2D Glasses - Comics

Theater Hopping #1

Fri, Aug 08 2008 17:30:00 CST

Theater Hopping #1

Friday, August 8 2008 - 5:30 pm
by: Bert

Seth Rogen Express

Wed, Aug 06 2008 19:00:00 CST

Seth Rogen Express

Wednesday, August 6 2008 - 7:00 pm
by: Bert

A Swing Vote and a Miss

Mon, Aug 04 2008 19:00:00 CST

A Swing Vote and a Miss

Monday, August 4 2008 - 7:00 pm
by: Bert

The Abominable Mummy

Fri, Aug 01 2008 00:00:00 CST

The Abominable Mummy

Friday, August 1 2008 - 12:00 am
by: Bert

The Making of Step Brothers

Wed, Jul 30 2008 01:30:00 CST

The Making of Step Brothers

Wednesday, July 30 2008 - 1:30 am
by: Bert

8 Types of People Who Post on IMDb

Mon, Jul 28 2008 18:30:00 CST

8 Types of People Who Post on IMDb

Monday, July 28 2008 - 6:30 pm
by: Bert

Review: X-Files: I Want to Believe

Fri, Jul 25 2008 23:00:00 CST

Review: X-Files: I Want to Believe

Friday, July 25 2008 - 11:00 pm
by: Toni

The new X-Files movie was entirely forgettable. It wasn't actively bad, but it certainly wasn't good either. It was mostly just... there, which is a shame. I like a little drive, some sort of motivation for why characters do what they do, why the plot plays out the way it does, or why a character dies. Why create a movie for the sake of its own existence?

X-Files 2 seemed like it wanted to be a thriller, a comedy, an action flick, and a romance all at the same time. It didn't work really very well and was just going through the motions. See my point on motivation above and my more detailed comments on the genres below.

Comedy: The comedy portions were amusing enough. The movie doesn't really take itself too seriously and shows a campy side every now and then (example: stay through the credits). Only issue here is that to do campy with any success, you need to go all out.

Action: Nothing stellar, but good suspense for some of it. The biggest action / chase scene, though, ends rather pointlessly stupid.

Thriller: By thriller I mean the investigation portion, which just seemed like a series of disconnected ideas rather than working progressively towards a logical conclusion.

Romance: The last genre X-Files dabbled in was romance, and it was much like the rest of the film. The awkward romance between two flat characters bored me. I'm not sure if it was the writing, the directing, or just the characters themselves, but all around unbelievable.

Fans of the show will more than likely be disappointed, but honestly it's no surprise. This movie comes out years after the X-Files faded away (and even longer since the show was consistently interesting). If this movie had to be made at all (which I would argue against) it should have been years ago. I'm not known for my memory, but in the end I think I will have forgotten this mediocre movie by the end of the week.

Review: X-Files: I Want to Believe

Fri, Jul 25 2008 22:30:00 CST

Review: X-Files: I Want to Believe

Friday, July 25 2008 - 10:30 pm
by: Bert

The second X-Files film is a complete mess. I went in with modest expectations due to the negative buzz, yet I never expected the dull, flat storytelling I witnessed.

I entered the theater with minimal recollection of the first movie or the television show. Although I had seen the first film (subtitled "Fight the Future") during its initial run and I tuned in to the show's finale in 2002, I was at a loss regarding where we left off with the characters and the mythos. Fortunately, viewers aren't required to know much about the background to understand the movie.

Considering the rich legacy of the X-Files, I Want to Believe is surprisingly light on serialization. Instead, the film feels like a standalone episode that could take place at any point in the series. There's no grandiose franchise-changing story arc and the film leaves things off roughly where they began. For some, this sounds like a nice change of pace for casual fans, but I was ultimately disappointed by the inconsequential nature of the movie.

The majority of I Want to Believe takes place in the frozen back country of West Virginia. The color palette consists primarily of cold, lifeless blues and grays. Altogether, the setting is dreary, boring, and repetitive. The film takes place over the course of a few days, but the drawn-out pacing makes everything seem much longer and stretched out.

Everything about the direction felt off in the movie. Scenes linger, characters are introduced randomly, and dialogue drags on without really saying anything.

I was most disappointed by the flat characters and overall lack of development. Mulder and Scully are aloof and even less compelling than they were during the television run. This might be fine in a procedural story, but I Want to Believe ceaselessly fixates on their awkward relationship, leaving the viewer's mind to wander.

The supporting characters are also one-dimensional and underutilized. We learn nothing about them and are untirely unmoved by their circumstances, even when they die. The "big bad" villains are cloaked in mystery, although not the kind of mystery you'd care to solve. Instead, they're doing "something bad" to somebody we don't get to meet for a reason we never learn. The good guys and the bad guys are equal parts bored and boring.

The only two bright spots come from two gifted actors doing what they can in this mess: Billy Connolly playing a troubled religious figure and Callum Keith Rennie (Leoben from Battlestar Galactica) playing a key conspirator. Both roles are crucial to the film, but despite the capable performances, the viewer is never given a good chance to get inside their heads or connect to the characters. Amanda Peet also shows up playing a forgettable, one-dimensional FBI agent.

Chris Carter has stated that he hopes to make a third and final film to explore the alien invasion of December 22, 2012. Unless the current sequel exceeds box office expectations (which is a huge uphill battle considering the negative consensus), the alien invasion movie is unlikely to be made. That's a major shame because it sounds like the kind of compelling project that would shine on the big screen.

To sum it up: poor direction and poor writing mire the X Files: I Want to Believe. The soundtrack, cinematography, and acting are unremarkable. It's not exciting, it's not fun, and it doesn't advance the series in any way.

I Want to Believe (in Love)

Fri, Jul 25 2008 04:00:00 CST

I Want to Believe (in Love)

Friday, July 25 2008 - 4:00 am
by: Bert

Review: Mamma Mia!

Wed, Jul 23 2008 10:00:00 CST

Review: Mamma Mia!

Wednesday, July 23 2008 - 10:00 am
by: Bert

Let me start by saying this: Mamma Mia! is one of the best-crafted stage-to-screen translations that I've seen. That said, I don't know if I could ever watch it again.

You see, I am not a "manly man" who loves hunting and tractor pulls, but I do have some testosterone. And I believe that disqualifies me from fully enjoying what a fun and beautiful experience that Mamma Mia! appears to be.

When watching it, I laughed quite a bit, yet I cringed even more. The movie's a roller coaster ride of shameless hijinks with euphoric highs and "oh-no-they-didn't" lows, at least according to half of the men (two of four) in the jam-packed screening I attended.

Meanwhile, the women seemed to be having a blast, smiling and humming along during what a character in the movie refers to as a "hen party". That is, except for my wife Toni, who I'm sure will elaborate clearly in her following review. I've never seen somebody melt so uncomfortably into a seat...

Anyway, since I can't assess the film objectively as a whole, allow me to evaluate its components. First, the acting of Mamma Mia! is great. Throughout the movie, you can tell that the entire cast is having a blast, which is contagious for the audience. The on-screen chemistry is phenomenal and the vocal talent is impressive all around.

Meryl Streep deserves all of the praise she's received so far. She is as captivating as ever and her voice caught me offguard -- even though I had witnessed her chops in A Prairie Home Companion, she raised the bar further than I thought it went. She alone could carry the film, although the burden was shared by a very capable cast.

Playing her daughter is the extremely underrated Amanda Seyfried. Going into this, you might have known her as "the ditz who can predict weather with her chest" from Mean Girls or "the dead girl" from Veronica Mars. After Mamma Mia!, she will be "the blonde bombshell with the stellar voice". I'm going to rewatch her catalogue now, because this movie is a complete revelation for her acting and vocal abilities.

The unlikely trio of fatherly figures (Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, and Stellan Skarsgard) are pretty amusing despite their limp roles. Firth, like a true British heartthrob, is pitch perfect and sports some pretty swank dance moves. Skarsgard manages to duck most of the singing, but he's pretty entertaining as an Australian adventurer. Brosnan has the most room to shine as the charming American architect, but he's the weakest singer in the mix, although perfectly fine.

Supporting roles are entertainingly filled by Julie Walters (aka Mrs. Weasley from the Harry Potter films), emerging actor Dominic Cooper, and the always hilarious Christine Baranski. Like in all Broadway musicals, a huge chorus chimes in when convenient, and they're everything you'd expect.

The music is obviously the most paramount thing when discussing a musical adaptation. Mamma Mia! does not disappoint one bit in this department. Abba's most memorable hits sparkle throughout the film, and although I'm not a big fan of the genre, I can respect expertly-crafted pop music.

