Day 81- Movie 76. Stowaway (1936)

After watching five bad movies in a row, I decided to switch things up a bit. I went with a film from the 1930s, starring Shirley Temple. Now, I take pride in the fact that I've seen a lot of movies. And yet, despite all my efforts to watch a wide variety of films, I've never actually gotten around to seeing a Shirley Temple movie before. That is somewhat shocking, considering Temple is perhaps the most famous child star of all time. She was the biggest box office draw for several years in a row. Her movies are famous, and yet, I never watched a single one. I was determined to end that tonight.

I chose Stowaway, which is not regarding as one of Temple's best movies, but a good one nevertheless. It was certainly an interesting viewing experience. I was very intrigued to see what all the fuss was about Shirley Temple. I can see why audiences in the 1930s would love her. Temple overflows with squeaky-clear wholesomeness. Audiences couldn't get enough of her. She was charismatic and had real screen presence- she could sing, dance, and act. She had a glowing smile, which I'm sure people just found adorable. She was the perfect child actor.

And yet, I couldn't fully buy into her performance. I'll admit her sugary sweet goodness got a little tiresome for me. There's nothing wrong with having a precocious girl brimming with positiveness, but it just got to be a little much. It was almost hard to believe. I wish they had showed a little restraint with her character instead of letting those good vibes overtake all aspects of the film. Still, you have to respect Temple for delivering what audiences so clearly desired.

This film felt like it was probably a bit of a misstep. I'm sure Temple's other films are better. In this movie, she is an orphan who grew up in China and befriends an American playboy and an engaged woman. The story is fine (if predictable), but there's some big flaws in this film. For one, Temple spouts off these bizarre Chinese proverbs throughout the entire movie. It's really quite strange, and gets annoying rather quickly. She came on really strong anyway, but the constant riddled proverbs proved to be too much.

While I didn't love this movie, I suppose it is mostly harmless. It mixes different genres quite well- musical, comedy, romance, and even a little drama. The story is enjoyable, although the movie telegraphs the ending pretty clearly. Speaking of the ending, it's a bit absurd. It all started to fall apart for me a bit the last 5 minutes. I guess this is a movie that certainly has strengths, but unfortunately, has some obvious flaws that really hurt it.

I would give Stowaway a 6.5/10. I actually thought I would have liked this better, but the film's flaws proved to be too troublesome. I just couldn't overlook them, and they prevent the film from achieving its full potential.

I'm interesting in seeing more Shirley Temple movies. She certainly has unbounded energy, but it needs to be controlled to a certain extent. It strayed into annoying territory here. It doesn't surprise me that her career dried up as she got older- her cuteness could only last so long. She loses effectiveness the older that she gets. I suppose that's why she made four movies a year while she was still young. You have to strike while the iron is hot. Anyway, this was an interesting film, but certainly not a great one.

Well, I did my 3 movies for today. I'm very tired, and I'm still 5 movies behind pace. I'm running out of days (is it really only 19 days away?). That means tomorrow needs to be another big day. I need to sleep and rest my eyes, or this constant movie watching will drive me crazy. I should reread this to make sure I didn't make any typing errors, but I honestly don't have the energy. Forgive me if I made any mistakes. Night.

Day 81- Movie 75. Jason X (2002)

So they move the Friday the 13th franchise 455 years into the future, and they still come up with an awful movie. That is pretty disappointing. After the terrible Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday, the franchise took a much needed 9 year break. The franchise had grown stale and worse and worse over time. Stopping the constant stream of bad movies was a terrific idea. And then, at some point, someone came up with a "brilliant" idea- let's bring Jason back, but this time, put him in the future!

I suppose in some way, this was a good move. Jason certainly grew tiresome in the present, so perhaps he would be more effective in the future. I kind of see that logic. I'm not sure this has ever been done before- take an established character and set him in a new movie, 455 years in the future. I appreciate this film trying something different and trying to be original. This franchise badly needs originality and creativity.

Unfortunately, it's not enough just to change the setting if you're going to deliver the same stupid movie anyway. I enjoyed next to nothing about this film. The future setting is cool, but it's the same exact storyline- people are killed one by one in various gruesome ways before a final showdown that destroys Jason forever... or does it? It's completely predictable.

I also have the say that the movie dropped the ball on the future tech. The script was very poorly written. So, it's 455 years in the future and we have technology that can immediately reattach a severed limb, but a spaceship doesn't have a central computer that could locate lifeforms on board? Maybe I'm getting a bit too geeky here, but the technology of the future was inconsistent and it made no sense at all. It only contributed to the absolutely moronic plot.

