PG-13

Left Behind (2000) Review

May 4, 2015 by JD Hansel

Oh boy, here we go …

For the most part, you can just take Kevin McCreary’s review and insert it here. I would, however, like to address a few things myself, and I’ll start with the positives. First of all, there are actually some really nice shots in this film that are theatrical enough to be right up my alley. Second, the film takes its time before it starts shoving the Bible in our faces, allowing the story’s development to take center stage for a while. Third, it’s tough for a religious movie to say “this is the world you’re living in” without it feeling both preachy and unrealistic, so I think it may work in this movie’s (or perhaps this genre’s) favor to do something more in the vein of sci-fi/fantasy.

That being said, the movie is still pretty silly, rather preachy, a little unbelievable, and a bit too cliche. I always like the rule that events can be unrealistic, but the reactions of the human characters to these events must be realistic if we are to take the story at all seriously, and I don’t think this movie makes the human characters quite believable enough for the story to work. The movie begs to be riffed, as I did throughout. It doesn’t do the best job at holding my attention, so I actually paused the movie one day and abandoned it for a few weeks. My long break from the film was also due to the fact that I found it kind of depressing – several cars and planes crashing, people losing loved ones, and especially dogs lost without their owners are all ideas I’d rather not associate with a benevolent supreme being.

So, in the end, it’s not the worst movie I’ve seen, but it’s far from the best. Oh, and please, no more bookend voice-overs in religious movies ever again.

Hamlet (1996) Review

April 10, 2015 by JD Hansel

Is there a way for a mere college kid,
Who hardly can recall the time of day,
To have the slightest clue of how to do
A film review about a Shakespeare play?
I once again must face that question now
Of whether I should judge only the film,
Or judge the work the film is based on too?
And why the heck did Shakespeare write this way?

So now that I’m done with the iambic pentameter (and I’ll admit I didn’t even rhyme it right for Shakespeare), let’s talk about Hamlet the play. I like Hamlet, as a character, and I find him to be rather fascinating. I can understand an intellectual who struggles to accept the concept of death, is obsessive and goes kind of insane, and slowly, methodically plans out how he can make clever plans once he has good evidence suggesting it is wise to do so. Perhaps it may frighten some people to hear me say this, but I can relate to the guy. That being said, it takes him months, and we have to watch five whole acts. We shouldn’t have to wait that long, so as to keep waiting in suspense from becoming waiting in boredom. That’s my main problem with Hamlet – it’s tedious.

Aside from that, Hamlet is a very well-written story with an interesting premise, clever dialogue, and strong characters, so this seems like a natural fit for cinema. This has been adapted for film and television many times, and while I have not completely finished watching the version with Patrick Stewart and David Tennant, I may like their performances of the characters just a wee bit better. Still, this movie has a really fantastic cast – all of them brilliant and/or super famous – and the characters are all done well. The acting may be a little over the top, but I don’t think that hurts the film.

Actually, one of the major criticisms I’ve seen of this movie is that it’s too theatrical. I’m not sure I believe in such a thing. The very theatrical acting works very well for the nature of this production. The shots are all huge, and I suppose they are theatrical, but I see them as cinematic. One might say that my heart belongs to film, but I still have the hots for theater. One would be right. I felt like I was watching a humongous theater production the whole time, and I loved that.

I must say that my big problem with it is still the length. I watched the full-length version on DVD, and I was frightened when I got to the end of disc one, which I thought would be the end of the movie, but I found out that it was only the end of the first half! The rest one on disk two, and it was a bit of a chore to get through. The impressive thing about this movie, however, is that it’s really the first time anyone had tried to do the whole play as a movie before, keeping in every word. This movie did Hamlet without editing it down, and that’s rather impressive. So, if you’re okay with a ridiculously long movie that looks good, has great writing, and has strong characters, I highly recommend it.

Harry Potter 8 Review

April 5, 2015 by JD Hansel

Let’s talk about Hermione. By that, of course, I mean let’s really overanalyze her character and make theoretical presumptions about her mindset without having read the books. What, you don’t want to talk about Hermione? You just want a review of the movie?

No. We’re talking about Hermione.

I love this character. Hey – I see that smug smile on your face, and no, I don’t mean it that way! I mean I care about this character because I empathize with her. I like her approach to life … unless of course what I really like is my assumption of what her approach to life is. Let’s think about this – she’s muggle-born, and that means she’s doomed to be mocked, scorned, and called a – cover your ears, kids – mudblood. Ouch. So, putting myself in her shoes, I think about what the best way to handle the insecurity that comes with such a burden would be.

Here’s the cool thing about wizardry: it’s established by Hagrid early on in the franchise that pretty much any wizard can cast the same spells with about the same effect as any other wizard, after enough practice. There isn’t much in the Harry Potter world, or at least not the cinematic world, to suggest that the purebred wizards always do better wizarding than those with human blood mixed in. So, it would seem that being a great witch or wizard is not determined solely by nature, but is in fact largely just know-how. Essentially, in a world in which everyone has access to the same spells, and with practice can use them to about the same effect, whoever has the most knowledge has the most power.

Let’s bring it all back to Hermione. She could have handled her insecurity about being muggle-born in a number of negative ways. However, Hermione, in her awesomeness, was wise enough to instead take on a pursuit of knowledge, which would naturally give her power over most other witches and wizards regardless of bloodline. This is where the genius of Hermione lies; it’s not in her book smarts, but in her passion for learning. She doesn’t need to be a chosen one, a prodigy, or a legend in order to have power. She has her brain. So, when I sat down to watch the final film in the franchise, I was waiting to see how good ol’ Hermione ends up.

