Film School Rejects » Jessica Rogers

Mike Myers to Explore Daddy Issues in Austin Powers 4

Jessica Rogers — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:34:40 +0000

Remember back to a time when you first saw Austin Powers and all the jokes were funny? Then you went to see the second movie, and it was still kind of funny? By the third you really wanted to see if Beyoncé could hold her own in a movie, and while it may have been entertaining, you couldn’t help but feel déjà vu?

Mike Meyers isn’t done yet.

According to reports over at Deadline Hollywood Daily, Mike Meyers has started writing a script for a fourth installment in the Austin Powers series at the request of New Line Cinemas. Though no details are finalized, the movie is said to be focusing on Dr. Evil and his relationship with his son Scott. (Remember, he turned evil at the end of the third movie).

What is most weird about this proposal is Meyers claims that this script is “loosely” based on his own relationship with his father.

Um, okay then…

Does this make Meyers an evil twisted individual with visions of grandeur, or is he saying that his father repeatedly tried to hold the world ransom for “One Billion Dollars!” (Sorry I had to).

With the success of the previous Austin movies and the Shrek trilogy, Meyers has some big box office draw. However, his latest movie The Love Guru tanked at the box office, leaving some to wonder if Mike Meyers has run out of funny power. There are only so many times the space ship joke can work, and one has to wonder if Austin Powers 4 will have anything original.

Would you see a fourth Austin Powers Film?

‘Mamma Mia’ is a Different Kind of Big Fat Greek Wedding

Jessica Rogers — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:34:54 +0000

Flip back and forth between an episode of Maury when he’s interviewing a woman who doesn’t know who her baby daddy is and My Big Fat Greek Wedding while playing ABBA’s greatest hits album in the background. Add a dose of Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnen and you get Mamma Mia!.

Actually, the movie is much better then that, in that it is able to take a “whose my daddy?” story line and make it fun and enjoyable to watch.

The story focuses on the wedding of Sophie Sheridan (Amanda Seyfried of Mean Girls fame), who was raised by her single mother Donna (Meryl Streep) a former member of the pop group “Donna and the Dynamos”. Sophie wants the perfect white wedding and dreams of the father she never knew giving her away. In an attempt to hold some semblance of a Parent Trap like reunion, Sophie invites three men who were all with her mother around the same time, believing that when she meets the men she will be able to tell which one is her dad.

Amanda Seyfried was the star in my book, proving that she is more then just a dumb blond who played second banana to Lindsay Lohan. Not only does Seyfreid convey a respectable yet not over the top amount of angst of growing up without a father, she’s got a stellar voice as well. Christine Baranski and Julie Waters, who play Donna’s best friends and former band mates, bring the right amount of encouraging and supportive sidekicks while still maintaining a cougar like attitude.

The one true downfall of the movie is thinking that James Bond was a substantial prerequisite for a musical. From an acting standpoint Pierce Brosnan played Sam, on of Sophie’s three potential fathers nicely, but his singing left much to be desired…like a vocal dubbing. He doesn’t sing till late in the film, but the second he opened his mouth the entire theater burst into giggles, and nothing about his song was meant to be comedic. I do have to give Brosnan credit for trying, but he should really stick to being a total bad-ass.

Mamma Mia! will please fans of ABBA and of the Broadway show, as well as anyone searching for a die hard chick flick.

The Upside: An all around feel good film that will make you wish you grew up on a Greek Island.

The Downside: Pierce Brosnan’s singing voice was cringe inducing and you will have Dancing Queen stuck in your head for days.

On the Side: In the background of one scene you can see a poster advertising a show for “Donna and the Dynamos” appearing at a bar called Fernando’s (also a song by ABBA).

‘Get Smart’ Shows Off Great Cast, Subpar Plot

Jessica Rogers — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:00:41 +0000

Immediately before I went to see Get Smart, I was watching several episodes of The Office on DVD. It was completely unintentional to spend almost the entire day watching Steve Carell; I’m just a huge fan of The Office. So naturally, during the entire movie I had to refrain from adding “that’s what she said” to half of the lines delivered.

