Music & Lyrics

"The best time I've had in the last fifteen years was sitting at that piano with you."
"That's wonderfully sensitive... especially from a man who wears such tight pants."
"It forces all the blood to my heart."

Has been 80s musician Alex Fletcher (Grant) has a problem. Since his band Pop! broke up he has been doing small-time nostalgic gigs, but the money is getting low. After learning that the cash levels are dropping he is approached by the current queen of pop Cora (Bennett) to write her a new song. Alex is a talented musician, but cannot write...but lucky for him, his new plant lady (because plants make women comfortable) Sophie (Barrymore) is a born lyricist. Together they set to get Cora to sing their song, and conqueror their own demons.

Rounding out the cast is Alex's neurotic manager Chris (Garrett), and Sophie's health guru Rhonda (Johnston) who has a major crush on Alex.


Overall I enjoyed this film. The film started with the music video for Pop!'s big hit Pop! Goes My Heart (which is so catchy that I have been singing it since I watched the film yesterday, and I downloaded it today!), and then jumps to the present day. However, the early scenes between Alex and Sophie were a bit too talky for my tastes: they talk about nothing and quickly. They do eventually get on the same wave length and things go a little smoother...and considering that this is a romantic comedy, they do end up having a convincing relationship. Where was Alex's Pop! partner Colin? I kept expecting him to make an appearance, but it never happened. But Rhonda and her family made up for some of that disappointment. The music was excellent, the rest of movie was cute, but not quite up to par.

Dude, it's quotable: The music is great...and there are some funny lines
--: If you like Hugh Grant then this is the movie for you! I enjoyed it, but some parts fall flat.

Music and Lyrics (2007) 96 minutes
Rating: PG-13 for some sexual content.
Director: Marc Lawrence
Starring: Hugh Grant as Alex Fletcher
Drew Barrymore as Sophie Fisher
Brad Garrett as Chris Riley

Kristen Johnston as Rhonda
Haley Bennett as Cora Corman
Campbell Scott as Sloan

Ed Wood

"Really? Worst film you ever saw. Well, my next one will be better"

An old, creepy house on a hill. As spooky music plays, the camera zooms into the house and stops at an opening coffin. A figure rises from the coffin and addresses the audience: this is the story of Ed Wood.
Ed Wood (Depp) has a problem: he has a vision but no one else seems to understand. The play he wrote and directed got bad reviews, and he can't find a studio to fund his film ideas. After getting rejected by another studio Ed meets his icon: horror icon Bela Lugosi (Landau). Inspired by Lugosi, Ed finds a small studio to make his movie: an autobiography about his transvestite lifestyle. The film flops, but it gives Ed the chance to meet other eccentric people: Criswell (Jones) a fake psychic and Vampira (Marie) the host of late night movie festivals. With their help he continues to look for funding, while trying to keep his life in tact. Will girlfriend Dolores (Parker) stick around? Will he get funded? Will he ever make a "good" film?


Why make a film about the undisputed "worst director ever"? While the film is about Ed Wood's film career, it never glorifies him nor his films, but it does show us a man with a vision. The film has Wood realize his vision through a talk with another memorable director, Orson Welles (Vincent D'Onofrio), in a heart-to-heart talk. I liked viewing Wood this way, it humanized him, but didn't make him into some more sap or try to explain away his motivations (like many biopics do). While the film focuses on Wood, every scene is stolen by Martin Landau's Lugosi. I'm not sure about the historical accuracy, but it was excellent.

Rent it: there are some great technical aspects, like camera angles and such, I think it requires multiple viewing, although this Burton film is a little harder to find.
--: the characters are off-the-wall, but it stays true to who they were, and there are some fun little one-liners.

Here is my review of Plan 9 from Outer Space

Ed Wood (1994) 127 minutes
Rating: R for some strong language
Director: Tim Burton
Starring: Johnny Depp as Ed Wood
Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi
Sarah Jessica Parker as Dolores Fuller
Patricia Arquette as Kathy O'Hara
Jeffrey Jones as Criswell
Bill Murray as Bunny Breckinridge

Bride & Prejudice

"I'm a hopeless dancer, but this looks like you just screw in a light bulb with one hand and pat the dog with the other."

It's Jane Austen's classic...set in India...as a musical. Are you excited??

Mr. Bakshi (Kher) has a housefull of women: his wife (Babbar) completely focused on getting her daughters married, and his 4 daughters: Jaya (Shirodkar) is the oldest, Lalita (Rai) is the smart one, Maya (Kothari) is weird/socially awkward, and Lakhi (Chowdhary) is the youngest and boy crazy.

The film opens with the Bakshi's attending a local wedding. The big news at this wedding is the arrival of the best man Balraj (Andrews), who is from England and rather wealthy. He also brings along his friend William Darcy (Henderson), who is a wealthy American. Balraj and Jaya have an instant connection, while William and Lalita have a rocky start. The sisters are invited to go on a trip with William, Balraj, and his sister Kiran (Varma), and on that trip Lalita falls for an attractive Brit named Johnny Wickham (Gillies). However Wickham isn't wealthy, and their mother sets her up with wealth, but disgusting Mr. Kohli (Ganatra).


Every time someone came into the room while I was watching this film I kept explaing: It's "Pride & Prejudice" in India big, colorful musical numbers...but apparently no one else was excited. Basically if you've read the book or seen any film version (including Bridget Jones Diary), you know exactly what will happen. I like that they changed some of the characters names, but kept them close to the novel (the last names of some characters and the initials of the Bakshi girls: Jaya=Jane, Lalitha=Lizzie, Meghna=Mary, Lakhi=Lydia). This is my first Bollywood experience and it was great! I couldn't stop smiling. I was very impressed with Naveen Andrews (from Lost). I couldn't figure out who he was for the longest time, and then it hit me...and I was floored. His character is quirky and fun, too bad he wasn't in more of the film. The mother, as usual, was a pain, but the dad had some good lines. The other sisters didn't really have a presence, especially Meghna, but her cobra dance is hysterical...check it out! Lots of dancing, music, and color. Overall a great film!

Dude, it's quotable: there are little one liners laced throughout the film
Rent it multiple times: I'm still thinking about the cobra dance, omg. Also, the opening wedding was pretty sweet!

Bride & Prejudice (2004) 107 minutes
Director: Gurinder Chadha
Starring:Aishwarya Rai as Lalita Bakshi
Martin Henderson as William Darcy
Nadira Babbar as Mrs. Manorama Chaman Bakshi
Anupam Kher as Mr. Chaman Bakshi
Naveen Andrews as Balraj Bingley
Namrata Shirodkar as Jaya Bakshi
Daniel Gillies as Johnny Wickham
Indira Varma as Kiran Bingley
Sonali Kulkarni as Chandra Lamba
Nitin Ganatra as Mr. Kohli
Meghna Kothari as Maya Bakshi
Peeya Rai Chowdhary as Lakhi Bakshi
Alexis Bledel as Georgiana Darcy
Marsha Mason as Catherine Darcy

Charlie's Angels & Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle

I can't think about/watch either Charlie's Angels film for too long without contemplating a lobotomy...so in order to cut down on the pain I decided to review them simultaneously, and grade them together.

Charlies Angels (2000)

"You're a woman, you've got female intuition, *and* you're a detective... and you didn't know this was going to happen?"

This is the story of 3 young women with very different lives, which ultimately aren't important, who all eventually became part of an elite crime fighting unit called the Angels for a man named Charlie. The Angels are ditzy nerd Natalie (Diaz), biker babe Dylan (Barrymore), and intelligent/well to do Alex (Liu), or as Roger Ebert explains: the movie is about looking at Barrymore's chest, Diaz's butt, and Liu's hair. They fight crime, aided (or in some cases hindered) by Bosley (Murray).

The plot doesn't matter. But basically a businessman (Rockwell) is kidnapped by his rival (Tim Curry) and it is up to the Angels to make everything better. These women look great (even when fighting, and manage to escape with only minor cuts and scratches). The possibilities are endless...and they made a sequel to this?

Charlie's Angels (2000) 98 minutes
Rating: PG-13 for action violence, innuendo and some sensuality/nudity
Director: McG
Starring: Cameron Diaz as Natalie Cook
Drew Barrymore as Dylan Sanders
Lucy Liu as Alex Munday
Bill Murray as John Bosley
Sam Rockwell as Eric Knox

Charlies Angels: Full Throttle (2003)

"Angels are like diamonds. They can't be made, you have to find them. Each one is unique."

The Angels return with new problems to solve. Two rings were stolen from the Witness Protection Program. These rings have information about the witnesses or something like that. The Angels must get these rings back before they end up in the wrong hands, but Dylan's past comes back to haunt her, in the form of an ex she put in jail, Seamus (Theroux). Also, an old Angel reenters the picture, Madison (Moore)...and there is a new Bosley (Mac). There is actually a whole clan of Bosley's. There are quite a few jokes about sequels, but it is basically the same movie again with more big stars and the characters have rounded out a tad: they have personal struggles (shocking, I know).

Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle (2003) 106 minutes
Rating: PG-13 for action violence, sensuality and language/innuendo
Director: McG
Starring: Cameron Diaz as Natalie
Drew Barrymore as Dylan
Lucy Liu as Alex
Bernie Mac as Jimmy Bosley
Crispin Glover as the Thin Man
Justin Theroux as Seamus O'Grady
Demi Moore as Madison

Overall these are big action flicks...like Tomb Raider and the James Bond films....it is all about action and attractive women (usually showing some skin). Don't worry about the plot, it is just an excuse for the characters to throw some punches and pretend to be in the next Matrix film. The only good parts are the Bosley characters: Murray in the first and Mac in the second. The Angels are attractive, successful women, but they have all done better. This is not a high point in their careers (or it shouldn't be).

Do your homework while watching: mindless entertainment...lack of plot. If you don't want to think about a movie, watch this...there is no thinking involved.
--: I'm not impressed...but this isn't my kind of movie. I remember enjoying the show, but it's been years since I've seen an episode, so perhaps this is the best they could do with the original material. Regardless, neither of these films needed to be made, and I don't think they were particularly good films.

Letters from Iwo Jima

"If our children can live safely for one more day it would be worth the one more day that we defend this island."

The island of Iwo Jima is a death trap. The Japanese military forces have sustained a great loss. The last stronghold between the Japanese and the American troops is the island of Iwo Jima. The soldiers holding the island are under the command of General Kuribayashi (Watanabe). Kuribayashi spent time in America and understands the way American military works. He learns (early on) that his is very much alone: there will be no air support, additional troops, or ammunition, and they are completely outnumbered.

His other officers want to dig trenches and commit suicide when faced with the option of dishonor, however this is not Kuribayashi's plan. He has them dig tunnels and fight till the end, stating the above quote. Will his officers obey the orders, or will they follow tradition and choose death over surrender and losing.


Wow. Typically war films made by Americans show the American perspective of the war, with their victory and a faceless / generic enemy. However Director Clint Eastwood chose to make two films about the same battle...the American version "Flag of Our Fathers" and the Japanese side. How do you fight a battle that you will inevitably lose? These soldiers were told that they were going to die, either by their own hands or by the American army, and yet they continued to fight. The film does not glorify them, just humanize them. As the title suggests, the story includes the letters written by the soldiers to their families. Their world, and the film itself, are devoid of color. Before the attacks the land was in color and as the battle continues the color fades and fades, till it almost looks black and white. And instead of focusing on a single character, the story shows multiple characters and a few times fades in and out of the scene, and flashes back to the past.

--: the film is a war film and as such it is rated R for violence, and there is quite a bit of violence.
Rent it: I am not a Clint Eastwood fan, but I enjoyed this film. After taking an Asian Cinema class in college, it was interesting to see all the history present in this film..history that we do not learn in high school. Yes, there are subtitles, but this film is worth it!

Letters from Iwo Jima (2006) 141 minutes
Rating: R for graphic war violence
Director: Clint Eastwood
Starring: Ken Watanabe as General Kuribayashi
Kazunari Ninomiya as Saigo
Tsuyoshi Ihara as Baron Nishi
Ryo Kase as Shimizu
Shido Nakamura as Lieutenant Ito
Hiroshi Watanabe as Lieutenant Fujita
Takumi Bando as Captain Tanida
Yuki Matsuzaki as Nozaki
Takashi Yamaguchi as Kashiwara
Eijiro Ozaki as Lieutenant Okubo
Nae as Hanako
Nobumasa Sakagami as Admiral Ohsugi