I just think this movie is so stupid. There's almost nothing that happens here that has any basis in reality, no matter what year it is. We have characters who are about to die who are making wisecracks. That's really stupid. We have a character who gets scared because he hears someone behind him, and thinking it is someone playing a trick on him, puts earphones in and turns back to work. What rational human being would do something so stupid? Ugh, it's so frustrating when people make a movie purely to make money and don't take the time to actually consider things like logic or reality.

I actually had hopes that this movie might have been different- that it would have reversed the trend of a franchise that has disappointed for decades. It didn't. To be fair, I definitely appreciate any shot at doing something different or taking a risk. Setting this film in 2455 was cool, even if it ultimately didn't matter. Besides a nice try with that, this film fails on almost every single level. I'll give this bomb a 5/10.

What a stupid movie.

Day 81- Movie 74. Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010)

In my opinion, the Resident Evil movies are remarkably consistent. None of them are actually good, but they're all pretty decent movies. There are completely absurd moments, huge plot holes, and laughable dialogue. But, there's also fairly impressive action sequences in every film as well. I actually gave all three films the same rating (something that doesn't happen very often)- 6.5. There was always things I liked, and things I did not.

And so, that brings us to the fourth Resident Evil movie. Alice is back again, ready to bring the fight to the Umbrella Corporation while avoiding the marauding horde of zombies always ready for a meal. The story is basically just a slight variation of the previous movies. This might have been okay, because I'd be happy as long as the film was entertaining. And yet, unfortunately, this film is the weakest of the franchise. It's not that this movie does anything especially worse than previous installments, but the whole thing is just getting tiresome.

The Resident Evil movies have always been poorly written (sorry Paul W.S. Anderson). There's always plot holes, gaps in logic and so many far-fetched events. I can go with this as long as the movie still manages to entertain. Unfortunately, in Afterlife, there are just some completely ridiculous moments. At one point, a door opens and a character says, "It's a trap." And immediately, all three walk through the door. That's just lazy writing. There are so many weak moments like this throughout the film. Ultimately, it made this movie hard to take seriously.

While I didn't hate this movie, I started to tire of the franchise. There was enough here to support three movies- I'm not sure about four. Now, I did enjoy certain parts of the movie. There's something fun about watching people fire automatic weapons at hundreds of zombies in an attempt to stay alive. That doesn't change. This film was 3D, but the 3D scenes in 2D weren't too distracting. I appreciated that. There are some very cool action scenes in this movie. I loved that aspect of it. While none of this movie really matters, it's fun in a mindless, effortless way.

Still, Resident Evil: Afterlife is a step down from previous installments. It's not a huge step down, but I just couldn't give this film a 6.5. I'll give this movie a 6/10.

So, if they decide to make a fifth (5 movies, my god) Resident Evil movie, I'll probably end up seeing it. However, if this is the last film in the franchise, I wouldn't mind that, either.

Day 80- Movie 73. Examined Life (2008)

I don't watch documentaries very often, but I've generally impressed with the genre. Documentaries are typically made with care by people who are passionate about the subject being examined. They are a terrific way to entertain, but also to inform. With that in mind, I was excited about watching Examined Life, a film that turns the camera on some of the most well known philosophers today, and lets them wax on about subjects dear to their heart. I was excited to watch a thought-provoking, intellectually stimulating film. Unfortunately, this movie sucks.

The biggest problem I have is not with the content, but with the way the movie was filmed. Director Astra Taylor is not a very good filmmaker. The movie is structured around seven or eight philosophers, who have about 10 minutes each to talk about something they care about in the field of philosophy. This part is fine. However, Taylor films them while walking down busy streets in NYC, riding in a car, walking along a lake, etc. The problem is that this is very visually distracting. I was trying to listen to people convey some very brainy, difficult to grasp concepts while hearing background noise and watching people walk past, occasionally looking at the camera, or any of a hundred other things people do. It was so, so hard to stay focused because my eyes were pulled around the screen. I thought this ruined the movie.

There were, though, other issues. The quality of the interviews are not all the same. Some interviews were poignant and fascinating to listen to- others were dry, all over the place, and otherwise impossible to follow (perhaps not for people smarter than I, but I got lost). Several scenes are nearly unwatchable. I wish these philosophers were more interested in trying to educate, and less interested in trying to sound as intellectual as possible. These interviewees might be brilliant, but brilliance alone is not enough. They need to be able to communicate effectively, especially to someone without a PhD in philosophy. I'm not trying to suggest they should dumb down their message, but talking over most people's level of intellect is not a positive thing. I got bored easily.

I do appreciate that this film got me thinking about some of the more esoteric, abstract elements of what it means to be a thinking, rational human. I appreciate intellect, and these philosophers obviously have it. There were some very fascinating thought exercises going on here, and it is nice to see passionate people speak intelligently about something they care so much about. I have no doubt that this movie probably kills in philosophy PhD classes. Unfortunately, for the common man, this movie is inaccessible, boring, and distracting. I love the idea of this film, I simply hated the execution.

For this reason, I'm giving Examined Life a 5/10, and I have to say that this is one of the worst documentaries I've ever seen. For a remarkably consistent genre, this one stands out as a complete miss. Director Astra Taylor certainly created something here, but it's not something for which I want any part. This movie could have been powerful and influential. Instead, it's stodgy, boring and pretentious.

Day 80- Movie 72. Darkness Falls (2003)

I'm not afraid to admit this movie scares me. I'm not saying that it will keep me up at night or make me afraid of the dark or anything to that extent, but the movie is hard for me to watch. The Tooth Fairy just so creepy, and the film does such a good job with the sound effects that I just feel very uneasy throughout the whole thing. I've seen a lot of horror movies, and I barely bat an eye at them. I don't typically feel uncomfortable with horror of any kind, but this movie just freaks me out.

The story is a bit crazy. There's basically a deranged tooth fairy who haunts the town of Darkness Falls. If you see her, she's determined to kill you. However, she can only get you if you venture away from the light and into the darkness. Just writing all that makes me realize how ridiculous the whole film is. The story is pretty absurd, and I recognized this even as I watched it. The plot is filled with cliches, so many unrealistic things happen, and the dialogue is occasionally laughable. This is a weak movie, except for the fact that it's pretty creepy. Plus, the first 15 minutes is about as uncomfortable as I've felt watching a horror movie.

I like movies where people have to stay in the light. I think it's a cool concept, and it creates some obvious but thrilling moments. I think the light/dark aspect was easily the best part of Pitch Black. It's fun to watch people trying to stay in the light so that they don't die. This movie uses that pretty effectively, although it does occasionally go way too over-the-top.

So this movie has wooden acting, weak, one-dimensional characters, a poor story, huge gaps of logic and reason, and other assorted flaws. There's so many reasons here for me to hate this movie. And yet, I can't bring myself to hate it. The reason is because the Tooth Fairy is just so damn scary.

I love that this film willingly shows us so much of the supernatural entity that is causing death and destruction. Too often, films are afraid to do this- they are afraid the ghost or goblin or whatever will be too silly if you see it too much on screen. We only get the faintest glimpses here and there. That can certainly be effective, but there's something inherently awesome about a film willing to give the villain some serious screen time. In this film, it makes all the difference in the world. The Tooth Fairy just looks so scary with her porcelain mask and billowing dark robes. She looks like Death itself, which is pretty freaky. On top of this, the sound effects people did a fantastic job of delivering some truly chilling, unforgettable screams and groans that were pretty chilling to hear. The visual aspects combined with the sound makes the Tooth Fairy a very creepy character indeed.

I usually hate stupid horror movies, and by most accounts, Darkness Falls could be considered one. I completely sympathize with anyone who hates this movie. I can definitely understand why someone would. And yet, for me, I just feel too off-balance and creeped out to hate it. The movie created emotion in me (which is what the great movies do) It might not have been one of actual fear, but I felt legitimately uncomfortable. I jumped several times, and I felt nervous while watching it. (and this is actually the second time I've seen it- I saw it in theaters in '03). I felt like this movie did a good job of trying to be scary.

So, the film's flaws prevent it from being a good movie, but this is still far better than it had any reason to be. If you told me I'd feel scared watching a film about a demonic tooth fairy, I would have laughed at you. And yet, this film pulled it off. I really think this is an underrated horror movie. I didn't love it, but I have to admit it was memorable. I'd give this film a 6.5/10.

Anyone else want to own up to a movie scaring you? For me, the ultimate one was the first time I saw The Ring, in theaters. I was glancing all around me the whole way back during that long, dark drive from Parkersburg to Marietta. That movie freaked me out, and is still one of my all-time favorite horror movies.

Day 79- Movie 71. Machete (2010)

Did we really need this movie? I mean, maybe, but I'm not convinced. On the one hand, I think the idea of basing a feature length film on a fake trailer from another movie is a clever, original idea. On the other hand, basing a movie on a fake trailer is a pretty stupid idea (I know the fake trailer was itself based on the fully written screenplay by Robert Rodriguez, but still). I suppose people who love B movies and exploitation films will probably like this movie. I personally found it absurd, nonsensical, and overall, not a very good movie at all.

However, it's hard to judge a film when it goes so out of the way to be purposely ridiculous. The film features some of the cheesiest dialogue I've ever heard, more gruesome violence than is necessary, and so many absurd moments that I completely lost track. And yet, that's exactly what this film was trying to achieve. So, in that light, you could call this movie a success.