When I first saw the trailer for Get Smart that simply showed Steve Carell unable to get out of a telephone booth I immediately knew that it would be at the top of my must see summer movie list. But then talks of multiple reshoots had me a bit worried. Remaking a classic TV show into a film is a slippery slope (let us all remember The Dukes of Hazard), and the rumor mill was casting some serious doubt on the flick.

The movie revolves around Maxwell Smart (Carell) an analyst working for the secret government agency CONTROL who dreams of becoming a field agent. When the criminal organization KAOS discovers the secret identity of every CONTROL agent, Smart is paired up with a reluctant Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway) to stop the evil plans of KAOS leader Siegfried (Terrance Stamp). What exactly those plans are, we are a bit fuzzy on; there seems to be no real plot until about halfway through the film.

Luckily, Get Smart has an awesome cast that carries the film even when the plot isn’t all that stellar. Steve Carell proves once again that while he can be over the top like many of his peers, he is also a master at dead panned, straight faced humor. He combines the naïveté of Michael Scott from The Office with the dopey eyed geekiness of Andy from The 40 Year Old Virgin The secret to his success in the film is while he was inspired by the television show, he puts his own spin on Maxwell Smart, making him just a loveable but slightly more competent. It also doesn’t hurt that his chemistry and banter with Anne Hathaway is awesome, even during the slow parts of the movie. Sure, most of the jokes and ouch inducing moments are pretty predictable, but they are still enjoyable.

While Get Smart will never be as good as the original (nothing ever is) it keeps you laughing and entertained.

The Upside: Steve Carell is hilarious as always, Dwayne Johnson staples paper to people’s foreheads, and Anne Hathaway is kind of a bad ass.

The Downside: The first half of the movie really doesn’t seem to have much of a plot going on.

On the Side: Did anyone else notice that the evil lair of KAOS looked a lot like that of Dr. Evil in Austin Powers?

Disney Wants to Put a Hexum on You

Jessica Rogers — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:00:14 +0000

Coming off of a few years with major box offices hits peppered with a few bombs (remember Around the World in 80 Days and Ice Princess?) to its name, it seems as though Disney is back to its former glory days as the can’t-fail studio. Following up on box office hits like the Pirates and National Treasure franchises, the studio has found a niche in family friendly but still pretty badass action movies.

Hoping to cash in on yet another action-hero franchise, the studio has picked up a new pitch from Oscar Nominee David Arata (Children of Men, Spy Game) for Hexum, of which little plot details have been made available. However, the title character of the movie is supposedly a worst case scenario analyst working for the government.

The movie is being produced by Sean Bailey, the sometimes producing partner of Ben Affleck, through Idealogy.

Sound Off: Is this recent string of Disney hits a fluke or has the studio found its way back to the top?

Horton Hears a Pro-life Protest

Jessica Rogers — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 23:53:08 +0000

Is nothing sacred anymore? Something as innocent and wholesome as a film adaptation of a Dr. Seuss classic has now become a battle ground for Anti-Abortion protestors.

Yeah, that’s right. Horton Hears a Who has now become ammo for the pro-life movement.

The story is centered on the line “A person is a person, no matter how small.” Sounds like a cute message to teach children, right? Nice and simple; kids learn to treat others with respect, despite their differences, all while being entertained by the likes of Jim Carrey and Steve Carell.

The movie’s motto was jumped on by pro-lifers, who stormed the movies premiere chanting and eventually wrapping red tape that said “Life” on it. The protestors were then greeted with jeers from the crowd who were angered at their presence. TMZ.com reported that certain members of the audience, which included the films stars Carrey and Carell as well as the American Idol finalists and Victoria Beckham and her kids, taunted back to the protesters, chastising them for bringing political debates into a movie premiere meant for children.

There is a time and place for ethical demonstrations, and it most certainly isn’t in the same cinema as a happy elephant named Horton who lives in the Jungle of Nool. Keep it on CSPAN folks.

