work with is his underpaid clerk Bob Cratchit(also played by Gary Oldman) who Scrooge treats like filth. Scrooge hates just about everything in life but one of the things he hates most is Christmas. This hatred eventually comes back to haunt him(no pun intended) when he is visited by the ghost of Jacob Marley. Jacob has been forced to carry around chains in the afterlife because of his greed and selfishness he had in his life on earth. Jacob tells Scrooge that a way to avoid this fate is to be haunted by three spirits in order to help him realize his faults and to embrace the spirit of Christmas.
Director Robert Zemeckis has been famous for his animation in which the actors actually act out their roles in CGI suits which allows the makers to create the CGI around them. This has been seen in past films like "The Polar Express" and "Beowulf". The same thing is seen in this film and the animation is astounding. First of all, Jim Carrey doesn't only play old Scrooge, but young Scrooge, and all three of the ghosts that haunt him. Garry Oldman also plays several parts that include Jacob Marley, Bob Cratchit, and even Tiny Tim. This is one of the factors that attributes to the creativity of this kind of CGI. It is very interesting to watch these two actors play the different characters. The animation was beautiful , descriptive and wonderfully detailed.
Now most versions of "A Christmas Carol" aren't too dark or scary but that's not the case with this new film. This remake is much more dark and frightening then all the others and actually made me jump in couple scenes(most would call them cheap thrills). I was imagining a young six year old going to see this film. Sure the kid's parents would say its a fun Christmas story but if I was that young, I'd have nightmares for weeks. With all of this said this telling of "A Christmas Carol" is definitely not for the young ones. I was very surprised at the cheap thrills, scary content, and dark thematic elements that this film included.
Out of the several "Christmas Carol" renderings I've seen, it seemed to me like this one was most like the book in terms of what happened and the dialogue. Most of the script seemed like it was taken straight from the book and placed into the film from start to finish. Also, some of the ways that events happened in the film reminded me more of how the book described them. For example, the way the spirits were portrayed(preferably Jacob Marley and the ghost of Christmas past) seemed like a more accurate portrayal then what other films have tried to show(This also means that some of the traits/actions of the spirits are a little creepier then we've seen before). There were only a few scenes included in the movie that the writers took artistic license on. For example, to add a little action to the film, there was a chase sequence shown where Scrooge tries desperately to flee from the ghost of Christmas yet to come(the more demonic of the three) where we see zombie-like creatures rising from the ground trying to slow Scrooge down. While scenes like this one added a little excitement to the film, other scenes included pointless action that I could have done without.
"Disney's A Christmas Carol" is a delightful tale of a hard-hearted man who gets taught the lessons of repentance and humility and in the end it becomes a story of a wonderful transformation that is sure to warm the hearts of all movie goers. Robert Zemeckis has created a visual piece of art that makes the classic story feel more magical than it's predecessors and welcomes us warmly to the upcoming holiday season. Two and a half stars out of four.
"Disney's A Christmas Carol" has a running time of 95 minutes and is rated PG for scary sequences and images.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Weekly Update
-It was announced this week that the incredibly popular Terminator franchise will be auctioned off this month. Several studious both big and small have stated their interest in buying the extremely popular sci-fi saga. Whoever owns the franchise will control new films, TV shows, etc. that can be made. The rights to the films are being sold by Halcyon who produced the most recent installment Terminator Salvation. It seems that at the moment we won't be seeing any sequels to the saga for a while. It also seems like...I couldn't care less.
-Big news for the Marvel comic movies this week. It was announced that actor Anthony Hopkins(who's been in too many films to list) will be staring in Thor, a new film about the Norse god of thunder. Hopkins will star as Odin, the father of Thor and Loki(the antagonist). Chris Hemsworth(Star Trek) is set to play Thor, Tom Hiddleston will play Loki, and Natalie Portman(the first three Star Wars films) will play Jane Foster, Thor's love interest. Thor will be released May 20, 2011 which is the same summer as Spider-Man 4 and The First Avenger: Captain America.
-Big news for the Marvel comic movies this week. It was announced that actor Anthony Hopkins(who's been in too many films to list) will be staring in Thor, a new film about the Norse god of thunder. Hopkins will star as Odin, the father of Thor and Loki(the antagonist). Chris Hemsworth(Star Trek) is set to play Thor, Tom Hiddleston will play Loki, and Natalie Portman(the first three Star Wars films) will play Jane Foster, Thor's love interest. Thor will be released May 20, 2011 which is the same summer as Spider-Man 4 and The First Avenger: Captain America.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Prince of Persia
A full weekly update will be up tomorrow but until then, the trailer for one of the biggest movies of next summer had just been released. It's for Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. The film is based off of a huge video game saga.
NOTE: There seems to be a reoccurring problem with the trailer bar when it defaults to a list of videos. I'm trying my best to fix this problem.
NOTE: Sorry but the video bar seems to be not working at the moment. I will try to contact Blogger but until then http://rottentomatoes.com has the Prince of Perisa trailer on their front page.
NOTE: There seems to be a reoccurring problem with the trailer bar when it defaults to a list of videos. I'm trying my best to fix this problem.
NOTE: Sorry but the video bar seems to be not working at the moment. I will try to contact Blogger but until then http://rottentomatoes.com has the Prince of Perisa trailer on their front page.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Michael Jackson's This Is It
It has been twelve years since the King of Pop had gone on a world tour and since then, some thought he had lost his touch, some thought he still had it, and some thought he was just weird due to cases alleging child abuse back in 2005. At the beginning of this year however, Michael announced a comeback tour. Michael stated that, "This is the final curtain call," knowing that this would be his final shot to gain back his fame. Sadly, those words turned out to be more true then anyone would have thought. Michael never intended to have the concert shown on the big screen but after his death in June, it was decided that people needed to see what he worked on with all his energy and will by showing clips of his rehearsals. "Michael Jackson's This Is It" did not disappoint.
The film not only shows us clips of Michael singing 24 of his famous songs(Black or White, Billy Jean, and of course Thriller were my favorites) but also shows us glimpses of backstage work, sound checks, video shooting(for visual parts of the show), and several interviews with those who worked with Michael. Let me say before going on that this combination of greatly organized shots came together to create an amazing documentary that was dazzling to witness. The King of Pop hadn't lost any of his talent. He still had a great voice and of course his sweet set of dance moves which he used from start to end with the same energy people remember from years ago.
It seems that Michael's vision for the show wasn't only a concert, but part film, part concert, part Broadway, and part visual awe. For several songs including Thriller, Michael basically recreated his world famous music-video in which they shot a video of the undead crawling from their tombs in 3-D. After Michael sings the first verse of the song, the zombies jump out and they perform the dance everyone wanted to learn back in the 80s. Other songs like Black or White, have added on portions(which happens in most concerts). In this song's case, two incredibly talented guitarists come forward and perform about two minutes of guitar solo madness. Visual aspects like fire, sparks, lighting, and wind were highly integrated throughout the show.
One thing that I enjoyed seeing was how Michael interacted with the band, other workers, and director Kenny Ortega who directed the "High School Musical" films. It seemed to me that everyone included Kenny treated Michael like a god by making sure all of his needs and wants for the show were taken care of. Don't take this the wrong way, Michael didn't seem full of himself at all in this film and also seemed very grateful and compassionate towards all of his co-workers.
Of course all Jackson fans will probably feel sad as they watch Michael sing, perform, and put his all into his show. I personally felt bad that everyone else couldn't see this masterpiece which would have no doubt given him the fame and success he wanted. I was amazed at the work that all of the people put into this show and I came out of the theater a true Jackson fan. Michael wanted to once again touch the world with his music and spread the message of love to all. Near the end of the film, the crew came together and Michael gave a speech which ended with the words, "Love is important, love each other, we're all one."
"This Is It" was truly magnificent and would have been the most amazing stage show/concert ever put on by an artist. My only regret seeing this film is that fans will never be able to see it in it's entirety. Michael showed us that he still had it all and he poured out all his strength so that he could dazzle us all with his lyrics. I was impressed 100% with this concert film. R.I.P. Michael...you did well. 5 stars out of 5.
"Michael Jackson's This Is It" has a running time of 112 minutes. It is rated PG for some suggestive choreography and scary images.
The film not only shows us clips of Michael singing 24 of his famous songs(Black or White, Billy Jean, and of course Thriller were my favorites) but also shows us glimpses of backstage work, sound checks, video shooting(for visual parts of the show), and several interviews with those who worked with Michael. Let me say before going on that this combination of greatly organized shots came together to create an amazing documentary that was dazzling to witness. The King of Pop hadn't lost any of his talent. He still had a great voice and of course his sweet set of dance moves which he used from start to end with the same energy people remember from years ago.
It seems that Michael's vision for the show wasn't only a concert, but part film, part concert, part Broadway, and part visual awe. For several songs including Thriller, Michael basically recreated his world famous music-video in which they shot a video of the undead crawling from their tombs in 3-D. After Michael sings the first verse of the song, the zombies jump out and they perform the dance everyone wanted to learn back in the 80s. Other songs like Black or White, have added on portions(which happens in most concerts). In this song's case, two incredibly talented guitarists come forward and perform about two minutes of guitar solo madness. Visual aspects like fire, sparks, lighting, and wind were highly integrated throughout the show.
One thing that I enjoyed seeing was how Michael interacted with the band, other workers, and director Kenny Ortega who directed the "High School Musical" films. It seemed to me that everyone included Kenny treated Michael like a god by making sure all of his needs and wants for the show were taken care of. Don't take this the wrong way, Michael didn't seem full of himself at all in this film and also seemed very grateful and compassionate towards all of his co-workers.
Of course all Jackson fans will probably feel sad as they watch Michael sing, perform, and put his all into his show. I personally felt bad that everyone else couldn't see this masterpiece which would have no doubt given him the fame and success he wanted. I was amazed at the work that all of the people put into this show and I came out of the theater a true Jackson fan. Michael wanted to once again touch the world with his music and spread the message of love to all. Near the end of the film, the crew came together and Michael gave a speech which ended with the words, "Love is important, love each other, we're all one."
"This Is It" was truly magnificent and would have been the most amazing stage show/concert ever put on by an artist. My only regret seeing this film is that fans will never be able to see it in it's entirety. Michael showed us that he still had it all and he poured out all his strength so that he could dazzle us all with his lyrics. I was impressed 100% with this concert film. R.I.P. Michael...you did well. 5 stars out of 5.
"Michael Jackson's This Is It" has a running time of 112 minutes. It is rated PG for some suggestive choreography and scary images.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)