In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Beauty & the Beast - Walt Disney Pitcures

On this special review of In the Theatre with Murphy Im going to do a re release of a timeless classic “Beauty and the Beast”. In 2002 Roger Ebert reviewed its first re release to home media on DVD, so i'll do a rerelease review for Blu-Ray. In todays's movie business we get at least six animated films come out in a year and most of them are done through the magic of computer animation. But back when I was still in diapers animation was done by hand and Beauty & the Beast is a excellent example of taking every advantage and solution you have with animation and make what is considered the best animated film of all time.


Belle (Paige 'O Hara) is a fish out of water in her small french village for her love of books and her dislike of the arrogant town hero Gaston (Richard White). When her father leaves for the county fair he finds himself trapped in the castle of a hideous Beast (Robbie Benson). Luckily Belle finds her father and reluctantly agrees to exchange her freedom for her fathers to the Beast. As with most good love stories the two start off hating each other but over time the do grow a fondness for each other. But as beautiful as their relationship blossoms it must be tested on what they are willing to do for each other to prove their the love to the other.


When Beauty & the Beast was released in 1991 it gained critical acclaim and proved that animation is not just for children since Beauty and the Beast proved to show such strong storytelling, excellent animation and the dealing of inner beauty vs outer beauty. The proof that Beauty & the Beast is a masterpiece is that it's the only animated film (until Up) to receive the highest honour of any film, the nomination for best picture. Although it honourably lost to Silence of the Lambs (1991) it still proved how far animation could go in the film industry with such classics as the Lion King (1994) and Toy Story (1995) with the sense that animation is not limited for souley children. Even as an adult now I see these movies as presenting very powerful feelings I could never understand as a child and now reflect on the struggles an adult would face such as what they wanna do in life and who they want to be with. 


The characters in Beauty & the Beast are very well done. Belle and the Beast make excellent chemistry together through out the process of the film and understanding that both have something that the other always wanted in a life partner. In Belle's case its someone who values her for her opinion and in the Beasts case someone who doesn't view him as a monster on the inside. The best scene of the two of them is the infamous ballroom scene which displays how much they understand about each other and of coerce how the use of computer animation is used to its full advantage at the time for the romantic scenario. The supporting characters in this film are animated on a brilliant level because being inanimate objects given life they are able to make full use of their vocal language as if they were real such as Mrs. Potts poring tea or Lumiere flirting.


The villain of the film is a rather interesting one. Gaston doesn't have any magical powers or a high intellect like other Disney villains that came before or after him. He is not a hideous monster on the outside like others and is actually a real “hunk-asourus” but this facade just hides the fact that he is the real monster of the film on the inside. Although he does lack powers like Ursula the sea which or Jafar the sorcerer he is just as sadistic and ruthless as either of them. He is considered the complete opposite of the Beast and the climax of the film proves it since he will go to any level to win Belle's heart and eliminate the competition. The final fight of the film is a clear example of two conflicting forces trying to win Belle's heart, and in the end it is the Beasts love for Belle that prevails over Gaston's love for himself.

The music of Beauty & the Beast is what earned this film an oscar winning. It has a beautiful soundtrack and has a song for everyone such as the hysteric “Be our Guest”, the obnoxious “Gaston”, the powerful “Kill the Beast” or the magnificent “Beauty & the Beast”. These songs are a brilliant reflection of characters and the animation reflects it perfectly.

Beauty & the Beast will always remain a classic among those great films that were released from the mid eighties to the start of the new millennium. Its well drawn, well acted, well sung and has made its mark in history as a true masterpiece that proves that true beauty is what is on the inside and love is the greatest judge of that. So if parents are thinking of what movies to buy their children for Christmas buy the Blu-Ray to show them how Disney made films through the art of pencils and not computers alone.


My Rating: 4/4 Shamrocks

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - The Social Network - Columbia Pitcures

Ironic isn't it, Ive been doing movie reviews for facebook for over a year now and now I'm doing a review for a movie that explains the origins of my “sponsor”. As most of us know we spend about a quarter to half our day on facebook for various reasons; chatting, messaging, liking, tagging and my personal favourite relationship changing. But just pause and think for a moment: how did all this start? When something big comes into our world we become so wrapped up in it (including myself) that we seem to ignore its origins. Now we've got a movie about facebook's origins and not only is it an accurate representation of how the site came to be what it is at the moment but a Hollywood blockbuster that is I think will make its mark in our era.

In 2003 Harvard Student Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) is charged with violating personal privacy after creating a website (while drunk) that bashes every undergrad girl in Harvard and charged with a six month academic probation. His ability to create a website in one night while drunk attracts the attention of the Wiklevoss Twins (both played by Armie Hammer) and their partner Divya Narendra hire Mark to build them a social network site called ConnectU. Mark later has a better idea and together with his best friend forms a social network sight to connect people from all over the world and revolutionize the college experience.