Toy Story 3 Plot Details Released

Jessica Rogers — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:58:12 +0000

You have to love it when the Wall Street Journal is the first source of details on a Disney movie. Stuck into to a lengthy dissertation on big budget studios re-entering the video game market (the details of which I will not bore you with) was the delicious gem about the third installment of Toy Story, giving us a sneak peak on what we should expect from our buddies Woody and Buzz.

“In Pixar’s coming movie “Toy Story 3,” Woody the cowboy and his toy-box friends are dumped in a day-care center after their owner, Andy, leaves for college.”

What! No Andy? Our favorite toys are going to be abandoned and left to fend for themselves, faced with droves of day care babies!? What is this world coming to?

There is no doubt that Disney is hoping lighting will strike for a third time; as uncommon as successful trilogies are in Hollywood, Toy Story has a positive history on its side. The first Toy Story was something we had never seen before, it was unique and different, not to mention that it launched Pixar as a powerhouse in Hollywood and ushered in a new wave of computer generated movies (Would there have been a Shrek without Toy Story?). The film was listed by AFI as one of only two animated films to make it onto their One Hundred Greatest American Films of all time, an was selected for preservation by the National Film Registry. Not bad for a kid movie, eh? Now Disney is planning on rereleasing the groundbreaking film in 2009 in Disney 3-D before the third Toy Story opens in 2010.

Toy Story 2, which is also slated for re-release in Disney 3-D in February 2010, brought back our favorite toys like Woody, Buzz, Ham and Rex, but also introduced us to new characters like Jessie (voiced by Joan Cusack) and Pete the Prospector (Kelsey Grammer). Toy Story 2 is one of the few sequels that still holds as much charm and is a popular as the first installment. Like is predecessor, Toy Story 2 was nominated for an Oscar for Best Music, and was beloved by critics and audiences alike.

The question is, will audiences respond like they have in the past? And will box office figures reach “To Infinity and Beyond?” (Oh come on, you knew I had to say it!)

Talking Point: Do you think that the third Toy Story will be a success?

Oliver Stone to Direct Bush Biopic

Jessica Rogers — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:18:03 +0000

Josh Brolin, newly indoctrinated onto the A-list thanks to his turn in No Country for Old Men is about to tackle a more difficult task. Butchering the word ‘nuclear’ in an over exaggerated Texas accent.

Brolin, who to me will always be Brand Walsh from The Goonies, is slated to portray George W. Bush in a biopic film that Oliver Stone is currently shopping around to studios. With a script written by Stanley Weiser filming hopes to begin in April, though a strike from the Screen Actors Guild would certainly put a damper on production.

Stone, in an interview with Variety, describes the picture he wants to paint of the 43^rd president. “How did Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world… It includes his belief that God personally chose him to be president of the United States, and his coming into his own with the stunning, preemptive attack on Iraq.”

According to Slashfilm.com the film was first mentioned when Oliver Stone was doing press for Alexander (remember that fiasco?) the director’s cut, but has flown under the radar with misleading titles like P.O.T.U.S and Misunderestimated (which makes the film sound more like a National Lampoon effort then an Oliver Stone flick.)

If everything stays on schedule, the film would be realized around the time of the next election or inauguration, which opens up a whole new world for voters. Maybe even posting election booths outside of theaters, which may help you get the elusive youth vote.

Talking Point: Is it too soon to make a movie about a man still in office?

Cloverfield

Jessica Rogers — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 06:22:14 +0000

The human mind has the capability of creating terrifying things. It is a well understood fact that imagination is much more powerful than whatever Hollywood’s special effects teams can come up with. When I first found out about Cloverfield, I was truly excited about the prospect of a monster movie in the vein of The Blair Witch Project (overrated yes, but still a good movie). Then I heard about it again…and again…and again. The overblown advertising had me very wary that it would never live up to its hype.

Almost twenty four hours after watching the movie and I am still am not sure.

