Jamie Daily

Asad (2012) Review | Jamie Daily

Asad (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Live Action Short Film (Bryan Buckley, Mino Jarjoura).
Watched April 2, 2014.

 

I watched Asad right around the time that I watched Captain Phillips.  Both portray the current climate of Somalia and its violence both on the water in piracy and also on land between its own people.  

 

Asad is a short film that takes a different approach than the afore mentioned feature.  Asad is a young boy nearing manhood and anxious to go out on the boats and pirate with the other boys in his community.  He knows the ocean and its currents better than anyone.  Instead, the local fisherman who believes in living a different life is convinced that Asad will one day catch the best catch they have ever seen.  

 

Although the film is quite short, it conveys Asad's conflict, home life, and over all environment extremely well.  I got the measure of his character almost immediately.  In fact, it is very skillful how quickly we understand each character.  Granted, the writers did put in several easy to catch stereotypes that might define the soul of a person, such as Asad's friend with a limp is all talk but has little courage when it comes down to it.  My favorite moment of the film was between Asad and his mother, where she struggles against the pressures of a society she has known her whole life and tries to raise her son in a war torn environment.

 

The film tries to instill a hope, but it is bleak.  Asad will grow up to be a pirate, a thug with a gun, or a fisherman.  His future is already set.

 

The filmmaking is decent, the acting is sub-par, and the story is one note.  After watching Captain Phillips, I was looking forward to a more in depth look at Somali life, but Asad left a little to be desired.  Although it shows the harder side of life, the film becomes preoccupied with a mediocre plot that stalls the pace and progression of the film.  

 

All in all, I wouldn't consider the film a waste of my time, but I would not suggest it for the a-typical audience. 

 

The Gatekeepers (2012) Review | Jamie Daily

The Gatekeepers (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Documentary Feature Film (Dror Moreh, Philippa Kowarsky, Estelle Fialon).
Watched February 1, 2014.

 

It is hard for me to describe The Gatekeepers to you because it is a very straightforward documentary.  It is an interview driven narrative that features all of the surviving heads of Shin Bet, the Israeli intelligence agency.  The men mostly discuss the events that occurred while they were involved, either on the ground or in leadership, and the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians.  

 

There are certain aspects of the film that are extremely creative.  They used 3D effects on images taken at events (specifically when some terrorists were gunned down on a bus) and make them appear almost life-like. 

 

The interviewees are honest and fairly transparent about their answers and what they believed at the time.  They knew that what they were doing was almost without morals but at the time they knew no other way to protect lives.  By the end and in their current lives they might have different opinions, but it is all in retrospect.  They understand that they are treating symptoms and not the problem.

 

This year of Oscars has focused a lot on Palestine and Israel.  It is interesting to see all of the different angels throughout the documentaries and dramas.  Unfortunately, The Gatekeepers was not my favorite.  It was certainly no nail-biter, although enlightening and informative.  As I mentioned above, there is little content aside from interview footage, although the B-roll that is used I quite enjoyed.

 

If what I have describes sounds like it might be up your alley, I would encourage you to see the film.  However, it is very slow and dry, so if you want something you would not likely see in a classroom, you might want to stay away from this one.

 

Frankenweenie (2012) Review | Jamie Daily

Frankenweenie (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Animated Feature Film (Tim Burton).
Watched January 13, 2014.

 

I will be one hundred percent honest, I am not a big Tim Burton fan.  I do not mean this in a particularly negative way, it is just that his form of artistry does not always grab me in the way it does others, and that isn't a bad thing.  Despite this, his films and in particular his stop motion animations are so incredible that from a technical standpoint, it is hard to hold a candle to his skill.

 

Frankenweenie is no different.  While the animated winner Brave from this year wasn't necessarily better in story and execution (big ambitions that fell short of expectations), Frankenweenie has a little of the bizarre we expect from Burton and a good amount of emotional connection that works well to keep audiences watching.

 

The film is a black and white story of Victor Frankenstien (voiced by Charlie Tahan), a genius kid who has a knack for science and a best friend who just happens to be his dog Sparky.  His science infatuation is stoked by new teacher Mr. Rsykruski (Martin Landau) and bemusedly endured by his parents.  All of his classmates are classic Burton odd balls with funny shaped heads, spooky accents, and fortune telling cats.  They are all gearing up for the science fair, which has sparked an odd amount of competitiveness in the class, and everyone is looking to Victor for inspiration.