This was without a doubt my favorite movie of the year, even beating Inception and Toy Story 3. One of the things that made me really like is that it's a bitter cold movie about a bitter cold story. The Social Network is a movie about a revolution and while most revolutions are a hot passionate war this revolution is the opposite a bitter cold conflict between different people either face to face or chat to chat. A prime example is in Eisenberg's performance; when Eisenberg is acting he is either being a total nerd or acting calm and cold to insure victory in a conflict. Eisenberg wasn't the only actor I thought was good; Justin Timberlake plays a supporting character in the movie and actually does a really good job in helping Zuckerburg with launching facebook. I think the reason so many of the actors in this movie did so well is because they let the ice run through them and that builds up great tension and some very cold chemistry.

Something else I really liked about this movie was its similarities to a fictional piece named Dead Poet's Society. The Social Network is obviously not a ripoff of Dead Poet's Society but the feel of the film is similar. When I saw Dead Poet's Society I saw a bunch of boys that wanted to change the way they thought by thinking their own way instead of their fathers way while the Social Network deals with someone who is trying to use their mind to their full potential by sharing socialism with the world. The thing that these two theories have in common is that they both deal with using one's mind to their full extend and going past what people say are the bounders even if those boundaries can lead to dangerous situations.

The last film David Fincher directed was The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) which made my #3 in 2008. As much as I loved this movie I still thought The Social Network was a leap forward in Finchers career as a director. In both films the main character is the subject of the entire story and everything revolves around that said person but what makes the Social Network better is that it's much more realistic and better explores in to the inner circle of the main characters desires and fears but lacks the emotions in Benjamin Button. David Finchers films are usually very dark so when I heard his next project was a biography on the creator of facebook, I was basically shocked because facebook is the recess of the Internet.

I really do think that the ten billion people that use facebook are all apart of this movie. I say this because every person who uses facebook will want to at least consider to see this movie to understand what has led them to want to join facebook. Their is no point in joining something that's the most popular thing at the moment if you don't understand where it came from and what it planned to do from the beginning. When you walk out of this film you will understand that it's a two hour lawsuit that lead up to facebooks creation but that's what its trying to do. It wants the audience to understand the struggle Zuckerburgs struggle and how even if you piss off the most powerful people you know you can still keep your cool if you have the brains and faith in what you do.

My Rating 4/4 Shamrocks


In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Vampires Suck - 20th Century Fox

Well Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls its now official; I have seen a movie that will break my spirit better than Son of the Mask (2005), Gigli (2003) and Disaster Movie (2008) all combined into one. Vampires Suck is the latest reason to walk out of the theatre after seeing the very first scene of a movie. But at least the title works well.

The plot of Vampires Suck can be summed up in just a few worlds. It's a parody of the first three Twilight films. Many of the movies that are parodied in this movie are movies that have been seen in the past year or are whats most popular at the moment.

I never liked either the Twilight books are movies and Vampires Sucks actually makes me think those movies were good. Vampires Suck is just the same rubbish that the dynamic dumbo's Jason Friedburg and Aaron Seltzer have been cramming down our throats for the last five years and their films just keep getting worse every time. Vampires Suck has a bit of a thread but most of the movie is just as I said earlier a large parody of whatever is most popular at the time.

The acting, directing, editing, effects and if they even had a script are all around the same level; horrible. This is because of one reason; the directors are taking the easy way out to make money in the movie industry. Well the thing is there is no easy way to make a good movie,it takes months to come up with a good script and it only took these writers less than a weekend to make a piece of crap like this. If you don't read over your work or are too arrogant to believe your a terrible writer than trust me your work will go down the tubs. I wrote some bad papers in high school that and too this day I regret not rewriting them so screenwriters of the future READ OVER YOUR WORK.

So after reading all the mad things Ive had to say I think I can come to the conclusion that this is the WORST MOVIE EVER MADE. Attention Mildmay and Teeswater, why beat each other when there are horrible writers and directors that can be reached on the next flight to Toronto. Let us join forces to destroy something worse than the Sith or yourselves. But seriously folks its just a sad parody of all the movies I hated this year along with what is most popular at the moment. I say don't see it in theatres, don't rent it, don't download it off itunes or lime wire, don't watch it illegally online, just don't watch it at all. This movie actually makes all the garbage that came out this summer look like Christopher Nolans work. Readers if you can do one thing to prove you all love me don't see this piece of shit.

My Rating: Ya know what I have now seen a movie that sucks worse than 0/4 shamrocks. I wonder if this fits for a rating, A very raw and bitter WORSE THAN AMERICAN BEER. If you want to hear a shorter and less winey review see the video I just posted and leave a comment.