Cloverfield starts off pretty slow, introducing you to the main characters and all of their CW-esque drama. In a nutshell Rob loves Beth, Rob sleeps with Beth, Rob never calls Beth, and therefore Rob loses Beth. Rob is moving to Japan for a new job, so his brother Jason and girlfriend Lily are throwing him a goodbye party, attended by Rob’s best friend Hud and Marlena, Lily’s good friend whom Hud has developed quite a crush for. Drama begins when Beth shows up with another guy, and she leaves in a huff after an argument with Rob. While dealing in the aftermath of their overdramatic angst, Ben and company are rocked by an explosion taking place nearby which send them scurrying to the streets of Manhattan away from…something.

I don’t know if I am just jaded by today’s technological feats of computer generated villains or what, but I was so looking forward to there not being a monster at all. To me it would have been much more terrifying if no monster had actually been shown at all and everything was left up to the imagination. When we finally see the…thing, I was too confused as to what to classify it as to really have the opportunity to be afraid. Maybe they were trying too hard to live up to the hype they had created but the thing was trying to be too much.

Beyond all that, Cloverfield had is high points. The cinematography and editing achieve something that no other movie like it before has; it maintained its realistic nature (achieved by hand held camera work) without cheating the audience out of any blockbuster movie effects. The editing is brilliant (though I wouldn’t hold your breath for any gold statues, as the powers that be don’t often agree with the general viewing public) and it makes up for the cheesy Rob and Beth storyline that makes even me, a lover of most teen angst driven TV dramas, a little queasy.

The Upside: The head of the Statue of Liberty being tossed into the streets was the highlight for me, as well as the often comical narration of Hud. All in all a successful monster movie for the technologically obsessed age.

The Downside: Rob and Beth are quite annoying and the camera work got a little hard to handle after a while

On The Side: Though the name Cloverfield is odd enough, the movie had several codenames, including Cheese and Slusho.

27 Dresses

Jessica Rogers — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:02:35 +0000

First and foremost, I feel the need to state the obvious: 27 Dresses is a bona fide chick flick of the highest order. Guys will not like it and will take no pleasure in sitting through it. It is kitschy, corny and predictable. However, as far as chick flicks go, it is still an entertaining watch.

Katherine Heigl plays Jane, an extremely accommodating woman who has been in twenty seven weddings (including attending two on the same night). She plays the dutiful bridesmaid to such an extent that she is much more of a wedding planner then wedding guest. When she is not on the “wedding circuit” she toils away as the personal assistant to George (Edward Burns) whom she has long been in love with. Imagine her surprise and dismay when her spoiled younger sister Tess (Malin Akerman) gets engaged to George and enlists Jane to plan the nuptials. While Jane is trying to maintain the slightest iota of self control, she is distracted by the constant wisecracking of her bitter friend Casey (Judy Greer), and the unwelcome intrusion of cynical reporter Kevin (James Marsden), and begins to wonder if the “always a bridesmaid” is really for her.

Being a true chick flick there were a few too many moments that were unrealistic. Hailing a random cab in New York City and ending up finding the same driver you had ridden with weeks ago? Being able to afford (on the salary of a personal assistant) an apartment that is big enough for you, your fashionista sister who plans on staying an unspecified amount of time and still has enough space left over to dedicate an entire closet to the graveyard of garish monstrosities your friends make you wear for their special day?

Judy Greer once again playing the second fiddle, tackling the role of Jane’s sarcastic and no nonsense best friend Casey brilliantly. Part of me is dying for this woman to have a superstar career and play the lead in her next film, but I love her in the sidekick role. Her one line quips about Jane’s hopeless crush on boss George and inability to stand up for herself make Casey an unsung hero of the film. (Her best scene has to be the slap she delivers to Jane to snap her out of her George induced stupor). And James Marsden, who had already stolen my heart with his turn as the fairy tale prince in Enchanted, once again bewitched me with those killer blue eyes of his. (Hey, I am reviewing a chick flick; I get to be gushy, because my god the man is adorable.)

I mean sure the dialogue was a little corny and the script was predictable but 27 Dresses maintains all of what you would expect of a chick flick; relatable heroine, at least one (if not more) love triangle, witty sidekick, often humorous misunderstanding, and an unsurprising conclusion. Still a good watch if you aren’t looking for something too substantial, just don’t expect Oscar gold.

The Upside: Just seeing all of those dresses lined up will send you into stitches and make you hope all of your friends stay single.

The Downside: Jane is a little whiny and Tess can’t seem to decide if she is a brat or not.

On the Side: The first round of dresses was not hideous enough for the filmmakers; Katherine looked too good in all of them and the wardrobe department had to rework all of them to look bad on her figure.

National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Jessica Rogers — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:00:47 +0000

First and foremost, it has to be stated that I am a Disney lover through and through and I have a lot of faith in the genius of Jerry Bruckheimer. Knowing this, you might be surprised to find that I almost had to be forced to watch the first National Treasure. There is a very good reason for this.

I cannot stand Nicolas Cage. Not really too sure of the why, but my god the man drives me insane.

That being said, I did eventually watch the first National Treasure and actually loved it. It was the perfect mix of Da Vinci Code level intelligence and action that would make Indiana Jones proud. Riley (Justin Bartha) was what made it for me; he played the perfect sidekick and kept me in stitches almost the entire time.

After admitting that I was wrong to almost miss out on a great movie because of my unfounded loathing of one actor, I happily went to see the sequel. Two hours later, I left the theatre with nothing more to say then “Eh”.

This movie suffered from “sequel syndrome”; the witty banter, the clever commentary, the surprising storyline all were a little watered down in the second installment. The action was exactly what you would expect from a Bruckheimer production; intense, audience pleasing, and lasting just a tad too long.

The film had a strong start, providing a historical background that put the reader in a better position to understand the plot (something that I personally was very grateful for, as a history buff I am not.) We learn that the great grandfather of Ben Gates (Nicolas Cage) has come under scrutiny; it seems that he may have contributed in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Ben has recently been unceremoniously kicked out of his palatial mansion by his lady love Abigail (Diane Kruger), so this news is just the cherry on top of a bad luck streak. Ben’s father Patrick (Jon Voight) is devastated by the possibility of the Gates family being remembered as traitors, and Ben sets off to find the truth. Assisted by his sarcastic and slightly bitter associate Riley Poole a reluctant Abigail and even his disgruntled mother (brilliantly portrayed by the incomparable Helen Mirren) Ben follows clues from Paris to London and back to Washington DC, where it is determined that he has to kidnap the President of the United States. Simple, right? After stealing the Declaration of Independence, kidnapping the leader of the free world just seems to be the next logical step.

Once again, the unsung hero of this movie is undoubtedly Riley whose quick remarks and hilarious observations are the most memorable aspect of the movie. Can someone please explain to me why this guy is not a star? His brilliant lines are delivered perfectly and he never breaks that blank stare of his unless it’s to smirk when something goes his way or scream in terror if something goes horribly wrong. Obviously the scream is seen much more often then the smirk.

Helen Mirren was a great addition to the team, playing Emily Appleton, Ben’s mother and Patrick’s ex-wife. The tension between Patrick and Emily is believable enough, and you get the feeling that what ended their relationship is quite possibly what is causing problems with Ben and Abigail (although you never really get an insight into why the two are separated).

Bottom line, this movie is good enough as an entertaining watch and is a decent enough follow up as far as sequels are concerned. A guaranteed classic, no. However, I did leave the theatre wishing I had paid more attention in history class, so perhaps that was one objective achieved.

Grade: C+

Film School Rejects » Jessica Rogers

Mike Myers to Explore Daddy Issues in Austin Powers 4

Related Reading:

‘Mamma Mia’ is a Different Kind of Big Fat Greek Wedding

Related Reading:

‘Get Smart’ Shows Off Great Cast, Subpar Plot

Related Reading:

Disney Wants to Put a Hexum on You

Related Reading:

Horton Hears a Pro-life Protest

Related Reading:

Toy Story 3 Plot Details Released

Related Reading:

Oliver Stone to Direct Bush Biopic

Related Reading:

Cloverfield

Related Reading:

27 Dresses

Related Reading:

National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Related Reading: