Album Review

Quick Step John
The multiple personalities of last week and next year

To be honest, when I sat down to listen to this album the first time, I found it a bit pedestrian.
Then I had an opportunity to see the band live and sit down and record a podcast with them. These experiences changed my initial perception of Quick Step John.
In the podcast, the guys talk about recording this album and struggling with limited studio time, which forced them to piecemeal each of their tracks together. In my opinion, the result is the album sounds flat and it’s never able to capture the listeners’ attention.
This is in stark contract to their live show, where their performance energy propels them to be daring with arrangements.
Quick Step John is a group of competent and talented musicians who share the fun they have performing and their love for their music with the audience. I would recommend giving Quick Step John a chance, and of course if you can see them live, that’s just icing on the cake. I hope that they are able to have the chance to capture these traits on a record in the future.

‘Untraceable’ delivers suspense

Although it opened in fifth place, intelligent moviegoers were able to track down Sony Pictures’ “Untraceable” at the theaters this past weekend. The Internet thriller starring Diane Lane downloaded $11.2 million over the last three days. FBI Special Agent Jennifer Marsh (Lane) makes a living out of investigating and prosecuting criminals on the Internet. She works a lot of evenings with co-worker Griffin Dowd (Colin Hanks), while her mother Stella (Mary Beth Hurt) watches her young daughter Annie (Perla Haney-Jardine). Jennifer gets a post-it note with the web-site www.killwithme.com on it and, upon entering the site, watches a kitty cat get tortured via a webcam. Finding it unsettling, Jennifer begins tracking down the owner of the site, and discovers the individual to be quite elusive or untraceable. Another segment appears on www.killwithme.com, and this time involves an unknown male who was kidnapped outside of a hockey arena. Set up in a torture device, the unknown male slowly dies whenever the public logs onto the site. Simply put, the more hits this site gets, the faster the victims die. Making matters worse for Jennifer is the lack of support she received from her supervisor Richard Brooks (Peter Lewis). She ends up working together with Detective Eric Box (Billy Burke), and their styles manage to mesh well on this investigation. During their time together, Detective Box tells Jennifer that he’d met her once before through his working alongside her deceased husband years ago. The killer soon realizes that Jennifer is hot on his trail and takes his torturing up another notch. He also begins tracking down Jennifer as well by setting up a video camera right outside her home. When someone close to Jennifer becomes a victim, clues left behind help Jennifer and Detective Box track down the killer. “Untraceable” is one of those films that the trailer just gives you enough to want to see it, and you aren’t disappointed. There was enough to make me want to see it, without giving everything away. Unfortunately, the one flaw with this film is that you find out who is the killer way before the end of the movie. However, I’m justifying that with the realization that when officials figure out who it is via the clues left for them. You can actually put two and two together. Academy Award nominee Lane does an outstanding job as Jennifer, a steadfast FBI agent who works nights to spend time with her daughter during the day. She shows her tenacity in her profession, along with the frustration of being called away from her daughter due to work. Although I looked at him as a suspect at first, Hanks’ Dowd is the perfect sidekick for Lane’s Jennifer. The ying to her yang, they work well together in catching bad guys, and have a great relationship beyond the job site. It’s frustrating seeing how hard Jennifer and Dowd work on this case, only to be stonewalled by their boss. His appearances are luckily few and far in between, but still annoying nonetheless. The acting is great, the suspense is nicely built up, and the tortures, well, are a bit gruesome. The first two aren’t as bad, but the second duo are worthy of several look-aways. Thank goodness the final torture never actually comes to fruition. In a horrible weekend that featured “Meet The Spartans” and “Rambo,” it is “Untraceable” that moviegoers should seek out at three and a half out of four stars. “Untraceable” is rated R for some prolonged sequences of strong gruesome violence, and language. Running time is 1 hour, 40 minutes. Last week’s No. 1, Paramount Pictures’ “Cloverfield,” toppled from the top spot to No. 4 with $12.7 million — its ten-day total reaching $64.2 million. For more information and show times, contact Regal Cinemas Marketplace 24, 180 Mill Road, Oaks, at 610-666-6697. Posted by Dennis J. Wright can be reached at dwright@phoenixvillenews.com

Cloverfield’ stomps its way atop the weekend box office

It was a record-setting weekend for the low-budget horror film “Cloverfield,” as it plowed its way through the competition. The Paramount Pictures flick scared moviegoers out of $41 million, almost twice the total of second-place finisher, “27 Dresses,” which debuted with $22.4 million. Two records were broken as “Cloverfield” set the mark for a January release, surpassing the $35.9 million re-release of “Star Wars” in 1997. It will also set a record for the Martin Luther King holiday weekend. “Black Hawk Down” earned $33.6 million during the four-day period in 2002. “Cloverfield” may earn an estimated $48 million once the holiday weekend is complete. The film begins with Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) and Beth McIntyre (Odette Yustman) enjoying an April day together while her father is out of town. From the moment Beth wakes up all the way through towards the end of the day, everything is captured via videotape. Fast forward to May, and Rob’s brother Jason (Mike Vogel) and girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas) are planning a surprise going-away party for Rob. Apparently, Rob is being promoted to vice president within his company and transferred to Japan. Lily wants Jason to handle the videotaping duties for the evening, including farewell testimonials from all party attendees. Jason passes the job off to Hud (T.J. Miller), who’s enticed to do the job since it will allow him to speak to his crush Marlena (Lizzy Caplan). So, Rob walks in, everyone yells “Surprise,” and the party commences. Within minutes, Beth arrives at the party, and she’s bringing a date with her, much to Rob’s chagrin. While on the fire escape lamenting to friends about unpleasantries exchanged between himself and Beth, Rob and his friends notice an explosion a few city blocks away. Lo and behold, a giant creature is wrecking havoc, and it brought along some scary little creature features who attack humans as well. With several more explosions going on, along with flickering electric and screams of panic, Rob, Jason, Lily, Marlena and Hud all run to the streets. By the way, Hud is still filming everything in its entirety — talk about dedication. After a tragedy strikes, Rob decides he wants to go to Beth’s apartment to make sure she is safe. The group ends up running through sewers and encountering military personnel who are fighting the giant creature. While it’s been the movie trailer that’s enticing moviegoers to see “Cloverfield,” it’s the actual film is what keeps you glued to your seat. However, with the all-too-often shaky camerawork, there have been reports of nauseated moviegoers leaving their seats. Some may get used to it after the initial uneasy feeling though. Once that is over with, you’ll find a decent horror film with a plethora of no-name actors dealing with mass hysteria, dogs and cats living together (oops, wrong film). You have to give Rob his due for wanting to go to Beth, but to drag your friends along on your act of heroism is a tad bit far-fetched. The giant creature certainly isn’t Godzilla-like, but you’re never given a clear and precise view of what it looks like until the very end. Perhaps that is for the best so moviegoers won’t be disappointed at the lack of creativity that went into this creature. All in all, “Cloverfield” does pack a horror punch, but not quite a devastating blow at three out of four stars. “Cloverfield” is rated PG-13 for violence, terror and disturbing images. Running time is 1 hour, 24 minutes. For more information and show times, contact Regal Cinemas Marketplace 24, 180 Mill Road, Oaks, at 610-666-6697. Dennis J. Wright can be reached at dwright@phoenixvillenews.com

Review of Cloverfield

Cloverfield
Directed by Matt Reeves
Starring Michael Stahl-David as Rob Hawkins, Mike Vogel as Jason Hawkins, T.J. Miller as Hud Platt, Jessica Lucas as Lily Ford, Lizzy Caplan as Marlena Diamond, Odette Yustman as Beth MacIntyre
Rated PG-13 for violence, terror and disturbing images

After months of rumors and hype, Cloverfield is here.
Before I start: the monster isn't Godzilla, it isn't some monster from a H.P. Lovecraft novel, and the title doesn't mean anything.

Phew. With that out of the way, Cloverfield has its flaws but overall is an entertaining action/horror flick. Now, there isn't too much to give away in terms of plot, but because of the mystery surrounding the film before its release, read on at your own risk if you don't want anything spoiled.

The film starts with a voiceover of a soldier discussing a tape from a handheld camera found in "the area formerly known as New York City" before the "Cloverfield" incident occurred (more on this in a bit).

Then the tape plays, and the rest of the movie is shot on handheld camera. We meet the protagonist, Rob, who is leaving the country to start a job overseas, and is having a going away party thrown for him by his friends. Rob's energetic brother Jason has the idea to use the camera to tape farewells from the party's guest, and quickly hands the camera off to Rob's goofy best friend, Hud, to take care of this task.

However, after 10 to 15 minutes of party footage (read: character development), an explosion rocks the city, everyone flees the building, the Statue of Liberty's head rolls through the street blah blah blah. The first 20 minutes is pretty much EVERYTHING from the first trailer.

But uh-oh, the love of Rob's life, Beth, is trapped in her apartment across the city...and..oh no! Something's alive in that explosion! Rob's never had the chance to tell Beth how he feels, what should he do?

Yeah, journey across the city with his friends who tag along for no reason while a rampaging monster of unknown origin wreaks havoc. How surprising. As you might have gathered, the plot is flat and predictable. I found the early scenes of the party annoying due to the shaking camera and cheesy one-liners, but once the attack begins the movie is an 80-minute roller coaster ride and you don't even notice the camera's annoying shaking.

The monster itself is never really explained, but I didn't care as I was ecstatic that they actually showed the beast instead of going the way of The Blair Witch Project and refusing to show us anything. The monster (or perhaps monsters? Not saying more than that) is/are awesomely horrific, and while it won't go down in horror movie history as particularly memorable or unique, it's still friggin' scary.

The characters are all flat, boring and not very well acted with the exception of the cameraman, Hud (Miller) and a "friend of a friend" he is secretly attracted to, Marlena (Caplan). Both Miller and Caplan get their share of one-liners in while also coming across as the realest characters. I found myself caring more about their storyline than Rob's nonsensical search for Beth, and I wish both characters/actors would have gotten more time on-screen. Miller's amusing and goofy, yet at the same time is our narrator of sorts throughout the film, while Caplan runs circles around the rest of the cast in terms of acting.

All of the major horror/actor sequences in the film are well-directed (I was surprised by how well Reeves, who has only directed television shows and The Pallbearer, handled his first major motion picture). But as I was watching I couldn't help but think that I've seen every single one of these sequences before in other monster/horror movies. They're exciting, sure, but rather unoriginal.

Cloverfield would have been far better if Reeves hadn't made some questionable direction choices. Firstly, the introduction with the army and the recovered tape. Okay, why not put this at the end of the movie instead of at the beginning? It pretty much tells you that this won't have a very happy ending.

Second, throughout the movie are several spliced scenes of Rob and Beth enjoying a romantic date together. The first time it happens is fine. Once the SEVENTH OR EIGTH SPLICE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ACTION SCENE HAPPENS...it gets to be overkill. Maybe Reeves was trying to be "artsy" but dude: this is a horror movie. And I as I mentioned above, the main romance storyline is unbelievably dull and stupid anyway, which makes matters worse.

And including the bit with the statue of liberty's head in the trailer was a mistake; when the scene actually happens and the camera lingers on the destruction, I'm pretty sure I fell asleep.

All in all, Cloverfield is definitely enjoyable and exciting while it lasts, and worth seeing at least once. Yeah, it's definitely the work of an inexperienced director that shows a little bit of promise, and it doesn't break any ground or set any standards, even with it's handheld camera shooting-style.
But it's the kind of movie-theater film that has to be seen at least once during its release, and can then be immediately forgotten.

And lets just hope there won't be any sequels. Please. Blair Witch 2 still haunts my nightmares.

Score: 5.5 out of 10/C +

Posted by
Brian McCarthy

Studios need to pick and choose their heroes

Over the past several years we've seen a veritable onslaught of superhero and comic book adaptations on the big screen.

The Spiderman trilogy, Hulk, Batman Begins, Superman Returns. Even ones based on more obscure titles, like the fantastic Sin City and the incredibly overrated-okay, downright terrible-Hellboy.

You'd think by now we'd be overwhelmed by these films. Just when you think flops like The Punisher and Daredevil will kill the genre as badly as Doomsday killed Superman, all of a sudden another sequel or adaptation appears that redeems it.

So I'm rather surprised that two of my most anticipated movies for this year that I mentioned in my last post are both superhero films. Now, "most anticipated" doesn't mean I'll necessarily like them. Just that I'm really interested to see how they turn out.

First off, The Dark Knight. I consider Batman Begins one of the best superhero films ever, if not simply for the fact that it helped erase my memories of Batman Forever and Batman and Robin.
When the film ended with the Joker's calling card, I instantly wanted to see the next film. Ever since Heath Ledger was announced as The Joker, I was skeptical as to how well the guy from Knight's Tale could pull off one of the greatest villains ever. Yet ever since the first full trailer, I've been pumped to see him in action.

But then there's Iron Man. Of the pantheon of famous heroes, Iron Man is definitely not one that comes to mind. But I'm interested to see how the big metal guy looks on the big screen.

So there's Iron Man. Then there's also a sequel to Hulk coming out with Edward Norton as the title character. They're even doing a Justice League movie too. And don't even get me started on the announced Spiderman 4.

Every hero ever created has diehard fans lurking around the corner. But that shouldn't mean studios should scour their comic book collections and choose every single guy in tights to star in a film, or to just keep pumping out sequels, exhausting every villain that hero has faced.

There is always a certain amount of excitement surrounding superhero and comic book films. But they'd be even more exciting if studios exercised some discretion in what sequels to make, and what costume-clad vigilantes to adapt for the silver screen.

Posted by Brain McCarthy

Looking Forward To Cloverfield

This weekend, one of three movies I'm really looking forward to watching is released: Cloverfield.

All of the people I talk to say the same thing: they don't know what to make of the movie, but only know that they really want to see it.
To my knowledge, Cloverfield is the movie that has had the most hype surrounding it with hardly any plot details revealed about it. The movie first surfaced last summer as a teaser trailer played before "Transformers" (which for all its silliness, is one my favorite movies of last year).

It starts rather, well, cheesy, with an unseen person shooting a going away party for his friend, Rob. The various revelers, none of whom are portrayed by well-known actors, offer jokes and comments for Rob and the cameraman, until the scene takes a complete 180 degree turn. The camera shakes, people are screaming, and the partiers rush to the roof to watch an explosion unleash upon downtown New York City.

The rest of the trailer, still shot from a first-person-perspective, ends with people running through the streets, shouting that there is some sort of creature attacking the city, when a large object crashes through the street...only to be revealed as the head of the Statue of Liberty. Fade to black...with no title for the movie mentioned whatsoever. Awesome, yes. Mysterious? Even more so. And such, the online forum rumor-mongering and search for a plot began.

The trailer was labeled simply as "Untitled J.J. Abrams Project," which itself contributed to the film's hype as Abrams is popular for the television shows "Alias" and "Lost," as well as for directing "Mission Impossible 3."

All of this mystery has made the film seem extremely intriguing, not only to me, but millions of Internet surfers who have studied the original teaser and subsequent trailers for the slightest hint of the monster, or any other plot details. Even the marketing for the movie is a mystery; there has been no commercials or full length trailers until recently, and websites have been discovered that are linked to the movie, including an absurd Japanese website, "Slusho," that at first seems unconnected...until some sections of it contain mythology about a sea monster.

So..WHAT IN THE BLAZES IS THIS MOVIE? WHAT IS THE MONSTER? The lack of information and marketing have given the film more hype than over-exposure ever could.

That's why I'm so excited to see the movie...because it might very well be a disaster. Firstly, Abrams is simply the producer. The director, Matt Reeves, is credited only with writing and directing episodes of the show "Felicity," as well as one or two episodes of other shows. Lack of experience means nothing, certainly. But still. Felicity?

Secondly, the threat of no payoff looms over this film as well. If this is just "Blair Witch Project with Monsters," I guarantee many people will be disappointed. We need to see this monster. It doesn't matter if it's an original creature, or some licensed beastie, like Godzilla. We need to see it. The concept of shooting a monster film entirely on hand-held camera is cool and all. But show us a monster. Please.

The hype for this movie has been almost completely created by the fans themselves, and not by the production company. That's pretty much an anomaly. No matter what happens, some of these fans will be disappointed. I hope I'm not one of them...but won't be surprised if I am.

I'll have a review posted online by this weekend, Monday at the latest.

The other two movies I'm excited about? The Dark Knight (new Batman film) and Iron Man. More on those later on.

Brian


Posted by
Brian McCarthy