My Freelance Writing Articles

Recently, I joined a website called Associated Content and have been writing articles for them on a freelance basis. Their writing assignments are great because the topics are common knowledge and interest, there are a wide range of topics and the required length is usually between 250-400 words. Also, unlike some other sites, you have more than one day to complete and submit the article.

Categorized below are the articles I’ve written so far. I will update this post every couple of weeks or so with the additional articles that become published. Let me know what cha’ think!

Work & Stuff
5 Tips for Promoting Employee and Office Health

Halloween Fun
Top 10 Halloween Movies and Scary Films

2009 Halloween Events in Virginia

Top 10 Halloween Songs – The Best Halloween Music

Outdoorsy Things to Do
Fall Hiking and Camping Ideas

Read more!

Book Review – Finger Lickin’ Fifteen by Janet Evanovich

Let me start my review by saying I L-O-V-E the Stephanie Plum Novels (and yes, there are 15 + of them)! They are great beach reads and are perfect if you want to sit back and relax with a funny and unique fiction novel. “Finger” is about stumbled-into-it, bounty hunter Stephanie Plum vs Barbecue Sauce vs Red Paint vs Headless Chefs and a lot more (as usual), but this time the main story revolves around Steph’s side kick Lula. She witnesses a terrible crime and the “head hunters” attempt to get rid of their only witness. “Finger” isn’t my favorite of the series, but don’t let that deter you from picking it up. It’s a little pokey in places, but fun, flirty and full of shenanigans.

Pros:
- As a Whole – This series as a whole is laugh out loud enjoyable. By the 15th book I’ve become quite attached to Stephanie, Lula, Grandma, Mom and of course Ranger and Joe, so another book with my favorite people instantly makes me smile. “Finger” encompasses some of the best traits of the series – cars blowing up, doughnuts, stupid criminals, viewings and the rest. Also, the main story is wrapped around Lula’s tight spandex, which makes “Finger” a refreshing addition to the Plum series.

- The Plot – I enjoy the fact that Ranger needs Stephanie this time around. Yes he bails her out of a couple of sticky situations (pun intended), but when his security company is in trouble he turns the resourceful and oh so cute Stephanie to help solve the mystery.

- “I’m a mess” – Stephanie confesses to Ranger, “I’m a mess.” I like this statement because, Stephanie, I know exactly how you feel – haha.

Cons:
- Lack Luster Love – One of my favorite aspects of this series is the love triangle between Stephanie and her two guys Morelli and Ranger but in “Finger” she swears off guys! This is disappointing. We only get a few exchanges with Ranger and they do technically end up in bed together but only for rotating sleeping shifts. I miss the usual sexual chemistry.

- Plot Twist – Not Really – spoiler alert - The story with Ranger’s security company being jeopardized by break-ins, which are suspected to be an inside job turns out to be … some random kids who stole Rangeman clothes – boooooring! I wish it were an inside job. That would spice things up emotionally for Ranger (whom we never get any emotion from!).

Summary:
Again, “Finger Lickin’ Fifteen” is not the greatest Plum novel, but not worthless either. It’s an easy read that will make you laugh out loud. I enjoyed the next episode in the Stephanie Plum series (and had me craving barbecue – just not Lula’s!).

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Movie Review – Public Enemies

4 words – “Christian Bale” and “Johnny Depp” – two of the best actors today finally in one film together. Although they rarely have scenes together they both contribute greatly to this sexy, dangerous crime film. Director Michael Mann takes us back to the Depression when robbing banks was the money making scheme of choice in a pre-Madoff world and John Dillinger (Depp) is named Public Enemy #1 by the head of the FBI J. Edgar Hoover. Melvin Purvis (Bale) is the FBI agent in charge of bringing Dillinger down. Depp and Bale are joined by an extraordinary support cast who create a thrilling cat and mouse chase based on actual events. Whether you love a crime film or you’re in love with Johnny Depp (like me) – “Public Enemies” will unshackle you from summer sequel boredom.

Pros:
- The Support Cast – Recreating an entire FBI department as well as an entire “gang” of bank robbers takes more than two leading men. The secondary characters of “Enemies” make the story more complete and in an understated way, fulfill the feel of the movie. They really are the atmosphere as much as the props, Bale and Depp. I was really impressed with the whole ensemble, which includes: David Wenham (“Australia”), Stephen Dorff, Channing Tatum (“Stop-Loss”), Rory Cochrane (“CSI: Miami”), Emilie de Ravin (“Lost”), Billy Crudup, Marion Cotillard (Academy Award Winner for her role in “La Vie en Rose”), Giovanni Ribisi (“Perfect Stranger”), Domenick Lombardozzi (“The Wire”), Shawn Hatosy (“Southland”), and many, many other talented folks.

- The Cinematography – One of the most standout characteristics of “Enemies” is the way the cameras work. It’s shot in a documentary type style, which I really like because it brought me more into the story. As opposed to watching this bank robber’s life unfold the filming style has the audience living the height of Dillinger’s life with him. It’s also beneficial for Bale’s side of the story. When the cameras are on him, no matter how much you love Dillinger, you want Purvis to catch the man.

- The Visuals – Taking place around the Depression, Michael Mann and his creative team restore the distinctive 1930’s look by not recreating anything at all actually. Much of the film was shot at historical locations still standing that many of the Dillinger events took place such as the Little Bohemia Lodge where Dillinger and some of his gang were found by the FBI and engaged in a gun fight.


- The Soundtrack - Elliot Goldenthal has done notable scores for other films like “Across the Universe” and “Frida.” For “Enemies” he combines bad-boy, blue grass type tunes with music from the era as well as piano melodies that all help to paint the perfect picture.

- Christian Bale – Bale’s “Purvis” is serious. I don’t think he smiles once during the film (well maybe once in the beginning when he’s gunning down a famous gangster), but it works playing both to Bale's assets as an actor as well as the tone of the character.


- Johnny Depp – Oh how I love Depp, let me count the ways. Maybe I’ll save that for another post – I’ll stay focused for the sake of the review. Depp’s Dillinger is sexy with a sense of true danger. There’s a subtly that the man sometimes fears for his life and is deeply hurt at the loss of friends or their mistreatment. I feel like I got to know John Dillinger with all credit due to another phenomenal Depp performance. No wonder he’s my favorite!



Cons:
- Length – At over an hour and a half in length “Enemies” could have used a few more edits (just not cutting out any of Depp – hehe).

- How Much is True – Scenes such as Dillinger walking through the “Dillinger Division” of the FBI without any of the staff recognizing him and scenes like people waving at him like a celebrity while he’s being driven to prison then Dillinger not being recognized in a movie theater make me wonder how much of the movie represents actual events.

- Purvis Point of View - More of Purvis’ point of view or more of a glimpse into his personal life would have added a nice symmetry to the film.


Summary:
“Public Enemies” is a wonderful bio pic of two legendary Depression era men – one robs banks and the other hunts bank robbers - they both like their guns. The whole team behind “Enemies” should be quite proud. Although I don’t think it’ll be up for any major awards this season, it’s a must see. The talent is reflected in all aspects of the movie – everything from the camera angles, to the score, to the costumes and best of all – the ensemble cast (and Johnny of course - swoon).

What did you think of the 30’s era picture? Did you think the cast was right or that maybe Leonardo DiCaprio should have played the notorious Dillinger?

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra

So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.

http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

I’m 60/40 about “Revenge” – I 40% liked it and 60% did not. I know it’s practically treason not like this movie, but, personally, I need more than CG and loud noises to enjoy an action flick. Now, don’t get me wrong, I like bits and pieces, but not enough to over rule the rest. The sequel to Michael Bay’s 2007 film, based on the toys by Hasbro, is louder, larger, geographically wider, and 6 minutes longer (it feels like 6 hours) than its predecessor. Some initial hype indicated there was more of a plot this time around, but, not surprisingly, there isn’t. The plot is just more complicated. Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, and John Turturro come together again and Ramon Rodriguez is a great addition to the cast of a not-so-great movie.

Pros:
- A Moment Here and There – There are a couple moments in “Revenge” that made me smile (or show some emotion other than disappointment). Any scene with Sam Witwicky’s parents is solid, relatable and genuine (with one exception). Scenes cover situations such as holding emotions back when your kid leaves for college, to fighting for their safety. The parent/kid relationship in this movie is very well written and plays authentically on screen (if you’re wondering what the “exception” is – it’s a scene where Sam’s mom eats pot brownies and runs around campus – it’s a stupid scene, but all others are great!). Another “Pros” moment takes place in the library. Particularly funny is when Sam gives Kaela a 10 second count down indicating when he will speak to her again. Anyone in a relationship will find the humor in this particular “must we do this now” type scenario.


- Ramon Rodriguez – I didn’t like the character of Sam’s college roommate…at first, but he grew on me. Turns out, Rodriguez (and his character) are pretty darn funny and is a refreshing addition to the robotic franchise.

Cons:
- Troublesome Characters - Man, what I wouldn’t give to have been a fly on the wall at the board meeting with Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg when they decided on the two ridiculous characters - Skids and Mudflap. I mean really, MICHAEL BAY and STEVEN SPIELBERG sat down one day and consciously chose to have these characters in the movie. Consider my mind blown.

- Louder Does Not Equal Better – More noise, faster robot transformations, expanded destruction and chaos on speed does not combine to create the greatest movie ever made. Not even close. Side note – at one point in the beginning of the movie some sort of robot destroys a city and breaks through an overpass. There is a lot of loud metal noises, but no sound effect for the crushed concrete and rebar, which for me made the movie that much sloppier.


- Clichés, clichés, clichés – There are three writing credits for “Revenge” and two of the writers also wrote for this year’s “Star Trek” and currently write for the show “Fringe.” With that said, it is unacceptable to have such overly used, 100% UNorginial lines as “Revenge will be mine” screamed from one of the Decepticons! Where’s the creativity - even an ounce? It’s like the writers gave up knowing that the CG would steal the show.


Summary:
The only folks I’d recommend this film to are people who want to waste nearly 3 hours of their lives and who want to leave with a headache with only a slight smile remembering the few sparse funny moments during “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.” If that sounds like you, then by all means, check out this ridiculous film.

What did you think of this movie? Is it a good sequel? What are your thoughts on Transformers 3?

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra

So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.

http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review - The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 (the John Travolta/Denzel Washington Subway Movie)

Fate derails for a NYC transit worker Walter Garber when a former inmate hijacks subway train Pelham 1 2 3, taking hostages, demanding money and to only be in communication with Garber. A remake, Tony Scott’s “The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” is action packed, and passionate. Both the native New York worker – Garber (Denzel Washington) to the “feeling wronged” ex inmate – Ryder (John Travolta) are fully energized throughout the movie. The cast also includes character actor Luis Guzmán, John Turturro (also in “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” out now), James Gandolfini as NYC’s mayor, Alex Kaluzhsky (keep your eyes out for this guy – he also has one of my favorite lines in the movie), and Gbenga Akinnagbe (“The Wire”). “Pelham” isn’t the greatest action movie ever made, but it’s nice to see these veteran actors, Washington and Travolta, do this kind of flick together.

Pros:
- Denzel Washington – Washington’s last two films, The Great Debaters and American Gangsters, had characters unlike the Walter Garber of “Pelham.” From being a dangerous crime boss to a larger than life, inspiring teacher – Washington’s “Garber” is more of an everyday man – but not perfect, which is what I really like about the character. And only Denzel, only he could give it the sincerity needed to not come off hammy. Would we expect anything else from the classy actor?

- John Travolta – I think the last time we saw Travolta this angry was in “Face/Off” (or was that Nicholas Cage?). Sporting some crazy tattoos, Travolta plays Ryder – the wisecracking, pissed off subway hijacker – to a tee. Glad to see Travolta gracing the movie screen again (and this time, not in a dress).

- The Pacing – It’s really well timed. It’s not too long or too short, the story progresses steadily and doesn’t get hung up in details. It gets to the point, and sticks to the point, and I like that in a film!

- It’s An Action Movie Too – I like "Pelham" because it’s not all talk, it’s not all negotiations with the criminal to let the hostages go, it’s not all “what are they going to say next to make him stop.” They have that element covered, but also there are cars flipping, cop shoot outs, a standoff and it’s great!

- Favorite Moment – Ok, this isn't really a "Pro", but it gets a special shout out because I liked it so much. Remember when I mentioned actor Alex Kaluzhsky had my favorite line in the movie? Kaluzhsky’s “Geo” is on the hijacked subway with his laptop, video chatting with his girlfriend. Of course the connection is cut once underground but the hijackers install routers so Ryder can surf the net. The laptop is on the floor when the connection is restored and the girlfriend can see what’s going on. While Geo is face down on the floor his girlfriend starts talking. She’s sobbing, “I love you.” No response. “Don’t you love me? Why aren’t you saying it back?” Geo angrily crawls up to the computer screen and in a frustrated whisper says, “I’m sort of having a weird day!” This moment was just so relatable and really brought the movie closer to home for me. I loved it, it was really funny!

Cons:
- Secondary Characters – Roger Ebert makes a good point, “This version occupies a denatured action-movie landscape, with no time for local color and a transit system control room that humbles Mission Control. That also may explain the film’s lack of time to establish the supporting characters, even Travolta’s partners.” I agree because, of course I didn’t want anyone to die, but I just didn’t really care about anyone except Washington. However, I think putting more emphasis on the secondary characters may have hung up the pacing a little and if that’s the case then I’d pass on the secondary characters.



- A Little Over the Top – The cars flipping during collisions are a little dramatic, but dang it if it doesn’t make for a good action sequence!

Summary:
“The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” is certainly entertaining. Now that it’s up against “Transformers 2” I don’t think it stands a chance, but make sure to catch it on DVD because you’ll really enjoy Washington and Travolta’s performances.

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review – Blindness

“Blindness” is not a happy movie, in fact, it’s kind of scary. Not only does the film depict an epidemic of a contagious illness rendering people blind, but it also depicts the worst of humanity and not in an outlandish way, it’s very, very realistic (which is the scary part). Danny Glover, Mark Ruffalo, Julianne Moore, Alice Braga, Gael García Bernal, Sandra Oh amongst others make up this ensemble piece about a group of afflicted individuals quarantined in an abandoned mental hospital where literally the blind lead the blind – except for one - a Doctor’s wife - who keeps her ability to still see a secret. After watching “Blindness” I just hope that something like this never actually happens, because it won’t be pretty.

Pros:
- Amazing Acting – I love it when actors make an audience hate them, love them, feel sympathy for them, because that’s a sign that they are really great! The actors of “Blindness” brought me into their … well ... situation I guess, so much so that I couldn’t just sit back and passively watch this movie - I was involved.

- Unique Story – There is definitely a portfolio of disease infecting society movies out there, but “Blindness” is different. No one actually dies from the illness that’s causing them white blindness. And it’s rare to have a movie of this genre continue as if there is hope to have a semi regular life after the disease (whether they are blind or not). In this movie, the illness doesn’t equal certain death or life as a zombie.



- The Pacing – The story progresses nicely – we learn about the illness and the reaction to it at the same time as the people and government in the movie learn about it. It’s paced so that the decline of society and the feeling of desperation is believable – we aren’t just thrown into chaos and expected to buy it.

Cons:
- Not Happy Times – There are about 15 minutes of this movie that are happy. I could have used a little more.

- It’s Scary! – I’m a little afraid that something like this could happen and seeing the way people changed and the awful things they did in the movie – I just wouldn’t want that to happen to anyone.



Summary:
“Blindness” is a good movie in the areas of acting and story, but you won’t be smiling when the credits start to roll. I think I just stared at the credits for a while and eventually I blindly turned off the TV.

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review – Deception

An accountant with a boring life is befriended one day by a mystery man who takes him on a whirl wind of exciting places – playing racquet ball with hot girls, going to the nicest clubs, smoking pot in a conference room - basically turning the accountant’s life upside down (in a good way). But of course it’s all too good to be true and suddenly the accountant is afraid for his life. Ewan McGregor, Hugh Jackman and Michelle Williams star in this sexy thriller (although you’ll probably be able to guess how it ends – it’s still entertaining).

Pros:
- All Star Cast – Its tough to top the three stars. McGregor, Jackman and Williams are a talented bunch and this movie emphasizes their best qualities – McGregor – his ability to play sincere and naive; Jackman – his ability to play the mans man and Williams – her subtly.



- It’s Attractive – Shot in Madrid and Bryant Park, NY the scenery couldn’t possibly look more welcoming for mayhem.

- This is How You Do Nudity – I know I complain a lot about unnecessary nudity, so for all the filmmakers in the world – study “Deception.” The nudity is appropriate without going overboard.



Cons:
- “Derailed” Revisited – If you’ve seen the movie “Derailed” starring Jennifer Aniston, Clive Owen and Vincent Cassel – then you’ve seen “Deception” (except "Deception" has more sex).

- People Only Want… - If you judged humanity based on “Deception” then you’d come to the conclusion that the only things people want in life are sex, money and power over other people. Love doesn’t really factor in until all the others are accomplished, there’s no family, no real friends, or other meaningful aspects of life.

- You’re Not Psychic – You’re not a psychic, the end is just that easy to guess.

- Sloooow Down! – It all happens so fast that it’s hard to believe some of the relationships develop that quickly.



Summary:
I’m 50/50 on “Deception.” I didn’t love it, but I didn’t hate it. It definitely showcases some of my favorite actors, but it’s predictable. If you’re interested in a sexy thriller – this movie is for you.

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Movie Review – Spiral

“Spiral” is a strange movie. I only rented it because it has one of my new favorite actors in it, Zachary Levi. “Spiral” is about Mason, a talented painter working at a telemarketing firm who sketches women and hears voices. At lunch one day a bubbly, bouncy co-worker reaches out to him and he begins to sketch her. They develop a friendship that evolves into a relationship and one morning Amber makes a discovery that changes everything.

Pros:
- Psychological Thriller It Is – Directors Joel Moore and Adam Green are known for stranger films and “Spiral” is certainly not an exception. Although other films, such as “Hatchet,” are bloodier than “Spiral” the creep factor is absolutely at a high level here.



- Unique Characters – I can definitely say I haven’t ever seen characters quite like Mason (the main guy played by Joel Moore [he was in Dodgeball]) and Berkeley (Levi). With Mason you can’t tell if his sketches are out of love, infatuation, obsession, or if it’s just what he does. And Berkeley, we don’t really understand why he’s friends with Mason, why he’s so protective of him and such an [bleep] hole to everyone else.



- Guessing Until the End – I definitely didn’t see the last 10 minutes of the movie coming. It was very M. Night Shyamalan.

- Check out this review – Critic Robert Koehler puts it nicely. He says, “[the movie] offers a momentarily strong slice of psycho cinema to the degree that an intimate camera and heavily designed soundtrack suggest what it's like to be inside Mason's rattled head.” (read the rest of his review)

Cons:
- Again, the Characters – With the exception of Amber (played by Amber Tamblyn) everyone is really unlikable!

- Dark Ages – It’s a little TOO dark.

- End – There were no hints as to the ending, so there’s no way to really guess it until it’s revealed and I don’t really like that. I like to pay attention and put pieces together, but you’re not really afforded that opportunity in “Spiral.”

Summary:
I won’t be recommending this movie to anyone unless they want to watch decent acting (Levi is totally not his usual “Chuck” character!).

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra

So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.

http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Movie Review – W.

“W.” is a movie showing the more troublesome times the former President has had both before his days in the Oval Office and during his Presidency. We see a goofier side of the 43rd President who has given this country so many memorable quotes. We get an insider glimpse of what it may have been like to be the Leader of the U.S. during one of its most difficult times – 9/11. Oliver Stone’s “W.” is surprisingly more unbiased than I expected and I did actually learn a lot about GW.

Pros:
- It's Funny – You have to admit that his Presidency was riddled with hilarious Bushisms. The movie takes advantage of that. Thrown in here and there are “misunderestimated,” “Internets,” and other famous word mangles. It also takes advantage of his quirky personality, his odd laugh and unique life experiences.



- The Right Actors - Josh Brolin is phenomenal. He looks like the former Pres, he nails the accent, the laugh, the walk, everything. It’s fascinating to watch! Also, Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush is wonderful to watch. Banks’ subtle humor and goofiness portray a side of the First Lady I’ve never seen.

- Personality – It’s great that this movie isn’t someone else’s opinion of President George Bush’s career. Instead, it’s someone else’s perspective (combined with a ton of research) on GW’s personality and life.



- Relating to the President – Stone chooses moments in Bush’s life that show him in a very relatable light. Bush is self doubting, wants to live up to his parent’s expectations, wants to find love, enjoyed his college days, has some sibling rivalry with his brother, etc., issues that every day folks deal with too. Go figure!

Cons:
- Disrespectful? – If you’re a huge Bush supporter, you might find that the choice of life moments such as Bush’s alcohol usage and funny phrases as President a little disrespectful (although, personally, I think that it is very well done, and more of a humors homage than insulting).

Summary:
“W.” surprised me with how unbiased it presents one of the most controversial leaders of our nation. I kinda think the President would enjoy this movie (he seems to have a fairly decent sense of humor). It’s funny and honest and you can’t help feel for the eldest son of this political family. I’d certainly recommend “W.” to any Republican or Democrat, just keep this in mind, “It's a behind-the-scenes approach, similar to Nixon, to give a sense of what it's like to be in his skin. But if Nixon was a symphony, this is more like a chamber piece, and not as dark in tone.” Oliver Stone.

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review – Doubt

“Doubt” the movie is based on the play written by John Patrick Shanley called “Doubt: A Parable,” which is a story about stubbornness, misunderstandings and, of course, doubts. Sister Aloysius, a nun stuck in the traditional ways of things in a quickly changing world, is a principle at a Catholic school in the Bronx. One day Sister James brings up an incident, which in turn encourages some suspicions Sister Aloysius has already been thinking and she decides to go out on her own to find the truth behind one the church’s Priests. The cast includes Meryl Streep as Sister Aloysius, Amy Adams as Sister James (a bright eyed and sweet teacher who kinda’ starts the whole thing), Philip Seymour Hoffman as Father Flynn (the suspected Priest) and Viola Davis as Mrs. Miller (one of the student’s mother).


Pros:
- The Words – Since the movie is based on a play it already has a great foundation of words, but in particular the dialogue is realistic. And because the majority of the movie is words (a.k.a – not a whole lot really happens, they just talk about it) it’s a darn good thing "words" is one of its strong suites.



- Great Characters – I’m always impressed when I see an actor in a role that I’ve never really seen them in before. This is particularly true for Streep and Hoffman. But the characters of “Doubt” are very well defined and lifelike yet don’t react in predictable/clichéd ways. It’s a little hard to describe actually.



- Compelling – At first glance the story may seem to be about a single African American student and an inappropriate relationship with a Priest, but that’s not the real story of “Doubt.” But the writer John Patrick Shanley (who wrote both the play and the screenplay) is far more clever and reveals a much deeper social issue.

Cons:
- The Pacing – It’s quite clear that this was originally a piece of theater. It’s a little slower than most movies these days.



- The End Ruins it All – Never in my life has the last 3 words of a movie pissed me off more. Never have the last three words completely ruined a movie for me. That is until I watched “Doubt.” And it’s heartbreaking that they are spoken by such an accomplished actor - Meryl Streep.

Summary:
“Doubt” is very real but complicated. Believable and not cliché. Intriguing but a little hard to watch the potentially career ending events unfold (career ending for a character, not an actor). It’s definitely a character based film. I think writers would really like it. But just do yourself a favor and turn your TV off at the end when Amy Adams sits next to Meryl Streep on a bench in the snow. You’ll like the movie a lot more that way.

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Movie Review – The Hangover

As much as I would love to think my taste in movies is sophisticated, I have to admit that “The Hangover” in all its testosterone, over done, modern slapstick grossness was pretty darn hilarious and I liked it! Staring Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, and Justin Bartha and from director Todd Phillips who brought us “Old School” and “Road Trip” – this boys-gone-wild Las Vegas flick follows friends Phil, Stu and Alan as they take buddy, Doug, to his Bachelor party in Sin City. Does what they say, “What happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas” apply if you can’t remember what actually happened while there? “Hangover” answers just that question. With a number of key cameos along with the adventure of figuring out what really did happen the night before, I describe “Hangover” as a mystery and comedy all in one!

Pros:

- Location, Location – Las Vegas is the only feasible place for this movie. Where else could offer the sheer potential for the variety of random things to happen and it not seem so random?

- The Right Group of Guys – Although the story is basic – 4 guys take their friend to Vegas for a bachelor party – those 4 guys are anything BUT basic. The actors - Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, and Justin Bartha – bring their own touches to what could have been stereotypical characters. Critic extraordinaire Roger Ebert describes Zach Galifianakis’s performance as, “the kind of breakout performance that made John Belushi a star after "Animal House." Great job guys!



- The “What Next Factor” – As coined by critic Ty Burr of the Boston Globe (read his review) a lot of the hilarity from this movie comes from the unconventional, odd events this group has been through. From stealing a celeb’s tiger, to a small, angry Chinese man, to a hospital visit – the surprise originality yet believability of the events keeps the laughs coming.



- Great Camera Work – The cinematographer portrays a beautiful, scenic Las Vegas that not everyone sees while bustling through the hotels on the Strip. He also uses the camera to literally put us in the moment of waking up after a heavy night of drinking to the point of sleeping face down on a linoleum floor in a Sin City suite. By strapping a camera to actor’s Ed Helms’ waist, we get my most favorite visual moment in “Hangover” with Stu, the first to wake up the morning after, and a wobbly, very close up shot and a quick feel for what this particular hangover actually feels like for these guys.

Cons:



- (I know I say it a lot, but…) Unnecessary Nudity!!! – MAN! This is an annoyance I am seeing waaaaay too often these days and “Hangover” is no exception. There’s plenty of BBB (boobs, butts and balls) throughout the hour and half flick that I REALLY didn’t need to see and didn’t, at all, add to the movie.

- Poor Groom – The groom Doug, actor Justin Bartha, is hardly in the darn movie! His worried fiancé has more lines than he does! It would have been great to get flashes of Doug’s memories of the drunken night to help the story along too.





Summary:
“The Hangover” will make you laugh and cringe in unexpected ways, which I applaud, because it’s kind of rare these days. Also, not all the funny moments are in the trailers, which I LOVE, so you’ll be surprised at a lot of the mishaps these boys encounter. It’s creatively written and not too predictable. So, for me, this makes it one of the best comedies I’ve seen in a long time!

Did you laugh? Where the jokes typical or pretty creative? What did you think of the 4 actors? A good combo or were they lame?

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra

So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.

http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Movie Review - Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian

Ben Stiller’s at it again, running around museums with a huge entourage of the best of the best character actors in the biz only this time he’s in D.C.’s Smithsonian Museums instead of New York’s Museum of Natural History. This is a great family movie to start out the summer movie season. “Museum 2” is creative, fun, witty, and actually has a little bit of history incorporated too. Don’t expect career defining performances, but expect to sit back, relax and enjoy an adventure (Amelia Earhart would be proud!).



Pros:
- History Come to Life – I bet every kid has wondered what it would be like to have the exhibits in a museum spring to life. The two “Museum” movies have brought that exciting day dream to the theaters. The highlights of the second film include Amelia Earhart, of course, Einstein, living photographs (this is a really neat effect), Al Capone, Ivan the Terrible, Napoleon Bonaparte, and a lot more.

- The Visuals – Two special effects that I really enjoyed were: 1) the photographs becoming animated and interacting with the events at the museum (also, Stiller and Adams end up in the famous Sailor kissing a Nurse photo and play out a scene in 1942). And 2) is an effect specific to Al Capone and his men – because their exhibit was in black white, the gangsters remained in black and white even when they came to life! It was fun to watch as the black and white Capone stood next to the very colorful Ivan the Terrible and little Napoleon Bonaparte.


- Amy Adams – Stole every scene she was in! She nailed the 1920’s/1930’s era lingo and speech pattern perfectly. She’s the Adams we all love - lighthearted, a little kooky, but smart and self reliant.


- Hank Azaria – Mostly he’s Kahmunrah (big brother to Museum One’s Ahkmenrah), but also adds the voices to Abe Lincoln and the Thinker statue. Azaria’s flexibility is astonishing – he’s great at choosing the comedic quirks of his characters. Kahmunrah has a bit of lisp and throws a fit when people touch his stuff. He and Adams are enough reason alone to watch Museum 2.


- The Character Actor Guest List – Stiller recruited the top funny folk in the movie industry for this movie. The hilarious ensemble includes - Owen Wilson, Robin Williams, Christopher Guest, Steve Coogan, Ricky Gervais, Bill Hader, Jay Baruchel, Clint Howard and about half the cast of “The Office.”

Cons:
- Plot, Not So Much – When it comes to movies with you-can’t-wait-to-see-what-happens-next plots, Museum 2 is not one of those movies. But that’s ok, it wasn’t supposed to be.

- Monkey Slapping – I love monkeys! But the scene where Stiller, the Monkey from the first movie and a new Monkey are slapping each other goes on waaaaaay too long!

- Under Utilizing the Talent – Though the cast is impressive, the most talented of them all Robin Williams and Christopher Guest are the least to speak! Even the Neanderthals have more lines!

- The Jonas Brothers – A better choice for the singing Cherubs would have been Justin Timberlake.

Summary:
“Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian” is a great way to spend the afternoon with your kids (young or in their 20’s as per my case). Historical figures left and right are springing into action and interact with Stiller and Adams to help out in unexpected ways. Is it a history lesson with a funny script? Definitely not, but, as my dad said “If it gets even one kid to go home and Google “Sacajawea” then it’s a good thing” (I’m paraphrasing, sorry dad). But is it a funny adventure film with a huge cast of talented character actors? You bet! It may be a rental, but it’s definitely an entertaining summer sequel.

What did you think of the movie? Cheesy sequel or fun film?

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Film Review – Terminator Salvation

Is Christian Bale the guy movie execs go to to restart their former money making franchises? The “Batman” star along with “The Village’s” Bryce Dallas Howard, Anton Yelchin, and Helena Bonham Carter are just some of the top actors chosen to reinvigorate the Terminator legacy. Director McG (known for ‘Charlie’s Angels’ and ‘We Are Marshall’) takes a stab at the series that launched Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to stardom. The result is a loud, nonstop, battle movie with a few of the franchises’ key one liners tossed in just for fun. It revolves around the now grown up and married John Connor and life on Earth after the “Judgment Day” event. It is definitely worth seeing in theaters because of the tremendous visual effects, but is it a movie that’ll be up to the “Batman” standards we are used to from Bale? Well, read on if you want to live … or if you’d rather just finish reading the review (P.s. Possible spoilers ahead as well)!

Pros:
- Not So Cheesy – An aspect of sequels that can be annoying, especially from movies with such notable one liners, is that the writers feel they have to repeat these well-known lines like it’ll be cute or something. The writers for “Salvation” did not however over do it with the numerous famous zingers from the original three films. There are a couple throughout the movie, but they are very subtle and the actors delivering the famous quotes don’t ham it up either. Great job!

- Visual Effects – The CG is incredible! Like another highly anticipated summer sequel “Transformers 2” – this movie would not exist without CG – it creates a believable habitat devastated from “Judgment Day” but it is still a location that is recognizable and familiar. The visual artists also did a great job making the Prisoner Transport machines realistic by seamlessly combining the CG with a perfectly replicated set for the actors.

- Won’t Be Left in the Dark – It has been awhile since I’ve seen any of the original “Terminator” films. If you’re like me, fear not, you won’t be left totally in the dark because McG was considerate enough to refresh our memories of the events that occurred during the previous movies at the beginning of “Salvation.” Thanks McG!

- Bryce Dallas Howard – As Conner’s pregnant wife, she and John work great as a tough team plotting against the machines as well as protecting their own people.



Cons:
- Batman Voice Cameo – The only nit picky aspect of the “Batman” movies that I don’t like is Bale’s voice when he’s Batman (versus his normal voice as Bruce Wayne). It sounds unnatural. And, sadly, the Batman voice does come back like a T-800 throughout the film.

- The "Rebar Through The Chest" Trick – A common movie magic trick film makers like to use is this: the main character is relieved he’s finally defeated every last one of his enemies when one of them surprises us all by using his last bit of energy to impale our leading dude through the chest with an object. But, as in typical badass fashion, our hero does not die from his incredibly serious injury, oh no, low and behold he WALKS away alive and ready to be badass another day. John Connor + Rebar + Chest + Walks Away = Me Feeling Cheated by a Cliche

Summary:
Honestly, there are more Pros than Cons for “Terminator Salvation,” which is not what I expected. The lack of clichés (minus the one mentioned above) and corny references to the other movies is pleasantly surprising. The dialog and plot are cohesive and believable. It’ll keep your attention, won’t confuse you with references and the acting isn't over done. I am definitely looking forward to the next installment, so keep an eye out for the review of “Terminator 5” due in 2011, because…

I’ll be back!
(hehe – I couldn’t resist!!)

Do you think “Terminator Salvation” upholds the key aspects of the original three “Terminator” films? What do you think is in store for the next two installments? Anything you particularly loved or hated about “Salvation?”

"Basically, I'm for anything that gets you through the night - be it prayer, tranquilizers or a bottle of Jack Daniels.” – Frank Sinatra
So may the prayers, tranquilizers and JD be with you and see you next time.
http://moviesworketc.blogspot.com/

Read more!

Theater Review – Wicked

The national tour of “Wicked” is in town and I was lucky enough to score tickets! My expectations were very high from the get go because the traveling cast features one of the original Broadway actors as well as Tom McGowan seen on “Frasier,” “Everybody Loves Raymond,” “Bad Santa” and others, so the talent was sure to be incredible! “Wicked” absolutely lived up to my expectations. It is full of technological magic, creative and funny songs and the actors are energetic from start to finish! If the tour comes to your area, don’t miss this one of a kind show! You’ll laugh and smile and be taken in by the stories of Galinda and Elphaba.

Pros:
- The Sets – Next to “Les Mis,” “Wicked” has one of the most impressive sets I’ve ever seen. To start with, there’s a movable, light-up dragon at the top of the proscenium arch, there’s a re-creation of the infamous Wizard of Oz floating head, Emerald City’s flashing lights and glimmer, Glinda’s traveling bubble and much more!

- The Songs – Both catchy and memorable. It’s a good thing they sell the soundtrack in the lobby because you’ll want it as soon as the curtain call is through.

- Galinda (yes, that's correct) – Helene Yorke, ‘Galinda/Glinda’ in the version I saw, is so darn cute and full of energy! Her role was originated by Kristin Chenoweth, which can clearly be seen in the mannerisms and quirky voice requirements of the role. But Yorke also brings a great sense of comedic timing and a truly beautiful singing voice to the stage.

- The Make-Up – I really want to know what type of make-up is used to make the Wicked Witch of the West green – from head to toe! She touches people, I’m sure the actress is sweating a little, and it never smears or comes off! Amazing!



- Learning the Back Stories – Not only are the stories of the Wicked Witch and the Good Witch revealed, but “Wicked” also tells us how the Scarecrow, Cowardly Lion and Tin Man come about.

Cons:
- The Second Act – Although everyone in the show is talented, the second act is just a bummer! The songs seem to drag, everything is gloomy, Elphaba’s intentions are all misunderstood, and it just gets to be draining.



Summary:
“Wicked” is a terrific and imaginative show that the audience and actors really seem to enjoy. The national tour was as high a quality as any Broadway show would be. The actors are extremely talented and have beautiful voices. It’s obvious that everyone involved puts forth 110%! I’d see it again without thinking twice!
Read more!