Precious Will Break Your Heart and Build It Back Up

The story of Precious is one that you don't often see in the movies. Or if you do see something like it, it won't affect you as much as this film will.

Claireece Precious Jones, or Precious, is a 16-year-old girl living in Harlem in 1987. She is over weight, illiterate, and pregnant with her second child. Precious lives with her slave driving like mother Mary (Mo'Nique) in an old run down apartment where she is to clean, make dinner, and take care of her physically abusive mother. Precious's principal comes to her house one night and tells Precious that she should really consider going to an alternative school. She signs up for the school and there is where she makes friends and gains a real teacher, Ms. Rain (Paula Patton) who helps Precious learn to read and write and is there for her in her time of need when no one else is.

I don't say this too often, but this is a very heavy movie. it deals with a lot of serious issues that are definitely still around in today's society. Precious has to deal with physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse and all on a regular basis. The reason she is pregnant for the second time is because of her drug addicted father who rapes her repeatedly. And just when things start to look better for Precious, they get worse and worse.

Newcomer Gabourey Sidibe, who plays Precious, is as real as actresses come these days. While watching her play the part, it almost felt like a documentary it felt so real. Comedian Mo'Nique portrays Mary in her drama film debut and is shockingly amazing at it. Mary is such a broken down character and Mo'Nique really nailed the emotion that she wanted the audience to feel. Other well known names play the smaller parts of the movie like Mariah Carey (who has stepped it up since the whole Glitter fiasco) and rocker Lenny Kravitz who, in his acting debut, did a pretty good job.

With Executive Producer Oprah Winfrey. obviously this movie would not be a let down. I'm pretty sure that everything Oprah touches turns to gold, and I'm pretty sure that gold has a name and its name is Oscar. I am certain there is an Oscar in the future for Precious. It was really one of the best movies of 2009.

Overall Grade- A

2012

As the myth or the legend or whatever goes, the Mayan calendar ends on 12/21/2012 and so that will be when the world ends. Well, I don't know if I believe that, but i really hope it doesn't end like it did in the movie!

2012 was directed by disaster movie specialist, Ronald Emmerich, who also directed blockbusters Independence Day and Day After Tomorrow. I think I can say comfortably that Emmerich is a professional disaster movie director and he shows us that in 2012.

Although the story line follows struggling writer Jackson Curtis (John Cusack), his ex-wife Kate (Amanda Peet), and his children, and all their sarcasm about the world coming to an end, what really makes this movie interesting are the special CGI effects. There are tsunamis all over the world, volcanic eruptions in Yellowstone National Park, and half of California literally breaks apart from earthquakes and falls into the ocean. As horrible and tragic as it sounds, it is actually very entertaining to watch.

Aside from Cusack, the movie has a very B list cast. Cusack actually does a fantastic job playing a sarcastic father of two, but at times (like when Las Vegas is crumbling underneath them), the sarcasm is a little unnecessary. Peet plays it safe as Cusack's ex wife , Kate, with a mediocre performance. Time after time Kate's children are in danger and only once towards the end does she really show a lot of emotion about it. Danny Glover plays a very one note, rather calm over the end of the world, President of the United States.

2012 is a good, but typical, disaster movie. I think it was an original idea and very smart of Emmerich to make this movie close to the actual year of 2012 because it gives the audience that little extra thought of, "What if this really happened?" But the real reason to see it are for the special effects! I remember in 1996 (even though I was only 8), going to see Independence Day with my parents. I remember my parents reassuring me that none of it was real, but I always wondered how they made it look so real? I almost feel like the same way now after seeing 2012 (but luckily my parents don't have to reassure me its not real this time).

Overall Grade- B

I Am Team "New Moon"...

...rather than "Team Twilight."

I have to admit, i am not a huge Twilight fan. I have never read any of the books and absolutly despised the first movie, Twilight.

But after being dragged to see New Moon by a friend who is also a "Twihard" (a huge fan of the Twilight series), I have to admit it actually wasn't that bad. I literally could not stay awake for the first movie. I tried watching it four times and fell asleep every time. The fifth time I tried I stayed awake for the whole movie, but wish I hadn't.

But fortunately, New Moon is starting to change my mind. In case you have been living in a cave in the middle of Antartica for the last year, the Twlight series of books written by Stephenie Meyer is about a clumsy girl Bella and her vampire boyfriend Edward Cullen. The first book/movie are all about how they meet and fall in love. But theres that big elephant problem in the room, that he is a vampire. But to completely understand all of this, it must be mentioned that Edward and his vampire family are "vegetarian" which means they do not prey on humans, just animals.

New Moon starts off where Twilight left off, with the couple struggling their way through two worlds, the human world and the vampire world. After one of Edward's brothers tries to attack Bella, Edward decides it is too risky for him and Bella to be together and disappears with out a trace. Bella is left heartbroken and decides to confide in her friend Jacob. And of course, Jacob turns out to be a werewolf and werewolves don't like vampires.

Although I want to tell more of the story line, I think if I continue I will be giving too much away! That being said, New Moon was pretty entertaining and definitely kept my attention, unlike the first movie. One major problem I had with the first movie was the acting. Kristen Stewart could not act her way out of a paper bag in the first movie as Bella and semi new actor Robert Pattinson looked pretty on screen, but was not convincing as Edward, a love struck vampire. Luckily in New Moon, Stewart picked up the pace and was so much more interesting as Bella. The very young and very "built" 17-year-old Taylor Lautner plays werewolf Jacob and does an excellent job of it.




I have to add, if you intend on seeing New Moon, make sure you see Twilight first, otherwise you will be completely lost. I would not recommend Twilight in any other situation but it really is necessary before seeing the second movie.

Overall Grade- B+

"Paranormal Activity" Will Haunt Your Dreams

Hey Everybody! Sorry I haven't been able to post in a while, but the purse strings have been tightened on this critic which makes going to the movies hard these days.
BUT! I did happen to recently catch the horror film of the decade, A.K.A. Paranormal Activity.

Like past indie horror movie, The Blair Witch Project, this thriller was made on a real budget of about $11,000 and little to no gore. With all the gruesome, porn-like scary movies out these days, this was a kind of refreshing haunt-you-in-your-nightmares type of thriller.

It all begins when strange things start going bump in the night. Boyfriend/girlfriend, Micah and Katie, decide to invest in a hand held camera to see if they can catch on film what has been spooking them at night. At one point when looking back on the footage they shot, they see evidence of their bedroom door moving back and forth.

To try and eliminate the problem, the couple bring in a ghost specialist, who quickly tells them that they are not dealing with a ghost, but rather a demon that may have been following Katie since childhood.

Now, I personally do not believe in demons and ghosts and whatnot, but for a week after watching this movie, I had to sleep with the lights on. Maybe it's because it was filmed to look like a documentary or maybe it was all the shadows and strange things they saw the demon do while they were sleeping, but all I know is that thing was no Casper.

According to IMDB.com,as of November 15, 2009 Paranormal Activity has grossed $103,690,184. For an extremely low budget film with no well known actors, that's not too shabby.

Overall, you don't get too many genuinely scary movies these days that are free of blood and guts. Paranormal Activity is guaranteed to scare the living day lights out of you without all the nasty Saw tactics expected in today's horror genre.

Overall Grade- A-

Did anyone else see this movie? Thoughts?

"Zombieland" Makes the End of Humanity Look Fun!

In the new up and coming genre of horror-comedy, "Zombieland" sets the bar high for future flicks.

When the Earth is taken over by zombies, four completely different people find each other and help one another fight to stay alive. In order not to get too close to one another, they use hometowns as their names. Theres Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), a cowboy ready to kick zombie-butt if they get into his way; Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), a paranoid loner who lives by a set of self made rules, and the sisters Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) who are only concerned for watching each others backs. The audience follows the group on a wildly hilarious road trip to California.

Going into this movie, I had my doubts. Comedic zombie movies have been done before. For example, "Shaun of the Dead" did the same type of movie in 2004. But "Zombieland" takes it in a whole other direction...American style. It's got Hummers, Twinkies, and Bill Murray. What else could you ask for?

If your too spooked to see a real horror movie like "Saw VI" this Halloween season, go see the funnier alternative "Zombieland."

Overall Grade: A-

"Taking Woodstock" is Totally Groovy Man!

Director Ang Lee has done it again because "Taking Woodstock" was easily the best movie I have seen in 2009 so far.

Although none of the musical elements of Woodstock are featured in this film, Lee retells the story of the man who made it all happen.

Elliot Teichberg (who now goes by Elliot Tiber)was just looking for some extra money to help out with his parents motel business in White Lake, NY. After he heard that a music festival was banned by a near by town due to it being a "hippie festival," Elliot takes matters into his own hands by bringing the festival to his own town. Little does he know that they had already sold over one hundred thousand tickets.

Elliot Tiber wrote the book "Taking Woodstock" and this movie tells the story of Woodstock through his eyes. The audience gets pulled into the background of how Woodstock went down behind the scenes. And with Lee's direction and accuracy to the story, the audience can feel like they were actually there watching what happened.

With more B-list actors than A-list, Lee was able to focus more on the plot of the film rather than the "movie stars." Emile Hirsch ("Into the Wild" and "Milk") played a young Vietnam veteran who is having problems adjusting to life back at home in White Lake. Hirsch did a fantastic job portraying this character and said in a recent interview that prepare for his role, Lee provided him with a thick binder full of materials and set up meetings with real Vietnam veterans.

"Taking Woodstock" is really worth seeing. Not only is it factually accurate of how Woodstock happened, it has great cinematography, great actors, and is just entertaining to watch.

Overall Grade- A

"Paper Heart" Leaves the Audience Asking, "Documentary or Mockumentry?"

Have you ever left a movie wondering what parts of it were true and what part were fictitious? "Paper Heart" is one of those movies for me.

I went into the Colonial Theater on Sunday night with a little background of this movie (the plot, actors, characters, ect). But when I came out of the theater, I rushed to my computer to ask the bigger question, "Was this movie a documentary or a mockumentary?"

The movie follows comedian and actress Charlyne Yi across the country searching for the true meaning of love. Yi interviews a wide variety of people. Some have been in love and married for fifty years. Some are divorced but have been in love. And some have only recently found love and want it to last forever.

The movie also follows Yi's own relationship triumphs with actor Michael Cera. They meet at a party where Yi and Cera have mutual friends and their relationship builds through out the movie. This is the part I found confusing. Was this couple real or fake?

As soon as I got home, I was determined to find out which parts, if any, were real. In an interview with traileraddict.com, Yi discusses that the story with Cera and herself was in fact planned out, but not scripted. Yi said in the interview, "We had a loose outline and we improvised a lot hoping that our dialog felt real."

Yi also went on to say that the people she conducted her interviews with around the United States were REAL people with REAL stories.

The premise of the movie is a different take on documentaries today. Although the parts with Yi and Cera's relationship was often very awkward for the audience, the stories of the real couples and their stories was worth the $6 admission.


Overall Grade: C+

Question to the readers: Would you consider this a documentary even though there is some fictitious parts to it? Why or why not?


Here is the interview with Yi from trailer addict to possibly help you make your decision: