I love movies. So much so that lately I’ve been able to pick (just by a trailer) if a movie will make me actually laugh, cry or roll my eyes. Most of the time, I can even tell you how the movie will end. And I am rarely wrong.

Sometimes, it’s good to know how you’ll react to a movie because then you’re prepared. Unlike I was for Up, where even with warning, I sobbed like a baby. Seriously, that movie broke me.

Anyhow, TC and I hit the movies again and this time it was my pick :) Let’s get to the review.

Movie: Dear John

Rating: PG-13

Release date: February 5, 2010

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B+

Summary: Nicholas Sparks is tries again to make you cry until you can’t breathe or your tear ducts beg for mercy. But this time, instead of “The Notebook,” it’s “Dear John,” a love story about John (Channing Tatum) and Savannah (Amanda Seyfried). John and Savannah meet and fall in love one summer, only to be torn apart by John’s Army deployment. To stay connected, they write letters to each other and over the years find that things don’t always stay the same.

My thoughts: I’ll just say it, yes, you will cry. And yes, there are several scenes of Channing Tatum shirtless and they are G-L-O-R-I-O-U-S. It’s the only time I’ve been in a movie where people are choking back tears and fawning over a bare chest at the same time.

In comparison to “The Notebook,” I liked “Dear John” a lot more. The timeliness of the story, a couple torn apart by one being in the military, really connects and the frustration and devotion between John and Savannah is very realistic. Sure, there are some hammy lines and lingering moments with unfinished sentences (like a bad Party of Five rerun) but the emotion in the letters between the main characters really makes you yearn for that connection we often lose by email.

Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried are great and the chemistry between them feels very real. And of course, he is VERY NICE to look at. Richard Jenkins (The Visitor/Stepbrothers) is also really effective as John’s dad. He is a great actor and the father/son dynamic made me cry at parts (even more than the main story) because it was so real. Even little Elliott from E.T. (Henry Thomas) has a small role and provides a rather surprising plot twist. There is a subplot about autism that never fully plays out and throws you off but it’s not a big distraction from the main story.

Here’s what I liked about the movie: the way it shows love growing and changing as time passes but distance remains. The ending was not what I expected but yet, it after some thought, I felt okay about it. It tackles the idea that a true love and connection never dies even as lives and relationships evolve, but doesn’t wrap everything up in a bow like, “oh my gosh we went through so much and still are the same people we were before.” That’s not real.

I wasn’t a huge fan of 500 Days of Summer’s realistic view on love but this is a good balance of reality and idealism and that I can live with.

On a tissue scale, this was a 2-3 tissue movie.

Did anyone else go see it this weekend? Or do you plan to see it?

I’ve had this review in my arsenal for a while but was tardy in posting. But now that the movie received a Best Picture nomination and Carey Mulligan received one for Best Actress, I thought it was time to post it.

YAY it’s almost Oscar time!

Movie: An Education

Rating: PG-13

Release date: October 8, 2009 (On DVD March 2010)

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A-

Summary: Jenny (Carey Milligen) is a London teen living a school-focused live in the 60s. She’s bored with her life and longs of a bohemian life in France, but her strict parents (Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour) keep her focused on school alone with the dream of attending Oxford. Then comes David (Peter Sarsgaard), a twice-her-age knight with good looks, charm and money. David gives Jenny an escape from her current life and  taste of a different one, with consequences.

My thoughts: Carey Milligen has been getting major buzz about her role as Jenny and I can see why. She’s cute, innocent and has an “aw shucks” persona. She is perfect for this role. And watching her with David, it made me remember being a teen in love for the first time. The shoulder shrugging, giggling and general “oh-my-god-this-guy-actually-likes-me” look was like looking at myself at 18, before I realized most guys I was dating were d*cks. And some still are.

Peter Sarsgaard needs to work on his British accent more (it was fading in and out) but he was definitely charming and I found myself being a little seduced by him. Rawr. And he would make an awesome sugar daddy, for real. Alfred Molina (aka Doc Ock) was annoying as the penny pinching, crazy enforcer dad but while he was driving me to drink, I did think he was really effective.

And because it’s the 60s, there’s lots of hand mixers, gorgeous dresses and smoking. That two of which I wanted to do when we left.

Go see it!

Fact: I’m not a huge fan of mysteries. Fact #2: I have never read one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s books.

But, I do like Jude Law, sh*t being blown up and men shirtless, so Sherlock Holmes is a pretty good fit for me.

And after seeing Robert Downey Jr. win a Golden Globe for his role, the curiosity got to be too much for me.

So away we go!

Movie: Sherlock Holmes

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 25, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A-

Summary: The classic Sir Arthur Conan Doyle characters are reinvented by director Guy Ritchie. Set in 19th Century London, Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and Watson (Jude Law) are on a case involving the evil Lord Blackwood, which requires the help of Holmes’ love interest/enemy Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams).

My thoughts: The main reason I don’t like mysteries is because I never fully understand the plot until the end when everything falls into place. Of course, I love that reveal but it’s the waiting and trying to piece it together myself that can be frustrating. Fortunately, you are let in on the bigger mystery in pieces throughout the movie, which keeps me engaged and curious to learn what else I’m missing.

Ritchie’s directing style with a mix of frantic and slow motion camera movements is present throughout and rather than making you feel sick, it breaks up the long periods of dialogue and Robert Downey Jr. staring at the camera. His setting of 19th Century London looks a little Gangs Of New York-like, gritty, gray and unpleasant, but it’s effective with the overall tone of the movie.