 

While Mrs. Frankenstien is all for Victor's classic weirdness, the Mr. insists he takes up a sport.  Unfortunately, at his first baseball game, tragedy strikes and good old Sparky gets hit by a car.

 

Cue the classic Frankenstien reanimation sequence in which Victor patches his dog back together and brings him back to life by utilizing a lightning storm.  While the new and improved Sparky needs a recharge now and then, and perhaps a new patch or stitch here and there, he is back to normal and all pet adoring audiences can relate to wanting their pet back again.

 

The science fair and competitive classmates make the story take a turn for the worse.  Will Victor be able to save the day and convince the town that Sparky should stay?

 

Let me tell you, I have lost some precious pets in my day and I cried right along with Victor when he lost dear Sparky.  However, when Sparky comes back with a sewn on head and his tail goes flying if wagged too vigorously, I was properly grossed out and very appreciative of the black and white versus color imaging.  The story was cute, the characters were quirky, and there was an emotional connection to the relationship between Victor and Sparky, but other than that I felt like Frankenweenie was a distinctly kids movie.  Pixar often maneuvers their stories to be equally appreciated by both kids and adults alike, but this nomination was a little too childlike for my taste.  Despite that, there is some morbid, racist, and fecal humor that might amuse some people. 

 

While it certainly wasn't the worst movie I have seen this year, it will never make my top 10.  If you want to appreciate Burton's exquisite art in the form of stop motion animation, then you will certainly appreciate aspects of this film.  The lead characters were strong and their story lines were decent.  It was the side plots I was more let down by, and the quirky classmates that had me scratching my head.  I have no idea how Victor did not have any friends in such a town of odd balls.

Islands in the Stream (1977) Review

Islands in the Stream (1977)
50th Academy Awards 1978
2/5 StarsNominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Cinematography (Fred J. Koenekamp).
Watched November 12, 2012.

 

I watched this film quite a while ago, before I got married and my posting schedule for the blog completely changed.  I am just now getting around to this piece, and unfortunately we weren't missing out on much.  Islands in the Stream is based on the last Hemingway novel.  Really it was pieced together by his wife after he passed away and we can't really know if he would have ever had published himself, but it is said that the main character is based on who Hemingway saw himself as.

 

Thomas Hudson (George C. Scott) has seen a lot in his life and has retired to an island in the Caribbean where he fishes, sculpts, and drinks.  He has some good buddies who don't expect much from him but would do a lot for him.  When the film opens he is expecting a rare visit from his three sons from two marriages.  Ranging in age from 10 to 19, the boys all have unique relationships with their father.  The oldest, Tom (Hart Bochner) remembers his mom and dad having a loving and passionate relationship, while the middle child David (Michael-James Wixted) is resentful toward his father for the way he treated his mom--the second wife.  

 

Wixted is probably the best performance from the three kids, and it is just as well because his character has the biggest arch out of the three.  It is very much a coming of age tale for him, and it helps that his dad is there to gently coach him through it.  Though you wouldn't expect it, especially because Thomas has been absent for much of their lives, he really does care for his children.  He perhaps has more affection toward Tom because that marriage was the best, and he misses it.  

 

The second part of the film is quite slow and is punctuated by an unexpected visit from the first wife, Audrey (Claire Bloom), who brings hard news that perhaps spurs on the third act, which is so drastically different from the first two it's a wonder it ever made it into the film.  Although the first two thirds of the film moved very slowly, I was interested in the characters and their relationships.  The third act completely lost me.  I'm not sure if it is a part of the book--some reviews made it sound as if it was an addition to the film and I would love to know if this is true.  Perhaps the production team was attempting to liven up the story, but I really wish it had not been included.  There are rescued Jews (the story takes place at the beginning of World War II), smuggling, and cheap looking explosions.  It is a huge disruption from the tranquility of the island life.

 

I'll be honest that I wasn't the biggest fan of Islands in the Stream.  I was curious about Thomas, his family, and the relationships all throughout the film.  I cared for them, but there were certainly moments that I won't specify (no spoilers here!) that could have been done better.  The cinematography was certainly beautiful and well done, especially for a film from the seventies.  The acting was acceptable, and although the pace of the film was slow it fit with the lifestyle of beach life.  

 

I wouldn't necessarily recommend this film.  I probably won't be watching it again.  If you are curious about Hemingway's last book, it might be a good place to start, but I expect the actual novel would be a much better medium.

 

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) Review

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
50th Academy Awards 1978
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 3 awards.
Nominated for Art Direction (Ken Adam, Peter Lamont, Hugh Scaife), Music-Original Score (Marvin Hamlisch), and Music-Original Song "Nobody Does It Better" (Marvin Hamlisch, Carole Bayer Sager).
Watched November 4, 2012

 

The reviews are positive, but my views are different.  Granted I have not paid much attention to the 007 franchise prior to Daniel Craig and thus my opinions will be incredibly jaded, I was not a huge fan of The Spy Who Loved Me.  I find that I am having trouble looking past the dated 70s styles.  However, it has been pointed out by many reviewers that the film did exactly what it was supposed to--it was never created to be film noir but a mindless entertaining film that all one must do to enjoy it is sit back and relax while James Bond does all of the hard work.  I will admit that, for the most part, The Spy Who Loved Me does that successfully.

 

This generation's Bond is played by Roger Moore, whose following of Sean Connery seems a tough blow, but he apparently does much better in this film than the previous Bond flicks he had starred in.  He is smarmy, with a classically good looking smirk, and a hidden pain of lost love that makes him attractive.  Not to mention his mad skiing skills that are said to be one of the best openings to a Bond film--ever.  

 

In this storyline, the bad guy, Karl Stromberg (Curt Jürgens) has been tracking and trapping nuclear submarines from all sides, which is why 007 and the Russian Agent XXX (Barbara Bach) suddenly find themselves working together.  Bond and Major Anya Amasova have significantly different feelings about working with one another.  Bond is of course attracted to the feisty female agent, while she resents his typical pig headed manliness and pushes against him in an attempt to not be overshadowed by a man.  Through their adventures she begins to soften toward him, until she finds out that he killed her love just weeks before, which of course means that she has to kill him once they save the world from nuclear destruction.

 

Complete with excessive explosions and gunfire, underwater cities, and women in bikinis, it is a true Bond film.  In comparison with today's franchise, the cinematography has zero creativity.  There is a serious lack of angles.  The editing is a bit slow, and the sound design was perplexing.  The lack of a sound track fails to disguise the terrible foley art during the fight scenes, not to mention how very choreographed every punch felt.  Somehow, Amasova did not come off as intelligently as she was supposed to be, probably because she kept making dumb decisions and relying on Bond to save her.

 

The acclaimed villain who everyone loves--Jaws (Richard Kiel)--would have been a lot more intimidating had the editor not had a preoccupation with dwelling on his metal-mouth grimace.  

 

All in all, I would consider it another TV movie entertainment date, but not necessarily for the main Friday night event.  In my mother's words, it's quite "campy" and outdated, but I did enjoy the last half hour that is spent completely devoted on freeing the submarine crews and saving the world.  Many reviewers disliked this part, but to me it was my favourite because it embodies Bond so well.  There is very little attempt at serious story telling and just straight, entertaining, unrealistic action.  Perfect.

 

Anna Karenina (2012) Review

Anna Karenina (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 4 awards, of which it won 1.
Nominated for Best Original Score (Dario Marianelli), Best Production Design (Sarah Greenwood, Katie Spencer), and Best Cinematography (Seamus McGarvey).
Won Best Costume Design (Jacqueline Durran).
Watched June 6, 2013.

Photo Source: Peter Viney's Blog 

The story of Anna Karenina is perhaps one of my least favourite so far among the 2013 nominations, which is of course no fault of the screenwriter as it is based on Leo Tolstoy's classic novel.  Those who love the story, as well as Tolstoy, don't worry.  Although my feelings toward Anna and her plot line are less than favorable, I did quite enjoy the stories surrounding her, as well as the interesting style of this latest film.  While the artistic direction may be a bit distracting from the story, I found it quite enchanting and it made me wish that it had been bestowed upon a different story, because then I would have liked to watch it again.

