Looking for someone to share in an adventure...

    "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is a fun loving, warm hearted film that with all it's flaws is a guaranteed adventure. I'm a big fan of "The Lord of the Rings" movies so I was naturally excited for this one. "The Hobbit" was my favorite book as a child, and it was almost exactly how I pictured it at parts.
     For those who don't know the story or mythology behind the "Lord of the Rings", "The Hobbit" is about a very small person (a hobbit) named Bilbo Baggins, who doesn't go on any adventures or ever dreams about leaving his comfortable home in The Shire (a place in Middle Earth). Until one afternoon when he is greeted by a strange wizard named Gandalph, who sees more in him than even Bilbo himself could have imagined. So Gandalph "invites" him to take part in a quest to help a band of Dwarves to reclaim their home. Along the way are many dangers, and stark circumstances. What fun!
    Martin Freeman makes a charming Bilbo Baggins, also he looks a lot like Ian Holm (the old Bilbo) which is nice for obsessive compulsive people like me. He is very likable in his performance, and is much more pleasant to watch than Elijah Woods. Although that could be because Bilbo is written differently. Ian Mckellen steps right back into the role of Gandalph as if he never left, but one thing that bothered me were the cameos by Christopher Lee, and Cate Blanchet, as if they were saying, "Yes, here we are, we wanted to be in this movie too...". 
     One of my fears going into this movie, was the concern I had with connecting with so many characters. In the book it is very easy to forget many of their names/personalities because of the size of the party. Surprisingly enough it was much easier to remember who was who than reading it in the book. Peter Jackson made efforts of not cutting much out, (if anything at all) hence having three movies. Jackson does however make some liberties which could disuade many loyal fans. Speaking for myself I was not bothered by these decisions, and I don't even think they are worth pointing out in this review. (If you are a Tolkien fan you'll know what has been added)
    Okay, now for some critical thinking. I missed a lot of the on location filming in this movie. Unfortunately we were spoiled on "The Lord of the Rings" with the beautiful scenery, and Weta Workshop monsters that have been replaced by CGI orcs, trolls, and goblins in "The Hobbit". Another thing that bothered me was the color seemed a little too vibrant. Overall it didn't have the same realism that the other Lord of the Rings movies had. I knew it was all fake, but with all the work that went into set design and make-up I felt a part of Middle-Earth in the earlier films, not so much in this one.
    I give it three and a half stars for being a stand-up movie but slightly not living up to my expectations. 

Wyn's Review: 
Andrea's Review: 
     

Hail Maria, Full of Grace

Maria Full of Grace: 2004, Joshua Marston

Wyn has been reviewing most of the movies, but I felt so strongly about this one that I'm taking a turn.
I saw this film a few weeks ago, quite by accident and without high expectations. My man was taking Spanish classes, so I added Spanish language films to our Netflix queue so he could practice listening to Spanish speakers. I watched it a little reluctantly, but after the first few scenes I was spellbound. Since then, I've thought of this film everyday. 
The film follows a Colombian girl named Maria Alvarez who accidentally gets pregnant and becomes a drug mule to earn money for her family. I won't give up the plot by revealing exactly what that entails. This film tells a unique story in my experience with movies, a story that changed my perspective on the drug trade, immigration, and courage. 
Besides the fantastic story, this movie's strength lies in its lead, Catalina Sandino Moreno, who, according to IMDB, received an Academy Award nomination for her role as Maria Alvarez. She plays her complicated role with strength and determination. 
The title of the movie references the Hail Mary, a Catholic prayer. Maria wears a gold cross throughout the movie. I've considered in detail what the name of the film means, and this is my theory: Even though Maria is no virgin, sometimes acts immaturely, and becomes involved with drugs, she carries a child, for whose sake she shows incredible courage. She also gives incredible sacrifices for her family, friends, and the women who travel with her. By the end of the film, she proves herself to be full of grace. 
Andrea's Review: 
Wyn's Review: 

Can YOU hear the people sing?

    Okay, here comes the dreaded one... Those who know me, know I am very critical of Les Miserables. The book itself is fantastic, and I have very few qualms with it, but the musical I consider overall to be a large load of steaming dog poo. So, my bais is out in the open for everyone to see... I hate this musical! That being said, I did enjoy this film a lot more than I originally thought I would. 
     Honey, you can't just call something dog poo and not explain. 
      Look who decided to show up and review a movie with me!
      I have very strong feelings about the musical Les Miserables. I grew up listening to it and singing all the songs full volume as only a diva child can. As I grew, I realized most of the libretto really isn't very good. For example, take this gem, which takes places during a climatic fight between Valjean and Javert: 

Javert: You know nothing of Javert

I was born inside a jail.

I was born with scum like you.

I am from the gutter too.

     I'm glad we got that exposition taken care of, but why on earth would that character tell Jean that in that moment? Beyond the sloppy text, the musical rushes over crucial plot points, like Valjeans encounter with the bishop and taking refuge in the convent. The movie went to great lengths, adding dialogue and changing song text, to correct these problems. They also went to great lengths to correct the odd orchestration of the original musical, removing some saxophone parts and fluttery arpeggios that seemed poppy and anachronistic.
    This film, more than usual films, rose and fell on the performances of individual actors.
     If anyone would ask me, "Wyn, should I go see Les Mis?" I would respond, "Two words: Anne Hathaway." I will admit I have cried twice in my life time watching Les Mis, and once was when Lea Salonga and Michael Ball sang "A Little Fall of Rain" in the Les Miserables in Concert: The Tenth Anniversary , and the other was in this movie when Anne Hathaway sang "I Dreamed a Dream". 
    I've heard "I Dreamed a Dream" thousands of times, by professional level singers and middle schoolers, and I've never seen a performer who understood it as perfectly as Anne Hathaway. Her raw rendition had me crying in my seat (Me too!), spellbound by the truth of her emotion. The recording of her singing doesn't do the performance justice; in the film, she fills the screen, shorn and alone and sobbing. Hugh Jackman also fared well as Jean ValJean. His face fit the character and his performance was generally heartfelt, though his bombastic rendition of "Bring him Home" showed the role to be a bit out of his range; a true tenor wouldn't have to push so hard to reach those high notes. Russell Crowe gives the most disappointing performance as Javert. Singing breaks his acting skills. He stiffly struts, blurring his words together, always at the same awkward dynamic level. Amanda Seyfried, as Cosette, sings with a shrill bleat, but looks competently pretty and earnest on screen. Samantha Barks also competently plays Eponine, but forgets to be sassy and instead whines most of her lines, making her utterly forgettable. Eddie Redmayne is charming as Marius, but I found Helena Bonham-Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen disappointing as the Thénardiers. Cohen confusingly switched accents, from cockney to french and back without warning, often during the same scene. The minor characters and ensemble universally shone. Gavroche and Enjolras, played by Aaron Tveit and Daniel Huttlestone respectively, marked high points, as did Colm Wilkinson, the most famous and accomplished of stage Jean Valjeans, as the Bishop. 
    So there you go for the performance end of things. There is much more to criticize here, but the make-up, costumes, and set design was terrific, and I was very impressed with the gross looking teeth. The cinematography was disappointing sometimes, which I would assume is due to the live recording of the singers. I could tell that some shots were sacrificed to satisfy the best singing take. A good example of this is a scene near the end when Valjean is talking with Marius, and Marius's face was completely out of focus in two separate shots. I guess that's one of the disadvantages to the "live singing" style: the director was limited to using takes with the best singing, regardless of camera work. That being said, I would love to see another musical done in this style. I felt very connected to the situations instead of being torn out of the scene with obvious "pretty" recordings.
     I think we've given this film enough criticism. I would recommend seeing this film just for Anne Hathaway, and if this movie were just the 20 minutes of her stage time, I would give it four stars, but I was severely bothered by so much of this movie that I could not give it more than three stars. What do you think honey?
     I think giving this film three stars is generous. I spent most of the movie (SPOILER) missing Anne Hathaway. I'll give it two and a half stars. 

Andrea's Review: 
Wyn's Review: 
    

The story that will make you believe in God.

     "Life of Pi" for me is the number one movie of the year. It's a touching story that encompasses many facets of my interests. I absolutely love animals and religion, and this movie is full of both. I am a very big fan of the book, and so when the film came out I had to see it. Many of you will be skeptics, but let me assure you, this one is worth seeing.
     I don't want to give away any of the plot, but if you know anything about the story, you know it is about a young Indian boy who gets trapped on a lifeboat with a bengal tiger. That may sound ridiculous and impossible, but that is one of the many joys of the movie. You believe it. I don't want to say anything else about the plot, (mostly because, honestly, there isn't much else to say) so I'll leave that alone. The beauty and joy that this movie brings is in the details. Speaking of the digital effects, I knew that Richard Parker (that's the name of the tiger) was a mixture of computer animation and a real tiger, but I honestly could not tell the difference. The colors, the lighting, and the sounds were so vibrant and bright that you could almost smell the sea water.
     This movie is a visual masterpiece. The director of the film, Ang Lee, pointed out that ultimately the sky was a representation of God, and the sea was life/death. In one point in the movie (trying not to reveal anything) Pi, and the tiger are sitting on the boat on a calm night. As the camera rests above the characters, the water, and the starry sky seem as one, creating fantastic symbolism of the sky being the resting place of God, and the water, representing life, coming together as one. To say it was beautiful is not giving it justice.
     Recently I heard of some of my friends saying they didn't like this movie because it didn't have as much action in it as the trailer would suggest. This is true. It's not an "action movie", as much as it is a suspenseful drama. Don't be fooled by some of the trailers/previews, it really is more of a Cast Away or 127 Hours type movie. (If you haven't seen either of those, you should...)
     I've been watching some truly fantastic movies lately and I'm giving away four stars like crazy. This movie earned all four of those stars. Andrea also gave it four stars.

Wyn's Review: 
Andrea's Review: 
     

A little reservation from our favorite President.

     Daniel Day-Lewis gives a staggering performance in this wonderful historical drama "Lincoln". As always DDL is captivating on screen and has a presence no other living actor today can match. Just when I think I cannot forgive him for "The Last of the Mohicans" he proves yet again why he is the king of the screen.
     The movie recounts President Lincoln's efforts to pass the thirteenth amendment, and all the complications that went with it. I'm usually not a fan of political movies, but this one has a mood, tempo, and style that was very enjoyable for me. The struggle that Lincoln had of passing the amendment was due to the complications of getting it passed in the House of Representatives. This included persuading many house Democrats who were not easily swayed. Some of my favorite moments of the film included James Spader and his band of political "lobbyists". They had the job of turning many of the house of representatives to voting for the amendment. It all sounds very complicated, but I promise, it's all explained very well (in case you're a political dummy like me).
     Sally Fields, Tommy Lee Jones, and Joseph Gordon Levitt all give glorious performances, and I think their performances are the overall reason why this movie will do so well. Stephen Spielberg did a fine job with this film, mostly because the camera was exactly where it needed to be. A good example is when the president is waiting to send a telegraph, and wondering if he should send the message he has planned, or to go with his gut instincts and send a completely different message. The camera is in a strange angle and all we can see is the empty telegraph room with the two operators and the president. It is such a powerful moment, and it emphasized the emptiness of the room so well that when the president tells a story it seemed as if he were asking for advice from the two operators.
      This film made me believe the power this man had. You felt as if you were in the white house with him at some times. Every character seemed so real and tangible that you were very invested in their situation and problems. I think I prefer movies that make me want to learn more about the history behind them. This movie made me want to learn more about politics in general and President Lincoln in particular.
      If Daniel Day-Lewis doesn't go home with an Oscar, I will be very surprised. Overall this movie is a triumph, my only criticism is that some of the points were a bit complicated, and I can foresee many people not being able to get into the film due to that. It can be a bit jumbled, and the characters are hard to keep track of, but I think everyone should give it a chance. I give it four out of four stars.
    Andrea gave it three and a half stars because the movie didn't really stick to her like it did to me. She had also taken a class this semester where they studied Lincoln in depth, and I guess it just wasn't living up to her expectations. Don't get her wrong, she loved the movie, just not as much as me. ;)

Wyn's Review: 
Andrea's Review: 

Super 8: The best way to make a zombie movie

 Alright, let's get this train a moving. That's an interesting phrase to start out with, seeing how the movie we will be reviewing this week has one of the most exciting crash sequences involving an oncoming train. Super 8 was a fascinating movie that was very much a love letter to Steven Spielburg. I grew up watching Spielburg films that had a certain charm that only he as a filmmaker could produce. J.J. Abrams has obviously been influenced in some way or another, because this movie seemed much more like a tribute than an original work.

