This movie was so familiar that I couldn’t decide if I had seen it before or if it had so many elements of a classic sports movie that it seemed like I had seen it. It was good, though, and I’m all for high expectations for student athletes. It also featured a young Channing Tatum, which was delightful too.
Cost: free from library (though quite a lengthy wait of about two months)
Where watched: at home.
poster from:
It’s a Dito Montiel movie, which means that it’s not super fabulous but that it also grows on me until the final scene when I decide I like it, after all. This movie also did the impossible: I actually found Terrance Howard’s acting to be quite good in this film, which is a reaction I’ve never had to the man’s craft before. Aside from the pleasure of watching Channing Tatum wandering through New York participating in illegal fights, this movie exposed me to a world I would have never seen and that, I think is Mr. Montiel’s gift.
Cost: $2.75 from Videorama*
Where watched: at home.
poster from:
http://www.impawards.com/2009/fighting.html
*Me: I have four movies left in the Channing Tatum Film Festival and I’m hoping you have them.
Clerk: Are you the founder of the Channing Tatum Film Festival?
Me: And its only participant!
Clerk: What exactly do you see in Mr. Tatum?
Me: It’s the weirdest thing, but he’s quite alluring on camera.
Clerk: He’s certainly a big slab of meat.
Me: I know! That’s what makes it so strange!
Like nearly every movie I’ve watched that stars Channing Tatum, this was much better than expected. It was free of poop, gratuitous sex, and possibly profanity (my filter isn’t very good in that realm anymore) and was populated with solid actors (I went home and looked up all of them, saying repeatedly, “Oh yes! I remember him/her!”) and interlocking stories. Though some of the plots fell apart upon reflection, ultimately this was just a tremendously nice movie, which I mean in the best possible way.
Cost: $10.50 (I know! But Channing Tatum calls.)
Where watched: Regal Fox Tower. It was me and one other guy and that was it. I can’t even remember the last time I was so alone in a theater.
poster from:
http://www.impawards.com/2012/ten_years.html
ps. This movie has a forgettable title and probably the worst poster I’ve seen all year.
This was a big, dumb action movie, but it held my attention. There were some pretty cool things, and I didn’t see the plot twist coming at all. It could have done with more character development, but something has to get sacrificed to the special effects machine and I guess that’s as good as anything.
Cost: Free from library
Watched: at home.
poster from:
Channing Tatum is in this movie for about 15 seconds.* I thought I would like this as I am a fan of all three starring actors (Bale, Cotillard, Depp) but Michael Mann likes to make those “manly men doing manly things” movies that I find mostly boring, as I did this one. However, there are a fun amount of small parts and cameos to look for (Hey that’s Billy Crudup/Lili Taylor/Givonni Ribisi/Leelee Sobieski!).
poster from:
http://www.impawards.com/2009/public_enemies.html
*Possible lucrative movie site: clocking the amount of screen time an actor logs in each film. Thus, those of us on personal film festivals would be able to better judge if we wanted to view a film in which an actor appears. Feel free to take this idea and run with it. Just tell me when you get it up and running.
So what if your teenage daughter wants to see Magic Mike? I say let her. It has some pretty good messages going for it: drugs are not so great, the main female character is pretty awesome, and in general, stripping is not the best way to make a living, even if you are a guy.
Cost: $7.00
Where: Livingroom Theater
*Yes, I
. Yes, I paid matinee prices again. Yes, it was still good. It’s my vacation, dammit, I can see the same movie twice if I want to.
poster from:
I have to say, the most surprising thing about watching Channing Tatum’s movies is that they have all been quite enjoyable. At this point, I’ve seen 11 of them, and they have been fairly different including romantic comedies, dance movies, dramas, action flicks. He hasn’t been pigeonholed into just one role.
The thing I find odd about Channing Tatum is that in still pictures he looks rather goofy. Here’s his current picture on IMDB. His ears stick out, his neck is too large, he’s sort of flat and dumb looking. His two-dimensional static representation, along with his idiotic name, may be the reason I never saw him in a movie until this July.
picture from: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1475594/
It doesn’t help that movie posters tend to overemphasize his physique as in this poster. With his ears and the focus on his abs, he just looks like a goon, and we all know goons can’t act.
poster from: http://www.impawards.com/2011/eagle.html
But can he? I’ve tried to look past my strange infatuation and I think I can say, yes, he can indeed act. He does do a bit too much of acting with the jaw clench, but I don’t think I would have enjoyed as many movies as I have (even ones I thought I would hate like
The Vow and
Dear John) if he had the acting chops of say, Keanu Reeves. (I love Keanu Reeves, but I heard him described once as attending the “Al Gore School of Acting” and I think that description pretty much hits the nail on the head.)
So yes, Channing Tatum is no Laurence Olivier, but he can certainly carry a movie.
And here’s why. In motion, Channing Tatum is hard to look away from. Something about the way he moves holds the eye. He could be dancing, as in
Step Up.
Or fighting in Haywire.
Or wooing his wife in The Vow.
Whatever he is doing, when he is moving, he commands attention. I think that what Channing Tatum might have is a healthy dose of charisma. That charisma has made for a delightful personal film festival.
Okay, so this movie is incredibly awesome in a sort of throwback spy action flick where you don’t really get what’s going on at first, but if you pay attention the whole thing will be revealed. It is gripping from the very first scene and has a lot of really amazing fight scenes that had me gasping and saying “Oh my!” to an empty house because I watched it by myself. Also, the main character is a gorgeous woman who is very fun to watch.
Cost: 2.00 from Videorama.
Location: at home.
ps. DVD extras are quite interesting. Also, I like both of these posters.
poster from:
So this movie shows the great disparity between men and women in Hollywood from the opening scene. On one hand we have two talented actresses,* who are beautiful, despite being underweight, and shunted, once again to the “girlfriend” role and they don’t do much but react to the males who are both overweight (which would be fine if women of a similar weight could star in or even take the boring girlfriend role, but they cannot so I must call them on this disparity) and making money doing the same shtick they have been doing for years (although I still find Vince Vaughn’s talky-talky arguments quite amusing.) I’m not sure why Ron Howard directed this, but at any rate, Channing Tatum was quite amusing as a sleazy guy who isn’t quite in control of his emotions.**
*Also, Queen Latifah was completely wasted in this film.
**Channing Tatum appears for a total of maybe 10 minutes, so make your plans accordingly.
poster from:
I dreaded watching this adaptation of a schmaltzy Nicholas Sparks novel, but
and
are pros and they can sell their characters like nobody’s business. Thus, though it could have turned into treacle at any moment, it never did, and it even surprised me a few times. Overall, much better than I thought and actually quite good.
ps. DVD extras includes a gag real which is unusual for a drama, and so quite fun. The gag part from the scene on the movie poster cracked me up.
pps. Stupid tag line for this movie as it doesn’t really relate in any way to the content of the movie.
poster from:
