Over the last several years we've been treated to all sorts of "Ack, I'm stuck!" thrillers, and they come in all shapes and sizes: Colin Farrell stuck in a phone booth; a couple of scuba divers stuck in shark-infested waters; a clueless everyman stuck in a coffin; three goofballs stuck on a ski lift, two goofballs stuck in a canyon, one goofball with his hand stuck beneath a massive boulder -- and one poor guy who spends a few days stuck inside a windshield! Most of these flicks are surprisingly solid, and they generally find novel ways to position their respective "Ack, I'm stuck!" gimmicks.
And then there's the new entry, Wrecked, which offers us Oscar-winner Adrien Brody totally stuck inside a wrecked car ... until he wriggles out. Then he's stuck writhing across the forest floor, arguing with imagined cohorts, growling at various woodland creatures, and slowly (ever so freaking slowly) figuring out how he got totally stuck in that smashed-up automobile in the first place. As you could probably ascertain from the aforementioned plot synopsis, not much happens in Wrecked, and what does happens does so ... s l o w l y.
Debut feature from director Michael Greenspan and writer Christopher Dodd, Wrecked simply drops us into a stranger's unpleasant situation, and then does very little that might make us care about the poor schlub with his leg nastily wedged beneath the dashboard. Aside from the simple appeal of "oh, that's sort of a shame," there's little to no investment in the lead character, which means that we're stuck watching a complete stranger moan, writhe, and hallucinate for a good 40 minutes. And once the man extricates himself from the car, things get only slightly more lively. The always-cool Brody (who seems to have a recent addiction to starring in weird genre films, and good for him!) does what he can with the scant material, but the flick goes from dreary to tiresome once the backstory starts falling into place.
Well-shot and intermittently effective, Wrecked seems a lot like a cool short that got stretched into feature length for no good reason besides distribution options. Wrecked certainly isn't a terrible entry into the "Ack, I'm stuck!" sub-sub-genre, but it hits the screen with a noted lack of energy, excitement or overall point. If, on the other hand, the idea of watching Adrien Brody wiggle and whine his way through a forest sounds thrilling, then Wrecked may be your new favorite film.
Captain America, leader of the Avengers, will soon be in motion picture in theaters this summer. So all the marvel fans can gear up and get excited as the film’s first official trailer is now out to the public.
This trailer shows Captain America’s background and origin starting with Rogers (Chris Evans) volunteering himself for the “Super –Soldier” secret project called Project: Rebirth. Too scrawny to fight in the war, the recruitment office rejects his admission into the army, so Rogers is forced to find other alternatives to fight for his country during WWII. He is then chosen for the project where scientists inject serum into his scrawny little body, and then BOOM! Instantly, he is turned into a mega-super-ultra fighter for the Allies side known as Captain America.
Rogers is then equipped with his legendary shield that is indestructible to bullets. Joined by his sidekick Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), he will soon go head to head against Hitler’s head of advanced weaponry, known as The Red Skull (Hugo Weaving).
The special effects in this upcoming film look amazing, although it was a little weird seeing Chris Evans as a shrunken little man in the beginning of the film. Instead of the bright red, blue and white colors like Captain America’s suit usually is, they have darkened the colors a bit, making him more realistic.
The music is very compelling and suspenseful as it pumps your heart, making up wanting to hear and see more. There will also be the strong cast characters in the story such as the gruff Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) whose powerful speech on the Super-Soldier project is heard in most of the trailer’s background sound as Chris Evans goes through his transformation, Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) who will be the future father of Tony Stark and will be the man responsible for designing the costume ensemble for Captain America, Dr. Abraham Erksine (Stanley Tucci) who creates the Super Soldier serum, and Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) who is a freedom fighter and the love interest of Captain America.
The trailer is very convincing and creates a very strong lure for both the fanatics of Captain America and also the women fans of Chris Evans. This may be one of his greatest performances yet.
This 2001 film, a "romantic science fiction thriller", is loosely based on a 1954 short story by Philip K. Dick called "Adjustment Team". The film was written and directed by George Nolfi and stars Matt Damon and Emily Blunt with Terence Stamp and John Slattery. Slattery is recognisable from his recent work on the hit TV series Mad Men.
Without giving away the whole story, the film is a romance as David Norris (Matt Damon) meets Elise (Emily Blunt) and they both seem to know that they are meant for each other no matter what else goes on in their lives. It's a thriller as we have our protagonists trying to elude a mysterious group of people. It's science fiction as the mysterious group can do things which defy the laws of physics.
The crux of the story is that this mysterious group of people somehow control our lives. There is a plan and when there are deviations in the plan, the group steps in to make an adjustment to get everything back on track. David was not supposed to meet Elise so the group breaks them up and tries to keep them apart. What's left unsaid throughout the film is whether or not these people are angels and whether their boss is God.
If there is some sort of bigger theme to the movie, it is whether or not we have free will or whether everything is pre-ordained. If all this is pre-ordained, we can argue that yes, there is a plan and that plan was written by somebody other than ourselves. If not, we could argue for free will and perhaps for the element of chance in our lives. Not everything can be explained by a plan.
Let me though stop right there. In reading other critiques of the film I noted that some reviewers got into this philosophical discussion of God, free will, pre-ordained events etc. pretty much how some people went overboard analysing Inception. Sorry folks, this isn't a religious treatise; this is a movie. It's entertainment and certainly not the most profound filming of the subject matter. Let's not start ascribing to it all sorts of hidden meaning, profound implications, and spiritual ramifications. It's just a movie.
Philip Dick One curious background note to this cinematic endeavour is that the story of the film is based on a short story written by Philip Dick in 1954. It seems odd that the writer (and director) of the film, Georg Nolfi, would have plumbed the depths of an author who certainly isn't on the New York Times Bestseller list. I quote from Wikipedia:
Philip Kindred Dick (1928–1982) was an American novelist, short story writer and essayist whose published work is almost entirely in the science fiction genre. Dick explored sociological, political and metaphysical themes in novels dominated by monopolistic corporations, authoritarian governments and altered states. In his later works Dick's thematic focus strongly reflected his personal interest in metaphysics and theology. He often drew upon his own life experiences in addressing the nature of drug abuse, paranoia and schizophrenia, and transcendental experiences in novels such as A Scanner Darkly and VALIS.
The novel The Man in the High Castle bridged the genres of alternate history and science fiction, earning Dick a Hugo Award for Best Novel in 1963. Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said, a novel about a celebrity who awakens in a parallel universe where he is unknown, won the John W. Campbell Memorial Award for best novel in 1975. "I want to write about people I love, and put them into a fictional world spun out of my own mind, not the world we actually have, because the world we actually have does not meet my standards", Dick wrote of these stories. "In my writing I even question the universe; I wonder out loud if it is real, and I wonder out loud if all of us are real." Dick referred to himself as a "fictionalizing philosopher."
In addition to 44 published novels, Dick wrote approximately 121 short stories, most of which appeared in science fiction magazines during his lifetime. Although Dick spent most of his career as a writer in near-poverty, ten of his stories have been adapted into popular films since his death, including Blade Runner, Total Recall, A Scanner Darkly, Minority Report, and now, The Adjustment Bureau. In 2005, Time magazine named Ubik one of the one hundred greatest English-language novels published since 1923. In 2007, Dick became the first science fiction writer to be included in The Library of America series.
Blade Runner? Total Recall? Minority Report? Wait a sec, this Philip Dick guy is no small potatoes. These three films are not just three films, these are three great films. As I read the words "Dick spent most of his career as a writer in near-poverty", I look up to discover that Blade Runner came out in 1982, the year of his death. Too bad Dick didn't live long enough to see that his work was finally recognized.
Final Word Does The Adjustment Bureau work as a film? Overall, this movie is good. I have the feeling that George Nolfi, the writer and director, was shooting for another Inception (see my blog Movie Review: Inception: My dream critique). Science fiction as a genre allows anybody to do anything as we can suspend the laws of physics and go nuts visually. However, Nolfi restricts himself with really just one trick - the teleportation via various doors - so the film has none of visually stunning laws of physics bending scenes of Inception. Of course, what a difference in budgets: The Adjustment Bureau clocked in at $62 million while Inception's budget topped out at $160 million. An extra hundred million will buy you a lot of special effects.
As I said, the film is good; it's a respectable "good". (Rotten Tomatoes: 72%) However, I'm now going to qualify that. It is good in that it is worth a look on a Saturday night curled up on your sofa with a bowl of popcorn. In that sense, it's a good hour and a half of entertainment. I'm not sure I'd fork over the price of a ticket at the theatre. I saw Inception at the IMAX and its special effects made it worthwhile shelling out for the knock-your-socks-off visual experience but The Adjustment Bureau? I don't think so. Wait to rent it to watch on your TV.
"White Irish Drinkers" might be writer-director John Gray's profane, boisterous, blood-spattered love letter to growing up in '70s Brooklyn, but its truer and more regrettable connection is to the rampant Scorsese mimicry that characterized early-'90s indie calling cards.
You know the kind: movies where young guys with glaringly obvious life choices — here, it's whether kind-eyed, wisecracking, big-dreaming Brian (Nick Thurston), who paints secretly in the basement, should escape the influence of his boozy, violent father (Stephen Lang) and abusive, criminal older brother (Geoffrey Wigdor) — instead get stuck in dumb schemes that strain sympathies, not to mention one's tolerance for overstuffed Noo Yawk accents coming at you like aural 3-D.
Gray has a long television background, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It might explain the hopelessly regimented emotional beats and by-the-numbers storytelling; it also colors his valiant attempts to make dialogue zing, and give the film's women — Brian's beleaguered mom (Karen Allen) and firecracker hook-up (Leslie Murphy) — more offbeat shadings.
Still, the clichés are what make "White Irish Drinkers" a drearily predictable bout, so much so that the decent last-round plot twist that momentarily dazes is immediately undercut by the sappy, life-changing-fuh-EV-uh jab telegraphed from the beginning.
Kate Winslet stars as Mildred Pierce, a big budget HBO miniseries that remakes the 1945 movie that won Joan Crawford an Oscar. Back in 1931 in Glendale, Calif., Mildred struggles financially to raise her two daughters alone after her husband leaves her. Desperate for work, she takes a job as a waitress, a position her older daughter Veda looks down on.
Eventually, Mildred opens her own restaurant. It's very successful, so she opens a few more and the money starts rolling in. She has a relationship with a high society playboy named Monty, played by Guy Pearce. But no matter what she does, she just can't gain the respect of her daughter, Veda, who's rotten to the core and also quite evil.
Mildred is blinded by love for her daughter and can't see her for what she really is. She sacrifices everything for this kid, but gets little in return.
The miniseries was directed by Todd Haynes and follows the James M. Cain book more faithfully than the original 1945 movie, which took several liberties with the material. Despite this being truer to the novel, that doesn't make it more captivating to watch.
In fact, the screenwriters back in those old Hollywood days knew exactly what they were doing. Their changes to the book were way more interesting and it made for a better viewing experience. They kept the essence of the story intact, but improved on Cain's work.
Haynes' version, on the other hand, checks in at over five hours and is very slow moving. Even with its draggy pacing, the last half-hour, with its surprise twists and turns, seems unnecessarily rushed. Plus there's several unanswered questions, and with all that time to burn, that's unacceptable.
On the positive side, the acting by Winslet, Pearce, Melissa Leo and Evan Rachel Wood is quite good and the whole production is photographed magnificently, evoking the era as it spans 10 years. Production design, costumes and settings are also top-notch.
But storywise, this did not grab me, whereas the original did. In fact, if you want to do yourself a favor, skip the HBO thing and rent the Joan Crawford version, which won her an Oscar and revived her career. At under two hours, it's not only quicker but infinitely more satisfying.
This was Matthew McConaughey at his wise cracking dramatic best unlike his recent string of comedic failures. "The Lincoln Lawyer" stars McConaughey as a slick lawyer who is used to representing one sleeze ball after another but catches (what he thinks) is a big break with a rich kid on a murder case. The rick kid is played by Ryan Phillippe who in real life dumped Reese Witherspoon (what a dope) and he is definitely a creep in this movie too.
McConaughey seems to have tricks up his sleeve and answers for everything until this case becomes much more then he thought. The story twists and turns and has you guessing and even plotting on how it should unfold and I love movies like this. There is also a great supporting cast in Marissa Tomei (who seemingly never ages), William H. Macy and Michael Pena.
Good action, real good dialogue and a very good thriller from start to finish as the writers for this movie really earned their money. I wont give away any more of the story because I don't want to give away the surprise but if it's possible this is a character I would like to see a follow up movie for. And if Barry Bonds needs a sharp attorney for his upcoming steroid case he should look for somebody like the lead character in "The Lincoln Lawyer" I give it a triple - three stars.
Review in a Hurry: With Kevin Smith apparently retiring from directing soon, there's opportunity afoot for somebody new to start making R-rated comedies full of Star Wars conversations and pot smoking. Enter, inevitably, Comic-Con faves Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, playing Comic-Con attendees who run into a foul-mouthed-yet-sweet-natured alien (voice of Seth Rogen). Like everything they do, it's an agreeable comedy that is likely to be overinflated to masterpiece status by fanboys.
The Bigger Picture: Pegg and Frost generally work with director Edgar Wright, but just as he branched out to do Scott Pilgrim Versus the World, so too have they, with Greg Mottola (Superbad) taking the reins on their screenplay this time around.
Still, this isn't a big departure. The duo came to geek-fame based on the Brit-com Spaced, which gained a cult following stateside largely thanks to the fact that it constantly dropped humorous references to American pop-culture. The subsequent movies Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz similarly riffed on the American zombie and action genres, transposing them to uniquely British settings for amusing (if overrated) effect.
Paul plays on their established personas and banter, with the guys playing, respectively, an aspiring English sci-fi novelist (Frost) and artist (Pegg) on a vacation at the San Diego Comic-Con, and a subsequent road-trip to various UFO-related sites.
Plans get sidetracked when they encounter Paul, your stereotypical "gray" alien, who has broken out of a government facility and is looking to get off-world. The twist here is that he's voiced by Seth Rogen and behaves more like a fratboy than a first contact, prone to swearing, smoking (tobacco and other things), mooning, and drinking beer. Aside from that, he's a pretty nice guy who has secretly been helping the government for years...but having learned all they can, the feds now want to dissect him.
The plot, such as it is, is your basic chase film, with incompetent agents played by Bill Hader, Jo Lo Truglio, and Jason Bateman hot on their trail.
What elevates this material to fanboy porn is the dialogue, which constantly appropriates signature lines from Star Wars, Back to the Future, Ghostbusters...even (huh?) Lorenzo's Oil.
There are visual and audio references as well, from a country bar where the band plays a bluegrass version of the Star Wars cantina theme, to some clever stunt-casting, and an oversized UFO that recalls the opening gag of Spaceballs. Thankfully, these aren't just pop-culture checklists for their own sake, a la Disaster Movie, but given their own spin. Fans will laugh knowingly, while newbies won't find any of it gets in the way of enjoying the story.
Pegg and Frost seem like fun guys to hang out with, which is their primary appeal...but they could stand to challenge themselves more. Outside of their comfort zone, they've shown greater promise as actors: Frost in Kinky Boots, and Pegg in Star Trek.
The 180—a Second Opinion: Considering the generally light tone, some sudden secondary-character deaths feel jarring and out of place.
Ever noticed how in Aussie films drugs are always a metaphor for love? Limitless says forget all that: drugs equal success, and - in a refreshing twist that pretty much justifies the movie all on its own - if you’re smart there’s no real downside to getting high on your own supply. That’s right: Hollywood cocaine dealers have finally pooled their cash and made a movie that gets across their side of the story (okay, probably not).
Eddie Morra (Bradley Cooper) is your average loser – he just lost his girl (Abbie Cornish), his book deal’s about to fall through because he can’t write a word, and he looks like a bum – when he runs into his drug dealing former brother-in law. There’s a new pill in town called NZT-48, and what it does is make you a lot smarter. Turns out being super-smart (Guy Richies’ Sherlock Holmes film-style, where smart means seeing all the connections super-fast) has a whole lot of uses around the home: Eddie gets laid, gets his book written and gets his flat in order all in one night. It’s no surprise then that he goes looking for more; it’s even less of a surprise when the dealer turns up dead. Luckily Eddie finds the stash the killers couldn’t, and he’s off on a brain bender that soon has him making swanky new friends, visiting classy new places, winning back the girl, and generally cleaning up his act.
Of course, that’s not enough, and he ditches the writing gig (it’s for chumps) for the world of high finance, where a mogul (Robert DeNiro) takes him under his wing. It’s not all plain sailing though, as an early loan from a Russian mobster is proving hard to pay back, Eddie’s starting to have blackouts and who’s the mysterious man who seems to be following him everywhere?
It’s kind of hard to sink the boot into a movie that actually comes out and says being smart is good, and fortunately this is just off-kilter enough to keep you guessing even when it seems like there’s only one way for it to pan out. For example, usually this kind of film ends up being a boring and painful lecture on morality: drugs are bad, getting things you haven’t earned is worse, and so on. Not here. Sure, there are plenty of warnings that NZT has lethal side effects, but Eddie’s one step ahead of them – and everyone else in the film, who usually come off second best once they get on the NZT train.
Instead of the usual predictable plot – the drugs come from a sinister corporation that wants them back, for example – this just throws problems in Eddie’s way and once he solves them the film doesn’t look back. There’s a scene where a supporting character has to take NZT to get out of trouble, and while it feels like it’s going to turn out to be a major plot twist and moral dilemma, once the problem's solved (by using a little kid as a weapon, which is the kind of amoral thing this film excels at) it’s never mentioned again.
If you have any moral qualms about checking out a film where about 60% of the suspense comes from a junkie trying to hide or retrieve his stash, this isn’t the film for you. If, on the other hand, you think it’s high time for a junkie President, this may just be your bag.
I just saw Battle: LA, it was flawless. It is probably the first movie I've been to in over a year that the audience clapped for at the end, and that was in the middle of the day.
I am not sure how broad an audience it will cater to as a sci-fi war flick, but I think that it will probably be something that military folks will actually enjoy which is usually not the case when Hollywood makes a movie about a niche group. I got the feeling that the producers really put some time into making the military relationships spot on. I think that the biggest thing this movie has going for it is how realistic it is, I am not sure if I would consider it a full fledged part of the new "hyper-real" science-fiction genre of movies(Inception, Batman franchise, Adjustment Bureau) but it is as close as you can get with an alien movie. You could replace the aliens with any of America's technologically capable terrestrial enemies(Russia, China, Canada) and lose nothing story wise.
This movie will likely rival Red Dawn as far as cult following, I plan to buy it the first day, hell, I'll probably even make it my first Blu-Ray. I would not be surprised if there was a minute spike in ammo and survival gear sales due to Battle:LA, it is just that realistic and emotion provoking. The scenes in Santa Monica during the first 24 hours are exactly what you would expect if the American mainland were ever attacked by a military force of any kind.
The realistic nature makes the aliens interesting too. We don't see them all that much, but when we do they aren't always the big daunting monsters or little weaklings we are used to in alien invasion movies. During the man to alien fighting scenes if you watch the aliens mannerisms you notice that they are moving and working the same way the protagonists are, they fumble around when things go wrong and even protect their fallen. This seemed like a new idea to me, similar to District 9, but new for an invasion movie- granted we haven't really ever gotten an alien ground invasion movie before.
Another really refreshing aspect of the movie is that they did not force any kind of love story. Eckhart and Moynahan kind of had a connection that you could see turning into something in the events after the movie ends, but they did not force any kind of love connection between the hardened Marine and the civilian veterinarian in the heat of a god damn alien invasion like Hollywood likes to do so often.
My mom is going to see it tonight, which is very unusual, she couldn't care less about sci-fi or war movies, I am waiting to see what she thinks of it. I love resistance movies and sci-fi movies, so there is little that could have made me dislike this one, it will be interesting to see what a non-fan thinks.
I wrote this on Friday. It turned out that my mom saw it at a South OC theater very near Camp Pendleton, and thus full of Marines. Apparently they really liked it as there were many ooh-rah's and only one face palm that she could see. It also sounds like her theater had a much stronger applause than mine did.
One more thing to add, this movie shows once again how useless Rotten Tomatoes is. No, this movie is not going to win film of the year, although it could be a contender for some of the lesser awards, but it is at least as good as any movie in any genre anyone could put it in. That Rotten Tomatoes has it in the low 30% range shows that their system is flawed, or that their critics are out of touch.
The movie is a very long boring story of Arunima (Tena Desai) who loves her dad (Anupam Kher), who believes that her dad loved her mom too. But her love for her dad is put on test when she begins to suspect her dad for her mother’s death. She begins to investigate and finds herself in between of her love for dad and her duty towards her dead mother.
The performance of the Anupam Kher as father who may or may not be guilty is the only strength of this movie. The plot and the amateurish acting and direction are big flaws of movie. At the end all I can say is that until and unless you really do not have anything to do at home, then maybe you can go and watch Yeh Faasley, I give it 1 and half out of five stars.
Johnny Depp and director Gore Verbinski have collaborated on three of the "Pirates Of The Caribbean" films. Now they've reunited for a new animated movie called "Rango."
It's one part Western spoof, that references several classic films, like Sergio Leone's "The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly" and one part kiddie action adventure.
Rango, voiced by Johnny Depp is a pet chameleon who, during a car ride, gets separated from his family and winds up in a desert town called Dirt. He makes up a whole backstory about himself, telling the townspeople that he's a tough, gunslinging hero. Everyone buys his story and the mayor even makes him sheriff.
The townsfolk are dying of thirst and they're some crooked characters on hand who control the water supply. It's up to Rango to make things right. In the process, Rango goes on a voyage of self discovery as he tries to become a real hero.
From a visual standpoint, the movie looks simply amazing. The folks at Industrial Light and Magic, that's the company that George Lucas founded, have made an eye popping spectacle.
Sadly, the story and the dialogue are bland and do not match the movies visual beauty.
Unlike Pixar films, which have lots of appeal for both kids and adults, "Rango" is predominantly a children's movie. There are lots of perfunctory chase scenes that seem to go on endlessly. It might be pretty to look at, but it's uninvolving for grown ups.
Verbinski, along with his screenwriters and talented cast try hard to parody the old west, but the whole thing comes off as strained and ultimately it's unengaging.
If you have kids, aged five to 10, they'll have a rollicking good time, but anyone over that age might marvel at the look of the film, but after about 20 minutes, will be bored.
Hall Pass dares to ask the question: can a film feature someone farting so hard shit explodes all over a wall and still have something to say about the human heart? Well, yes – so long as what it’s got to say about matters of the heart comes direct from a fairly stupid greeting card.
The Farrelly brothers have been mixing gross-out comedy and relationships since There’s Something About Mary (still easily their best film), but while their style of comedy still reigns supreme their star has waned in recent years, largely because… well, let’s start at the start.
Richard Mills (Owen Wilson) is a loving husband and father with a bit of a wandering eye. His best friend Fred (Jason Sudeikis) is the same only more so, and their wives – the alarmingly fake-tanned Jenna Fisher and Christina Applegate respectively – are getting a little tired of it. Via some extremely clumsy exposition they’re introduced to the idea of giving their husbands a “hall pass”: a week off from marriage to remind them how scary and difficult it is being single. The guys jump at the chance and the scene is set for some Hangover-style hijinks, right? Right?
Okay, the guys do get stoned on a golf course, get drunk at a bar, make references to “big mouthed vaginas”, beat off in a car parked out on a street, get attacked by a crazed near-midget, have a giant penis waved in their face and eventually start to maybe get close to the chance to score with women they’re not married to, but it doesn’t take long to realise that, much like the guys in the film, the film itself feels a little too conflicted about the whole idea of a hall pass to really have fun with it.
This is the kind of film where there are boobs – on Aussie actress Nicky Whelan – but the person who gets to see the boobs, rather than touch them, decides he instead really loves his wife and family and must leave instantly to be with them.
If this makes you go “awww”, what are you doing at this film? Oh right, your boyfriend wanted to see it. Which explains why this is full of supposedly funny moments that never add up to much actual fun: this is a date film, and a date film can’t possibly seriously suggest that being in a long-term relationship might actually be soul-crushingly boring. So the guys can’t have any real fun on their break – they’re just mocked and punished over and over again for daring to be dissatisfied with their lives. The wives don’t fare much better, though considering Applegate gets the immortal line “I believe between the hours of 10 and 6 it’s a woman’s job to fake everything” they hardly deserve a free ride either.
It’s a decent enough concept and occasionally there are glimpses of just how funny a film that really ran with that concept could have been, but with the Farrelly’s not being anyone’s idea of subtle (which is why their star has faded: their characters are too cartoony for Apatow-style comedy from the heart) and Wilson giving an oddly subdued performance the whole thing never really gets going.
Over the last several years we've been treated to all sorts of "Ack, I'm stuck!" thrillers, and they come in all shapes and sizes: Colin Farrell stuck in a phone booth; a couple of scuba divers stuck in shark-infested waters; a clueless everyman stuck in a coffin; three goofballs stuck on a ski lift, two goofballs stuck in a canyon, one goofball with his hand stuck beneath a massive boulder -- and one poor guy who spends a few days stuck inside a windshield! Most of these flicks are surprisingly solid, and they generally find novel ways to position their respective "Ack, I'm stuck!" gimmicks.
