I am Number Four

Director: D. J. Caruso


Duration: 109 minutes


Rating: PG-13


Cast: Alex Pettyfer, Dianna Agron


A sci-fi movie packed with adrenaline and action is definitely a movie worth watching. But nowadays, sci-fi movies either lack logic or action-- usually rarely a combination of both. They diss logic in the name of the movie being “science fiction” or the movie is too “scientific” for it to contain much action. But I am Number Four (2011), directed by D.J. Caruso, contains both the action and the logic. Okay, there may be a fault of logic here and there, but for the most part, it is present at all times. In all honesty, the movie itself was quite a frightening experience for me, since some of the characters were evil aliens with disgusting appearances and a couple of the scenes reminded me of an intense Halloween patch.

I obviously am not a horror film person, so this movie scared me more than did it intrigue me. But for the parts of it I did watch (not hiding behind my hands), it was a mediocre film. It had a bizarre combination of a romance-sci-fi-horror thing going on. I guess the office wanted to allure both men and women for this film. But also, the story ended in a complete opposite path. The whole purpose of the movie was for this Number Four to find his other friends and fight off the evil aliens. But at the end, Number Four ends up taking up a case about his friend’s dad, who might have been whisked off by some alien species also. I found that part a little incomprehensible but other than that, the fluidity was there.

Another thing I didn’t quite like was its refusal to stick with the book’s story line. Characters were killed way too soon, evil aliens were advancing way too fast, and the good guys weren’t getting anywhere with their knowledge of information. If the movie had stayed with the book’s plots, it wouldn’t have made a gross of only $54,374,349 while the estimated budget was $60,000,000. The book totally made everything more dramatic and intense, while the movie made things seem almost tacky and unbelievable. Perhaps it was due to the lack of acting skills of certain actors, or maybe it was just the camera works that didn’t capture enough of the body language of the characters. But either way, the movie left a hole in the viewer’s stomach, in a negative way. If it was the type of “I need more! It was so good!” yearning, the viewer would have returned home, ecstatic for the arrival of the sequel. But if it was the “What is this?” type of hole, you can pretty much take it that the viewer will not return for the sequel. Despite my crude comments of the movie, it definitely was packed with action and adventure. After a couple battles among the good and bad, I felt myself getting heated up from the adrenaline coursing through my veins. And better yet, it is sci-fi so all the characters have some type of supernatural power. Thank goodness for computer graphics and special effects. So if you are on an action streak, this movie is highly recommended.

Entertainment: ★★★★★

Social Commentary: ★★

Acting: ★★

Total: ★★★

Beastly

Director: Daniel Barnz

Duration: 86 minutes

Rating: PG-13

Cast: Alex Pettyfer, Vanessa Hudgens

The modern Disney-adaptation of The Beauty and the Beast comes in the form of Beastly (2011), starring the two hottest celebrities Vanessa Hudgens and Alex Pettyfer. Alex Pettyfer, with his gorgeous physique, plays the role of Kyle, a snobby prep who gets everything and anything he wants because he is simply “beautiful”. He shuns those who are less beautiful than he is and has many, many faux-friends, who just use him to their advantages without his knowledge. On the day of Prom, the narcissistic prince becomes transformed into a monster, to learn his lesson that the outer shell is not everything. When he reveals his hideous self to his supposed-to-be close ones like his father, girlfriend, and other friends, they crouch in disgust of him and all run away. But then, he meets the nerdy, goody-two-shoes Lindy (Vanessa Hudgens). And you know how it is, like The Beauty and the Beast; they slowly fall in love, regardless of the social and physical difference.

I commend the movie’s excellent storyline/plot. It stuck to the book for 90% of the time, which is very rare to find in these book-to-movie translated films. But the film itself felt very short. Not because I was totally absorbed and engrossed in the movie but because the pacing was too taffy-like. Some parts were very slow, while some parts were too fast. It was very inconsistent and the two main characters had conflicted feelings for the majority of the movie. They confirmed each other’s feelings in the last 10 minutes of the movie. It seemed like the script-writers were taking their time explaining everything that had happened but seeing the due-date, had slammed some sort of last-minute ending to the movie. For me, the ending of any movie is equally (if not more) important as the beginning of the movie. I don’t know why it would be written that way though, since the movie is only 86 minutes. The writers could have added on some type of unique epilogue to the movie so that the audience wouldn’t be left just with the bare backbone of The Beauty and the Beast. After all, this is the contemporary era so the crew should have ate their hearts out with the new technology and added a brand new twist to the ending, since the setting itself was in New York. If not, they could have just cut Kyle’s soliloquies and gone straight into the “boy meets girl” part of the movie. And also, it may have been the budget standard, but the setting and props weren’t as extravagant as it could have been. I mean the “high school” is an elite academy, only for the richest of the richest. And the home properties were supposed to be in the Upper West-Manhattan, which translates into BLING BLING! Money.

