Movie Reviews -- Moneyball, Contagion, Paranormal Activity III

Moneyball

You would think I would be easy to please with a movie about the study of baseball statistics. Actually, that probably makes me a tougher critic. I went in hoping for a steak and left feeling I got baby food. What little math I saw was very dumbed down for the audience.

The story is that somebody is hired to get the most bang for a very limited player payroll budget for the Oakland A's. A statistician is hired to pick stretch that dollar as far as possible. The old timers were horrified at who he was buying, but in the end the team did much better than anyone expected. However, that doesn't necessarily make for exciting subject matter. I can't fault anything about the movie other than I found it somewhat boring. This subject matter would work much better as a documentary. In fact, there was a very good piece on 60 Minutes about the same story recently, which says about everything one needs to know about the topic.

5 out of 10.


Contagion

Normally I like pandemic movies like I Am Legend and The Stand. However, it is hard to group Contagion with those too. For one thing, only about 12% of the population dies in the latter (sorry if I'm spoiling anything) as opposed to about 99.99% of the other two.

Much like Moneyball, Contagion goes for realism as opposed to an epic science fiction story. The thing is I don't go to the movies to see My Dinner with Andre. I want an entertaining story. Contagion was a too slow and too long for my liking. Still, it had some good moments and I wasn't entirely disappointed.

6 out of 10.


Paranormal Activity III

Just saw this one today with NicksGamingStuff and SOOPOO. I loved the first one, liked the second, and am ambivalent on the third. For the benefit of others, all three movies involve a demon that follows around two sisters. The third movie is the first chronologically, when the two sisters were young girls. Some questions are answered that arise from the first two movies, but just as many new questions are raised.

The movie itself follows exactly the same formula as the first two. That made it much less scary for me. The first 80% of the movie goes by rather slowly, with most the action in the last 20%. One might say this about the first two, but the ending felt rushed, and I felt they cut it off too soon. One could show up an hour late and not miss much.

Still, it wasn't all bad. Watching made me feel like I was visiting an old friend. My advice is if you liked the first two, you should probably see this one too. Otherwise, not.

6 out of 10.

I feel ripped off if I pay money to see a 6 out of 10
movie. I make sure they're 9's before I go. That
means I see maybe 3 movies a year. Just saw Red
Dragon last night for the first time. It was very slow,
I would not have seen it in the theatre.

Quote: EvenBob

I make sure they're 9's before I go.

If you're not psychic, how can you tell? I have learned to not trust critics or the general public too much, especially after I was completely let down by Inception, which has an 8.9 at IMDB.com. At the time I saw it, the rating was much higher, but I suspect ballot box stuffing. I give it a 4, and I'm generous at that.

I find my tastes generally agree with the ratings on IMDB. I check it before I watch any movie. I was surprised and disappointed in Inception also. I think a 4 is too generous.

Mark

Quote: Wizard

If you're not psychic, how can you tell? I have learned to not trust critics or the general public too much, especially after I was completely let down by Inception, which has an 8.9 at IMDB.com. At the time I saw it, the rating was much higher, but I suspect ballot box stuffing. I give it a 4, and I'm generous at that.

I see mostly sequels that I know will be good. Or ones that
get real good box office and word of mouth.

Quote: Wizard

If you're not psychic, how can you tell? I have learned to not trust critics or the general public too much,

Tell me about it!

One of my favorite SF movies is "Back to the Future" (all three, but I liked the first one best). I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to see it, though, because the review of it I read boiled it down to "kid has to travel back in time to get his parents to meet." And that, I thought, was ridiculous and reeked of predestination. I wonder if the reviewer even saw the movie.

Quote: Nareed

Tell me about it!One of my favorite SF movies is "Back to the Future"

I wasn't doing it in the 80's, only in the last 10 years.

I think you're being too harsh on MoneyBall. You were looking for math and didn't really get it, but I don't think you can fault the movie for making the movie general for all audiences. I thought the movie was excellent. I love baseball, and I like statistics, and I found myself wanting more information after the movie was over. My own criticism was the long drawn out ending which they could have easily tidied up. Excellent baseball movie, and it documents the beginning of the influence of sabermetrics in baseball.

I thought it was a good people story.

I admitted that my background made me a tough critic. Personally, I just didn't buy into the characters. I liked the manager, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, one of my favorite actors, and would have liked to see him have more screen time. The story about the ex-wife and daughter did nothing for me, and they only skimmed the surface of it.

Then again, making a movie about a bean counter crunching baseball statistics can't be the easiest subject matter to work with. Like I said before, it would have worked better as a documentary, but it must be a drama they did about as well as anybody could have expected. Compared to that POS movie 21, Moneyball is a gem.

Quote: Wizard

played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, one of my favorite actors,

I like Hoffman. My fave of his is 'Doubt', with Meryl Streep.
He was in Red Dragon last night, he's very talented.

Of the three, I saw Contagion. Filmed in the style of Traffic, by same director. I'll go see any movie about death, time travel, end-of-world, etc, regardless of critical reviews. Some reviewers are taking bribes, I'm convinced. Anyway, it was full of celebrity stars, but I thought the collapse of society could've been more detailed and creatively told/filmed. Paltrow and her son had a convincing death, but others not so much. I left theater thinking "That's it?" I'd've preferred something more fantasy like "I am Legend", but Contagion was more realistic, yet not realistic enough. I left theater thinking the same about "Catfish", for anyone who saw that one. Lot's of promise, not enough payoff.

Contagion was more like a 2028 History Channel reenactment of an epidemic back in 2013.

I find films far more enjoyable now if I know the general theme of the first five minutes and the genre. Knowing too much spoils it for me.

Did you know Max and I applied to be extras for contagion? Max got called back but I did not. Unfortunately he never made it out of the extra pool and spent the day on the set (at candlestick park in SF) waiting around doing nothing. Either way he got paid the same.

I just watched the trailer for PA III and most of the scenes in the trailer were not even in the movie. There was a lot of good footage in the trailer that I would have liked to see expanded on. I think I'm going to have to wait for the DVD to see the "deleted scenes." Furthermore, I think it is a little dishonest to show scenes in a trailer that are not even in the movie.

Quote: Wizard

Furthermore, I think it is a little dishonest to show scenes in a trailer that are not even in the movie.

The trailer (Why is it called a "trailer" when you see it in advance?) for the original "Men in Black" flooded the TV viewing prior to the release. It had a great line, in my opinion, which wasn't in the film as released. Agent "K", explaining to Agent "J" about the glasses that block the effect of the memory erasing "flashy thingy" says in the trailer, "That's why they call them Ray-Bans." I thought that was very clever.

Quote: Doc

(Why is it called a "trailer" when you see it in advance?)

In the silent movie days they were shown at the end of the feature. The practice was abandoned quickly, because people didn't stay and watch them, but the name was never updated. It joins the long list of names like "blackjack", and "roller coaster" where the motivation behind the name has long since vanished.

I do think that responsibility for the trailer should be given to the director. IMDB has even invented a new type of "movie criticism". They rate a movie on how closely it resembles the movie that is advertised in the promotional spots. Many viewers are surprised to see a dark drama when the movie promos were clearly for a romantic comedy. Pierce Brosnan's movie, Matador, was advertised as a James Bond type adventure, when in actuality it was quirky personal drama. In the latter case I think many people who saw the movie felt gypped, while those viewer who might have enjoyed the movie didn't see it because of the promotional material.

Quote: Wizard

I just watched the trailer for PA III ...

Prof. Frank Coffman identified 5 salient points in the 1920's for a course in popular imaginative literature for a good English ghost story:

1) The pretense of truth
2) "A pleasing terror"
3) No gratuitous bloodshed or sex
4) No "explanation of the machinery"
5) Setting: "those of the writer's (and reader's) own day"

The original "paranormal activity" held true to these dictums. It has the pseudo documentary style. The "terror" made you jump, and not cringe in disgust. The couple was amorous, but they resemble ordinary people, not highly actors engaged in highly choreographed sex scenes. It made the story more approachable. There was no back-story, or convenient encompassing explanations. Lastly the setting was a very normal townhouse in the present day.

The original PA was a miracle in this day and age. Essentially a film project that captured the feel of ghost stories that you would hear as children. It was the most unexpected of successes.

I haven't seen either sequel.

Quote: pacomartin

The original PA was a miracle in this day and age. Essentially a film project that captured the feel of ghost stories that you would hear as children. It was the most unexpected of successes.

According to IMDB, it cost only $15,000 to make. It then grossed 9.1 million in just its first week. I love an underdog success story like that. Great movie. It is amazing how scary it was considering there was almost no blood. They say the movie has a cult following, to which my response is, how do I sign up for the cult?

"It is amazing how scary it was considering there was almost no blood" >>> I would say the scariest movies of all time have little (if any) blood/guts, just my opinion.

Ken

"I like Hoffman. My fave of his is 'Doubt', with Meryl Streep" >>> Funny you mention that EvenBob, I'm watching that movie right now.

Ken

Quote: Wizard

I just watched the trailer for PA III and most of the scenes in the trailer were not even in the movie. There was a lot of good footage in the trailer that I would have liked to see expanded on. I think I'm going to have to wait for the DVD to see the "deleted scenes." Furthermore, I think it is a little dishonest to show scenes in a trailer that are not even in the movie.

I do agree, many of the scenes in the trailer were NOT in the movie. Why? Usually they'll put that in the DVD when it goes up for sale. Thats how/why they advertise........ "packed full of deleted scenes".

Its an old selling trick. They make a ton of money off the theater sales and then those same goofs want to see the COMPLETE movie when it comes out on DVD. The best of both worlds. How did I like the film? Not bad, I liked part 2 the best. Get ready for part 4.

Ken

Quote: mrjjj

They make a ton of money off the theater sales and then those same goofs want to see the COMPLETE movie when it comes out on DVD.

Including me.

Quote: mrjjj

Get ready for part 4.

I set the over/under of total movies in the series at 6.5.