|
|
B. Merritt's Profile
Customer Reviews: 744
New Reviewer Rank: 1,030
Classic Reviewer Rank: 355
Helpful Votes:
5437
Views:
1706
Helpful Votes:
9
Views:
127
Helpful Votes:
0
|
|
Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Your Profile.
|
Reviews Written by
B. Merritt "filmreviewstew.com" (WWW.FILMREVIEWSTEW.COM, Pacific Grove, California United States)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Watch It For The Continuation But Not For The Characters ...Because They Aren't In Here, July 4, 2009
I think it's safe to say that the folks at Disney (the company that made this film) watched too much of The Lord of the Rings and tried - and failed - to emulate it. Epic battles, living trees, and much more are pulled directly from what we saw only a few years ago under Peter Jackson's able hands. And although THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN has a few "moments" of its own, it fails to entertain anywhere near the first film, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.
This is mostly due to the fact that we are rushed into battle scene after battle scene with little time to look at (and feel for) the characters. This is painfully obvious when we get 7/8 of the way through the film and still haven't seen Aslan but have been in so many fights that they begin to meld together. The Lord of the Rings never had this problem because the focus was kept tight on the characters, particularly the Hobbits. Which brings me to a positive point about Prince Caspian: the development of the friendship between Lucy (Georgie Henley, returning from the first Chronicles film) with that of the dwarf Trumpkin (Peter Dinklage, Death at a Funeral). Although lightly touched on by comparisons with, say, Samwise and Frodo, the connection between dwarf and young queen was powerful enough to make me care a bit about what happened to them.
The downsides, however, are just too numerous. The almost bratty nature of Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes, Stardust) made the main character seem petulant rather than regal. And his continued arrogance toward Peter (William Moseley) was completely out of context with C.S. Lewis' novels. The repetitive battle scenes lead nowhere, and when Narnians die, we really don't feel any remorse for them as the viewer.
That said, there's plenty of eye-candy in terms of CGI. It's everywhere. And it's almost too pervasive. But it is used well ...albeit often.
The big question many may be asking is: "Should I watch it?" And the answer is a definite "yes." Although it's horribly flawed, it's worth watching for Lucy and Trumpkin, as well as the funny antics of Pattertwig the Squirrel and his deadly sword. And you'll need to be up on the film for the final release due out some time in the near future: THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER. Let's hope Disney gets that one right and we'll at least have two out of three in the positive corner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blood Hunt: A Novel
|
by Ian Rankin
Edition: Mass Market Paperback |
| Price: $7.99 |
|
| Availability: In Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
Oops. Mr. Rankin Slipped Up?, July 3, 2009
Comparisons will always be made between an author's previous work and his newer or lesser known ones. Fair or not, these comparisons are valid in terms of literary quality and how they foster against the greater works of their predecessors. That being the case, I have to say that comparing BLOOD HUNT against Mr. Rankin's other novels is a tough call to make.
Most of us know and love Ian Rankin's Inspector Rebus series of books ...starting with Knots and Crosses. Having read just about all of these, I have come to expect the unexpected from Rankin's characters. His stories border on predictability then veer wildly to the unexpected. I particularly enjoy that most of his murder mysteries start out with the murderer basically being known but his/her motives not quite so clear. And having Rebus falling apart but working through pains and problems was always something we (the reader) could empathize with.
Unfortunately, most of that gets lost in Blood Hunt. Initially seeming like a Rebus format, the story never gains a sense of wonder; the reader learns of a problem (a murder in this case) and the path is exceptionally (dare I say predictably?) drab and pat. Chances are, while reading the book, if you think you might know where it's headed, you do (ex. Brother of ex-SAS officer is found dead of apparent suicide. Brother checks into the circumstances surrounding the suicide. Finds out it's a murder with possible police cover-up. Brother fights the good fight, even going so far as to put his family in danger. Kills his adversary. Exposes bad guys. The end.) This is, perhaps, over-simplifying it, but the gist is there.
If you stick with what Mr. Rankin does best (Rebus), you'll be exceptionally pleased. But if you wander afield and check out his lesser works, don't say you haven't been forewarned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
A Gritty, Comedic, Bachelor Movie Surrounded By A Mystery..., June 15, 2009
***CONTAINS SPOILERS***
A surprising combination of outlandishness, childishness, and drunkenness move along at a funny pace in this year's comedic offering, THE HANGOVER. What really helps the film, too, is the complete contradictions that is each scenario surrounding four men who head to Las Vegas for a bachelor party.
Doug the bachelor (Justin Bartha, National Treasure) heads to the city of sin with friends Phil (Bradley Cooper, Failure to Launch), Stu (Ed Helms, Walk Hard) and future brother-in-law Alan (Zach Galifianakis, Into the Wild). All of them, as stated earlier, are complete contradictions. And these contradictions seep out of the film like nausea creeping up on you the day after heavy drinking. Doug, the bachelor, we don't see much of because his buddies lose him their first night in Vegas ...and I mean they literally LOSE him. Doug is the responsible one who obviously lets go a bit too much as we later watch him -- on a video surveillance tape -- dry-hump a tiger they steal from Mike Tyson's home. Yes, THAT Mike Tyson. Phil, the carefree one, has to become the responsible adult and find Doug amidst the chaos that is Alan and Stu. Stu, we quickly learn, has lost more than his marbles but also a tooth (did I mention that Stu is a dentist?). And Alan -- who's "not allowed within a hundred yards of a school" -- ends up carrying a baby on his chest; a baby that they have no idea where it came from. But let's back up a second...
Our friends toast on top of a fancy hotel, drink their first round of drinks under the stars, and then remember nothing much after that. What the devil happened? Were they slipped a Mickey somehow? Regardless, the morning after, they awaken in their hotel room with quite a few surprises. First thing they notice is that their room is completely destroyed. The next is that they have a live Bengal Tiger in their bathroom. Then a baby in the closet. A missing tooth in Stu's head. Missing pants for Alan. And all of them have misplaced their memories of the previous night.
From here the story takes on a the role of a comedic mystery, trying to solve the prior night's mishaps, shenanigans, and debauchery. The main theme, though, is to find out where Doug the bachelor might be. Stolen police cars, kidnapped and naked orientals, and an unknown wedding all lead our three buddies to their goal.
Making it back to the wedding (late, of course) the comedy takes a more serious twist as we find out what Doug has learned about his life, his future wife, and his friends (standing at the alter, we hear him become a responsible husband). But finding a camera after the wedding and viewing it with Stu, Alan, and Phil will end the film in a most shocking manner as the credits roll with bizarre screen shots.
This film will most certainly not be for everyone. It isn't, in anyway, similar to the 1984 Tom Hanks film Bachelor Party. The Hangover is more gritty, more modern, and definitely more visual (in both a sexual and crude manner). It assaults the senses, which is why it works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No More White Noise, June 8, 2009
Works like a charm. Small. Unobtrusive. But vital. VERY vital. Without it, my 5,000 mghz phone and answering machine sounds like two people having sex on top of an off-balance washing machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
I Don't Believe It..., June 3, 2009
I must admit that I haven't watched THE X-FILES television series for some time. Like many series (Lost included) they start getting ridiculous or lose focus of their storylines. I guess I shouldn't have been surprised that this newest theatrical release -- THE X-FILES: I WANT TO BELIEVE -- is just as insipid as the last few episodes I'd watched of the television series. And it looks more like a murder mystery than the supernatural feel that appealed to early watchers of the series.
David Duchovny (Evolution) reprises his role as ex-FBI agent Fox Mulder, as does Gillian Anderson (The Last King of Scotland) as Dana Scully. The ridiculousness of the premise is such that I'm having trouble typing it here. It sounds so ...pat and simple. But it's basically about a pedophile catholic Father who supposedly has visions of women who've been kidnapped recently and moved to unknown quarters. One of the kidnapped is an FBI agent and agent Whitney (Amanda Peet, Martian Child) wants Mulder's help to find out if this holy man (Billy Connolly, Fido) is the real deal or if he's jerking their chain. "Wanting to believe", and still aching to find his lost sister, Mulder joins up with the FBI once again and gets pulled into the terrors ...along with Scully.
By this time, we know that Scully and Mulder are hot for each other. It's old news brought back around again and given way too much easy screen time. They fall into each others' arms in lockstep fashion (no surprise there).
The storyline is simple and pretty lame. And it really has nothing to do with the supernatural or aliens or anything that we've come to expect from Chris Carter's creation. It's more in-line with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, a sort of horror/murder-mystery ...mess.
The saddest part is the over-acting by Duchovny and Anderson. Their lines are forced and unrealistic, as are almost all the actions that dictate what they do.
I felt this film would've been better relegated to the realms of the television series than given a theatrical budget. It's weak. Really weak.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
Exceptional Documentary That Focuses On Everyone Involved Post 9/11, June 3, 2009
I often complain about the lopsidedness of documentaries. And more often than not, whenever I mention this, people pepper me with insults because they believe "that's what documentaries are designed to do." I beg to differ. Let me show you what I mean.
There are some seriously stilted documentaries that look at one side (and ONLY one side) of an issue and never give credence to the other. How about an interview with someone who opposes the views that the documentarians are putting forth? How about some information that might refute what is being told? This one-sidedness is just too easy to find. Things like After Innocence, The Future of Food, and Religulous are prime examples (there are tons more but I don't have the time nor inclination to mention them).
Occasionally - if not extremely rarely - a documentary will come along that allows both sides to speak. And such is the case with the Academy Award winner TAXI TO THE DARK SIDE.
The story starts and ends with the murder of Dilawar, a taxi cab driver in Afghanistan who is mistakenly picked up by U.S. forces and sent to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba for interrogation. Once there, he soon dies from injuries sustained at the hands of his captors. The middle of this documentary is the meat and potatoes of what went horribly wrong with the U.S.'s war on terror. It's a serious eye-opener. Not because it focuses on the problems the U.S. had with its detainees after 9/11, but because it allows everyone to speak about the successes and failures of torture. Yes, torture.
From the men on the ground (staff sergeants and privates) to the President's advisory attorney at the U.S. Dept. of Justice (John Woo), we get to hear from just about everyone on the topic of the incarcerated detainees and their treatment at the hands of untrained and unprepared interrogators. It is astonishing, too, to learn that not a single person above the rank of sergeant was punished for the death of Dilawar (nor any other detainee who was abused). You mean to tell me that these grunts were responsible for ...everything? Give me a break!
I don't delude myself any longer. The U.S. (either overtly or covertly) now uses "enhanced interrogation techniques" (e.g. torture). Make no doubt about it. We do it because we want to protect ourselves. But at what cost to our own moral compass? We claim to follow The Geneva Convention, but do we? Not as far as I can tell. And don't take my word for it. Watch ALL of the people in this documentary talk about this very subject and come to your own conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
Jolie Surprises By Not Showing Skin And Instead Showing Much Talent..., June 3, 2009
The CHANGELING is a frightening cautionary tale of historical abuses by those in power against the meager. No, I'm not talking about the last eight years under George W. Bush. This is 1928 Los Angeles, and a single mother named Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie, Wanted) returns home from work to find her young son Walter (Gattlin Griffith) missing. After frantic calls to the local police department, the next day a patrol car is sent out and a missing person's report is filed. Five months later Walter is found and brought home ...but it isn't Walter. He was taller ...and was not circumcised. Ms. Collins pleads with the police to find her son and take back this imposter but the police refuse.
Captain J.J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan, Hitch) of the LAPD tries to make Ms. Collins seem crazy or out of touch. He goes so far as to have her incarcerated at a mental institution where she finds other women like herself who have challenged the authority of the police only to have everything taken away.
Meanwhile we learn that an insane man named Gordon Stewart Northcott (Jason Butler Harner, John Adams miniseries) has kidnapped many children and taken them to his distant ranch where unthinkable things were done. Most of this was discovered when a Canadian child illegally in the U.S. spills the goods to a semi-decent cop, Detective Ybarra (Michael Kelly, Dawn of the Dead) who tries to bring this to the attention of his superiors only to be rebuffed because "it doesn't look good for the department."
On Ms. Collins' side (even while she's in the loony bin) is Reverend Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich, Burn After Reading) who learns of Christine's problems with the LAPD and already has a running battle going on with them over their autocratic style. His assistance is invaluable in aiding in Christine's release from the mental institution ...as well as releasing the other women who were wrongfully imprisoned on behalf of the LAPD.
History tells us that Mr. Northcott gets what's coming to him. He's a slightly pitiable and disgusting fellow who was probably completely insane. Actor Jason Harner played him exceptionally well; a creepy and frightening premonition from the past. We also learn that several LAPD higher-ups get canned in the wake of the breaking news about the despicable things the authorities have done.
Most of the praise obviously goes to Angeline Jolie for her excellent portrayal of Christine Collins. You can feel the rising tension as she battles to find her son and butts up against the walls of "justice." Frustration is palpable. And you hope beyond hope that little Walter survived his ordeal. But did he?
History tells us he probably didn't. But who knows. He could be a changeling, wandering out there, lost amidst the masses. We hope...
(Final note: Clint Eastwood needs to stay behind the camera from now on. He's got what it takes to remain a powerful director. Please!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I Need A Twelve Step Program!, May 30, 2009
Okay, I admit it: I'm addicted to Swiffer products. I own just about everything they've come out with and am pretty darned happy with them. This item, the Swiffer Wet Jet, is my hardwood-floor-saviour ...but not without some issues.
First is that hardwood floors are a bit of a pain to keep up. They show dirt, grime and streaks readily, so you have to be willing to sweep, re-sweep, and mop on a fairly regular basis. If your floors are really dirty, then you'll be going through Wet Jet replacement pads quickly (something I've learned). The pads are great for what they are but once they get any significant amount of dirt on them, they rapidly become useless. They will streak your floors mercilessly and you'll scream in dismay at how terrible they look. Do not fret. What you need to do is sweep (I use a Swiffer Max Sweeper) ...and sweep well. What I do next is use the Swiffer Vacuum Sweeper (yes, I double-sweep ...I told you I was addicted!). Then, if the floor looks free of debri, I pull out the Wet Jet.
Now I need to get the floor wet. Really wet. So I put down a good layer of the solution by holding down the spray button for about 3 seconds. I start mopping. And I don't mean just lazily spreading the solution around on the floor. I get my back into it. Scrub. Scrub. I go over trouble-looking areas two or three times. I scrub some more. If my floors were really dirty, I change out the pad frequently to prevent streaking. After I've finished, I don't walk on the wet floor. I let it evaporate. The smell of various solutions is nice and not overly strong (at least it wasn't for me).
After the floor has completely finished drying, I look at the floor from different angles. See streaking? That's where the pad got too dirty and couldn't pick up the grime so I just pushed it around on the floor. I re-mop the trouble spots using the Wet Jet. And scrub. Scrub hard. Now I look again. I don't see any streaking or grime.
Mopping needs will depend on how much dirt is tracked into your home, so if you've got a high volume walk-in area, it'll need Swiffering more frequently than you might like. But I don't mind it. Like I said, I'm addicted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diabetics With A Sweet-Tooth --- REJOICE!, May 30, 2009
When I was diagnosed with type-II diabetes about two years ago, it felt like a death blow. I mean, I love sweets. And my favorite were peanut butter cookies (my wife also made a mean peanut butter cheesecake that I still crave to this day but am able to hold off thanks to these Murray Sugar Free Cookies). I'd tried other sugar free items but they all had a seriously bad after-taste to them. The artificial sweetners were pretty bad.
But the Murray brand are pretty darned good. And I can eat about 6 of them that equal 32 carbs (I'm a tall guy --- 6 feet, three inches --- with a big frame). There's no horrible after-taste and the peanut butter flavor is just enough to satisfy my slavering pallete.
If you're looking for a quality cookie that won't shoot your blood sugar up into the statosphere, these are a great option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
The Presiden't Been Shot ...Again and Again and Again and Again and Again!, May 30, 2009
The problem with VANTAGE POINT is that it doesn't take into consideration two very important things: the point of view of the watcher, and a believable storyline. Let me explain...
Seeing a situation/crime/etc. from different points of view might be interesting to some. But if you're going to do that, you need to make sure that there are engaging points that aren't repeated ad nauseam. You might think that four or five points of view would be the maximum allowable for something like this. And you'd probably be right. But how about six? Or seven? Too many? Would you believe this one has eight?! Far, far, far too many. And they all start just about the same place, which grated on the nerves after a short while.
The storyline is pretty ridiculous, too. Doppleganger Presidents. Double Secret Service agents. Terrorists who need to hire an assassin. And an ending that is pure schlock.
Not being that much of a fan of Dennis Quaid didn't help matters for me either -- the only two films with him in them that I enjoyed were Enemy Mine and The Big Easy. The rest of his movie repertoire is questionable to say the least; Jaws 3-D, Yours, Mine & Ours, The Day After Tomorrow, etc.
I will say, however, that the action was fun to watch. And seeing William Hurt (Into the Wild) get shot multiple times was pretty enjoyable, too. But that's where my enjoyment stopped. Matthew Fox (Speed Racer) as agent Kent Taylor was completely miscast and unbelievable. But probably the most miscast of all the characters was Forest Whitaker. Having seen Whitaker in The Last King of Scotland, I know what he's capable of. Here, he seemed like an overweight but athletic American out of his league carrying a video camera through Spain because ...well ...we're not sure.
The big and final letdown was the ending of this film. If terrorists are prepared to kill, maim, and destroy innocent people in order to get to the President of the United States, would running over a girl stop them? I doubt that. Which made me nearly turn off the film. But we had to have a happy ending, sweet and sticky, with Quaid saving the day. Ugh.
|
|
|
|
(WWW.FILMREVIEWSTEW.COM, Pacific Grove, California United States)
![The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (Three-Disc Collector's Edition+ Digital Copy and BD Live) [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61xn7z%2BhaPL._SL110_.jpg)
![The Hangover [Theatrical Release]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51oHbKLSfEL._SL110_.jpg)
![The X-Files: I Want to Believe (+ Digital Copy) [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41aypd6UtuL._SL110_.jpg)
![Changeling [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51kHXh72r2L._SL110_.jpg)
![Vantage Point (+ BD Live) [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51A2X6F7wXL._SL110_.jpg)
