DrWillHatch Reviews

Family Guy (1999– )

Addictive but lazy cartoon that's ultimately forgettable

[4/10 · 24 March 2009]

When Family Guy first premiered, I was not in a discriminating mood. With the 1990s containing a wealth of clever, surreal cartoons, why should I be? Nickelodeon produced Doug; Ren and Stimpy and Rockos Modern Life among other fine cartoons(Yes, this includes Spongebob).All had quirky, dreamlike animation and surprisingly sophisticated stories and dialog. The Simpsons became an outright phenomenon, perhaps not as brilliant as its biggest defenders claim it to be, but a very fine investment of your time and certainly dismisses the false axiom that all TV is junk. South Park started out as a crude but hilarious attack on everything with unique and intelligent satire underneath. It evolved to become a Monty Python- esquire show with outrageous concepts and brutally swift and sharp societal critiques(Such as their defense of the noble underpants gnomes) and eventually settled to be entirely self referential and "meta" like the Simpsons did, and has unfortunately jumped the shark. Family Guy is superficially like The Simpsons and South Park. It pushes buttons and is a favorite among college students and bestiality enthusiasts. However, what it has in loquacity it lacks in true wit.

The show is famous for its use of gimmicks, especially for flashbacks. Many are references to bad TV sitcoms or commercials. Some are funny(Especially from the first two seasons), most are not. Are references inherently funny? I'm not sure, but they are mostly what the show stands on considering that its characters are painfully uninteresting. Where Homer and Bart have charm, and Cartman has an artillery of self awareness and pure outrageousness to back up his awful behavior, Peter Griffin has no excuse. He's just a loud, obnoxious pig. Anything funny coming from his character is only because the writers forget how to be unfunny that day. Lois is also very shallow and dull; Meg is a prop, only to be abused; Chris is borderline retarded and only occasionally funny, and the two main stars of the show(Stewie and Brian) are so inconsistent in their characterizations that it all really kind of pointless.

Other gimmicks I can't stand are when a character points to something obviously and lingers on it for an uncomfortably long time. This happens a lot lately, and I can't bear it any longer. Not just the oft mentioned chicken that likes to beat Peter up, I'm talking about the painful moments where they talk about pop culture and prod it as if they are alien spectators. That's not wit or even ironic humor, it's totally boring and lifeless.

Not that the show can't be funny, in fact some of the earlier episodes had me rolling. Highlights include the pilot episode, where Peter loses touch with reality after losing his precious television; when Peters religious zealot father shows up and wreaks havoc; When Peter becomes a narc at Megs school, and the "pancake" episode. I suspect these are the episodes that accidentally incorporated actual human traits in its characters, or merely were times the writers had actual comedic inspiration.

One last thing, the show is not offensive. It's only offensive to those who wouldn't watch the show in the first place, so it's almost like a circle jerk to the choir of hipsters.

Meet the Spartans (2008)

Awful in parts, but really a leg up over Friedburg and Seltzers other films

[6/10 · 10 December 2008]

Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of Jason Friedburg or Aaron Seltzer, in fact I go out of my way to avoid their films. I was only marginally entertained by "Scary Movie"(I'm sure most of which all had to do with the Wayans brothers), and abhorred the sequel. I saw "Scary Movie 4"(but not the third movie) just to pass the time with a friend, and despite maybe one joke that worked(Sort of. It's the one where a ray gun disintegrates everyones clothes), I was utterly bored. "Date Movie" was another film I saw almost out of some obligation to watch whatever DVD my pop collects, and the film was horrible and monotonous, and worst of all, boring. There is nothing worse than a bad comedy. I didn't follow up on "Epic Movie", "Superhero Movie", "Disaster Movie", and I will probably never watch anything else by these hacks again.

In between all this garbage however, is "Meet the Spartans", which isn't as shallow or tedious as their other films. Actually, some of the jokes work, and that is because this film has the good sense to wield sex as its arbitrator of humor. Not all, mind you, but a surprising amount of the humor works, which is a lot of gay jokes, as Greeks are famous for their comfort with homosexuality inmany instances. There are also jokes intended for the red blooded male in mind. I was surprised at how the actors actually put conviction into these jokes, as if they actually are trying to entertain the audience. If it is on a base level, at least it is a pleasurable one.

Also, there are a few dance numbers in here which entertained me, and the reason I liked them is because they were silly, out of left field, and not as mean spirited as Friedburg/Seltzer skits usually are. Also, I think that they inadvertently raised the level of craftsmanship by placing the story in a historical context. Even if you know nothing about the Greeks outside of "300", at least that makes you aware that there is life outside of vapid popular culture. Oh sure, there are plenty of cringe worthy references to celebrities and American Idol, but than again, what were you expecting from this movie?

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Another great addition to the saga

[8/10 · 1 October 2008]

Actually, I find this to be the second best after Raiders, it had me riveted from start to finish. I'm going the Roger Ebert route with this one. If you liked the previous Indiana Jones entries, you should like this one, and if you didn't, don't waste your time. Apparently some people totally hated this movie for its lack of realism or any pretense of realism for that matter. While I can see that there are holes in the film(A film like this or any of the other Jones films should be watched with a belief that this is some sort of strange, more exciting alternate reality than our own), with the exception of the inexplicable ending, I could suspend any disbelief because of how great this film is. It isn't as tight as "Raiders" is in the logic department, but I still loved it, and in spite of the lamebrain alien mythology, it is still a smart film.

All of the actors are very good. Harrison Ford is exactly the same as he was when we had last seen him, and I appreciate that he is subject to human emotions and isn't just another noble superman. He is cocky, impatient, occasionally rude and even a little ruthless. Shia LaBeouf equips himself nicely as Mutt, he is an able sidekick. Cate Blanchett is a little bizarre as the Soviet in charge of retrieving alien and paranormal objects for Khruschev I suppose, but her goons are intimidating enough. Karen Allen doesn't get nearly enough screen time and is neutered from her more fun and spunky time in "Raiders". Basically all of the main characters as well as the supporting players are lively, likable(or loathful) and intelligently acted.

The action scenes are excellent, and very cool. I for one, actually liked the sword fight scene, as implausible as it was, there was so much going on during that scene and afterward, it was great fun. The car chase through the streets of Indianas home town and through the college at which he(until just recently according to an important plot device scene) teaches was the highlight, I thought. The infamous nuclear testing scene is bizarre and humorous and totally cool to have, I don't care how bogus it was.These are just a few whiffs of the many thrills you'll have.

This isn't the type of film one can review with giving any insight, either you have a good time or you don't. I had a great time, I was full of enthusiasm and joy after I left the theater and I bet if you haven't seen it yet, you will like it too(unless you are a whiny IMDb fan boy)

The Dark Knight (2008)

Now that I have seen this film several times...

[9/10 · 20 September 2008]

I can finally put the film in its proper context. When I first saw the movie, I went into it absorbing all the hype about how mind blowingly amazing it was and how it was an instant classic if not THE best film ever made. So I viewed the film in an intellectual frame of mind...and I loved it, but with some reservations. Firstly, I admired Bales performance much more then Heath Ledgers, who practically everyone said and continues to say stole the show. I thought he was an exceptional villain, but since he was a completely remorseless maniac, with even Ledger himself calling him a "psychopathic, mass murdering, schizophrenic clown with zero empathy", I didn't know what to make of it. For a film that was going for "realism"(as real as you can get with entirely foreign geographical locations like Gotham City and scientifically implausible devices and applications), having a brilliant, insane super criminal who somehow has limitless access to henchman and supplies, and can rig hospitals and ferry boats with explosives even when there is manhunt out for him right in the middle of a major metropolitan city seemed a little far-fetched. Didn't it? To buy in to the story, you have to accept that the various crime bosses and crooked business men have almost total control over Gotham. Of course corruption exists, look around you, but I just find it hard to believe that all the corrupt civil servants and mob members would have the ability to manipulate the entire city for the Jokers benefit.

Anyway, what I really admired about the film was Batman himself. I see Batman as the ubermensch, I think he is human potential at its very peak, and I think Christian Bale did an outstanding job at it. He has emotions and deep feelings of love and compassion for people he cares about and the citizens of Gotham themselves. He is deeply touched that his Batman persona is actually making an impact in peoples lives, lamenting on crude vigilantes, yes, but relieved that he may one day retire from being Batman because of the new DA, Harvey Dent, who has been christened "The White Knight" of Gotham. He may get to relax and maybe spend time with his longtime crush, Rachael Dawes, but then the Joker enters the picture. Watching Batman become increasingly desperate to apprehend the Joker, whether through outright physical abuse, or abuse of technology(some sort of device to monitor peoples cell phones throughout the entire city simultaneously), it is actually a little disturbing to watch Batman become unhinged. What I also liked about Batman was something Henri Ducard told him in "Batman Begins": "If you commit yourself to an ideal, you can become more than a man...a legend." Batman has completely omitted himself to his code of ethics and morals, and built himself up to be the greatest human alive, look at how he easily evades the attack dogs late in the film. I think that any benefit we can get from superhero stories is how the hero can teach readers or viewers to reflect on these morals and apply them in real life, who doesn't want to be Batman? The Dark Knight makes me appreciate Batman Begins much more then I had previously, the former accentuates the good qualities of the latter and gives it focus, a sense that it is one part in a longer struggle.

The supporting cast are all excellent. Aaron Eckhart played Harvey Dent, the third lead in the movie. While I thought the hospital room scene wasn't totally believable, I was honestly moved by Dent slowly moving into insanity because of the Jokers actions. Not when he laments about how his girlfriend was taken from him, but during subtler moments, like when he was talking to Jim Gordon in the hospital, you can see he is gone off the deep end. Or before that when he is going to kill an insane henchman of the Jokers, flipping a coin to decide his fate, I thought that was the most disturbing moment in the movie. Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Maggie Gyllenhaal and every other actor actor involved are handle themselves greatly, there isn't a weak actor in the cast.

Finally, after watching the film several times more, I finally see the greatness in the Joker. I have never seen Mr Ledger in another film before, so I couldn't appreciate how deeply he sunk himself into the role. The physical transformation is astounding, and he does play an insane mastermind to the absolute T, even if he doesn't seem right in a "realistic" world frame. He is charismatic and will certainly be remembered, and I see him as a Mephistopheles type character. Batman has always been a mythical story at heart, so why not embrace it? Congrats on your amazing performance Heath, you played pure evil and insanity in a great way, and I hope you somehow know how many fans you have down on Earth.

I also give my heartfelt praise to the director, screenwriters(director Chris Nolan and his brother), cinematographer and everyone else involved. The movie has great dialog, a great and consistent plot, is a wonder for the eyes and is just fantastic all around as it explores different themes like pure evil, morality, order, human nature and more. It is not the best film I have ever seen, but it is a very respectable effort.

PS I would also like to compliament the action scenes and sick humor used by the Joker. The Dark Knight also works perfectly well as a straight action picture for those without minds(just kidding). It is just as exciting as the best action movie ever, Die Hard and the Jokers dialog, while twisted by his evilness, is also very funny

Are You Scared? (2006 Video)

A mediocre "Saw" ripoff, but with one truly horrifying scene in it

[6/10 · 19 September 2008]

I caught this last night on television, and the premise sounded interesting enough, a play on peoples fear of reality TV shows. While I am a fan of some reality TV shows, I certainly recognize the inherent wrongness in some of the shows. Aside from the obvious privacy issues, where are the ethics in whats OK and what crosses the line in exploitation? Usually I would say "consent", but sometimes I wonder. In this film, the unlucky participants applied to a show titled "Are You Scared?", which to them probably meant something along the lines of the relatively harmless "Fear Factor". Alas,they are chosen when they least expected it. They were kidnapped and awoke it a run down building, trapped there by the insane host.

This is a rip off of the "Saw" movies, which I found to be very unsettling because of the mean spiritedness of the Jigsaw Killer, but I was utterly bored by the dialog and acting in them. Here, the same is true for the most part, one scene with a male and female detective was enough for me to know that all subsequent scenes would be equally trite and boring, so I skipped all of the scenes containing them. I also skipped some useless scenes from the helpless victims inside the abandoned building. The actors portray stupid thoughts and actions, in particular the first person to be offed, who does not realize that his life is in grave danger, despite having a surgical scar on his body that wasn't there before, and no one considers that they were kidnapped and drugged, brought here against their will. Not even the biggest "fame whore" would approve of that I don't think. However, during some scenes, these people are likable enough, they aren't scumbags who are being taught a lesson by an insane toymaker, like in the Saw movies. They are normal, everyday folk who are being put in a situation beyond their control, and what could be scarier then that? The death scenes are suitably gruesome and ironic, according to the fear of that person. The story itself and twist ending is mediocre, and while the victims are likable, no one in the movie leaves much of an impression, well, except for one scene. There is one scene in here that terrified me beyond belief. If you don't want to be spoiled, don't read the next paragraph.

When it's the twin brother and sisters turn to die, the host plays a clip of their audition video. The brother says that he is not afraid of anything, and the sisters only fear is losing her brother. The game that the psychopathic host has set up for them is of course going to play on this in a cruel way. Both are hooked up to chairs, facing each other, and the host tells the brother(forgive me for not remembering their names, though it doesn't really matter in a film like this, does it?) to press a button or they'll be disqualified. This sets off a drill saw that will bore a hole into his brain unless the sister presses a button next to her, which then sets the drill in her direction. While there are countless scenes of terrible deaths in film and especially this kind of film, this partiular scene is utterly terrifying. In this moment, and this moment only, the emotional pull you have towards the characters is very strong, and thus, the quality of the acting is very good. You an see the love that these siblings have for each other, and you can see on their faces that they realize one of them is going to suffer a horrible death. Eventually, the brother sacrifices himself so the sister can live, and the totally understandable breakdown that follows is heartbreaking. It is meant to be a standard gory death typical of this horror sub genre("Torture Porn" is an apt descriptor for most of the trash that comes from this genre), but it is set up with such surprising emotional honesty and suspense(notice the music that is played in the intermediate stage before the twin brother gets killed) that it becomes a very memorable scene in an otherwise forgettable movie.

Besides that one scene, the film has not much more to offer except for a likable cast, moody atmosphere and a few interesting exploitation deaths.

Cyber Seduction: His Secret Life (2005 TV Movie)

One of my favorite "bad" movies

[9/10 · 8 September 2008]

There are numerous(far, far too many to count) films, pieces of literature, art, music or otherwise, that are mediocre. They are pieces with admirable qualities balanced out by bad ones. The job of a film critic is to analyze the worth of the film through whatever proscription's are appropriate. As a lover of film, I am sadly kind to many to many films that I would call mediocre, and reserve my most scathing criticisms for those films which are either truly awful , or those with something that I deem has no redeeming value. Cyber Seduction:His Secret Life is an all around failure from what it set out to achieve(at least from what I think they were trying to achieve), and I am so glad that they did. This is one of the funniest, most laugh a minute films I've ever had the pleasure to watch. Seriously, it's like the director watched a Monty Python marathon for inspiration before making the film. For those who don't know, the film concerns the trend of pornography addiction among teenagers. I'm not sure of the actually studies done, but this film is comparable to "Reefer Madness" in its exaggeration of the "problem"(though much funnier). Jeremy Sumpter is a teen who has a bright future ahead of him. He is a talented competitive swimmer, has a "proper" girlfriend, and is a good example to his younger brother. Through some sort of plot contrivance(I haven't seen it since it came out- minor details aside, it left a big an impression on me), he discovers the joys of stimulation, which eventually leads to his, and several others lives ruined in the process. A lot of the humor comes through sheer absurdity. First of all, the porn he discovers couldn't be more tame(later on, in one of the funniest moments of the movie, his swim mates receive pda images of people wearing latex, which we are supposed to interpret to be bondage porn). It is mostly a bunch of plain looking women dancing around unsexily in bras and panties. Secondly, you never actually see him masturbate. Actually, it is more likely that he is a zombified addict due of the energy drinks like Red Bull that he excessivly consumes. You might blame his stupidity(he never closes the door) on his mother, who is played by Kelly Lynch with absolute zero knowledge of even the most basic concepts of sexuality. It could be a genetic trait. Eventually his younger brother becomes addicted to pornography as well and he leaves his private disc("Virgin Vaginas") to be easily found in his dresser drawer(which was totally unnecessary, he could of hid it easily from his illiterate mother and doofus father on his PC). Did I mention that he loses all interest in his girlfriend and causes his family to crumble?

The film wouldn't be nearly as successful had I not been drawn in by the characters. I have to give credit to the two main actors. I saw this film almost directly after I saw Jermey Sumpter in "Peter Pan", which I loved him in. In this film he is very likable, and portrays the idiotic character with such seriousness and earnestness that you can't help but like hima little . It's not his fault that he was born in such a strange alternate reality where, honestly, red blooded teenage boys lament over the dangers of bondage(which isn't really bondage), and slutty girls try to commit suicide after the first "date". Kelly Lynch is fun to watch, as she plays the entirely overzealous and nonsensical crusader with a straight face, and it adds another level of irony that she apparently has no problem with "doing nudity"(I wouldn't know, I've never seen her in another picture). The whole film plays this way, the characters act so out of proportion with how people in real life act, but with such likability and seriousness that you can't help but laugh. I can't really describe how ridiculous this movie gets without telling you about that the film is bookmarked by two instances of tragedy. The aforementioned scene where a slutty girl Jeremy met off the internet bangs her head on a marble sink after Jeremy realizes he's in over his head, and two instances of him looking like hes committing suicide.

Whether it was intentional or not, this film actually managed to be somewhat intelligent in its commentary. Through all the absurdity, I think viewers might get the message that you shouldn't be espousing the dangers of something or someone without first doing the proper research. If you don't, you'll end up looking like a complete fool(like the mother). You might say that nothing tragic would of happened had she just followed her husbands initial advice, and let him do his own carnal explorations(which he should of been doing which he was much younger). I gave this a 9 because it truly made me laugh, the IMDb bottom 100 should be reserved for films with no talent in stimulating anything, except my revile.