 

This may all be a very complicated way of saying that I have a love-hate relationship with director Joe Wright's interpretation of Anna Karenina.  It is the story of a woman (Kiera Knightley) in the Russian high society  who does not love her husband (Jude Law).  Instead of remaining faithful so that she may be with her beloved son, she runs off with Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson)--whose mustache is very silly if I do say so myself--and therefore suffers the social backlash.

 

It is this story that I found very annoying.  I didn't care for Anna and therefore understood none of her decisions.  Her husband, although a bit weak when it comes to home life, was an admirable character.  Vronsky was young and had no idea what he was getting Anna into, and her poor abandoned son doesn't get much screen time.  I appreciated the story in that it shows an example of why it is morally wrong to cheat on your husband, although Anna mainly suffered the surface repercussions--none of her friends would hang out with her any more.  If the book goes more in depth about this, then perhaps there was not enough time to explore the depth of it more than that in the film.

 

Despite my dislike for the story, again, I quite appreciated the production design and the costumes.  In fact, my love for period pieces is what kept me going through the over two hour film and I wished that the beautiful consuming and innovative sets could have been bestowed on a different plot line.  I liked the side stories, although they seemed somewhat out of place, despite showing a complete turnaround from Anna.  

 

I will very readily say that I won't be seeking out this Anna Karenina adaptation again any time soon, and unless you 1. like the story or 2. have incredible patience, I would advise against watching it just to see the aesthetics.

  

Footnote (2011) Review

Footnote (2011)
84th Academy Awards 2012
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Foreign Language Film (Joseph Cedar).
Watched June 1, 2013.

Photo Source: FilmoFilia 

Footnote is an interesting Israeli film full of comedy and family drama.  The story of the film is fairly boring, but perhaps that is what makes it so good.  Despite the fact that it is a foreign film, the story is so every-man and ordinary that the circumstances, both comical and heart wrenching are relatable for even yours truly.

 

It was not my favourite film, but it borrowed techniques of humor and story telling from some of my most beloved styles that I appreciated it for what it was.  The wonderful camera work communicates the extensive family drama.  There is even  an arch nemesis. 

It is the story of a father and his son, Eliezar and Uriel Shkolnik who are both scholars in the same field.  Uriel has been significantly more successful than his father, whose life's work was stolen from him and published directly before Eliezar was set to release his Talmudic Studies work.  As such, his only published acknowledgement is in the footnote of another noteworthy scholar's book.  Eliezar has studied the same thing his entire life, and although he has been nominated every year to receive the Israel Prize, he never receives it.  In turn, he is very critical of his son's work, which is much more philosophical and less grounded in fact, as he believes.  Despite this, Uriel has been exceedingly successful in his career.

 

The rest of the plot I will leave for you to discover.  The characters are very interesting.  Uriel always feels as if he has to overcome his father's poor reputation in the scholarly community, while Eliezar  believes that he himself is one of the most knowledgeable scholars.  He will publicly criticize his own son, despite his own failings.  The marriages and father-son relationships are strained and cyclical.

 

Yes, I did say that there is a comedic element to this film.  It is constantly teetering between character implosion and circumstantial humor that makes it a somewhat stressful viewing experience.  

 

The film is beautiful, the acting is wonderful, and the characters are deeply complex.  It is the story that I found as slow as molasses.  I believe that Footnote is worth one viewing, but after that I would rather spend my hours on something else.  

 

If you generally enjoy foreign films and don't mind a slower pace, this is something that I would recommend for you.  Otherwise, I would recommend viewing something else.

 

(WARNING: Trailer contains major spoilers!)
  

Brave (2012) Review | jamiedaily

Brave (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 1 award, which it won.
Won Best Animated Feature Film (Brenda Chapman, Mark Andrews).
Watched April 28, 2013.

When it comes to kids' films, Brave is pretty good.  When it comes to Pixar films, it doesn't quite meet expectations.

 

The animation is nothing to complain about--it is the absolute beauty that we have come to know and respect from a Pixar film.  However, except for Cars 2, Brave almost hits the bottom of my list of watch-worthy Pixar films.  I was more than excited when it came out in theaters--Pixar's first female lead is a fiery Scottish red head who wants to ride through the glen shooting arrows instead of getting married.  The story is indeed what holds this film back, and I hardly felt it was worth 93 minutes of my time.

 

Perhaps my expectations got the better of me when it comes to Brave (and who can blame me with the song they chose for the trailer--see below).  It starts out well enough, following a predictable yet charming and entertaining storyline that is very well in line with the trailer.  Merida (voiced by Kelly Macdonald)has a long, unruly, incredibly red mane of hair that goes deep down into her soul.  While her father is distracted by hunting bears and telling the story of how he lost his leg, her mother is preoccupied by making lady out of her daughter, who is in fact a princess.  

 

As is true in many royal situations, and other cultures besides, Merida is going to have an arranged marriage, although the method of choosing her suitor is rather barbaric and the candidates are bleak.  They participate in games to win her hand--such as throwing heavy objects and other manly displays.  Merida is furious with both of her parents, but most especially her mother.  The two of them have a strained relationship, fueled by both who refuse to see the other's point of view.  

 

I won't say much else about the story, else I should give away some major plot points, but it is the rest of the story that I was very disappointed with.  There needed to be some way to solve the situation.  If Merida lay down and accepted the marriage, she wouldn't have become a Pixar leading lady.  However, there needed to be some way to bridge the communication gap between herself and her mother, and frankly I found the results a lot more childish than most Pixar blockbusters.

 

There are a few twists and turns in the story that don't lend much, and actually weigh down the plot, although I cannot embellish lest I give too much away.  Therefore I will leave you with this: the animation, colors, and scenery are all beautiful.  The music is fairly good, and although the men are all one dimensional, they were my favourite bits of the film.

 

If you enjoy Pixar, I would say that Brave is probably worth seeing at least once, but there are a lot more films on my list to watch before I would see this one again.  Maybe I can satisfy my need for more Celtic culture in my life by listening to the song from the trailer ("Tha Mo Ghaol Air Aird A' Chuain" by Julie Fowlis) over, and over, and over again.

 

Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012)

Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 4 awards.
Nominated for Best Actress (Quvenzhané Wallis), Best Directing (Benh Zeitlin), Best Picture (Dan Janvey, Josh Penn, Michael Gottwald), and Best Writing-Adapted Screenplay (Lucy Alibar, Benh Zeitlin).
Watched March 30, 2013.

Photo Source: A Fistful of Culture 

My thoughts about Beasts of the Southern Wild, whether profound or otherwise, are few and far between.  The reviews I have read about the film seem to be on either one side of the fence or the other--complete love or near hate.  I am a rarity and find myself on the fence--neither a devote follower or a hater.  It's a coming of age story… but with a six year old.

 

This is Benh Zeitlin's breakout film as a director, and as such, he came out with a bang.  Being nominated for four Oscars while taking the risks that he did in the film are gutsy, and I doubt this will be the last we hear from him in Hollywood royalty.

 

The film is about a community that lives outside the levy in New Orleans around the time of hurricane Katrina, although this fact not stated in the film.  The main character, Hushpuppy (Quvenzhané Wallis) lives in this placed called the Bathtub with her father.  They live in two separate trailers that are perched on stilts.  Her father is not always present, and sometimes Hushpuppy has to fend for herself.  Although it is obvious that her father Wink (Dwight Henry) isn't the best dad in the world, he is desperate to teach his daughter how to take care of herself because he knows he won't be around forever.

 

When the hurricane comes, many in their community leave for the protection of the levy, but those who stay see their home torn apart and spend the next while riding boats on what were once streets.  The animals and sea life slowly die and the group has to decide what to do, because doing anything might make the levy people force them to evacuate.

 

Hushpuppy occasionally narrates the film with thoughts so profound and poetic, even though it might be in broken english, that it is hard to believe a six year old could phrase anything that way.  And yet, it is believable because we know Hushpuppy, and we know what a stubborn, quiet, intuitive little girl she is.  We also understand the love she has for her home, as well as the imagination that plays out for us on the screen.  

 

Zeitlin used all non-actors for his cast.  The actor who plays Hushpuppy's dad Wink (Henry) is a baker and has stated no interest in pursuing an acting career.  Many times when non-actors are used, it tears the film apart and very little of the other positive qualities matter.  However, I think the fact that Wallis was nominated for Best Actress, being the youngest ever nominated at nine years old, speaks volumes about the performances in Beasts.  

 

Despite the wonderful acting and the art direction, I found the story hard to connect with.  Even though there are traumatic things happening on screen, I felt little to no connection with the characters and felt very little whenever bad (or good) things happened to them.  The cinematography, at times good, others not, was shot on film instead of HD.  I generally like this quite a lot, but the film utilized the currently very popular style of hand held shots, which is something I can only stand in minimal amounts.  I understand the choice, in part, but think it would have been much more powerful if it was used more sparingly.  

 

I'm not sure whether or not I would recommend this film.  If you are a fan of such brain benders as The Tree of Life by by Terrence Malick, you might enjoy Beast of the Southern Wild, although Zeitlin has a ways to go before he reaches Malick's genius.  This isn't a movie to watch casually, but if you are looking for something serious with childhood adventures (in a non-children friendly movie), it might be a good option.

 

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)
84th Academy Awards 2012
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 3 awards.
Nominated for Best Sound Editing (Ethan Van der Ryn, Erik Aadahl), Best Sound Mixing (Greg P. Russell, Jeffrey J. Haboush, Peter J. Devlin), and Best Visual Effects (Scott Farrar, Scott Benza, Matthew E. Butler, John Frazier).
Watched March 11, 2013.

 

"'Dark of the Moon' is one of the few recent 3-D movies that justify the upcharge.  Mr. Bay clearly enjoys playing with the format, which is also to say that he takes it seriously." (NY Times)

 

Photo Source: DB Covers

Unfortunately, I did not see Transformers: Dark of the Moon in 3-D.  I saw it in 2-D, once in theaters and once in my home.  Both times I came to the same conclusion--the third film in the series is leaps and bounds better than the second, but despite its amazing effects and sound, it cannot touch the first, and nor will any of the three ever been on my Top 10 list.  

 

The cast in this film is pretty stacked.  From the reoccurring Shia LeBeouf as Sam Witwicky (who is always the same, but I love him) and the hilarious John Turturro as Simmons, to the new Patrick Dempsey (Dylan), John Malkovich (Bruce Brazos), and Ken Jeong (Jerry Wang).  Megan Fox was fired for her mouth and the new girlfriend is Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as Carly.  Like Fox, she's not a very good actress, but Michael Bay tends to care more about aesthetics than talent in the Transformers flicks.  

 

Once again, the Autobots must save the world from the Deceptecons, but this time they almost flatten the whole city of Chicago.  The plot is simple, but it meanders while trying to get from point A to point B.  Sam is struggling to find a job out of college and is bitter that he can't fight alongside the Autobots.  Inevitably, after something Decepticon inspired goes down at his new office, he weasels his way back into the middle of the fight and ends up rallying everyone together to save the day by the end.  

 

Carly only serves the purpose of looking good and being a distraction for Sam, both in the fight and in normal life.  His parents make an appearance (this time in a Winnebago and matching track suits), the incredible Alan Tudyk has a small role as Dutch, and the list goes on.  Despite the small story, the experienced actors bring life and humor to their roles and I enjoyed them individually.  

 

The special effects combined with the sound were beyond breathtaking.  Few instances appeared contrived, even when a whole building was collapsing on its side and being eating by a Decepticon.  President Obama even makes a brief appearance (and by an appearance I mean that he was completely animated).  Subtleties are not Bay's directorial strong point, but his attention to effect details is paramount to the success of his vision.  Despite this achievement, the story and many times the acting do not measure up to the aesthetic feast on screen.

 

I know a few people who absolutely swear by the Transformers franchise and would watch the films night and day if they could.  If you are one of these people, I don't need to suggest that you see the film because you probably already have it memorized.  If you enjoy amazing special effects, or can appreciate a good sound mixing, this could be the meal you have been waiting for.  If story is more your thing, I would look elsewhere, unless you are planning on spending the next two and a half hours turning your brain to mush.