I’ll come back to that in a moment, but first let’s get the real review-ish part of this review out of the way. The film looks as good as its last two predecessors, with a score that’s about the same, although maybe slightly vamped up. The story is by and large very fascinating because it keeps the audience asking new questions while simultaneously answering old questions. I was mostly sucked in, although it’s hard for me to care about what happens to Harry as much as I care about what happens to Little Miss You-Know-Who. I could have used more focus on the relationships in this than on the Horcruxes, but it’s still cool all in all. I love the Snape twist. I was actually very thankful for the epilogue scene because the series didn’t feel like it had enough closer without it, and it made it a little easier to say goodbye to these guys.

But Hermione. What was her reward for her brilliance? Surely J.K. would reward being wise more than being chosen by fate, right? After all, to do otherwise would essentially value superstition and luck over reason and thinking. Guess what! In this movie, Hermione has more bad ideas than good ones, feels like a side character, marries Ronald, and is upstaged by the outstanding development of … wait, I have to go look up his name again … oh, right, his name’s Neville Longbottom. I forgot. I’m not making it up; I really did.

I’d have jumped up and cheered had the wand Harry was using, upon flying into the air, flew through the sky over to Hermione, but noooooo . . . it makes far more sense for it to go to Longbottom. Look, Longbottom is allowed to really grow as a character, and he’s allowed to avenge his parents, but it’s just not right for him to be given more glory than Hermione. Heck, when I was a little boy, I’d get to suck on a red Dum Dum lollipop if I was reasonably well-behaved at the doctor’s office. That’s a decent prize for a small feat, but since Hermione has just been flippin’ brilliant throughout the whole franchise, she deserves a lot more than getting to suck on a redhead dum-dum for the rest of her life. Does it show that I don’t particularly care for Ronald? I really don’t. His only role in the franchise seems to be showing up, eating, panicking, swearing, and leaving, and I had no interest in seeing him together with Hermione, who honestly seemed to have more chemistry than Harry anyway.

I digress. Wait, no I don’t. I’m still not totally okay with this. I care about Hermione, and I don’t even know if she ever gets to reunite with her parents. The movie could have focused on her a lot more than it did, but on the whole, it was a good, fun film that seemed to give the series the completion it deserved. It just didn’t give Hermione what she deserved. Ten points from Gryffindor.

The Naked Gun 33 1/3 Review

March 24, 2015 by JD Hansel

*Sigh of mild disappointment, but understanding why it is what it is.*

It has its moments. It was fun seeing their take on the Academy Awards, even though I missed a few of the references. (The girl in the traditional Native American attire was a clever throwback that got me laughing.) The 24-hour Johnny Mathis station was brilliant. Aside from that, the movie is rather weak. However, this is the type of sequel that is enjoyable not because it is on par with the original, but because it is an opportunity to spend more time with the characters we love and miss. Those are important too.

Harry Potter 7 Review

December 21, 2014 by JD Hansel

(MINOR SPOILERS)

Yeah, I got tired of writing out the full titles. They’re really long.

Anyway, the seventh film in the Harry Potter series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part One is dark. By about the third or fourth film, it was clear that this series was not for the children anymore, but now this is especially true. It’s time to bring back beloved characters, bring back characters we didn’t care about and make us love them, and then finally kill them off. It’s also time to bring back old Umbridge, who unfortunately does not get her heart ripped out of her body and her skull bashed in in this film, but I can dream.

It is more fun to see our heroes in the Muggle world than in a Quidditch tournament, so that’s a plus. There’s basically no Hogwarts or Minerva McGonagall, and there’s hardly any Snape or Dumbledore (despite the fact that this would be a great time to learn more about these two characters, particularly the latter.) I have heard that, in the books, there’s a lot more information about Dumbledore revealed, but the movie is not focused on him. The upside to this is that there is more time spent with the main characters, and the lack of Ron means more time focused on Hermione, who is, in my opinion, the most interesting character in the franchise. I would like it if the films would go into her background a little more, and I’d like to see her brain at work, solving mysteries and showing off, but I guess you can’t have everything.

I do believe that this is one of the films that does not have the charm of the first two movies in the series, but the interesting details that are revealed, the focus on the main characters, the interesting drama, and the fascinating plot make it a nice film overall.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier Review

December 19, 2014 by JD Hansel

I’ll try to keep this review simple and spoiler-free.

It’s funny how I’d give Cap 2 about the same rating as Guardians of the Galaxy, but for completely different reasons. Basically, Guardians worked because it was silly and fun, and it knew how to handle that. Cap 2 worked because it was dramatic and mysterious, and it knew how to handle that. I generally like my super hero movies to be light and fun, but this one just keeps the audience engaged in the mysteries of S.H.I.E.L.D. and its enemies, and I felt compelled to try to figure it all out. The drama between characters strangely works because it is handled very carefully, and the light banter between Cap and Black Widow is brilliant.

It’s hard to say why I’m not giving this film a higher rating, but even though I think the stressful time I was having while watching it (for unrelated reasons) may have skewed my view of the film, the fun, colorful feeling I like a superhero movie to have (see Guardians, Burton’s Batman, ‘66’s Batman, Doctor Who: The Movie, Big Hero 6, etc.) just isn’t there. It feels rather pale, like it’s trying to look a little bit like The Dark Knight in terms of lighting and color. While there are certainly fun moments, the movie might be taking itself a little too seriously overall.

If you like a movie that keeps your mind working and is packed with surprises and suspense, you’ll enjoy this one. (Just be sure to catch up on the Marvel films that precede it – otherwise it won’t be half as fun.)