Everything about the music is well done: the arrangements, the singing, and the choreography mesh together to create a musical fan's dream. The director and cinematographer did everything right, I'm just not the right demographic. Three songs did, however, blow me away: "Lay All Your Love On Me" (wow, Amanda Seyfried!), "The Winner Takes It All", and "Take a Chance On Me".

The biggest downside to Mamma Mia! is the lax authorship that tie everything together. I personally can't stomach the underlying deceit the movie's built upon (I won't spoil it, but it's easy to figure out) and I found the resolution beyond clich�. I can forgive some of the weak transitions since this is a jukebox musical made up of otherwise unrelated tunes, but some of the flaws are beyond excuse. I especially found humor in the contradiction of main character Sophie being conceived during the time of flower power, yet being 20 years-old in the age of internet marketing.

Nonetheless, musical fans will adore this film. Casual musical hobbyists will get a big kick out of it, even if they have a Y chromosome. And anyone else willing to accept the film for the fun, harmless fluff that it is should have a good time.

If you see Mamma Mia!, make sure to stay until the traditional credits "white-on-black" scroll. The pseudo-credits feature the campiest montage you could possibly imagine and it's sure to leave a smile on your face.

Review: Mamma Mia!

Wed, Jul 23 2008 10:00:00 CST

Review: Mamma Mia!

Wednesday, July 23 2008 - 10:00 am
by: Toni

Once again I feel I must preface my review with a bit of background. This movie was on my "No way in hell" list (until we started officially reviewing movies). I'm not that into musicals and I'm not that into chick flicks. I had a bit of trouble writing a review that didn't simply show my distaste for this type of film.

It became immediately obvious that the story was only there to allow for more music. That's fine, but the story was terrible. Every fifteen minutes or so I found myself squirming in my seat or smacking myself in the forehead. I feel a bit bad about it. I was probably annoying the folks who actually wanted to be there, but I can't help it. It was painful. The characters spoke and pure stupid came out. But then they sang and it was slightly better.

I'm not that into musicals, but it is worth mentioning that the music, choreography, and costuming were all very well done and created a unique and colorful mood. It wasn't all that bad. There were some really funny lines in the movie. I would say that the over-the-top nature of everything made it almost enjoyable.

I noticed two things odd about Mamma Mia! that you may not want to read because it might make you fixate on them. If you tend to fixate, don't read the rest of my review. Just a warning.

The first was the issue of time. She's 20... right? And the mom was all flower-power... right? And there's internet...? something doesn't add up. This could have easily been avoided if there was no mention of the web. The second oddness was that the camera would change styles often and seemingly without reason. Sometimes it would be normal - crisp and clean- but at times it would be soft and backlit, or soft, light and slightly blurred. Other times it would be grainy. This would change sometimes 2 or 3 times in the middle of a scene.

In the end, it's decent for what it is, a cheesy pop-musical. "Sufferable" I believe is the phrase that comes to mind. I know some people in the crowd got a kick out of it. It's just not my style. I think Bert owes me something animated.

Mamma Mia Misandry!

Wed, Jul 23 2008 09:30:00 CST

Mamma Mia Misandry!

Wednesday, July 23 2008 - 9:30 am
by: Bert

Review: WALL-E

Mon, Jul 21 2008 16:00:00 CST

Review: WALL-E

Monday, July 21 2008 - 4:00 pm
by: Bert

Pixar delivers once again. If you were to paint a movie target, the inward concentric rings would read "Movies", "Good Movies", "Pixar Movies", and finally "Top Pixar Movies" as the bullseye. WALL-E belongs to the latter category, rivaling what I consider their top films (The Incredibles and Toy Story 2).

By now, most of you have already seen WALL-E, but in the off-chance that you haven't, remedy that. This is a rare treat of a film that every age group can enjoy on the big screen. Lush graphics, wonderful characters, and an epic (although understated) story come together to form the best 98 minutes of animation in years.

Director Andrew Stanton (mastermind of A Bug's Life and Finding Nemo) has given life to some of the most powerful, beautiful, and marketable characters I've ever seen, and he accomplishes it with a minimal amount of dialogue.

The best part is that the principles aren't even children's character stereotypes we're used to. Instead, all of the characters are multifaceted, malleable, and relatable -- which is a big statement when discussing heroic robot explorers.

At the heart is, of course, WALL-E, the titular garbage-compressing, nostalgia-collecting robot that could. He's the kind of protaganist that anybody can get behind: compassionate, selfless, and diligent as can be. He may look like a cubic mix between Johnny Five and the robot from Gyromite, but the little guy can do a lot.

His accomplice is the sleek and determined EVA, an ovular iPod descendant sent to assess the planet's vegetation status. Their interaction starts out as if we were watching a commercial:

EVA: I'm a Mac.
WALL-E: And I'm a PC.
EVA: I'm a powerful and attractive white machine facing an uphill battle.
WALL-E: I'm a modular and seemingly unstoppable machine who builds intricate systems out of garbage.

As time goes on, mutual Robo-Love blossoms in a surprisingly well-done analog to Hello Dolly. Along the way, we get to meet the jolly recently-enlightened captain (voiced by Jeff Garlin), former leader Shelby Forthright (portrayed in archival footage by the inimitable Fred Willard), and a devoted cleaning robot named MO. Side note: I would love to see what would happen if you attached something dirty to his back and set him off in a circle.

The acting is fine in the hands of the capable actors, although none are really given an opportunity to shine. The soundtrack and mixing are wonderful. Likewise, the visual effects are beyond anything I've ever seen. And of course, the story is top-notch; it's well paced, it never drags, and it doesn't talk down to kids.

WALL-E is at once an adventure, a romance, a comedy, and a tragedy. Most of all, it's a poignant warning about humanity's current trajectory. This is a film that deserves to be studied by adults and children alike.

Review: WALL-E

Mon, Jul 21 2008 15:00:00 CST

Review: WALL-E

Monday, July 21 2008 - 3:00 pm
by: Toni

I'll just say this first: I really liked WALL-E. Pixar did its usual amazing job of making everything look real within the movie's universe. The characters had incredible depth, despite (or perhaps assisted by) the lack of verbal communication. I like the basic messages behind it too: don't run from your problems and the environment is a nice thing to have around.

I want to say that it was really cute, but not in the sickeningly sweet way. No pink (well, maybe a tiny bit), no puppies, no glitter, no overly sappy music to force tears. The cuteness comes more from the robots' character traits and the various interactions and subtle motions. I respect the understated cuteness.

WALL-E has been getting some serious flak from quite a few different sides. Most of the arguments being made just sound like people projecting their personal issues onto something which isn't nearly as flame-worthy as they make it out to be. An example, I see the obese folk as victims, not villains. The politics of this movie are however you want to see them.

There were a few science and logic leaps, but really you have to realize they're inevitable. It's a kids' movie, after all. It's not like they're there to explain string theory or anything. Just a side-note. I know we've got some logic-snobs in the audience. :)

What I want to know is, where are the other ships? I mean, here is obviously the "Middle Management" ship populated by telemarketers and the like. Where did the "Great Thinkers" and "Working Class" ships get off to? My guess is they did something useful with the amazing technology they had at that point and found new planets to colonize.

Lessons from WALL-E

Mon, Jul 21 2008 09:00:00 CST

Lessons from WALL-E

Monday, July 21 2008 - 9:00 am
by: Bert

Kill the Batman

Fri, Jul 18 2008 11:00:00 CST

Kill the Batman

Friday, July 18 2008 - 11:00 am
by: Bert

Review: The Dark Knight

Fri, Jul 18 2008 10:00:00 CST

Review: The Dark Knight

Friday, July 18 2008 - 10:00 am
by: Bert

Can a film with as much hype as the Dark Knight possibly live up to such lofty expectations? I'm pleased to say: yes, it can.

For some background, I'm a bit of a Batman nerd. To me, he's the ultimate comic book hero and I've frequently debated with friends the many ways in which he's better than Superman. I consider Batman Begins to be the perfect blueprint for a franchise reboot (only rivaled by Casino Royale) and I've been excited about the prospects of the Dark Knight since we glimpsed the Joker's calling card at the end of the last film.

I can't remember a single movie with more buzz. From intense viral marketing to a barrage of enticing trailers, the Dark Knight has been on everybody's mind for nearly a year now. Heath Ledger's untimely death this past January only heightened people's interest and sparked macabre speculation over posthumous awards. I've been hooked all along and the haunting poster of the Joker asking "Why so serious?" gives me chills every time I see it.

That said, it should be no surprise that this morning, I was one in a sea of enthusiastic Batman fans who made a pilgrimage to the midnight premiere. I have been going to midnight shows for the past decade, and this one blew away everything before it: Star Wars, the Lord of the Rings, and Spider-Man had nothing on the Dark Knight. At AMC 30 in Barrington, no less than eighteen screens sold out. Pair that information with the fact that the title's appearing on a record 4,366 screens nationwide this weekend, and it looks like several box office records are bound to be broken.

As the last credits rolled at 3:00am this morning, I found my mind racing to assess everything that I had just experienced. At first, I tried to take inventory of all of the upsides.

The acting was superb. Christian Bale turns in as charming and nuanced a role as ever, further cementing his status as one of the top actors of his generation. The supporting cast was even more impressive than in Batman Begins, which is quite a feat. Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine are unrivaled as key allies and sympathizers for Batman.

The newcomers do not disappoint at all, either. Maggie Gyllenhaal is a major step up over Katie Holmes, even though the Rachel Dawes character remains the most underdeveloped. Aaron Eckhart turns in the best (and most tragic) depiction of Harvey Dent I've had the pleasure of experiencing. In Christopher Nolan tradition, all of the bit players are wonderful as well: Eric Roberts is as smarmy as ever, Nestor Carbonell is a likeable mayor (even if he does wear mascara), and Anthony Michael Hall is fun as a reporter (and possible villain-to-be). To top it all off, our favorite psychologist makes a brief cameo.

The Dark Knight's real star, as we all know, is Ledger. All of the praise that he's received so far as the Joker is merited. From his very first reveal, the Joker entertains, creeps, inspires, and terrifies in a way few other on-screen villains ever have. Throughout his career, Heath Ledger turned in formidable roles, but none were nearly as compelling as this incarnation of the Joker. One incredible hospital scene had me simultaneously laughing uproariously and creeped out. If nothing else, we should all be thankful that he went out at his pinnacle, and not like, say, Raul Julia in Street Fighter.

The entire film is set against the grimmest and most atmospheric Gotham to date. The scenes filmed in Chicago were brilliantly done and I found myself geeking out, having lived in the area my entire life. Last summer, I remember saying to Toni "this film better be amazing" for all of the detours we had to take navigating the city. I never had any doubt that it would be.

All of the technical details are as impressive as you could hope for. The visual effects dazzle, the sound mixing creates an immersive mood (highlighted by the Joker's creepy atonal theme), and the costume design is top-notch. From top to bottom (actor, clothing, and makeup), the Joker is the perfect adaptation of a comic book villain onto the big screen.

I can't say enough good things about the screenplay or the cinematography. In the Dark Knight, the characters grow and change on multiple levels. Batman seems simultaneously more triumphant, tragic, and human than any other cinematic superhero today. Unlike other franchises, these films don't feel stale and interchangeable; whereas Spider-Man 2 and 3 were evolutionary upgrades, the Dark Knight is a revolutionary step forward.

After careful consideration, I can't come up with a single substantial flaw in the movie. With that in mind, I consider it both a a privilege and a burden to start with the Dark Knight as my first review for 2-D Glasses. It's too intricate a movie to fully explore in this space and it will be a high benchmark against which all subsequent films will be measured.

I'm off to study voodoo in hopes of reanimating Heath Ledger for the follow-up...

Review: The Dark Knight

Fri, Jul 18 2008 09:30:00 CST

Review: The Dark Knight

Friday, July 18 2008 - 9:30 am
by: Toni

I have to admit, I was looking forward to this movie ever since Batman Begins came out. All of that anticipation and excitement made the movie a little over-hyped.

That being said, The Dark Knight was good, really good. It didn't blow me away like Batman Begins did, but for me, it has plateaued at a similar level of greatness. Like I said, it's really good.

The Joker's performance was hilarious. There was a sufficient mix of explosions and fights. Batman was... well... Batman (a.k.a. awesome). The story was compelling. I also think the movie had a good flow to it in general. Oh! And Cillian Murphy got a cameo, which was pretty sweet.

My only real issues with the movie are that: 1) the brand new old girlfriend didn't get to do very much and just seemed like the same old tired prop and 2) the movie was a bit long. There was a lot to cover, admittedly, but there were at least two points when I thought it was over, only to be reminded of the loose ends left to tie.

All in all, I'm impressed and await the next in this line.

News: Welcome to 2-D Glasses

Fri, Jul 18 2008 09:00:00 CST

News: Welcome to 2-D Glasses

Friday, July 18 2008 - 9:00 am
by: Toni

Welcome to the site! There's still a good deal of work to be done, but we'll be posting new comics every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. New reviews will be posted as we see movies!