Magic in the Moonlight (2014)

I think I wrote before that if you've seen a movie by Woody Allen, you've seen them all, or to not sound that mean, at least a part of each of them. So, that's why I've never liked much Woody Allen = it just seemed boring. There are just two categories - romantic comedies or dramas with some hint of romance. But either my taste got "softened" by my age, or I started finding also some which have a slightly different nuance in the extremely prolific repertoire of the aforementioned (after all, at one movie per year it's actually hard I guess to find variation). "Magic in the Moonlight" is one of these more fortunate case, or at least this is what the trailer suggests...

Sometime in the 1920s: Stanley is a well-known magician, going with Wei Ling Soo as stage name, who besides the artistic career also formed a reputation of debunking fake mediums. So, he cannot resist the invitation of a fellow magician, old childhood friend, who asks him to investigate Sophie, a young lady posing as able to talk to spirits, who infiltrated into a rich family somewhere in South of France, making them believe she's the only way to contact the late head of the house. That's the starting point, and it doesn't sound bad at all.

The movie's part of the comedy area of Woody Allen, and it obviously keeps a lot of the specific elements = the characters construction, dialogues, etc. However, the context that's slightly more exotic and the location elements that add to the general feeling making it look a bit more like something by Alexander Payne ("Sideways", "Descendants"), give the movie some originality, enough to make it look different than just another episode of an anthology series. It's not something to stir strong laughs, but it has its humor, and even though it doesn't try to rival with Agatha Christie on keeping the mystery = you get quite quickly the answer on "who's the killer" in the story, it still doesn't lose you. That's because you have something left - to see how the romance evolves in all the context (even though that's predictable too). Probably this is also the disappointing part, in the sense that you'll probably expect something more elaborate, not just the simplistic solution you're offered. But after all, it's a light movie, relaxing, and not trying more than that. Something for a vacation :) Just the opportunity to end my 2019 chapter with a: Happy Holidays! & hopefully a better new year to come ;)

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

The Irishman (2019)

To be clear from start where we stand, and since I'm not in the best writing mood and also I don't want to get too long, for me "The Irishman" compared to "Goodfellas" seemed like the new "Jumanji" vs. the old "Jumanji" (the new = the one of two years ago, because for the latest one I won't lose time anymore). Yeah, I know that the new "Jumanji" is ranked better than the old one (maybe I'm getting older, but... come on), exactly the way "The Irishman" got in a couple days to be considered by at least a part of the critics as the best of Scorsese. Really?...

So, I said I don't want to get long with this = if you want the full story, Wikipedia search for Jimmy Hoffa, union leader in the '70s in US with some mafia connections, and the unfortunate protagonist of one the most controversial disappearances ever, not solved by today. Unofficially, at 30 years after the event, an Irish guy from the close circle of Hoffa, Frank Sheeran, on his death bed makes a stunning confession - he killed Hoffa... and also Joe Gallo, another mobster who's killer's left unknown... and even other hits of the same type... and also transported weapons for the Bay of Pigs invasion. All these so cleverly put together, that he didn't get charged for any, and the FBI still has the case officially unsolved. It's an excellent subject for a best-seller, and now for a top grossing movie. I don't say that everything's fake, but still it looks too much like a fishing story, and the fish might not be that big.

But the movie, how is the movie.. well, even the new "Jumanji" is ok in some parts. "The Irishman" starts well, with a bit of a "Godfather" feeling that you don't meet nowadays anymore, but soon it starts to hit you with some not so nice stuff. The effects and/or make-up to rejuvenate De Niro didn't look more artificial since "J. Edgar". De Niro is more Italian than Irish, and as well as he gets his role played, it doesn't really completely belong there - in comparison is enough to look at Ray Stevenson in "Kill the Irishman", a much less pretentious movie some years ago, also set in the mob wars niche. Hoffa didn't have Italian roots as Pacino has, although here the contrast is not so big, but again, Jack Nicholson in "Hoffa" directed by Danny De Vito, which I've seen long long ago still stays in my mind as more credible. On the other hand, we have a comeback on screen after a very long break of Joe Pesci, which is indeed and undeniable made for the role he plays.

What's left to say - the movie is very long, and the ending even longer - I've never had this feeling of extra unnecessary lengths anywhere else except "LoTR: Return of the King" after the ring is melted, or in the latest "Avengers", after... well, I don't remember after what, completely forgettable. Even so, it's a movie to see. Until the end, the script is written sufficiently ok to keep you there. Technically: camera work, editing (minus the effects I was saying) is top class. And if that doesn't move you, at least for the fact that you don't get to see much often something in this genre that reaches a decent quality.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Winter-Spring 2019-2020 Movie Preview - Part 2

As usual, there aren't many title yet announced for next Spring, so there's not much room for a selection. To get into the subject, for next March we have a remake of "Mulan", live motion this time. The first trailer doesn't say much, but given that it's a remake I doubt any spoilers were required.

In April we move off from the usual "X-Men" line in "The New Mutants", with a much darker look, so probably a bit more mature. The only part that seems to connect the two is the Marvel logo. I say that's promising, or at least interesting.

Finally, in May we have the already postponed released date for "Artemis Fowl", a potential successor of "Harry Potter" = the first episode that moves to the big screen based on another series of books in the same genre.

We end, therefore, this round of preview = back to difficult stuff = let's see what subject I manage to find out for the next entry ;)

Winter-Spring 2019-2020 Movie Preview - Part 1

I'll make permanent this "brief" version for previews, with just one entry per month. Not that I'd like to get rid of it quicker, but because there's really not much choice for more titles that show some promise. Maybe I'm getting too old, grumpy & picky, but well... that's life.

For December I tried to find something else that's more interesting than the last episode of the "Star Wars" saga, but I couldn't (really, I watched 12 more trailers having their release set for next month until I gave up). And unfortunately not because "The Rise of Skywalker" is very interesting - given that there are enough spoilers, and even seemingly more enough cliches in it. I said that I'm old, grumpy & picky. But let's keep some hope...

January has a better offer, but by far the title that seems to be the choice to watch is "The Gentlemen", or finally Guy Ritchie's return to the genre that made him a great director.

I gave up on horrors since some time. A while ago a director was saying in an interview that this is the most accessible genre that allows you the largest boundaries on creativity (ironically this was in a "making of" for a very poor movie). There are some studios that got specialized more or less on this niche (Blumhouse, Screen Gems, etc.), which keep repeating a couple recipes where they just change some ingredient. In February we have "Fantasy Island", which seems though to bring at least a setting that's a bit different. Not much, but at least we move out of the ghosts and other evil area which is lately beyond overused.

Back soon, cu sezonul de primavara...

*12* - Extra Ordinary (2019)

As I said it in other years, for the usual weekly entry I'm choosing what subject I can pick (if I can pick) from what I've seen in the days nearby, but for each blog anniversary and end-of-year I'm trying a bit more to find a title that's worth to be watched. Unfortunately, if in the beginnings of this I was reserving some time to see at least 3 movies, for some years I'm more focused on carefully choosing, hoping to find "the lucky one" from the first try, because there's no time for a second one. Now, I realize that I even got late to the "carefully choosing" part. Ergo: no chance for a 5/5. But "Extra Ordinary" is still a bit more than "ordinary" :)

Somewhere in Ireland: Rose Dooley is an auto instructor and the daughter + apprentice of the famous Vincent Dooley, ghost exorcist and paranormal expert. Former exorcist actually, because during a badly ended session he got crushed by a truck. So Rose, traumatized by the event, tries to focus on her more domestic job, although the community seems more productive in restless spirits and rising the number of scared potential customers than in people needing a driving license. And like that we get to Martin Martin who still lives with his late wife, deceased since 10 years. "The plot thickens", to directly quote the character, when Christian Winter, a "one-hit wonder" singer, having moved to Ireland to evade taxes, and becoming an expert in satanic rituals to find his way towards the 2nd-hit wonder, sets his eyes on Sarah Martin, the daughter of Martin Martin.

There's enough I guess to not get into spoilers. The movie is something like "Ghostbusters" meets Edgar Wright & Simon Pegg, but without Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg. We have the same feel and dark humor as in "Shaun of the Dead" or "Hot Fuzz". Sometimes it might seem a bit silly, but everything is forgotten when we reach the final crescendo, getting more & more crazy by each scene, reaching its climax at the end (really, even for the VFX, where there's a major contrast with what you'd expect for the low-budget you just watched). It's not a masterpiece, but the actors are ok, the script is ok, we have a minimalist score that fits well, and most important: I laughed. And that doesn't happen often lately when seeing comedies (that's why I'm actually typically avoiding these).

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

So, that's it for the 12 year anniversary. I still persist in continuing with probably the most unread blog in the country as views/days of existence :) (presumption not verified but highly probable). But well, moving on ;)...