My top 5 movies of 2011

It’s the end of the year, so you know what time it is? That’s right, it’s time for my 3rd annual top 5 movie blog post.

Looking back to 2009 I was a big fan of comedies, as all of my choices gave a good laugh or two. In 2010 I’m sure I watched funny movies, but I moved on to more dramatic/thriller kind of movies for my top 5 picks. After watching 37 movies this year, let’s see what top picks are. When you’re done scrolling let me know your favourites:

5. 50/50

Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Seth Rogen, 50/50 is based on a true story of writer Will Reisler who blends the seriousness of a life-threatening cancer story, with comedy.

4. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows II

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2It was a long journey but the story of Harry Potter was finally settled, and they couldn’t have finished it in a better way. I found as the cast got older and the storyline became darker, the movies became more entertaining.

3. Bridesmaids

BridesmaidsI hadn’t really seen a comedy that made me laugh til it hurt since The Hangover, but I was expecting Bridesmaids, starring Kristen Wiig and a great cast would at least compete for the title – and it matched it.

2. The Help

The HelpAs I mentioned in my review earlier this year, I was worried the movie version of The Help, wouldn’t live up to the book version – thankfully it did, and then some. This is a great story to open up the discussion of race relations, but also one with strong female characters played by Viola Davis, Octavia Spencer and (though on the evil side of strong) Bryce Dallas Howard.

1. Super 8

Super 8When I first saw the previews for Super 8 I wasn’t all that excited to see it, but once I watched it I couldn’t take my eyes off the movie, and it shot to the top of my list. I’ve seen a few people saying this J.J. Abrams directed movie is an homage to producer Steven Spielberg’s films like E.T. for the most part, but I could also feel a hint of Hook and Jurassic Park – simply for the use of the children.

50/50: Odds are you’ll love it

50/50As with any other Joseph Gordon-Levitt movie, I was compelled to check this one out. There’s something about the scripts this guy picks that produce great movies, and 50/50 was no different.

The gist of the film is Gordon-Levitt’s character, Adam, finds out he has a rare form of back cancer and that because of the difficulty of the operation, there’s a 50/50 chance that he’ll survive. Obviously it’s a traumatic experience for him, but thankfully his best friend Kyle, played by Seth Rogen, is there to lighten up the situation. Because of his situation, his relationship with his mother, wonderfully played by Anjelica Houston,  becomes stronger as he opens up to her, and conversely he begins to see the true colours of his girlfriend, Bryce Dallas Howard.

Writer Will Reiser does an excellent job of mixing some serious subject matter with comedy, which lead to a roller coaster of emotions throughout the movie. Of course, since the story is based on Reiser’s own experiences, it came across as very realistic. You could feel Adam’s emotional struggles as he tries to deal with his cancer, his flaky girlfriend, his semi-hysterical mother and even Kyle who, in trying to make him feel better by getting him to use his illness as a way to hook up with girls.

The scenes with his therapist Katherine, played by Anna Kendrick, and the relationship that develops between the two is where I’m mostly torn. As a young therapist she seems way out of her element in dealing with a patient – she has very little experience – and when you add on her acting on her feelings for Adam, she is in no way qualified to work in the profession. I like the chemistry between the two once it gets over the initial awkwardness, but it’s totally unrealistic (though I’ll admit, not improbable).

50/50 will make you laugh, but just as quickly you may find yourself tearing up, so be prepared to deal with an emotional drama with great comedic timing. Gordon-Levitt steals the show once again, and has made it possible for me to give the movie a 5/5.

Our Idiot Brother doesn’t hit you over the head for laughs

Our Idiot Brother

Paul Rudd is usually a hit, and is always a draw for the fiancee, so Our Idiot Brother was a movie we had to check out.

The movie is about Ned (Paul Rudd), a bit of a hippie who has a very honest and optimistic look at life. After some things don’t go his way after an unfortunate sale to a police officer and breakup with his girlfriend, he’s still happy, but left to his own devices with no real marketable skills. While he tries to get back on his feet, he bounces between his three sisters’ places, where his simple but genuinely well meaning ways of helping them deal with their issues end up causing more trouble than good.

If you’re looking for a comedy that has a solid storyline and isn’t one that hits you over the head with jokes, then this is a good choice. His sisters, played by Zooey Deschanel, Elizabeth Banks and Emily Mortimer deliver great performances. One is sex-crazed and can’t keep a steady relationship, another is a journalist trying to get ahead in her career at any cost, and finally there’s the housewife who’s neglected by her husband and is essentially lifeless. They’re caught up in the stresses of their unhappiness, and their loved but burden of a brother tramples through their lives, turning each one’s upside down. While they all love each other, they’re very much a dysfunctional family who aren’t open with one another and it’s caused their relationships to suffer. Ned is the “idiot brother” who comes in and fixes it without even knowing what he did, kind of like Forrest Gump in a way.

Our Idiot Brother won’t stick with you like some movies but it’s an enjoyable movie to watch while you stay in on a weekend. I give it a 3/5.

I’m split about J. Edgar

J. Edgar

It’s not too often I’ll go see a movie based on the star, but Leonardo DiCaprio is usually a good choice. With J. Edgar, it looked like a great story about the troubled man who made the FBI into the law enforcement power it is today, so off I went to see it.

Acting

As J. Edgar Hoover, DiCaprio conveyed the frailty of the man with his mother, the overcompensating dominance with those in the bureau/politics, and the extreme paranoia against anything foreign, especially communism. I found it hard to feel for Hoover since he rarely let his emotions show, outside of anger.

Armie Hammer, as Hoover’s long-time second in command, had much more of an emotional role to play. As a man who was so clearly devoted to Hoover, he always seemed to have to keep him in check when he got out of line, but he hardly faltered, even though Hoover never really showed the affection he wanted until they were old men.

Makeup

Since the story took place across two different times, when the characters were younger and old, a lot of makeup magic was needed to make sure the characters looked like their real life counterparts. As an older Hoover, they did a tremendous job on DiCaprio. Aside from a few scenes he looked as close to the real man as they could make him. On the complete opposite side of the spectrum was Hammer’s makeup. As an older Tolson, his face looked like it had a blob of plastic thrown on with slits for a mouth and eyes. It unfortunately took away from the movie as I was distracted every time he was on screen.

Plot

My biggest issue with the movie was the story. I’m not sure what they had in mind, but to me it seemed like a 2hr, 17 min dump of everything that happened to hoover from the time he began his rise to his death. The lack of focus along with the sometimes awkward jumps back and forth in time made it hard to stay focused and into the story.

Finally…

In the end I could forgive some of the bad makeup and the acting was brilliant, but the neverending story simply made this movie boring for me. Since I’m so torn, I give J. Edgar a 2.5/5.

If you saw the movie, what did you think?

Paranormal Activity 3 turns back the clock

Paranormal Activity 3On Friday night I finally made it out to see Paranormal Activity 3 after weeks of waiting. I had skipped the second one in theatre, just because I thought the first was a fluke – boy was I wrong. This time I wasn’t making the mistake of watching it at home.

Like the second, part three takes us back in time, but now we get to know what Katie and Kristi went through as children in 1988. As I’m sure you can imagine, the technology back then was a bit more clunky than the cams we see in the first two films. That being said, they managed to keep it realistic by having the machinery mounted or oscillating (ingeniously) on a house fan. There was some carrying of the camera but it was minimal and generally in situations where you’d believe they’d bring it with them.

The ‘scare factor’ for this one is there, but being the third in the series, I (and everyone in the theatre) kind of knew what was coming. When I saw the first one, the audience was into it and as the movie went on, they become more vocal. With this one, there were a lot of (assuming) teens in the crowd and I found them to be a lot more vocal from beginning to end. It made the experience a little less intense, since I was distracted by their commentary. This isn’t a criticism of the film, just something I feel the need to point out if you decide to watch it in the theatre.

Even though it’s moving backwards, this one advanced the storyline and opened up a few options for the film makers. I’m not sure how they’ll manage to tell the story since technology would be an issue. I’m thinking they could move forward in time now and make it some kind of investigative thriller – we’ll have to see.

Overall I really enjoyed it and can’t wait for the next one (though I may end up watching it at home instead). I give Paranormal Activity 3 a 3.5/5.

What did you think of the movie? Where do you see the franchise going from here?