web analytics

JerseySmarts.com

Movie Review: Pirates of the Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest

Posted on by

Like we do every Friday night during the summer, some of the guys and I got together and went to the movies to see the latest release. This week, it’s Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, and Kiera Knightly in Pirate of the Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest.

Disney did a great job with this film. It looks great, the cinematography is awesome, the soundtrack was good, the story is fun and intriguing – great job all around. I do have two minor complaints, though (one movie-related and one not movie-related). First, our seats absolutely sucked. We were sitting in the two left-most seats in the fifth row back so our heads and backs were contorted the entire time as we tried to take in the entire screen from an odd angle. Why do they even make those seats? No one likes sitting in them – why not just make more seats in the upper rows?

Second, I thought that the ending – while brilliantly done – could have done more to tie up some loose ends with this particular movie. For those of you that don’t know, there will be another Pirates movie next summer that was filmed concurrently with this installation of the film. That’s cool with me and it’s a smart way to do a movie (just like they did with Lord of the Rings). But at least at the end of the first two Lord of the Rings movies, there was some conclusion, though something always loomed on the horizon. At the end of Pirates 2 there were minimal conclusions, no major “end” to any subplots or storylines, and at least one gigantic unanswered question (which you’ll have to watch the movie to find out).

A completely wrong, 100% jaded Entertainment Weekly Review did make one good point about the ending of the movie:

Without an artistic stake in eliciting joy (or sadness, or concern, or something other than a glazed giggle at Depp’s finery), there’s nothing to keep producer Jerry Bruckheimer, director Gore Verbinski, and their screenwriting galleymates from piling on another big false ending, and another, and another, “Caribbean” without end, until a pummeled audience begs for a toilet break and, for mercy’s sake, a real conclusion.

I don’t agree with some of that, but I certainly agree about the false ending and the need for a real conclusion.

Other than those two somewhat minor points, I thought that the movie was great. Depp does a great job at being his Richards-inspired pirate and Bloom plays the role of hero/good guy very well. Some suggestions for your movie viewing, though…

Don’t go see this movie when there are a bunch of little kids in the theater – they were all laughing at parts of the movie that were completely unfunny last night. For those of you who did see the movie, think of the very last scene and what happened – our theater had a bunch of kids laughing at the very last moment. Made no sense whatsoever. This also goes for generally “family-friendly” times at the theater because it appeared to us that a lot of older women were laughing at every word that Depp said, which was really distracting.

I suggest going to see the movie after having watched the first movie. I was going to do this, but between work and a tight schedule, it didn’t happen. There were a lot of references that you wouldn’t have been able to pick up unless you watched the first movie or at least had it in mind while watching Pirates 2. But these are all not that important (for example, the use of the term “poppet”).

This movie was, I think, one of the best that we’ve seen so far from the summer movie offerings. Superman Returns was a general bore and the Da Vinci Code was so-so. Pirates of the Caribbean is the movie to see this summer – I strongly recommend it and go ahead, spend the big money to see it in a good theater.

For those of us who have seen it, I would recommend this one for a cheap matinee replay. Good job Disney!

Book Review: Bush Country

Posted on by

I read this book about a month and a half ago, so I hope I don’t forget anything about it in the review.

What I remember most about John Podhoretz’s Bush Country is the near-infallibility of all of Bush’s moves in Podhoretz’s eyes. True, I believe that a lot of what President Bush has done as the leader of our country is admirable and will mark him as one of the most dynamic Presidents in the history of our country, I’m not entirely sure that a book can be written discussing his Presidency without talking a bit about some blemishes on his record.

If nothing else, I would have liked to see an inclusion of at least some of Bush’s faults. However, this book’s subtitle was, “How George W. Bush Became the First Great Leader of the 21st Century—While Driving Liberals Insane” and this is something that Podhoretz shows time and time again in the book.

You all know that I don’t give away much about the books that I read, but one thing that really made me laugh was how Podhoretz explains how completely out of touch the liberals are with simple Americana references. For example, both Presidents Ronald Reagan and the current George Bush have been called “cowboys.” Now, for those of us who’ve ever watched a western or who know half a dime’s worth about Americana, we know that simply owning a ranch a cowboy does not make.

These men own ranchers, but are by no means cowboys! But, as Podhoretz explains, it doesn’t matter to liberals that they’ve completely jumbled Americana and simple American imagery because the masses will believe just about all of what the liberal media puts before them.

Podhoretz also proves how Bush is not a puppet and how he’s not a moron like most liberals wish he was – some of these topics are covered with a grain of salt since they really don’t warrant full lip service for being so outlandish. I mean anyone who says, “President Bush sounds like a moron,” either only listens to his handful of vocal gaffes from 2000 and 2001 or they don’t like that Texas accent. I worked with an older woman who was from Texas and she had the same accent and I like it!

Overall, I would say to hold off on reading this book if you’re already 110% behind the President. There’s no need to read stuff that you already know. If you’re a leftist thinker who hates the President, then you may want to read this to see how the other side thinks. I got this book on sale, so it was worth it for me to read!

Book Review: Where the Right Went Wrong

Posted on by

In terms of voting, I am registered as an independent which simply means that I have not declared which party I would like to be affiliated with. My reasons for doing this are simple enough: I do not want ANY party to think that they automatically have my vote, period. I want politicians to earn my vote and tell me why I should cast my vote for them.

One of my reasons for doing this is because of the very real fear that either of the two main parties could be overrun by ideologues and be made into something completely different. Patrick J. Buchanan’s book, Where the Right Went Wrong, chronicles how a core group of neoconservatives have taken over much of the agenda of the Republican Party.

I’ve never been comfortable saying that I am a neoconservative thinker or voter and this book has finally given me the answers as to why. Yes, I believe that looking at how I live my life and go about my business that I am much more conservative than liberal in just about all aspects of everyday existence. However, today’s “conservative” label – while obviously the majority in America – has always seemed a bit off to me.

For example – how can conservatives endorse dramatic increases in social welfare spending, amnesty in immigration, expansive foreign policies, worldwide free trade (gross), and the constant removal of American jobs to cheaper international locales? I want to declare myself proudly as a conservative, but these are by NO means traditional conservative values.

Mr. Buchanan, a three-time former Presidential candidate, easily rips through how what has becomes today’s “conservatism” is really just a neoconservative mindset. Further, he discusses how neoconservatives have given up the heart and soul of the conservatism practiced by President Ronald Reagan in the 1980’s and Senator Barry Goldwater in the 1960s. The true conservatism that Mr. Buchanan speaks about this book is the conservatism that I agree with – the America first conservatism.

An example for you regarding the current military policy. Right now, we have troops in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and Saudi Arabia. I understand all of the needs to have these troops here, etc. But, must our troops remain in these areas? Take Germany for instance. Why can we not move our troops out of Germany now that they are a fully functioning Democratic Republic? Sure, keep a small base there and continue to operate that little hospital, but by-and-large shut down the United States operations in Germany! And what of us being in Japan? Why can we not pull our troops out of Japan and allow them to rebuild their navy and a new, smaller amphibious army?

South Korea is a little more tricky, but would it not be prudent given current events to tell China and Russia – this is your problem and you need to deal with it because we’re moving our troops out. Listen folks, the reason that North Korea is contained where they are is because AMERICAN troops keep them plugged up. When did it become America’s problem to make sure Asia is secured in the 21st Century? Russia and China are enjoying burgeoning capitalist systems at the expense of America putting our troops and spending our money on the North/South Korean border. Bullshit on that! Tell Russia and China to take some ownership over their continent and pull Americans out – we don’t need to be there any more.

I can have an entirely different conversation about the current missile situation. I tend to agree that if Japan wants to blow the Korean missiles off of the launchpad, then they should do it. Different subject, different post.

I recommend Where the Right Went Wrong to anyone who is a Republican voter but looks at the national party and its direction and goes, “Huh?” Buchanan does a great job of giving credit to Bush and Company where it is due such as the booming economy, the strong stance against the Taliban in Afghanistan, etc. However, this is not a “I like/dislike Bush” problem. This is a problem of a small handful of ideologues taking over a Grand Old Party and trying to remake it in their perfect world vision.

It’s a good read – look for it at the local library or the Barnes & Noble.

Movie Review: Superman Returns

Posted on by

We went to go see Superman Returns last Friday night. My overall assessment of the film is that it wasn’t what I thought it would be given the hype for it, but it was a good movie, nonetheless.

The most notable “thing” about the movie is that it is really long. One of my friends timed how long it took for the opening credits to go by and it was 6 minutes. There is another scene where Superman is reminiscing about his days as a boy on the Kent Farm and that takes at least 5 minutes – so right there were 11 minutes that we could have done without (these minutes would have been better spent in a longer DVD release). That being said, the time wasn’t completely wasted because Bryan Singer created some good film with that time (except for the opening credits – that was, in fact, a waste). Hopefully, he uses his time better in the already planned Superman sequel for 2009.

What I found unexpected about the story is that it was pretty much a generic Superman vs. Lex Luthor plot. Superman is a good guy and Lex is a bad guy and both Brandon Routh and Kevin Spacey are brilliant in their roles. However, the movie sometimes leaves you wishing that there was “more” to it. After the movie, a bunch of us were talking and I compared it to the Spiderman series where there is just so much going on and so many storylines and subplots that every minute of film time is a necessary evolution of the entire story. Singer’s Superman Returns doesn’t have that same feel and although it works for the movie, it will definitely leave you feeling like you’re eating a hollow cake – it tastes good and looks phenomenal, but the yummy insides are no where to be found.

I also take issue with this concept that Superman is no longer an American icon. I don’t like that. Superman’s iconic promo has always been, “truth, justice, and the American Way.” That’s just how it is with Superman – the whole world knows that he stands for these things. The fact that this iconic slogan was reduced to, “truth, justice, and all that stuff,” is offensive. What’s wrong with the “American Way?” What? Because Hollywood hates President Bush they are going to throw the baby out with the bath water? That’s horseshit. But not enough to detract from the actual movie itself.

The fact that there is so much Christian iconography in the movie sorta makes up for the lack of “American Way,” but in a different respect. Anyone who watches this movie and DOESN’T see how Singer tries to make Superman out to be Jesus Christ definitely needs their eyes checked out! But the images play well, although sometimes they tend to become a lot less subtle than the producers and writers may have liked.

Overall, I’d give this movie a solid B+ rating with glimpses of an A- here and there. If I had the time to catch a cheap matinee, I’d probably go see it again. Otherwise, it’s probably a definite DVD buy for me when it’s released. I can’t stress enough how great Spacey is as Lex Luthor or how well Routh fits into the Superman role. My recommendation – go see it in a nice theater with a good sound system so you can appreciate what a great job the folks did in putting this film together. But don’t expect a tantalizingly deep plot – it’s good guy versus bad guy in this film.

Movie Review: Click

Posted on by

Adam Sandler’s got a new movie out called Click. A few of the guys and I went to go see it the other day and I thought it was a good movie – it took some weird twists and turns, but it was a good flick.

The best way to describe it is to think of it as an old sitcom. It starts out with a lot of humor, takes an unforeseen twist, then it gets very serious and everyone learns an important lesson, then it ends with some more humor. Henry Winkler is in it and he does a good job of playing Sandler’s father. Also, Rachel Dratch has some very short but very funny scenes in the movie. And Sandler is, of course, a great character in this movie. He plays the prototypical “nice guy” who is just looking for a break. Playing such a character puts him in a situation where just about every guy in the theatre understood what position he was in…you know, because we’re all nice guys!

And I would be wrong not to mention how good Christopher Walken is in the movie. I won’t give away what his final role is in “Click,” but it’s a lot more interesting when he tells you his real occupation.

Great movie that I would recommend for anyone. Go see it!