Other than those faults I found, the movie was very entertaining, mostly since I have the hots for Alex Pettyfer, along with 2387460 teenage girls. If anyone feels like watching a chick-flick movie with an irregular time division, this definitely would be the movie to go to.

Entertainment: ★★★

Social Commentary: ★★

Acting: ★★★

Total: ★★★

The Hangover

“Plus it’s not a purse, it’s called a satchel. Indiana Jones wears one.” Known the best for its blue and slapstick humor, The Hangover (2009) definitely kept countless Americans laughing for the entire duration of the movie. When Phil, Stu, Alan, and Doug take a trip to Las Vegas for Doug’s bachelor party, things spin down the drain faster than you can say “wedding”. They lose the groom-to-be, find a baby in a cabinet and a tiger in the bathroom, and have an encounter with the ever fantastic Mr. Chow who demands ransom. Yet, none of the three seem to remember what has happened the previous night. As these three go on the hunt to get a clue of what has happened to their best friend, they befriend many dynamic and distinct strangers who all have miraculously managed to be a part of their “wild night out”.

To be utterly and completely honest, there wasn’t much to this movie except for its humor. Yes, it’s true; it’s not sophisticated humor like sarcasm, puns, or satires. But the plebeian jokes have busted many people’s ribcages throughout the years. Does this movie have a good story line? No. Does this movie have a moral to it? No, not unless you count “never trust drug dealers for they can give you the wrong drug and screw up your brain.” This film was strictly and solely based on being the comical and ideal “four best friends that anybody can have”. With their brotherly-borderline-gay love for one another, the characters in this picture definitely can act their heart out. It’s almost like a reality TV-show.

But regardless of the positive reviews I have received from my peers on this movie, I have found it to be quite disappointing. Yes, I knew that this wasn’t going to be the best movie I’ve ever watched, but I expected it to be even more hilarious. I believe some parts were intended to be funny, but to me it just seemed totally awkward and forced. Going overboard, one may put it as. I don’t know, maybe from all the vigor I received when asking about this movie, I expected this movie to keep me up all night with sudden short clips flashing through my mind. But none of that; instead, just brief funny moments throughout the movie, but nothing really impacting and engraved into my permanent memory. Yes, I’m sure if I see it again and again, I’ll still laugh at the same parts as I previously laughed at, but it wouldn’t be something I would want to see over and over again, for it is very dull and repetitive. If you’re home alone on a Friday or Saturday night with a couple hours to waste, I recommend you spend those two hours watching this film for an instant “feel-good” remedy. But if you’re looking to watch something worthwhile and really analyze a substantial topic, this would not be a recommended film, for it may end up killing your brain cells than challenging them.




Entertainment: ★★★★
Social Commentary: ☆ (yes, that's a zero)
Acting: ★★★★


Total: ★★


Director: Todd Phillips


Duration: 100 minutes


Rating: R


Cast: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha

Sin Nombre

Usually, films about the hardships of an illegal immigrant and/or gangs are not very popular. Not many people like the idea of having other country citizens invade their own homeland. In addition, when the term “Mexican gang” is heard, infinite negative connoted words pop up, with no fantasy or luxury like those of a “Mafia” or any European “underworlds”. Sin Nombre (2009), directed by Cary Fukunaga, is a foreign Mexican film that tells the story of Willy, a member of the gang named MS 13. This movie, many aspects similar to the book Enrique’s Journey, has a character wishing to reach her destination in New Jersey, to be reunited with her mother and sisters. Although many viewers may get confused and think that Sayra, the Honduran girl, is the main character, it is actually Willy (Casper, as referred to by his homies) that the story develops around.

This movie initially explores the heinous side of legitimate and infamous MS 13. Knowing that the director spent his time with actual gang members to get the precise dialect and setting, the movie itself is very morbid and haunting. Five-year old children getting morally corrupted, gruesome murder scenes, and graphically tattooed individuals, you name it. Barely twenty, thirty minutes into the movie, approximately three deaths had occurred, not counting minor or extra characters. So by now, readers that have not yet watched the movie will assume that this movie is totally grotesque and violent. Surprisingly, that was not the intent of the director. Throughout the picture, Fukunaga actually dissects the bond and the loyalty that comes with part of being the “brotherhood”, as Casper so desperately tries to get out of. It also gently touches on the subject of friendship and how love can change a person (as cliché as that may sound). In the basic plot, Willy is in love with Martha Marlene (his girlfriend) and mourns over her death. But from what I perceived, Willy wasn’t “in love” with Martha, but was lusting for her. Yes, she made him smile and a softie at heart, but when Willy met Sayra, he felt the need to protect her even if it meant the option of leaving her. Although their meeting was brief, he had saved her life numerous times-- from his leader, la miras, and his allied members. He even went out of his code of conduct for this friend, who very possibly could have turned out to be his true lover at the end.

The film also held many historical and geographic facts and portrayed the migrants’ laborious life on the top of the train. Maybe not in full, complex details since the plot was more based on character development, but most of the hardships were there: Severe weather, gang accounts, and the instability of the train. Although the movie didn’t exactly end with satisfaction, it really could have been up to the viewer’s discretion to come up with a “perfect” ending, since everyone’s taste bud is unique. If you’re looking for a touching and adrenaline-filled movie, this would definitely satisfy your hunger.

Entertainment: ★★★

Social Commentary: ★★★★★

Acting: ★★★★

Total: ★★★★

Director: Cary Fukunaga

Duration: 96 minutes

Rating: R

Cast: Edgar Flores, Paulina Gaitan

The Hurt Locker

When my film teacher decided to show my class The Hurt Locker (2008) for Women’s Appreciation Month, I was a little more than skeptical about her choice. First, this was a movie about WAR. I, myself, am not a ‘war’ person at all. I find it all very depressing and lackluster, although there are several exceptions such as Saving Private Ryan and Across Enemy Borders. It does not appeal to my senses in most cases. Which brings up the second point: What does and can a woman director know about war? Although I am a strong feminist, I understand that men do have a little more knowledge in that subject area. As the movie started, I was secretively hoping to sleep through the movie since I assumed it was going to be a typical war film. But boy, I had a whole lot of surprise in store for me.

The movie begins with Staff Sergeant Matt Thompson and his crew (including Specialist Owen Eldridge) deactivating a bomb. When the Specialist sees a man with a phone, he is torn between either shooting the man down or letting the man use his phone and blow up the bomb along with the Sergeant. The Specialist fails to do so and it ends up causing the Sergeant his life. Weighed down with this guilt, Eldridge continues to carry out his duties to his comrades. Later in the story, the viewers stumble across Sergeant First Class William James. This man is visibly different. He does not seem to fear death and actually takes joy in life-risking experiences. Sergeant JT Sanborn calls James a “red-neck madman” from his way of putting everyone- including the team- in danger. As the story later fully develops and unfolds, the audience realizes that the movie actually revolves around William James’s life and how the three characters’ pathways intersect and bond during their call in Iraq.

Not only did this movie thoroughly project the themes of friendship, brotherhood, and loyalty, but it also conveyed more than the mere message of “war-life is hard”, unlike typical war films. It showed how disoriented soldiers became when they returned to their so-called “normal” lives, back in their homes. It showed that real men cry at the loss of their comrades in a war. All of this couldn’t have been fully expressed unless the actors were truly engaged in their roles and the camera works were precise enough to capture every fleeting emotion, action, and language the artists fumed out. In addition to the thrill and adventure the film provided, the story line itself was very intricate and exquisite, with many twists and turns that kept me on the edge of my seat. Moreover, this informative feature keeps the moviegoers alert and unconsciously makes them wish for the safety of the characters, even though some may have a totally unlikeable persona (such as Sergeant James), be full of insecurities (like Specialist Eldridge), or be a life-loving soldier, afraid of death (similar to Sergeant Sanborn).

Entertainment: ★★★★★

Social Commentary: ★★★★

Acting: ★★★★★

Total: ★★★★★

Director: Kathryn Bigelow

Duration: 131 minutes

Rating: R

Cast: Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, Brian Geraghty