My girlfriend and I were trying to decide whether to see The Other Guys or Dinner for Schmucks this past Friday night. I shot Joey a text to ask his opinion. His response, “Do you like Carell or Ferrell more?” Being huge fans of The Office we both replied Carell and Joey told us our decision was made.
Things that would have been more worth our time:
Watching Steve Carell in The Office reruns.
Watching Steve Carell in Date Night after we rented it from the store.
Watching Steve Carell sleep.
Seriously. If you remember my Date Night review, you know that I was not overly impressed. Let me assure you that it was markedly better than Carell’s latest big screen endeavor. The humor in this film is derived mainly from misunderstandings that arise from the idiocy of Carell’s character, Barry. Paul Rudd’s character, Tim, meets Barry and henceforth nothing that he does goes according to plan. The two continue to find themselves tangled in awkward situations that cause problems for Tim. It may sound similar to the premise of the Meet the Parents franchise but they are world’s apart. Even if you disregard the terribly shallow characters (Larry Wilmore’s character is literally one of the worst I have ever seen) and plot, you are still left with situations that are based solely upon entirely unbelievable characters.
Some of Barry’s quirks (such as the fact that he creates scenes with taxidermic mice) are plausible and funny, but the go overboard in many occasions and make his character a total dolt. Many of his actions do not mesh with the rest of what we know about his character and he is taken from tremendously socially awkward to complete and utter idiot, which seemingly contradicts itself.
Furthermore, the writer appeared to be torn on whether one should feel sorry for Barry and empathize with him or just find him totally laughable. The dynamic between the two does not work well and makes for a feel good ending that leaves you with a confused and dumbfounded feeling. This is one of the worst comedies I have seen in recent memory and certainly the worst work I have seen from Carell. As he transitions away from The Office, hopefully this is not a sign of things to come from Steve Carell’s live action movie projects.
.5 stars out of 5
The reason I say live action projects is because Saturday brought a new day, and I decided to give Steve another chance as I went to see the new Dreamworks animated blockbuster Despicable Me. When you come out with an animated film weeks after the largest grossing animated film to date (Toy Story 3 if you live under a rock and haven’t read this), your expectations have to be tempered. The same must be true when going to watch such a film. If you do, you will be pleasantly amused with Despicable Me. The film’s plot is fairly original as super-villain Gru (voiced by Carell) learns to father three young girls that he has adopted in order to use for his dastardly plan to become the greatest thief of all time. The story is entertaining for both young and old. Children will enjoy the gentle humor and goofy minions while adults will sympathize with some of Gru’s lot and will appreciate some of the jokes intended for a more mature audience (including a jab at the company formerly known as Lehman Brothers).
The difference between this film and Carell’s other recent ones is that it is not based solely upon his character. Gru is in no way similar to Michael Scott and so Carell can successfully create a character that has no ties to what made him big.
Despicable Me is a fun movie that does not try to do too much, but lets Carell break away from what seems to be a patterned typecast. Its humor is driven by good writing, and I’ll say it again, good stories make good movies.
3 stars out of 5
Moral of the story, Joey cannot be trusted. Just kidding. If you haven’t been able to tell by now the two of us have slightly different movie tastes. Hope you are still enjoying the blog, and please feel free to share this link on Facebook or post it on your Twitter. We would greatly appreciate it. Speaking of Twitter be sure to follow @clawtomicbaum for the latest from the minds of two geniuses. And don’t forget to send us requests!!!!
-Nuss
Showing posts with label Nuss. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nuss. Show all posts
Weekend With Steve: Reviews of Dinner for Schmucks and Despicable Me
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Read User's Comments
Sweet Dreams are Made of These: A review of Inception
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Ever since the inception (wow terrible pun) of our blog, Joey and I have been talking about having a date night where the two of us would reunite like old times to go check out a new movie. For the last six months we have been trying to get together and it almost happened this weekend. Being the great friend and co-blogger that he is, Joe asked if I wanted to see Inception and I was pumped. But like that day when you realize the NBA is not a viable career option, my dreams were dashed as Joey had to go into work at 6:30 (on a Friday night mind you). I know, some friend.
To make a long story short, I am not really sure how it all came together or how we got there, but we ended up on a double-date at Inception (Joey mentioned our last double date here). The typical hype that surrounds each new mind-bending thriller had made me pretty excited to see the latest pairing of Nolan and DiCaprio. The last time DiCaprio paired with a first class director (see Shutter Island review here) I was very impressed, so my expectations for this one were very high.
The movie throws your right into the action and confusion. The first couple of scenes begin as a dream within a dream and quickly alert the audience that they will have to pay attention to all that is said. The story reminds me of the Matrix insomuch as it centers around questions of reality and consciousness. The imaginative creativity that expresses itself in the creation of entire cities and bends physical boundaries is the most compelling aspect of the movie. It drives the plot and allows for some impressive visual effects (still kind of wish I saw it in IMAX).
Overall the acting was satisfactory. Headliner DiCaprio’s character in many ways mimics his portrayal of Teddy Daniels in Shutter Island. While the east coast accent is gone, the fact that he (SPOILER ALERT) sometimes struggles with defining reality and is haunted by his suicidal wife makes his characters nearly identical. I was pleasantly surprised by Tom Hardy who played Eames (the witty quick talking forger of dreams). He brings a suave demeanor and eccentricity that bring his character into a reality (another terrible pun). Ellen Page was good but nothing to write home about and Joseph Gordon-Levitt was the winner of best actor whose career has been defined by a baseball movie. He starred in Angels in the Outfield and beat out Tom Berenger who was Jake Owens in Major League (in all seriousness his performance is pretty good and he had one of my favorite lines of the whole film when he steals a kiss from one of his co-stars.
All in all, the movie borders on the edge of confusion for confusion’s sake. The plans were well discussed and therefore explained to the audience until an added layer of complexity in the last half an hour of the plot. The story skillfully incorporates common knowledge about dreams and weaves (third bad pun) it into the details behind dream-sharing technology. An example is how each layer of the dream causes the dream to occur in less time in reality. This allows for building of anticipation as one layer of the dream reaches its culmination and the others to continue on leaving the audience hanging. The plot is intriguing and the idea of stealing valuable information through dreams has to make you wonder.
The last quarter of this one kept it from being a great movie. Don’t get me wrong , it was still really good. But towards the end, I was feeling tired, my head was spinning, and I felt disoriented. But then again the easiest way to tell if you are in a dream is whether or not you can remember how you got there. I thought the end of the movie was a cop out, then again, since I can’t remember how I got there, maybe I’m just dreaming.
3.5 Stars out of 5
As always, we'd love to hear your thoughts. Comment below and make sure to follow us on Twitter. And if any of you have hookups with the Daily Journal or any other publication that needs some movie review help, let us know. Also if you want to treat me and Joey to a free movie, or even tell us you're going to treat us and then make us pay (thanks Megan McCarty) give us a holler. I promise it'll be a good time.
-Nuss
To make a long story short, I am not really sure how it all came together or how we got there, but we ended up on a double-date at Inception (Joey mentioned our last double date here). The typical hype that surrounds each new mind-bending thriller had made me pretty excited to see the latest pairing of Nolan and DiCaprio. The last time DiCaprio paired with a first class director (see Shutter Island review here) I was very impressed, so my expectations for this one were very high.
The movie throws your right into the action and confusion. The first couple of scenes begin as a dream within a dream and quickly alert the audience that they will have to pay attention to all that is said. The story reminds me of the Matrix insomuch as it centers around questions of reality and consciousness. The imaginative creativity that expresses itself in the creation of entire cities and bends physical boundaries is the most compelling aspect of the movie. It drives the plot and allows for some impressive visual effects (still kind of wish I saw it in IMAX).
Overall the acting was satisfactory. Headliner DiCaprio’s character in many ways mimics his portrayal of Teddy Daniels in Shutter Island. While the east coast accent is gone, the fact that he (SPOILER ALERT) sometimes struggles with defining reality and is haunted by his suicidal wife makes his characters nearly identical. I was pleasantly surprised by Tom Hardy who played Eames (the witty quick talking forger of dreams). He brings a suave demeanor and eccentricity that bring his character into a reality (another terrible pun). Ellen Page was good but nothing to write home about and Joseph Gordon-Levitt was the winner of best actor whose career has been defined by a baseball movie. He starred in Angels in the Outfield and beat out Tom Berenger who was Jake Owens in Major League (in all seriousness his performance is pretty good and he had one of my favorite lines of the whole film when he steals a kiss from one of his co-stars.
All in all, the movie borders on the edge of confusion for confusion’s sake. The plans were well discussed and therefore explained to the audience until an added layer of complexity in the last half an hour of the plot. The story skillfully incorporates common knowledge about dreams and weaves (third bad pun) it into the details behind dream-sharing technology. An example is how each layer of the dream causes the dream to occur in less time in reality. This allows for building of anticipation as one layer of the dream reaches its culmination and the others to continue on leaving the audience hanging. The plot is intriguing and the idea of stealing valuable information through dreams has to make you wonder.
The last quarter of this one kept it from being a great movie. Don’t get me wrong , it was still really good. But towards the end, I was feeling tired, my head was spinning, and I felt disoriented. But then again the easiest way to tell if you are in a dream is whether or not you can remember how you got there. I thought the end of the movie was a cop out, then again, since I can’t remember how I got there, maybe I’m just dreaming.
3.5 Stars out of 5
As always, we'd love to hear your thoughts. Comment below and make sure to follow us on Twitter. And if any of you have hookups with the Daily Journal or any other publication that needs some movie review help, let us know. Also if you want to treat me and Joey to a free movie, or even tell us you're going to treat us and then make us pay (thanks Megan McCarty) give us a holler. I promise it'll be a good time.
-Nuss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