      This was an exciting, touching, and frightening (at times) film that focuses much more on the relationships of the characters than the science fiction story-line (which wasn't bad at all considering what gets produced in Hollywood these days). The story revolves around a group of middle school kids in 1979 who are in the middle of making a zombie movie to enter into a film festival. The story takes a serious and abrupt turn when a train derails in the middle of their film shoot. The kids soon realize that this was no accident and their lives are about to change. The makeup/special effects/lighting designer is a young boy named Joe Lamb, who is trying to deal with the recent loss of his mother. His deputy father (who felt very similar to Sheriff Brody in Jaws) doesn't understand his son anymore than he understands what's going on in his little Ohio town. 

       I really enjoyed this movie for many reasons. This movie gave me the same thrill that Alien did many years ago. The monster in this movie was hidden, leaving us to wonder, "What is it?" Keeping the monster hidden gives more suspense than just revealing everything. On top of being entertained with the suspense, I was touched by the sweet relationship of Joe and Alice Dainard, who have a troubled past. One of my favorite scenes involved a conversation where Joe tries to apply makeup to Alice's face. 

     Was it a perfect movie? No. I left the movie theater with a feeling of confusion. Many things were left unexplained. Maybe that's the intention, but I felt dissatisfied with the ending. This movie has many great elements and I highly recommend it. 

      Well, sweetheart, I absolutely agree with you. The most charming and genuine scenes in the movie took place between the children, whose earnestness in filming their zombie movie is honest and possibly autobiographical. I've heard rumors that J.J. Abrams identified himself with one of the characters, and whether or not that is hearsay, the children are well-rounded characters that we grow to like. The least satisfying scenes featured the monster. Its character and goals were confusing. It eats people, but feels their emotions and thoughts when it touches them. That seems terribly inconvenient to the monster, and it mainly serves to allow for a scene in which the monster has mercy on Joe because he, well, thinks so hard at him. My other problem was with the ending. If the monster could put together his ship any time, why did he need Joe to tell him to do it? 

     But we should give credit where it is due. Early in the film, Charles, played by the talented Riley Griffiths (his first appearance in a film), comments that he's added a scene to his zombie movie. The detective needs a wife, someone to tell him that she loves him, so that the audience doesn't want him to die. Watching a previously filmed scene, Joe congratulates Charles on the good zombie death, and Charles rightly complains that it isn't enough. It needs a story and it needs emotion. This film successfully delivers the characters, the story, and the emotion that are so crucial to making action scenes (like dying zombies or exploding trains) mean something to the audience. Charles is giving a message both to a too complacent audience and to confused writers and directors (read Michael Bay). This film was an enjoyable experience and I would recommend it for a date night. 

     Yeah, I think we're on the same page. Do you remember when I leaned over to you and asked if that monster actually ate that person, right after it was explained that he just wanted to go home. I was genuinely confused. That doesn't sound like E.T. at all. A more successful relatable alien would be found in District 9. But you are absolutely right, this movie puts the Sci-Fi on hold to create wonderful moments with these kids.

Final ratings:

Andrea: 

Wyn: 

This is our blog...

Well, should we post on our new blog?


We need a movie...


No, silly, like an introductory post, so all our friends know why we even have a blog!


Oh, sure! But you get to write it.


And so it begins :) Ever since high school, I've loved movies. I don't watch and enjoy them like most people do; I love them enough to cry and laugh and shout about fantastic cinematography. I also love them enough to refuse to see Transformers 2 and Red Riding Hood. I've become rather picky, and my pickiness has almost nothing to do with whether the film's target audience is male or female. However, I do know what girls like, and an excellent romantic comedy is one of my greatest joys. 


My sweet fiance' also loves good movies, and they brought us together. We've held hands through everything from Citizen Kane to Street Fighter, and even fought about a few movies (Sherlock Holmes, this is you). When he had the idea to write couples' film reviews, I thought it was fantastic, and here we are. For every film we review, we'll give you two perspectives and a date night rating. We'll tell you if it's a girls only movie, or if it's better to skip it altogether. 


As a word of caution, we won't be reviewing every film to come out of Hollywood, and many of our reviews will be for films already on dvd. We aren't professional critics and don't have access to everything right away. Also, we simply don't have the time or the desire. Most likely we will skip a lot of movies we both agree probably aren't any good. However, if you request reviews, we will try to accommodate you. 


We'll posts our first review within the week. Happy reading, and happy watching!


Oh! Postscript, I type in purple and he types in blue :)