My girlfriend and I go to see movies most fridays before having a nice dinner out. Hence we've seen most movies that come out for the past few years, not to mention we rent tons of movies from blockbuster. I've always wanted to try to write reviews and so I gave a shot to writing one for starsky and hutch. Feedback, other reviews, are welcome! Enjoy.
Starky and Hutch, based on the 1970s classic TV show, is about two detectives, David Starsky and Ken "Hutch" Hutchinson, who have completely opposite styles yet are made partners as a punishment by their boss, Captain Doby. Well, I had never seen or even heard of the show, but that didn't stop me from thoroughly enjoying the movie. In a sense, everything in this movie we've seen before: Ben Stiller (Starsky) plays a tightly wound, firmly rule abiding, yet manic when over-provoked character (a la Mystery Men, Meet the Parents, and most recently Along Came Polly); meanwhile, Owen Wilson plays a blonde, chill, surfer-dude / rebel... just like in the "Shanghai" series, I-Spy, the Big Bounce... well pretty much all of his other movies. So basically the actors were not tested for their range. This isn't even the first time the two have worked together (Royal Tannenbaums, Zoolander). Yet the chemistry between the two work extrememly well, they are just so good at playing their characters (practice makes perfect), and their characters make perfect dramatic foils for each other. Stiller and Wilson were perfect for these roles. In a sense, there's nothing original in the movie, but the formula that's there works wonderfully. Another thing which I like about the movie was that it didn't descend into a movie making fun of the 70s, as so many cheap comedies do, but rather immersed itself into the 70s and let the jokes flow naturally. This was not one of those movies that makes you wait a long time between laughs, the audience and I myself laughed heartily throughout. The nice comedic acting abilities of Stiller and Wilson accentuates a fresh and funny script. The trailer to this movie did not do it justice, the jokes in there were not among the top half of the funniest jokes in the movies, and are funnier anyway in the context of the movie. Hysterical scenes abound in the movie, and one of my favorite involves the detectives' questioning of a korean henchman about the appearance of his boss ( "I have no idea... they were white... and you know they all look the same!). As with all Ben Stiller movies, it would not be complete without a dance scene, and this one, as one may be able to guess, is a disco dance-off a la Stifler's in American Wedding, but better. The supporting roles were very good as well. Snoop Dogg is a natural at playing Huggy Bear, the Pimp informant -- and you can't help but wonder why you can't be so cool. Carmen Electra continues her recent barrage of small roles, and she's okay. The best eye candy though, was Brande Rokerick (a playboy playmate), who cameos as a cheerleader girlfriend of a slain henchman. Will Ferrell, who I am a big fan of, continues his hilarious work as "Big Earl," an emprisioned biker ganglord who has a fetish for "dragons." That had to have been one of the funniest movie scenes I'd seen in a while. Vince Vaughn is mediocre as the villian, but he's not really asked to do too much. In summation, this was a very very good comedy and definitely worth going to see. It was really a lot of fun. The leads Stiller and Wilson turn out stellar performances, better than their last movies, though I personally did like "Along Came Polly." There's been a lack of good comedy in theaters for a while, so if you need some lighthearted diversion, this is a movie to enjoy! Verdict: Thumbs up, way up! Date factor: my girlfriend enjoyed this movie, so it's a positive.
did anyone else see this movie? i also saw hidalgo, which was okay. if i feel like it tomorrow i will write a mini review.
I saw Starsky 2 weeks ago, it was hilarious. I especially enjoyed when Phillips mimicked certain staples of 70's cop shows, like the extreme camera zoom on the actor's face after a big stunt.
Hidalgo is based on the factual historical characters of Frank T. Hopkins and his mustang Hidalgo. Viggo Mortensen, coming off his majestic role in the LOTR series, stars as the main character Hopkins, a former army dispatcher / cowboy who is famed to have won 400+ endurance races in the United States. The premise is set when the Sheik of Sheiks in Arabia (Omar Sharif) takes offense in Hidalgo's repuation as the greatest endurance horse and challenges horse and rider to his great ancestral proving ground of endurance -- the race over endless deserts called the "Ocean of Fire." Hopkins carries with him a secret burden -- he is half Sioux Indian, and he struggles mightily with his identity, destiny, and the disappearance of his race. Both he and Hidalgo as seen as perhaps fallen off their prime, so can the two friends get it together for one last triumph in the strange, distant lands of Arabia? Wait a minute. At this moment, the movie starts sounding pretty familiar. The character of Frank Hopkins has many parallels with Aragorn. Meanwhile, the movie contains MANY similar elements to Seabiscuit, and borrows (not only Sharif) heavily from the classic Lawrence of Arabia. So wow! Three awesome movies in one, this one has got to be great then right? Not exactly. Though the story of Seabiscuit and Lawrence of Arabia are great stories and told with an elegant sense of triumph and grandeur, Hidalgo rarely (never really?) reaches these heights, and though it employs many similar mechanisms, they don't all work out well. One thing I didn't particularly like was the attempt to give Hidalgo personality and add a few laughs by having the horse snort or stare at Hopkins when he makes blunders, the whole effect was a little cartoony and unnecessary (luckily they didn't do this in Seabiscuit). The two young bedouin servants of Lawrence in "Lawrence of Arabia" were well cast, taught the viewers about their culture, provided some comedic elements and all in all added a layer to the film; meanwhile the same attempt here with an old shepard assigned to serve Hopkins fails at the same goals. The twist with the evil nephew of the Sheik, Prince Atif, attempting to steal the Al Hattal, the Sheik's prized stallion and the honor of the tribe, is pretty predictable as well. The synopsis of the film boasts a "romance" with a "beautiful princess," yet Jazira, the Sheik's daughter wasn't really all that beautiful, and in any case poor chemistry with Mortensen makes the romance even more unbelievable than the pure context of it. An interesting religious/spiritual theme was laid out in the movie that was provocative for me but wasn't really 100% satisfying at the end. Throughout the movie, Hopkins' (Christian) belief of free will mixed with the can-do attitude of the wild west is set against the deterministic beliefs of the Arab Bedouins. The clash is rather compelling, as free will is related to Christianity, Hopkins' Native American culture, as well as Islam. Besides the above there were actually several other good elements to the movie. The gun-slinging, knife throwing action choreography was pretty nice. And between a couple periods of inactivity, there were some scenes that wowed me. The race scene in the beginning was nice, but the one in the end was really great, the drama of the scene exceeded, I felt, even the Seabiscuit v. War Admiral scene. The treatment of Mortensen's Native American heritage I felt was also pretty good, but I cannot judge truthfully without knowing more about it myself. One of my favorite scene, however, was when an Arab prince astride the flawless arabic stallion Al Hattal said to Hopkins: "You cannot win, I am of a race of great riders." To which Hopkins replies: "So am I." That was deep! In the end the movie yielded to too many cliches for my tastes. The underdog wins and humbles the proud Sheik, and the two become friends despite their religious differences. That was handled in a way I've seen a million times, yet one cannot really fault Omar Sharif for his dignified portrayal. Two more very common cliches are involved with the ending which I cannot reveal, but the last one made me mutter "oh c'mon!" under my breath. But all in all, there were moments in Hidalgo that were compelling and that I will remember for a while, and perhaps that is a sign of a movie worth watching. I would just watch Starsky and Hutch first. Verdict: Mixed. It won't make your day better, but it's entertainment. Date factor: both my girlfriend and I highly anticipated this movie. I was a little disappointed, and though she said she was too, I could tell she kind of liked it. Chicks dig these films. So I guess this is a positive as well.
Did anyone else see these movies? I'm curious as to what people thought. I guess we're at a lull for movie debuts though. I'm waiting for the Ladykillers, Eternal Sunshine (because I really liked the Majestic I'm willing to give Carey another try at drama), Jersey Girl (Ben Affleck not so good, but Kevin Smith is a great writer), Home on the Range ( "got milk?" hahaha) and the most anticipated movie of the year (by me) -- Kill Bill vol. 2
well, you go there, sign up, get your account, and then the website has pretty much anything up for review. cars, music, games, movies, everything. people come and rate your review based on how good it is, and you slowly (very slowly) start making money off of your reviews. ive been writing there for a couple years and since ive been there that long ive made more than $200.