Downey is intriguing as Holmes, dialing his Tony Stark impression down about four notches to still be entertaining but a little more damaged. Jude Law is a great Watson, trying to keep Holmes on the straight-and-narrow and withholding his desire for adventure. Rachel McAdams is good but not great. After meeting her character, she isn’t who I would have cast, but she’s effective.

And there is genuine suspense in the movie too. A few times I was grabbing my handrest and hiding behind my hands. I was also a little surprised this is rated PG-13 because a few scenes are a bit graphic and violent, but hey, what do I know?

I recommend this movie. I liked it much more than I thought I would but I don’t think Robert Downey Jr. should get used to winning awards for his role. He was good, but not “blow me away amazing.”

Did you see Sherlock Holmes? If so, what did you think?

Just to start off, I’ve never read the book that the movie is based on. I tried, twice, and couldn’t get past the first two chapters. If you’ve read the book you likely know why. There were some heavy, upsetting things that happened and although those actions set up the entire book, I just could not bring myself to keep reading.

So that’s my disclaimer to the below review :)

Movie: The Lovely Bones

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 11, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: B-/C+

Summary: Based on the Alice Sebold book, The Lovely Bones is set in the early 70s, where Susie (Saoirse Ronan) is murdered by her brutal, deceptive neighbor (Stanley Tucci) and her family (Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz) deals with her terrible loss and tries to solve her murder.

My thoughts: Yeah, this movie is kind of a downer. I wouldn’t go see this if you’re looking for something light and fluffy but if you read the book ahead of time, you probably already knew that :)

For not reading the book and judging this solely on the movie. It was…okay. Visually, it was amazing. After LOTR, everyone knows Peter Jackson has a great eye for CGI and creating alternate worlds, and he does that here, weaving between real life and this “inbetween” world. What I found to be a little lacking was the story, which I had a hard time following in parts.

The most poignant scenes were the ones Susie narrates about her close relationship with her dad. Their close relationship and how lost he feels after she’s gone and her death being unresolved was very difficult to watch without crying. TC and I were both reaching for the tissues. But I had a hard time following how she communicates with her family, what this “inbetween” world is, how all of it fits together, especially at the end. To me, it felt very…unresolved or unsatisfying in how it ended.

The best part of this movie is Stanley Tucci, who is great in every movie he’s in, especially The Devil Wears Prada and Julie & Juila. He’s great but in this is he TRULY scary and chilling from his clothing to his mannerisms to the cold look in his eye. He is absolutely mesmerizing in this and creates a level of terror and fear that truly makes you fear and wonder what he’ll do next. He’s nominated for a Golden Globe tonight (as of publish time his category was unannounced) and he definitely is a strong contender. It’s just too bad that he gets lost in a story that jumps around and then ultimately ends without feeling like you went full circle. If nothing else, his performance in this movie is enough to see it.

Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz are good as his parents, I honestly can’t imagine Ryan Gosling playing the dad, but again, I think story makes it difficult to really develop their characters. Although I didn’t read the book, I know a key part in how Susie dies is missing due to the graphic and unsettling subject matter, and I don’t know if that would have really brought the story to another level on film, but I think for how great of a director Peter Jackson is, he needs to tighten up the script a bit more next time to really make it a complete picture.

Oh and be sure to watch for Peter Jackson’s cameo.

What did you think of the movie? If you read the book, did you feel the movie was pretty accurate?

It takes a big person to admit she’s wrong. And today, I am that person. In my pre-holiday movie post, I said I had no plans to see Avatar, and at the time I didn’t. But these d*mn social networks kept saying great things about it and my insatiable curiousity was peaked.

So when my love Jenn was in town this weekend, we planned to go see it together in 3D, because she loved it…and I trust her judgement.

Here’s the review:

Movie: Avatar

Rating: PG-13

Release date: December 18, 2009

Everyday Adventures’ grade: A

Summary: Um, this is a tough one to really summarize but it involves a fight on planet Pandora between humans and the Na’vi race to preserve its trees and energy source that the humans desperately want. I think I’ll leave it at that.

My thoughts: I have to say, I really liked this movie. James Cameron made me care about blue people and even made me cry a little bit. D*mn you James Cameron. Kidding!

The reason I like James Cameron flicks is because he blows sh*t up and makes you care about the characters. And how he does that is creating a layered story of characters that you can relate to in part and really get to know inside and out. You don’t know much about their backstory but you’re along for an adventure with them and can’t help but feel the wealth of emotions they do as the story progresses.

And Avatar is successful at making me care. Sure the Na’vi race is a little offputting at first and you don’t know how to exactly connect with them. But when you do, you feel fear and panic they do in trying to protect what’s theirs. Sam Worthington is great at Jake, especially as he goes through his emotional transformation, and Sigourney Weaver turns in a good performance as Jake’s tough boss. Cameron isn’t known for great storytelling but this story was definitely compelling, layered and entertaining.

But the real star of the show is the movie’s visual element. The effects are amazing, especially the clarify and use of color through the animation and CGI. It’s even more amazing when both worlds mix, you mind is pretty baffled. I’m very anxious to see how this technology is used in moviemaking in the future as it is definitely something different.

At 2 hours and 40 minutes, the movie is long and you do get a bit fidgety. Definitely hit the bathroom before it starts and avoid too many liquids during the show. But despite the long running time, it was still a great movie and I would highly recommend people check it out.

Have you seen Avatar yet? If so, did you love it or were you surprised at how good it was? I have to say, the trailers initially didn’t really sell me on it but I’m glad I went.