Raymer Reel Talk Reviews

Permalink

Aziz Ansari: ‘Dangerously Delicious’ Review

Following in the footsteps of Louis C.K., comedian Aziz Ansari released a comedy special on his website this past week entitled “Dangerously Delicious” that was available for just $5. The special is the second stand up Aziz has recorded after 2010’s “Intimate Moments for a Sensual Evening” and will likely help boost interest in his new stand up tour, “Buried Alive,” which starts in April. As a fan of Aziz’s specials and his work on “Parks and Recreation,” I happily shelled out $5 and sat down to watch “Dangerously Delicious” tonight. Here are my thoughts:

What worked

- Aziz starts things off on a hilarious note, calling some members of the audience out for taking pictures during the show even after they’ve been asked not to do so. Aziz makes light of the whole thing and gives the audience a chance to take photos while he poses in the middle of pretend jokes. It was good audience interaction and a solid opener.

- Aziz gets a laugh any time he mentions Harris and this special is no different. Aziz reads a copy of Harris’ college essay, which of course is ripe for ridicule. The part about the illiterate guy is especially funny.

- There’s a particular sign language gesture that Aziz mocks heavily early in the special. In typical Aziz-fashion, he analyzes the gesture and invents a wild story of how it came into existence and when normal people might use it. You can bet some people walked out of the theater doing this gesture.

- The strength of any Aziz stand up is going to be his ability to relate to activities that normal people do every day. Aziz is a pop culture nerd who understands technology and can connect with the under-30 crowd easily, so when he talks about incessantly researching Joe Pesci or watching the ending to “Saw,” there’s a shared connection that makes the whole thing a lot funnier than it probably should be.

- Being a normal guy, it’s always amazing to listen to Aziz’s stories of running with celebrities he adores. In “Dangerously Delicious” we get stories about Jay-Z and R Kelly, two of Aziz’s favorites. His stories don’t disappoint.

What didn’t work

- There’s a bit about racial slurs that really falls flat. Not because it’s offensive or insensitive or anything like that. Aziz just pokes fun at some lame racial slurs. I chuckled a few times, but much like the audience, I was ready for the next bit pretty quickly.

- Aziz repeatedly references a certain sex act and the punch line loses it effectiveness pretty early.

- While the majority of his jokes are solid, there wasn’t one that stood out to me as a potential viral video. Which is fine, I guess, since Aziz has made it pretty clear that he wants this special to be legitimately distributed for now.

All in all, this was a solid special for Aziz and a great investment at just $5. Having already bought my tickets for his “Buried Alive” tour, I can only hope his comedic palate is even more refined by the time I see him in person.

Reel grade: 80 out of 100.

Permalink

‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ Review

What does it say about an actor when he’s blown off the screen by a chimpanzee?

Furthermore, what does it say about a movie when that happens and it actually makes the movie better?

Those are two questions left by “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” which is now available to rent after a 2011 theatrical run.

“Rise” is a prequel to the celebrated “Planet of the Apes” movie and chronicles the ascension of Caesar, a hyper-intelligent chimp who leads a rebellion of apes against their human oppressors.

At the heart of the movie is the relationship between Caesar (Andy Serkis) and Will Rodman (James Franco) – a relationship that, as mentioned above, becomes more one-sided as the movie progresses.

Serkis once again breathes life into a digitally-rendered character and completely steals the show as he did back in 2001’s “Fellowship of the Ring” as the treacherous Gollum.

Will might be the human protagonist, but Caesar is the movie’s star. The journey Will and Caesar take together is heartfelt and genuine but it’s only after they’re separated that Caesar’s (far more interesting) story can begin to unfold.

The effects in “Rise” are simply breathtaking to behold, conjuring up the same wonderment that helped make movies like “The Matrix” and “Avatar” such phenomena.

There was a debate shortly after the movie’s release over whether Serkis should receive an Oscar nomination for Best Actor for his turn as Caesar since, as the actor argued, his terrific performance was made more difficult by the fact he couldn’t speak.

He simply had to rely on body language, facial expressions and simian grunts to convey a wide range of emotions. After watching Caesar and being emotionally invested in his journey, I agree with Serkis – he deserved a nomination.

The simple fact is that Serkis is redefining what it means to act. He’s showing that the emphasis doesn’t have to be on the actor’s face but can instead be focused on the actor’s non-verbal communication.

Serkis is nothing short of a pioneer, tearing down Hollywood’s preconceived notions with a swipe of his digitally rendered paws (Serkis also did the motion capture work in 2005’s “King Kong”).

So while the human characters in “Rise” are nothing more than cardboard cutouts, Caesar’s journey from outsider ape to king of the jungle is worth the price of admission alone.

I’ve seen a lot of critics say that they were cheering for the apes in the movie’s final confrontation on the Golden Gate Bridge. While I wouldn’t go that far – the apes do kill, after all – I can sympathize with their plight.

The apes under Caesar’s rule are seeking freedom, not world domination. They don’t want to rule humans, just themselves.

Then again, “Rise” is a prequel to a movie about apes enslaving the human race, so it’s cool to watch the seeds get planted in this installment.

A newscast about a shuttle to Mars and a storyline about a virus with disastrous side effects both point to where this new line of adaptations are headed.

“Rise” is the first stepping-stone in a long journey to the familiar apes-humans conflict we’ve seen before. Serkis better keep that motion capture suit handy.

Reel grade: 88 out of 100.

Permalink

Three weeks from tomorrow – let the Games begin.

Permalink

Will Rodman: At age 3, Caesar has completed puzzles ages 8 and up. He has been displaying cognitive skills that far exceed that of a human counterpart.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Permalink

‘Real Steel’ Review

If you’ve ever dreamed of seeing “Rocky” played out with robotic boxers or watching a movie where metallic claws don’t shoot out of Hugh Jackman’s hands, “Real Steel” is exactly what the doctor ordered.

For the rest of us who’ve never wished for those things, Jackman’s latest is a cliched but fun father-and-son tale that just so happens to be the big screen adaptation of Rock-Em Sock-Em Robots.

That description alone would make most movie fans roll their eyes but “Real Steel” doesn’t assume that the “turn off your brain and have fun” mindset will take the spotlight off its gimmicky plot.

Credit belongs with director Shawn Levy and his team of writers for explaining why robots have replaced humans as pugilists in the near future and even weaving the sport’s history seamlessly throughout the movie.

At the heart of “Real Steel” is the relationship between Charlie Kenton (Jackman) and his estranged son Max (Dakota Goyo), who gets stuck with his father for a summer after his mother dies.

Charlie, whose love for robot boxing took precedent over his relationship with Max, is at first reluctant to let his son be part of his (oftentimes seedy) business but soon comes to realize that Max has an appreciation and knowledge of the sport that could help revive Charlie’s meandering career.

The duo’s luck turns when they discover an old sparring robot named Atom who comes complete with a shadow feature not seen in modern machines, most of which are controlled by a giant control pad.

The story hits every beat that an underdog movie is supposed to hit, including the surprising first victory, the montage of consecutive wins, the big break, the setback and the heartwarming resolution. It’s all textbook but it’s still fun.

There are hints scattered throughout the movie that Atom is somewhat sentient, and while the audience is never given a straight answer, Atom’s hinted-at humanity is enough to make us feel every punch he takes.

“Real Steel” also deserves props for not taking the easy way out with the movie’s conclusion, which is undeniably sappy but doesn’t feel contrived.

If you approach this movie with the same wide-eyed wonderment that made the “Transformers” series a billion dollar property than you’ll surely enjoy watching robots duke it out in the ring. And for those wondering - yes, the robots look really good and the fights are easy to follow.

“Real Steel” is the perfect kind of movie to pop in on family night and enjoy with a big bowl of popcorn. It’s a visual treat for the kids and has enough robots and reconciliation to satisfy all the Rock-Em Sock-Em skeptics.

There’s a real chance it will steal your heart. (See what I did there?)

Reel grade: 80 out of 100.

Permalink

Charlie Kenton: How old are you? 9? 10?
Max Kenton: I’m 11.
Charlie Kenton: Okay… are you sure?
Max Kenton: Yes. I’m sure I’m 11.

Real Steel

Permalink

‘The Grey’ Review

If you’ve seen television previews for “The Grey” then you know the outrageous scene the movie’s marketers have used to sell it – Liam Neeson, broken bottles taped to one hand and a knife taped to the other, does battle with a bloodthirsty wolf.

That’s what drove this critic to the theater on opening weekend, at least. The thought of Neeson fighting anything, whether it be European bad guys like he did in “Taken” and “Unknown” or, once again, wolves, is a cinematic treat I can’t resist.

So imagine my disappointment when that big, juicy scene doesn’t actually happen in the movie.

Let me repeat that: You never get to see Neeson punch a wolf with a fist full of broken bottles.

I won’t spoil anything but to say that the brief flash from the previews of Neeson holding up his taped fists is all you get. Granted, when you see the build up to that scene, you know how it ends, but still, being robbed of that smackdown is tough.

For those who haven’t seen the previews, “The Grey” is about a group of oil drillers who are forced to survive when their plane goes down in the Alaskan wilderness. Worse than the subzero temperatures is a ferocious pack of wolves who see the survivors as intruders and begin hunting them down one at a time.

Being the alpha male (and bonafide action star) that he is, Neeson leads the men on a fight for survival that challenges their will to live every second of the day.

There are genuine “jump out of your seat” thrills during the movie’s 117-minute running time, most of which involve the wolves, but some that come from trying to survive the treacherous Alaskan wilderness.

Unlike most survival movies, characters in “The Grey” are not one-dimensional. They go through all the phases one would expect of a plane crash survivor – shock, denial, grief, terror and resistance – and they actually make logical choices.

The survivors also spend a fair amount of time pondering the meaning of their survival, debating the fickle nature of fate and questioning whether there are larger forces at work.

“The Grey” is not for the faint of heart. Men get eaten by wolves, and director Joe Carnahan doesn’t shy away from showing the gory details. There’s also a hefty amount of profanity, but you have to credit the movie for being realistic.

Neeson crackles with that reserved intensity he’s famous for, and he doesn’t disappoint in the action scenes. While we’re robbed of his broken-bottle rumble, Neeson does grapple with a wolf early in the movie and actually punches it in the face.

So there’s that.

Those expecting a thrill-a-minute type movie should probably look elsewhere, because while “The Grey” delivers the thrills, those jolts of adrenaline come after long stretches of campfire discussion or wandering through wilderness.

It’s expertly crafted, though, and is one of those rare movies that makes you marvel at the magic that goes into filmmaking.

Watching the actors slog through waist-deep snow and brave freezing temperatures (at least it looks that way!) will surely make viewers think twice before they curse 40-degree winter days.

Then again, watching “The Grey” might also make you curse deceptive marketing.

Reel grade: 81 out of 10

Permalink

January is a good month for movies. These four are my must-sees.

Permalink

‘Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol’ Review

It’s hard to be impressed by action movies nowadays.

Thanks to advances in special effects technology and the efforts of directors like Michael Bay, audiences have seen every kind of explosion, gunfight and stunt work the imagination can produce.

For many of us (this critic included), the last time an action movie made us say “Whoa” was probably “The Matrix.” By using a couple of Hollywood effects stalwarts – slow motion and wire work – the film delivered something totally fresh and visually stunning: bullet time.

The effect has been used dozens of times since the movie’s 1999 release and, needless to say, it doesn’t pack quite the same punch. If you’re anything like me and have been hoping to feel the same kind of thrill “The Matrix” gave you, our search is over.

“Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol” is not only the best action movie of 2011, it’s one the best action movies of the past decade.

By their very definition, action movies should provide interesting characters and a serviceable plot against a backdrop of action so thrilling it leaves your whole body tense. You should leave the theater with white knuckles if an action movie has done its job.

“Ghost Protocol” passes with flying colors when held against this standard. The actors are all superbly cast, the plot is competent enough not to drag down the movie and the action soars thanks to the same innovative approach that made “The Matrix” so great.

Breathtaking stunt work is what makes the action in “Ghost Protocol” so exhilarating. As the previews divulged, super spy Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) must scale the tallest building in the world – the Burj Khalifa in Dubai – using nothing but a pair of suction gloves.

The sequence is filmed with such a perfect mix of grandeur and danger that it puts the audience right there on the building with Ethan. The sweeping shots down the face of the Burj Khalifa are sure to evoke a shudder from even the most hardcore adrenaline junkies.

The movie also excels by having simultaneous action scenes unfolding with different members of the team. While tech expert Benji (Simon Pegg) rarely mixes things up, Jane (Paula Patton) and newcomer Brandt (Jeremy Renner) are often throwing down in fisticuffs while Ethan is doing the same or running after a bad guy.

Director Brad Bird, whose last film was “Ratatouille,” has a flair for the frenetic and the movie really shines when he decides to shift into sensory overload mode. If you want an action movie that’s dedicated to bringing the thrills and executes its vision to perfection, look no further than “Ghost Protocol.”

Cruise rockets back to superstardom with his turn as Ethan Hunt, but it’s the newest cast member who really shines. Renner is the perfect addition to the “Mission Impossible” family as the skilled but tortured Brandt, an analyst who shares a shadowy connection to Ethan and is forced to work with the team after a near-fatal accident.

The only area where “Ghost Protocol” stumbles is the development of its villain, a terrorist named Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist) who’s determined to start a nuclear war. That’s really all you ever discover about the man, as his motives are murky and his character is never fleshed out like the others.

Finally, don’t worry if you haven’t seen the previous “Mission Impossible” movies, or like me, you haven’t seen them in years.

“Ghost Protocol” is a mission you should choose to accept.

This review will self-destruct in five seconds…

Reel grade: 91 out of 100

Permalink

I’ve heard this might be the best action movie released in 2011. For those of you lucky enough to see it in IMAX since last weekend: does it deserve the hype? Is it the best M:I movie to date?