THE HOST by jaiskizzy

the gist: toxic chemicals + han river = malevolent mutant monster! it's a fine sunny day in seoul and a bunch of people are happily speding the rest of their ordinary lives on the banks of the han river. probably disgusted by this humdrum moment, a humongous mutated tadpole shows up to stir things up a bit. after trashing the place and scaring the bejeezus out of the koreans, it leaves as fast as it came, taking a little girl with it. the girl's grandpa, dad, uncle and aunt then goes on a mission to rescue her from the icky clutches of the amphibian beast. will they be able to find her? will the monster be stopped? will smith? (no, he's not in the movie)

the reaction: allow me to dig up yet another childhood memory that somewhat relates to this review. i remember when i was a kid, i watched a pinoy horror movie about a giant crocodile in a rural setting. i cant recall anything else about it but im pretty sure it was crap. end of childhood memory. anyways, when i first heard of the host last year, i thought it was about a game show where contestants are killed by the main mic guy. but it wasn't (but wouldn't that have been a cool horror fick too, eh?) so, why is this entitled the host? well, apparently, the beast also carries a virus and anyone who comes in contact with it and survives will carry it as well and eventually pass it on and cause an epidemic. this subplot is well weaved into the main storyline, which is of course about the monster. no, wait, this movie is actually about family, and the monster is an extra. really. it's good since it's a take off from the usual monster movies where we're teased by glimpses of the monster for three quarters of the film. of course, this trick works because then we go down on our knees when the monster is revealed in its entirety, but joon-ho bong decided to go the other way. the mutant tadpole appears very early in broad daylight and we see it in full, with no gimmicks, just as it probably would happen in real life. another great feature is how the monster never really gets all the attention. like i said, this is more of a family movie and the monster merely part of the supporting cast. an example of this is when the little girl is snatched. the girl is in the foreground, the monster is in the back. focus on the girl, blur on the monster as it gallops towards her. but, no, it veers and goes off screen, and as if just an afterthought, it takes the girl with its tail and pulls her off screen. whoa.

awesome, awesome acting by the dumb father with the colored-hair and little girl. our actors just dont have the juice that these korean actors have. ive seen a number of korean flicks and man, they're just remarkable. they don't just act role, they become it. even that little boy that the girl meets in the beast's lair was freakin amazing, especially in the scene where he peed his pants. i have many favorite scenes, one is that tracking shot where the dad is in the foreground running, chasing after the monster in the background. i also liked the office building sequence with the drunkard uncle. and the scenes in the quarantine camp. fuck, who am i kidding? i like everything! and that giant tadpole thing. amazing. you'd almost believe it wasn't cgi. and it's not just the monster itself, but how it interacts with the real world. if you've ever seen anything pinoy-made that had something cgi jump into the water, you'd see how fake the splash is. none of that here, folks. simply seamless special effects. and the ending, although a little bit farfectched, is pure genius. id ruin it if i told you how it went, but i'll give a hint: big sister losing the archery competition. oh and by the way, this movie is partly a comedy, too.

a must-see mutant monster movie most likely you'd like like i did. i just wish that hollywood sees this as a challenge to come up with a better one, and not push through with the planned remake. out of ideas, guys? well, you should ring me up 'cause ive got plenty.

the good: the movie.
the bad: the idea of a remake.
the ugly: that giant mutant tadpole monster thing.
the verdict: 10 molotov cocktails.

bloodzilla.

p.s. in the 1st asian film awards, the host bagged four: best actor, best cinematography, best special effects, and (no surprise here) best film. bravo!

Read More

300 by obi

Adapted from a graphic novel, "300" depicted the historical Battle of Thermopylae during the ancient Hellenic period. The story (if there's much to recount) revolved around the Spartan King Leonidas, who summoned 300 of his best Spartan warriors to stall the impending invasion of the Persians so that a bigger contingent of the Greek army could reinforce the city-states' defense. Despite prohibition by the Law of Sparta, foreboding of the Oracle, and unawareness of the Spartan Council, the King marched to war upon the mountain pass of Thermopylae, facing overwhelming odds and defeating a hefty number of the invading forces. Back in Sparta, the Queen Gorgo was fighting her own battle... to request the Council to send backup to his husband's warband. To no avail! The Spartan army's eventual collapse started when a Spartan outcast, Ephialtes, defected to the Persian God-King Xerxes and divulged a secret passage through the mountains which gave the Persian soldiers an advantage to outmaneuver the dwindling Spartan numbers. In the end, King Leonidas and his 300 warriors were literally butchered to submission before the Greek reinforcement arrived.

The movie doesn't have much to flaunt in regards to the storyline but the special effects, film settings, and costumes are awesome! When asked by my peers what I could say about the movie, I just tell em, "It's like a 'dark Troy' without an interesting plotline". It was jampacked with battle scenes, all of em are worth the effort of the filmmakers and are among the best I've seen so far. I like how the cinematographers conveyed Frank Miller's* sinister appeal on his graphic novels into the movie. Everything has a dark, gloomy theme on it that I could feel the melancholic air like I was inside the film itself.

*Frank Miller is the author of the graphic novel of the same title, where the film was based.

I see not much of a flaw on how the actors portrayed their roles. Gerard Butler (King Leonidas) has been very convincing with his part as a stubborn leader, and so as his leading lady Lena Headey (Queen Gorgo) who was very effective playing the part of a bold wife (no pun intended, you'll see in the movie why), willing to confront anything for what she upholds and for the love of his husband and land. Special kudos goes to Rodrigo Santoro who was the God-King Xerxes of Persia in the film. He acted the part so well but I dunno if they really intended him to look and act implicatively like a homosexual.

Summing it up, the aesthetic brilliance of the movie has well compensated with the simplicity of the story. Epic lovers will sure dig this one but those that are indifferent with gore and violence should rather not try to watch it. Six gulamans.

Read More

MONSTER HOUSE by jaiskizzy

in a seemingly peaceful neighborhood there is a house, inhabited by a scary mean old man who terrorizes kids that step on his front lawn. dj is a kid who lives right across and he monitors everything that happens around the house. when his fat friend chowder's basketball ends up on the house's area of responsibility, they retrieve it only to come face to face with the gruesome geriatric ghoul himself... who suddenly has a heart attack and dies. soon, the house becomes haunted and not the way we all know haunted houses. seemingly possessed by the old man's ghost, the house roars to life with window eyes, wood plank teeth and a carpet tongue. who you gonna call? ghostbusters!

i really think that just about every kid, especially in my generation, had their own nebbercracker and their “adventure” stories to tell about him. there’s the old neighbor who owned a fruit tree and would come out with a shotgun if kids dared to climb it. (and then there’s that really bad one we usually see in the news, he who cant keep his hands to himself…) mine was my mother’s grumpy old father, but not as menacing as nebbercracker. that was eons ago, when he was still alive and strong, and me a young boy who still played in the dirt with my cousins. we weren’t really that afraid of him, making him mad was actually a bit of a laughing matter for us. remember those little firecrackers with string on either end that when you pulled them, the firecracker would go off? well, i tied one of those to the bathroom door while gramps was taking a bath and when he came out, boom! my cousins ratted me out and i got a good whacking then. anyways, the point of this flashback is that monster house is a movie that everyone can relate to, and it doesn’t just end with the villainous old man. take for example dj, damn i was that kid. all grown up but still treated like a baby. then there’s chowder, didn’t we all have that kind of friend at least once? and of course, pretty girl jenny, we all had (and still have) our jennies. that one girl you had the biggest crush on and gave you your first and subsequent pimples.

because of this, monster house is a refreshing take on the cgi genre. all we’ve seen recently are talking animals, talking cars, more talking animals, and talking ants (again?!). kids are eating up these movies like free candy and it was a brave move to take the path least treaded, the people behind monster house deserve kudos for that reason alone. and they came up with an animated movie that is almost real, where the kids acted like real kids, and the characters and situations mirrored the ones in our own lives. the only other movie i could compare this to is goonies, and that was live action. well, you know how most kiddie adventure movies are, kids are in trouble and the adults wont listen or believe them and so they face the perils themselves. a tried and tested formula put to good use the way we haven’t seen it. one different thing they did here was the person the kids turn to for guidance: a pizza guy named skull who has all the high scores in an arcade game. to them, he is the all-knowing one and the only one who would care about the sht they’re in. that’s some great writing if you ask me.

the voice acting was perfect. only ones i recognized were steve buscemi as nebbercracker and maggie gyllenhal as the babysitter, but that doesn’t mean the others weren’t great. because they were and they fit the roles like condoms. take for example pixar’s cars. cars don’t talk but after the movie, you might say that a talking car could sound like that. in monster house, dj and the rest of the characters sound exactly like they look and the way they would if you bumped into them in real life. and i need not even discuss how good the animation is, every cgi movie that comes out after the last one just ups the ante that im guessing there will be virtually no use for real actors in the near future (which i honestly hope never happens, at least not until jessica alba bares it all). for me, chowder seemed the most realistic of them. his movements were just… right. there’s a very noticeably big difference between a cartoony turn of the head and humanly real turn of the head. chowder, and the rest of the “cast”, had the latter. my only gripe about this movie are the unreal parts, like the inside of the house (the outside, i bought. but the inside was just too much. an uvula?!) and the unbelievable climactic end sequences. they should have retained the realism a bit more. good twist ending though. oh and if you pay attention, there are some good jokes in there that only an adult would get.

this movie was the brainchild of a guy fresh out of film school. good job dude. plus, he was backed up by the best in the business. robert zemeckis and steven spielberg? ‘nuff said.

the good: animation, story, and that freakin house.
the bad: the house’s interior and the over-the-top sequences.
the ugly: the old man’s wife.
the score: 8 bottles of urine.


home skiz home

Read More

DEATH TRANCE by jaiskizzy

a samurai-lookin dude wrecks havoc in a temple and steals a mysterious coffin that carries a myth that it can grant wishes. soon a rumor spreads that a monster of a man is making rounds and killing off people, keeping the heads in a coffin, all the while accompanied by a child. later, a monk arrives at the temple and is sent by the archbishop to find the thief and bring the coffin back. he is given a sword with a handle that resembles a penis and cannot be unsheathed. from there it's fight after fight after fight. who is destined to pull the sword out of its scabbard? why it's entitled death trance, i'll never know. or care. japanese live action anime is the shiznit, baby!

i first used "live action and anime" together when i reviewed another japanese film in the past, casshern (click here if you want to read it). live actors performing anime-type action. in perfect execution. combined with anime-type shots and more or less the same kind of storytelling. well, i guess only the japanese can pull off something like that, anime is theirs anyways, because here's another example of that cinematic splendor. actually, most of the japanese action movies ive come across kinda utilize the same formula one way or another and i guess that's their trademark, same way that high flying kung fu is the trademark of chinses action films. what's the trademark of pinoy action movies? is it the rapid succession of punches to the stomach punctuated by a clap to the ears? the destruction of cars that were obviously taken from the junkyard? or the big warehouse final gunfight/brawl scene? doesnt matter anyways. i mean, there really hasnt been any decent (couldnt use good) pinoy action film recently. or has there been any action film at all?

anyhow, while our local action stars are busy trying to save their carrers on tv, the rest of the world just keeps getting better and better. like the emergence of tony jaa for instance. in japan, tak sakaguchi is one of the top action stars. i first saw him in the movie versus (a good one). death trance is the very much-awaited follow up to that movie, helmed by the same director. they basically have the same approach: most characters are nameless, tak is the best fighter, everyone wants him dead. in death trance however, tak is up against better opponents, worthy of his fighting skills. there's this one woman who kicks his ass, a couple of ninjas, and a group of zombies that fight back. then there's the final battle sequence where he's up against... a goddess. of destruction. cool eh? of course, there are also some characters who are on his side. well not actually allies, they're just drawn by the same purpose: the coffin. there's the monk, and then there's the little girl who resembles rin, sesshoumaru's sidekick in inuyasha. this little girl drinks blood instead of milk. oh yeah, steven seagal's son is there too and he's got a gun. and a sword. and a really stupid looking haircut which is an example of how those weird and cool anime haircuts would look like in real life.

dialgoue's kinda bad, costumes were good, the action, great. tak's fight scenes arent like the usual ones we see in other movies. nothing fancy or outrageous. he just gets it done, punching his way through, beating them with his stick (which turns out to be not just an ordinary stick). oh, and this is one of the few movies ive seen where the punches do connect. tak takes care of business with coolness and arrogance, he just knows he'll be the last man standing. and smiling. when he falls down, he just goes back right up, none of that dramatic slow-mo sht. steven seagal's son does clean house differently though. gun, sword, and at one point he even builds together a rocket launcher out of nowhere. which sorta puts the timeline in modern times right? but there are no buildings and no one's wearing a watch or using a cellphone. they're all dressed like it's the feudal era. must be post-apocalyptic japan. well, wherever or whenever that is, it's not a good idea to go walking alone in the woods if you cant fight, 'cause you aint goin nowhere.

when the end credits roll, tak is named grave although nobody ever calls him that in the movie. i guess the director felt names arent important in this kind of movie, you just remember the characters. unlike in many pinoy movies, the characters' names dont even fit the actor or actress. sheesh. anyways, death trance is a great film if you take it as it is. ask nothing more and you will be rewarded by bottomline mindless but fun dynamic entertainment. else, stay away and watch something like you are the one. eugh!

the good: the hits, the weapons, tak sakaguchi's coolness.
the bad: no back stories, no names, no plot.
the ugly: the throbbing penis sword. and the goddess of destruction didnt look much like a goddess.
the score: 8 chained up coffins.


skizziguchi

Read More

NACHO LIBRE by jaiskizzy

the always funny jack black stars as ignacio, a friar/cook in a mexican orphanage who grew up dreaming of becoming a luchador and a luchador is one who participates in the mexican sport lucha libre. lucha libre is mexican wrestling. anyways, with the diminishing food supply, and the arrvial of the hot nun, sister encarnacion, ignacio steps up to finally fulfill his dream. with the help of esqueleto, he dons a costume and enters the lucha ring as nacho. despite getting their asses kicked, the twosome earn money and soon set their sights on the big leagues. will they succeed? will nacho bang the hot nun in steamy rough forbidden sex? will i stop asking these questions and get on with the review?



the first movie where i first recognized jack black's talents was high fidelity, a love story-ish film starring john cusack. i cant exactly remember his role but he was a record store clerk who had an extensive musically knowledge. i think it was kind of a gay role, not sure, but maybe it's because the only scene i can remember him in is him listening to walking on sunshine. i checked the internet movie database and goodness, this dude has been in a ton of movies before that, in less prominent roles. i'd have to watch some of them again (especially high fidelity. that was a good one) to seek him out. anyways, jack black was born to be funny. he has the face, the body, belly, the wit, the skills, and he uses these to deliver the funniness effectively. he's that friend of your who wouldnt mind making a fool out of himself just to make the group laugh. he made falling in love funny in shallow hal and made us wish he had been our grade school music teacher in school of rock. here in nacho libre, he makes churchlife seem fun, and the sport of lucha libre funny (it is taken seriously in mexico). he is the main man of laughs in this film, (esqueleto failed to impress me) with one exception: that monk who said he'd been having diarrhea because of the food ignacio serves. the line, the way it was said, and the context, made me laugh out loud. the rest is all jack black, almost every scene he's in and every line he says is hilarious. his in-ring antics were classic, how can a fat guy like him be so agile? but my favorite ones were his impromptu songs. jack black's other talent is music, his next movie is a semi-bio about his band, tenacious d (their songs are awesome: fck her gently, tribute, and the skit inward singin). anyways, as jack lets loose a bit of that musical genius in a couple of songs, one began about his turn to sing and then sequed to ramses, the greatest luchador in the world, the other dedicated to his love interest, encarnacion. both were darn funny and jack black golden (complete with self-instrumenation), but encarnacion was my favorite. made me laugh so hard, with "i eat bugs,i eat grass, with my hand i wipe my... tears" and then "encarnacion! encarnacion!". never thought a name like that can be funny.

did you notice i said "almost every scene"? blame the director jared hess for making me say almost. he did the same thing with napoleon dynamite. not all the jokes and gags work. like a mango tree, not all the mangoes you're gonna get would suit your taste. there'll be big sweet ones (or sour, if you prefer), some ordinary ones, and then there are those that are cracked open and rotten. there were quite a lot of rottens in napoleon dynamite (for me, i guess. lots of other people worship every frame of that film), and a few in nacho. these particular scenes resemble those in pinoy comedy flicks: planned rescue blows when ignacio mistakes two bystanders as the hired brawlers, the training scenes, and the old and tired "nyeh!". bad choices, mr. hess.



jared hess should be immensely grateful for having jack black on board. he pulled this film together like that scene where he is in his recreational clothes and he clinches his butt. surrounded by mundane characters, this was a one-man show. i also liked how he punctuates any references to lucha libre with a glorified look on his face, you know like the one i'd wear if i saw jennifer love hewitt's boobs in person. and who would take a romantic walk with a woman he's attracted to and then stop near a wall and do a one-knee-bent pose to impress her? only jack black. a walking tub of lard and laughs. the same cannot be said for his sidekick, esqueleto. he's just not funny. the big grins, the screams, failed attempts at being funny. horrible. he is no match for napoleon dynamite's partner, pedro. the fat kid, chancho, did a better job. and then there is that sweet sexy senorita, sister encarnacion. there should be a bible passage somewhere that prohibits nuns being this hot and dimpled because more sins would just be committed at the sight of her. kneeling. hands clasped near her lips (thunder!). anways, she looks a lot like penelope cruz (prettier, imho) with a pinch of winona rider. she gave a great performance of just being hot.



this movie, like many, is in a "hit or miss" zone. on one side, there's the people who would enjoy it to the bone, and there's the uptight ones who'd say they wasted their money. it's a hit for me, i'd watch anything with jack black in it (or will ferrell. or better yet, jack black and will ferrell!!) because he is the one of the few jesters left in this business that can really make us laugh with the least amount of effort. he did his magic here and made it as funny as it is. here's to more comedies, jack!

the good: jack black. and the hot nun (bless me father for i have sinned...)
the bad: esqueleto's "trying hard"-ness. pinoy-ish comedy.
the ugly: them hairy midgets.
the score: 7 corns on sticks.


skizzo libra

Read More

THE BREAK-UP by jaiskizzy

after meeting at a baseball game, a tour guide dude and rachel, from friends, fall madly in love with each other, and live in a condo together, seemingly inseparable. but then one night, through an argument over lemons, the artsy girlfriend calls it quits with her video-game-loving boyfriend. both parties, however, refuse to leave the condo, and they start throwing sht at each other (figuratively, of course, but what a sight it would have been if it wasn’t, eh?) to determine who’ll fold up first and make amends. who will win this war? hang on to your lover’s hair ‘cause some of the stuff you’ll see will be familiar.

let’s face it, love’s a killer. sure it’s a good thing, it inspires you, makes you feel high and all, but you’re putting so much at stake, it’s a disaster when it goes bad. they called it “falling” in love for good reason. it’s a risk to take that path: either someone catches you or you end up in pieces at the bottom. and even if somebody did catch you, you know there’s still a slim chance they just might throw you over again. i know because i’ve had four ex-girlfriends, and each one of them i thought, she was the one. anyways, this movie has a lot of truth in it. it begins with pictures of vince vaughn and jennifer aniston kissing, having fun with friends, kissing, going to places, and… kissing. just what all couples in love have. awww sweetness… well, some good things must come to an end because what other thing do all couple have? fights (seriously if you’ve honestly never had a fight with your significant other over anything, you’re lying). and like most fights we all have, this one is just as stupid: vince bought 3 apples when jennifer asked him to buy 12. they shout, say things they’d regret later, things get out of hand, boom. the movie’s title. the movie, however, i think is not about who was right or wrong. it’s about the consequences, the aftermath of the break-up, and choices they made, which, even though meant for laughs, was making it all worse. jennifer goes on dating other guys, vince invites some strippers over, stuff we all would have done as well given that situation despite having knowledge that it’s wrong. that’s how very faithful to life this film is and im pretty sure anyone who watches this will have one or two realizations.

im not gonna go and ruin the ending for those who haven’t seen it. well, there really isn’t any ending to ruin because it does not matter how it ends. only two things can happen after a break-up: one, you go your separate ways and either forget about each other or be friends; and two, you get back together. anyways, you probably wouldn’t like how this movie ends, but i guess that’s an intended reaction. it shows you what happens if you do this or that. i think the ending’s just right.

i apologize if im making this sound more like a love doctor’s lecture than a movie review. apart from its genuine representation of relationships, there’s zero else worth noting. this film is mostly vince vaughn, i guess the writer was male. he did well in his role, give and take pretty much how we all men are. lazy, insensitive, stubborn. vince vaughn was a good choice, words that come out from his mouth are some of the words that stay in my head. im sure some of that weren’t in the script. now i cant say the same for jennifer aniston. she’s still rachel to me. she really oughta something about it, take on a role like charlize theron in monster and maybe she can shake off that “friends”-style of acting and show her versatility. else, i, and others who have seen her wear the princes leia costume for ross, would never get the chance to take her seriously (but a round of applause for that walking-around-naked scene).

overall, there’s just not enough laughs to consider this film a comedy. it’s more like a bad but convincing reality tv show episode. except that it’s not real. anyways, i think only those in a solid, strong relationship can survive watching this. if you’re having a tough time with your pardner, stay away, this won’t help. instead, just get porn.

the good: the arguments, how most couples would relate to it, and jennifer aniston’s ass.
the bad: flat minor characters, and inadequate humor.
the ugly: the tone rangers. and marilyn dean. ugh.
the score: 5 lemons.


jai

Read More

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN'S CHEST by jaiskizzy

the gist: in this swashbucklin sequel to the curse of the black pearl, the talented mr. johnny depp returns as the peculiar pirate and antihero of the high seas, jack sparrow. pardon me... captain jack sparrow. legolas/will turner and his hottie wife-to-be, keira knightley, are need to find him to save their necks from the gallows, he, on the other hand is looking for a key which would open a chest, the contents of which will help him settle his debt of death to the dreadful davy jones. will the captain succeed in salvaging his soul? will will (tee-hee!) turner and his feisty fiancee do some pleasurable pirate pumping? (mickey says nope!) oh well... avast, landlubbers! wacko captain jacko is backo.

the reaction: the only other pirate movie i saw before this and after the first one is a porn flick entitled pirates. yes, you read that right. porn. but clear your head of the cheesy nonsense pre-sex situations and equally cheesy nonsense dialogue because pirates was actually a very good movie. it had great special effects. it had a story. it had set designs. it had costumes. and yes it had hardcore sex, but the point is that it looked like a hollywood-made film, leaping miles beyond b-movie territory. bottomline: if a porn company can come up with something like that, what more can hollywood do right? well, years ago, the curse of the black pearl became a surprise hit as nobody thought that a movie based on a disneyland theme park ride and made by kid-friendly disney would do well in the box office. it surpassed expectations and left the fans wanting more. turns out it's actually a trilogy, and here came part 2. is dead man's chest as good as its predecessor? nah... it's better! the first one was a fresh fun frolicky flick on a subject none of us havent seen in decades: pirates (hook was about peter pan, mostly). it introduced us to captain jack sparrow, will turner, and elizabeth swann, and now they've taken these three persons (and some small players) and put them in an all-new adventure, against the usual way of sequels showing pretty much the same from the original, comparable to the equally entertaining indiana jones movies.

dead man's chest begins with a woman's chest, keira knightley under the rain, and from there we are taken on a wild roller coaster-y ride, and i think exactly a roller coaster ride because the movie kinda starts off slow (this is for non-watchers of the first movie to get to know the characters), much like the long queue you go through before you actually get strapped onto the cars. however, i was never bored with any of the non-action scenes and though that it was a proper re-introduction, especially with captain jack sparrow and his count of monte cristo-inspired entrance (note that gun he aptly brandishes in the posters). once that is done, the movie picks up the pace and kicks off the endless fun. like the first one, this may be an action-adventure movie but it never takes itself seriously, and ultimately triumphs as a comedy. but dont expect the laugh-out-loud balls-to-the-floor type. the movie is about silly fun and that's the kind of fun-ny you will get. i had the most laughs for the sequences in the cannibal tribe island. cannibalism has never been as hilarious. even the serious character of will turner takes part in the hilarity. but of course, when it comes to fun, the captain is your prime pirate. also, if you pay attention to the dialogue, there'll be lots of jokes and innuendos to giggle at.

dead man's chest does not let one down on the awe aspect as well. i enjoyed all the action sequences a lot, the three-way swordfight was great from start to finish. the special effects were awesome, so awesome that in some parts, it's hard to tell which are real and which are cgi. of course, the magnificent monster of mayhem, the kraken, is obviously cgi but all of its scenes were terrific. but davy jones wins the best cgi prize on this one. this octopus-faced villain was so well-done, some kid's gonna have nightmares about him. those tentacles are so life-like, always squirming about, and davy jones even uses them as extra limbs to hold things and play the piano (as opposed to the low budget medusa effect of darna's nemesis, valentina, using eels. the nerve these morons claim that they're at par with hollywood standards! spit!). great character design and great translation on the screen. also, one memorable scene for me is when the flying dutchman, davy jones' sinister skeletal ship, submerges into the ocean with and over-the-shoulder camera angle on an unflinching davy jones. neato!

the actors get the largest portion of kudos, and the versatile mr. johnny depp takes most of it, being the genius behind captain jack sparrow. instead of giving us the cliche cutthroat pirate performance, he opted for an eccentric swaggerring almost gay-like interpretation, loosely based on the rolling stones guitarist keith richards, at least according to the depp (keith richards will play captain jack sparrow's father in part 3). and just like in part 1, the depp carried the whole film, owning every scene he appears in. of course, legolas and keira "amidala decoy" knightley were just as great with their respective roles, orlando, keeping his will turner as the calculated commanding hero against the happy-go-lucky wing-it captain jack sparrow, and keira being pouty and spunky and yummy like most girlfriends are. i wouldnt have cared if she didnt have any lines. she did a naked vanity fair cover. she's hot. the rest of the minor characters did well too, biggs was good and so is the inclusion of bald headed fatso and guy with a wooden eye, but i cant help but notice that the beckett guy was sort of doing a captain jack sparrow thing with his role. and who would forget bill nighy as davy jones, yes there was a real actor behind that cgi, the dude who played the rude old rockstar in love actually and sang "christmas is all around me", and viktor in underworlds 1 & 2. the voicing was just perfect. overall, a cast of champions.

the conclusion: shiver me timbers! a well-done follow-up movie to a seemingly hard to follow-up movie (i hope you understood that). the figures agree: dead man's chest took the record from spider-man for being the highest grossing film on its opening weekend (spidey=114.8 million; captain jack=$132 million). a cult series in the making, im sure that disney will find it difficult to turn a blind eye to the fans after part 3 arrives and proves to be a splash hit as well. if disney makes the right decisions, i strongly believe that the pirates of the caribbean franchise can do to the sea what star wars did to space. arrr!

the good: the special effects, the comedy, and captain jack sparrow.
the bad: some incomprehensible pirate language, and the slightly uneven pace.
the ugly: davy jones's crew.
the verdict: 8 compasses that do not point north.


captain jai skizzo

Read More

SUPERMAN RETURNS by jaiskizzy

it has been five years since superman disappeared from the face of the earth just like that (snap!). the world has moved on with him, and so has lois lane, who is now with a child and a new man in her life. and just like that (snap!) the big blue boy scout returns and catches up on the things he missed. meanwhile, the evil lex luthor has another evil scheme up his evil sleeve: use the crystals he found in superman's fortress of solitude to make a new kryptonian continent right next to america. will he succeed or will our formidable flying friend foil the foul fiendish foe's felony? fee-fi-fo-fum!

first, i am angered that they did not show us the spider-man 3 teaser trailer. it was supposed to be included in all prints of superman returns, and i so expected to see it in the theater but alas! some morons decided not to release it just yet. what? they gonna show it in front of some stupid pinoy teen love team flick? curses! disappointed, i went to apple.com and watched the trailer there and thanks to the goosebumps, i am now okay.

so there i was with layla, lying on our lazy-boy seats, finishing our popcorn and drinks before the movie started. then the lights went out, spider-man was a no show, and then... superman returned. as kyrpton exploded and the credits rolled (or flashed, like the opening credits of superman 1, props to that!), i repeated in my head a pre-movie mantra i think every comic book geek knows: please, don't suck... please, don't suck... please, don't suck...

well, it didnt suck. it... sipped (i hope you get it).

as a kid, when i first saw superman the movie in betamax, i thought it was the most amazing thing i have ever seen in my entire life. holy hummingbirds, that man can fly! fast forward to the present, it is only understandable for a fanboy like me to expect as much. but i read a couple of not so good reviews, and i forced myself to lower my expectations. now those were met. the rest, misfired. i believe that it is bryan singer's fault, that he was given too much freedom with the material, and that he wanted to pay homage to the original too much that he made a movie that had personality issues. wait, folks. dont crucify me yet. i liked the movie. i feel i got my money's worth. but it needs improvement. it has more flaws than i thought it would have.

now before i delve into the details of what worked and what didnt in superman returns, i must warn you that i will be treading in spoilersville. actually, to me, this review is spoiler-free. i mean, what is there to spoil? it's superman versus lex, superman will obviously win and save the day. plus, there's the love story and we all know where that's going, so technically, no spoilers. but for goodness' sake, if you havent watched the movie, i would recommend that you stop reading this right now and just come back here when you've seen it. thanks.

passionately honoring the superman legend and choosing to follow the continuity of superman 2 was both a hit and miss for bryan singer and co. sure, he had to show his love for the superman mythos and do this as a tribute to those who went before him, but this only makes superman returns less original, seeming like more of a remake (of superman 1) than a sequel. some of it where cool though, like retaining the silly but iconic cowlick, and the one photograph of superman carrying a car above him which is exactly like the action comics #1 cover where superman first appeared. i did like the superman and lois flying scene a bit (which they already did in superman 1) because this one was done in a different context and how this used the same theme that played in the original. (layla questioned what the flying scene was for, to which i replied that in superman 2, superman erased lois lane's memory of her knowledge that clark kent is superman and who knows what else was deleted. and besides, if i was superman, id take her flying everyday!). and while im on the subject of flight, the flying effects were okay but having scene all of this in matrix reloaded and revolutions, it wasnt anytything new.

i didnt like the idea of superman just leaving like that without saying au revoir to search for kryptonian answers and then come home with nothing. they should have at least made him find something, no matter how insignificant, or or maybe something found him, so that at least his 5 year-absence was a total waste of time. it's also awkward how his return was just accepted like air by everyone, except lois, and as clark kent he just goes back to work like he just took a day off. the coincidence of superman and clark being gone at the same time and returning at the same time wasnt even touched. only one scene sniffs at this suspicious subject: lois lane and her husband-to-be compare superman's stats with clark's but they dismiss it with a nerdy wave from clark. a weak scene, would've have been better if clark clumnsily toppled a pen holder or a pile of papers instead. superman returns scores low on humor. not much in the drama department either, so leave your box of tissues at home (in superman 1 i fought tears from fallin when jonathan kent died and clark said that he couldnt even save him despite all his powers. classic). i guess bryan singer needs to work on his tearjerking.

what i do think bryano is quite good at is finding untapped talent. he gave us hugh jackman with wolverine, now he's got brandon routh. when i first saw this guy in a few online pics as clark kent, he had a slight resemblance to the late christopher reeve. in the movie, not only does he look a bit like chris, he sounds very much like him as well, especially in clark kent move. he was great as clark kent, but kinda lacked the simpleton-ness that chris conveyed. he also did good as superman (the resemblance ends with clark kent), but still needs to work on the level of respect that chris's superman demanded. and is it me, or doesnt the way he flies looks kinda awkward? (this is evident in the pre-end credits flight scene where brandon flies and smiles to the camera the same manner it was done by chris in the 4 superman films. im sure that if you played those scenes side by side, you'd notice the difference.) i also think he needs to practice "pain" acting more. tom welling seemed better at this. overall, mr routh was a good choice for this role. another good choice which really surprised me was kate bosworth. i initally thought she was a miscast, considering her previous roles (a babe in rules of attraction, a surfer chick in blue crush), and how she didnt look like the lois lane type. but lick my loins, what a great performance by miss bosworth. great as reporter lois, great as mommy lois, and great as you-left-and-i-moved-on lois. would have been better with a pinch of margot kidder's quirkiness, the role was kinda too serious, but that's just me. photo-junkie jimmy olsen was good, and so was perry white, although i wonder what it would have been like if hugh laurie (house) got the role. the inclusion of cyclops was okay too, a good guy instead of being "she's mine" psychotic. it was also nice to see that the kid didnt do any haley joel osment or dakota fanning all-out acting (watch out for the piano scene). also, the little screen time that martha kent had was effective, especially in her last scene, looking up at the hospital because she cant go in or else she blows superman's cover. which finally brings us to the role of lex luthor. hmm. ive always like kevin spacey as an actor, he was great in the usual suspects (also by b.s.), k-pax, american beauty, the life of david gale etc. here, he wasnt great. not even good, imho. i prefer the lex luthor portrayal of gene hackman, and im sure kevin spacey used that as inspiration and mixed it with his own, which led to a mad, unconvincing lex. gene hackman's lex was arrogant and rude and funny, repetitively proclaiming that he is the greatest criminal mind of the century, and casually dealing with three powerful kryptonian villains. kevin spacey's lex just comes off as a 2-dimensional power-hungry mastermind. i do however have sort of absorbed his "billions!" and "wroonnngg!!!" lines, so i guess he managed to squeeze in a good one. and then there's lex's neanderthal minions, one who looks like will ferrell and another who looks like adrien brody, who were pretty useless, and i couldnt see why they had to cast kumar from harold & kumar go to white castle, in an equally useless, yes-sir role. kitty was great though, enjoyed her car with no breaks scene, but she is no ms. teschmacher.

now about the costume... it was fine with me. they had to do some changes, okay. the s became smaller, okay. there's an s on the belt and no s on the cape, okay. keyword: acceptance. but i think the colors were kinda dull. when the s shield is displayed in the opening credits, it was shiny and vibrant. why then did they have a different color scheme with the costume? because... the shield would look dull if they used the costume colors. sheesh. and then there is superman's boots. or, more appropriately, his "combat" boots. looked like they were designed by skechers. very out of place with superman's sleek suit. and by the way, they really schould start tackling the science behind the costume. if bullets ricocheting off of it dont leave a scratch, how come a human doctor was able to rip it off so easily?

all in all, i think this was a good "reintroduction" movie. im sure some would get blown away by the airplane resuce sequence. it was good scene, but i thought it needed more oomph, as this movie needed more action than just superman carrying stuff. heat vision was used well here, i particularly liked the sheet that superman made to disintegrate the falling debris. after several paragraphs, i still havent said enough about this movie. there many other things to like and love, to hate and hiss at. maybe it was just that we expected too much after taking so long for the movie to arrive at the silvescreen. remember, it could have been worse: nicholas cage was once cast as superman and one producer wanted to make some "gay" changes. clearly, bryan singer wasnt able to perform the magic he did with xmen 1 & 2 but was able to put on a good show for fans and non-fans alike. and hey, it's superman, dude! that man can fly!

the good: homages, acting, and that one scene where superman bathes in the sun's rays!
the bad: lex, costume, having nothing new.
the ugly: the borrowed scenes from spider-man (run jump run) and james bond (you'll see... well, only if you saw goldeneye).
the verdict: 7 kryptonite shards.

superskizzy.

Read More

LE PARFUM DE LA DAME EN NOIR by jaiskizzy

ist: a great magician dies and the widow, the titular lady in black, remarries. the newlyweds spend their honeymoon on a nice little house, home to a handful of peculiar people. one of the guests suspects that the magician is dead which makes the lady in black the lady in danger. he and his bumbling sidekick must put their heads together to solve this mystery and unmask the crook amongst the other guests. guided by subtitles! yay.

a classic example of the film ingenuity of the french. you’ll never see a pinoy movie like this (unless some wacko plagiarizes it). the core of this film is its unconventional humor, it’s funny, quirky, and amazingly light, despite dealing with danger and death. weird that it’s almost magical how something serious is being discussed and then the zealous hostess would suddenly cut the tension with “let’s eat!” which instead of being annoying makes you laugh a bit. there’s just too many ridiculously funny scenes to enumerate, but one of my favorites would be the two guys hiding in a well each with a periscope to spy around them (im pretty sure you have no idea what im talking about. it’s just one of those “have to see” things). normally it would have been corny in another movie but here it just wasn’t. it perfectly jived with the tender tickle tone of the film. another favorite would be the solar submarine sequence, again a seemingly out-of-place idea but integral to the story.

hsuck me sideways if i knew who the director was, but whoever he is, he did quite a job here, there were some great camera shots (thumbs up to flashback scene in the school hallway) and fine scene “choreography”, like when one character retells an event in his point of view, we see the exact same scene that was previously shown but in a different perspective. only a few movies got this to work. another reason why this movie is such a bundle of enjoyment is its characters, all of them colorful and full of life, each with their eccentricities. for me, the best of the bunch is the dude who played sainclair, who looks so much like alan cummings. he has sort of a charlie chaplin aura with him and a teensy bit of gayness. sainclair is one funny chap and most of the time not on purpose. he steals every scene he is in. so he’s kind of like a speaking charlie chaplin. minus the slapsticks. one very notable scene has sainclair hiding in a workshop trying to stay quiet but instead causes more ruckus that results into a domino effect/chain reaction of the objects inside.

an unusual film with an unusual plot and unusual characters. needless to say, i had an unusually good time.

the good: the storytelling style, the characters, the humor.
the bad: a french film with no nudity?!? minus points!
the ugly: honestly... the lady in black.
the verdict: 7 detachable periscopes

le skizzeur.

Read More

INSIDE MAN by jaiskizzy

it's a fine sunny business day in manhattan, so how about... a bank robbery? clive owen et. al. had just that in mind. masked, armed, and calculated, they turn the bank into a fortress and hold the people inside as hostages. enter denzel washington with big willy and the twins to match wits with the crooks and make sense out of this seemingly well-planned crime. enter jodie foster with a corporate smile on her face and a hidden agenda in her, um... hiding place (hey that one rhymes!). take a puff. it's a spike lee joint!

spoiler clue: inside man. the title says it all. anyways, this movie wasnt actually on my list of must-sees. not that i dont think it would be good, it just went under the radar and would have went right past me if layla hadn't wanted to watch it only because she's having an affair with clive owen (albeit an imaginary one). turns out it was a good thing i didnt decide to just stay home and ponder. because this film was beautiful. well, so was my companion, but this film was filmly beautiful. although ive had knowledge of the directorial existence of spike lee, ive never been really familiar with his movies. i heard they were good. now i have proof that they are. inside man was presented with a very personal feel. the exchanges between characters looked authentic and the shots were almost p.o.v., as if you were there watching the events unfold or eavesdropping on the conversations. you even see scenes like the unrolling of the police tape, something you dont see in most movies with a similar theme (that thing about the trains was very realistic) i also like the way spikey chose to inter-cut the present events with future interrogations with the hostages inside the bank who obviously survived. this helped increase the mystery aroma of the movie. lets you put together the puzzle piece by piece but not in a whodunit detective story way. do not expect any big scenes though. like i said, this is a very personal and very human movie. this may be a bank robbery movie but there are no car chases or bullet-ridden encounters here, no sir. (i wonder, however, why heist/hostage taking movies always happen near a diner...)

this film could be used as a visual aid in an acting class. the powerhouse cast performed at top-level calibre in their respective roles. despite zero drama moments. denzel washington was unbelievable. that dude can act. else, he's like that in real life. every word he let go and every expresion he wore, real like the hair on my knuckles. he never goes over the top or makes a hero's one-liners. just calm, casual, and cool. clive owen is equally great, considering he had to act behind a mask most of the time. i think it was primarily his vocals that gave the attitude his character needed. closing the triangle is jodie foster in a very easily but well done role. this trio held the film together and i doubt that the movie would have worked the way it did if it werent for them. also, in a small but effective part was the green goblin himself. and then there's a girl and her nice cleavage that needed no acting. bra-vo.

i am a volleyball and i just got spike leed.

the good: good directing. fine acting
the bad: a lil predictable. or was that deliberate?
the ugly: denzel on a segway shot.
the verdict: 8 bugged pizza box lid lifers.

detective skizzy.

Read More

CARS by jaiskizzy

"i am speed... i eat losers for breakfast." goes the pre-race mantra of lightning mcqueen, an arrogant rookie race car all eyes on the prize: win the piston cup and be dinoco's new endorser. on his way to california for the finals after a triple tie, lightning gets lost and ends up at the forgotten little town of radiator springs where he destroys the main road on his arrival. he is sentenced to community service and is prohibited from speeding away until fix the road. soon he makes new and learns a few important lessons in life, like tractor tipping. will he get to california in time to make the audience weep with a dramatic moment, i mean, win the race?! ka-chow!

as a fan of pixar animated features, with a special lil fondness for the shorties, i have been anticipating this follow-up to the incredibles. on the other hand, layla's primary reason to see this one is because it is was born out of apple. so, she and i headed to eastwood and watched it with about a hundred fairly well-behaved kids (thank heavens). and who better to judge if this film works than these mini men and women? based on their reactions, cars definitely scored high. they bought all the lil jokes, laughed at the hillbilly tow truck, mater, and fell silent at the right moments (one proof that this movie isnt heavy for their noggins to comprehend: lightning discovers doc hudson's true identity when he finds a familiar object in doc's house (garage), to which a kid who was paying attention exclaimed: "piston cup!"). i myself found... uh, myself, chuckling at some of the jokes and losing it at a few (which seemed meant only for the adults to understand, like, lightning says "piston cup." and then mater retorts "he did what in his cup!?"). but the scenes that really reached out and tickled everyone funny boner are the car "spoof" of pixar movies: toy car story (you're a toy... car1), monster trucks inc., and a bug's life, voiced by the original actors. this wittiness was probably what made this animated film appealing to both kids and adults, and i think i blinked too many times and missed out some of the small ones (some of the ones i didnt miss: "braking news", "i auto be in pictures", and jay limo). and there are still lots more to enjoy.

anyways, owen wilson voiced lightning mcqueen well. he was able to channel a distinct personality to the car, as if you are actually watching him do the gun gesture when he does the ka-chow. paul newman as doc hudson hornet was very believable as well. but it was larry the cable guy/mater who brought the garage(house) down. well, not that much, i wouldnt say he stole the show as some would. he just excelled as the film's main comic relief, and im pretty sure we'll be hearing from him or seeing him more in future projects (git-r-done!). other cars i really liked were the hippie volkswagen van fillmore (he has a license plate goatee, plays jimi hendrix' rendition of star-spangled banner in the morning, and offers homemade "organic" fuel), and guido the italian forklift who only knows one english word: pitstop (his pitstop debut was hilarious). the cgi was topnotch pixar, great car designs (although as an adult, i thought they were a tad too cartoony and flexible), awesome landscapes, and supa-fine lighting effects (the reflections on the cars' shiny exterior were amazing). plus it has michael schumacher as a ferrari. coolness.

yet another pixar classic. great kids movie that kids of all ages and all kids at heart will have a blast with, although in varying levels. not the best in the timeline, but worthy of the legacy nonetheless. definitely demands a second viewing. here's to ratatouille!

the good: the cars, the humor.
the bad: how come there were no kid cars?
the ugly: the rust-eze cars.
the verdict: 8 white wall tires.

skizmacher.

Read More

THE OMEN by jaiskizzy

gist: in this updated version of a classic, julia stiles and a dude who resembles one of my high school friends (topaquits!!) are the oblivious parents of the devil’s son whom they have aptly named damien. some sinister shit starts spreading as the path to power is paved for the prince. a priest preaches prophecies, papa ponders, peter piper picked a peck of pickled pepper!

not a good film. okay. but not good. that is, on its own. but if you’d compare it to the original, it plummets down to crap territory. mostly, it was faithful to the original, but the things they changed though didnt work. i remember how creepy the old omen had been and how this remake wasnt (or maybe because i was just a kid then). this one felt like watching a long episode of csi miami, with csi (las vegas) as the original omen. well... yes, it kept me awake. yes the impaling was cool, and the decapitation even cooler. yes there was one suspenseful scene involving an air bubble and a startler involving snow. but beyond that? close, but no cuban. i actually had a hard time completing the summary above, because sentence number one was the only solid definition for this movie. everything else that followed and surrounded that concept seemed like random stuff thrown in for padding, like cotton to a flat-chested girl’s bra. sure, they contribute to the idea that this boy is satan’s offspring sent to give the earth a beating, but they don’t really form a concrete mold to hold a well-structured story together. anyways, three-quarters into the movie, i already had thought of a nice way to review this film. as a tribute to the apparent collapse of the julia stiles’ career (what happened to you, girl?!) i present to you…

10 things i hate about the omen 1. julia stiles. she looks fat and old. 2. damien. looked scary in the trailers. acted scary in the movie. 3. the red stuff. too forced. 4. clues to the death. a la final destination. 5. the nanny. too obvious. i would have fired her at once. 6. the dogs. could have been scarier. 7. the men in the gorilla suits. sheesh. 8. scaring the audience with sound volume. 9. cheapo video editing. 10. the predictable, no build-up, “that’s it?” ending.

plus there was no clear indication if damien born on 6/6/6 or the events begin in 6/6/6. because if damien was born in 6/6/6, then the movie happens in 2012, and it doesn’t look like 2012 at all. one more thing, whatever magical thing killed the other players, why didn’t it kill damien’s dad? tsk. tsk. tsk. a very very defective movie. obvious rushed to meet the 6/6/6 deadline. tsk.

the good: the impaling and the seamless decapitation.
the bad: refer to the list.
the ugly: the toothbrush commercial scene. ugh.
the verdict: 6(66) red balloons. (3 if compared to the original)

jai albert omen or the owen.

Read More

KISSKISS BANGBANG by jaiskizzy

a twist of fate puts harry, a small-time thief, in an acting audition and faster than post-pee tapping lands him on the lap of los angeles california, in a party where he meets a gay detective called gay perry, and sees his promiscuous high school crush, harmony, getting felt up by a stranger while she sleeps on a table. the three of them are then sucked into a murder conspiracy while i ate beef tapa that felt and tasted like plastic.

is robert downey jr. gay? because if he isn't, then he better undergo some masculinity restoration program because he is definitely sending out gay signs in his role here eventhough his character, harry, is 100% male and boners up when snuggling with harmony. i don't know, it was just kind of annoying and made it hard for me to relate to harry. val kilmer, on the other hand portrayed his gay perry role very well. refined and held back, the kind of homosexual i wouldnt have a problem being around with (except for the kissing part) because the only thing i hate more than vegetables are loud and proud gay people. anyways, thank goodness there was a pretty stunning girl named michelle monaghan to cancel out all of this gayness. she's kind of like an l.a. lolita, she's an aspiring actress who's only claim to fame is a beer/bear commercial and she's probably slept with more men than you could ever invite into your stag party. still, she was purty hot.

this movie is so fast-paced, scenes just snap one after another, it would seem that the book this was based on was no more than 100 pages long. a lot of things happen in this film, and despite a few being a bit far-fetched, i enjoyed almost all of them (except for the kissing part). these scenes are accompanied by some smart and funny dialogue, especially the ones that went between harry and gay perry. one good line was val kilmer's after he bitch-slaps harmony's father: "big tough guy." three words that represented a paragraph of explanation. now that's some swell writing. another aspect that makes this movie so entertaining is the narration by harry, one of the best movie narrations in my opinion, to the point that i believe robert downey jr narrated better than he acted (he even pauses and rewinds the film when he forgets to tell something). i dug the groovy cartoon opening credits. kudos go to the director, who gave this movie a fresh book-ish pulp-ish look. oh and by the way, if you are a guy, dont make "i will survive" your ringtone...

highly entertaining despite the lack of over-the-top sequences and super special effects or the not talky, artsy-fartsy philosophical/social/moral/spiritual messages.

the good: the narration, visual style, harmony.
the bad: the gayness. ugh
the ugly: the kissing part.
the verdict: 7 johnny gossamer novels.

skizz skizz, bang bang.

Read More