And yet, for me, it's not a complete success. The story is about a Mexican ex-federale, Machete, who tracks down a whole host of bad men and kills them for various reasons. It's all very confusing and not exactly entertaining. Well, I suppose if mindless, nonstop violence is entertaining, then you may be entertained. I personally prefer some reason for violence, which this film wasn't interested in providing. There's definitely a story involved, but it almost doesn't really matter. The film is all about violence.

As much as I want to hate this movie, I understand that it's not that simple. I really believe that to a certain extent, movies should be judged based on what they were trying to be. You can't rate a movie like Machete the same way you'd rate an Academy Award contender, because this film was never trying to be that kind of movie. While I can't say I'm the biggest fan of exploitation movies, this movie was a pretty effective one. It doesn't really matter if that's the kind of movie I like or not- that's what Machete is. You have to respect that.

As far as the cast, I suppose you have to given Danny Trejo credit for bringing Machete to life. He's not a fantastic actor, but he was the only person who could play this character effectively. I don't have any criticisms of him. The rest of the cast is impressive, although they don't all work as well. Robert De Niro, Jeff Fahey, and Steven Seagal all have meaty enough parts to be pretty enjoyable to watch. Jessica Alba isn't a great actress, and that shows here. Michelle Rodriguez was pretty good, and I have to say I've been increasingly impressed with her as an actress, even in a film like this. I love Cheech Marin, and I loved him in this film. He greatly helped it and I'm glad he was in it. Lindsay Lohan had no real point to her character and was mostly a huge waste of time. Big surprise there.

I admit I'm struggling with this film. On the one hand, it's a loud, obnoxious, absurd, extremely violent, offensive, ultimately pointless movie. And yet, that's exactly what it was trying to be. How do you judge that? I have to say that I didn't really enjoy Machete, but I couldn't completely hate it, either. I want to give this film a 5.5, but I have to admit it's probably better than that. While not good, I'll give it a 6/10.

If you liked Grindhouse: Death Proof and Grindhouse: Planet Terror, you'll probably love Machete. If you didn't see those movies or didn't like them, then I can't imagine why you'd want to watch this movie. It certainly isn't for everyone.

I apologize for the confusing, nonsensical parts of this review. However, you simply can't spend 105 minutes watching a movie like Machete and have any hope of thinking straight.

Day 78- Movie 70. Hook (1991)

I used to absolutely love Hook when I was younger. I remember watching it over and over again. Since that time, I haven't seen this film at all. It's been at least 15 years since I last saw it. I was interested to see how it held up over time. I can say that although the movie is still very good, it wasn't quite as good as I remembered.

I do believe Steven Spielberg deserves credit for creating such an elaborate, impressive world here. Neverland has never looked so good. This film was nominated for 5 Academy Awards- Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Visual Effects, Best Makeup, and Best Original Song. Four out of the five relate to the visual look of the film- it's certainly impressive by 1991 standards.

If you don't remember, the film is about an adult Peter Pan (Robin Williams), all grown up and has completely forgotten about his adventures in Neverland. When his children are kidnapped by Captain Hook (Dustin Hoffman), he must venture into Neverland, remember who he really is, and save them. The film is pretty fascinating because of that central question- "What if the boy who would never grow up actually did grow up?" I always think it is fascinating when familiar stories are given a new infusion (that's probably why I enjoyed Wicked- the book and the play). I loved watching the continued adventures of Peter and Captain Hook.

The cast is pretty good. Robin Williams works well as the adult Peter. He's more reserved than in many films, but he does have the opportunity to showcase some of his trademark humor and energy. I liked him in the role. I loved Dustin Hoffman as Captain Hook, although he did go a bit over-the-top with the performance. It was cool seeing Julia Roberts in a smaller role as Tinkerbell. It's also fun to see Gwyneth Paltrow in an extremely small, very early career role. I even have to mention Bob Hoskins, who's pretty excellent in a small role.

There's a few aspects of this movie that I didn't like, and wouldn't have been aware of as a 10 or 11 year old. It's actually pretty disturbing to think about Peter Pan abandoning the lost boys for decades, returning, getting their leader killed, and then abandoning them again. It's a bit disturbing. The story itself is occasionally hard to believe. The story definitely could have been tighter and more effective. The movie surprisingly long, at 144 minutes. It needed to be shorter.

Still, I loved Hook as a kid, and I still very much enjoy it today. The film is flawed, but it's still a pretty good adventure that gives a new spin to a familiar story and characters. I'd give this film a solid 7.5/10.

Well, the week is half over. I've managed to at least not lose any more ground. My weekend is looking busier than I expected, but I absolutely need to get caught up. I finally reached 70 films, which is a pretty big accomplishment. On the other hand, I'm still 8 days behind. I don't think there's any chance I can get all the way caught up by the end of the weekend, but I certainly need to close the gap.