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - The Karate Kid - Columbia Pitcures

In 1984 the Karate Kid was released and proved to be a great film that I my self hold very true to but many people thought that it ran a bit too long at 2 hours and it could have cut out at least ten to fifteen minuets. Well now its 2010 and we've got a new batter stepping up to plate, thats right after all the horrible unspeakable sequels that were released following 1984 are make has come out and this is at almost two and a half hours. I can say that this Kid might as well pack his GI bag cause thats how I felt waiting from this dragging movie to end.

Dre Parker (Jaden Smith) and his mother have moved from Detroit to Beijing so his mother can find better work. His mothers actions have indirectly ruined the boys' life as he is constantly picked on by a neighbour hood bully who is a Kung Fu prodigy who see's him trying to make friends with a beautiful chinese girl who Dra develops feelings for. The bully eventually gangs up on him but is saved by a maintenance man Mr. Han (JackieChan) who decides to teach Dre how to do Kung Fu the proper way so they can both develop peace of mind over their problems.

First off this movie is obviously not as good as the original for a few reasons. The first one is very obvious: In the original film the main character Daniel LeRusso (Ralph Macchio) is learning real Karate (Goju-ryu to be specific) yet in this remake the main character is learning Kung Fu and the title is still the Karate Kid, the reason; Kung Fu is in and Karate is out yet the name is still popular enough to attract attention and as my Sensai told me only 1% of people practice real martial arts so it really doesn't matter to the 99% of people who don't take it anddon't care as long as it kicks but.

A major issue with this film is that its too much like the original Karate Kid. In almost every scene there is something that is just too similar to what the original was and all I can do is sit back and expect what I've already seen before only slower and more dragging in this movie. We all know that a remake mimics its source material more than half the time ratio of the film. Five years ago Tim Burton remade Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and while most of the plot remained the same their were a few touch ins that weren't in the original but I still thought they were good, but in this film they just drag on and replace what made the original film great with a continuous loop thatI don't think can really help the main character like in the original film.

The acting in this film is ok but I dint think it was that great. I thought Taraji J. Henson was just as obnoxious and annoying towards her son in the original as she was in this movie. We all know what she does is out of love for her son but the problem is she doesn't really know too much about letting the Kid think his problems through before she starts talking and because she does this it really gets on the audience's nerve as the main characteris trying to evolve and you would rather watch Jaden take his jacket off a thousand times before she starts talking. Jackie Chan was good but I thought he was a bitter piece of cardboard and doesn't really shape himself very well between being a handyman and kung fu teacher. However there is one scene in the movie where he really opens up and starts acting a bit more real but after that he's still cardboard and I really like Chans' work when he is more at ease with himself and serious at the same time like Rush Hour (1998) or Shanghi Noon (2000).

Jaden Smith, the new fresh prince was good in this movie but I've two major problems with him. One; He is too much like Will Smith. Whenever I see Jaden acting I really just see Will Smith and because of this its really hard for me to see Jaden stand out as his own actor instead of being in his dads shadow. If Jaden was a bit older and develop a bit more mature personality than I think he could have handled this on his own terms. My second problem is that the main character is too young to be facing the warrior like troubles of a boy. Because of this its not very realistic when it should be someone who's around sixteen facing these problems in the movie.

The two things I liked best in this movie was the cinematography and choreography. Many of the shots of China in the movie were just breath taking and you can tell the crew on the film really did their homework on where the best places are to shoot film in China such as the Great Wall for a training session. The choreography on the film was great because every fight scene felt real and looked like real Kung – Fu. With the title being a weak link the movie has to focus even more on its Kung – fu aspects and philosophies which the film does good in showcasing.

Running at more than two hours their really isnt much more to talk about with the new Karate Kid because if its running too long than people will start to get bored and even with this good information their will be people who are getting impatient with the fight sequences while others just want it to end. But at least this ones better than the sequels. If you wanna see the real Karate Kid go see the original because you will love it.

My Rating: 1/4 Shamrocks


In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Iron Man 2 - Paramount Pitcures

I wasn't surprised to find that a summer sequel like Iron Man 2 to do smoking well at the box office. What I was surprised about was that unlike its predecessor (2008),Iron Man 2 lacks many of the amazing things such as the acting and effects that were present in Iron Man 1. However I still found this movie to have a good followup to the last Iron Man because it is still able to showcase its dazzling effects without getting too overproduced (and I emphasis "too").

Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has become the golden rule of the superhero, Never reveal your identity to the public. By braking this rule it has turned him into basically a full blown idiot. This is influenced him to treat his entire life as an after party with his armor as his tuxedo. Beneath this Tony's core is killing him and for his health appoints his assistant Virginia (Gwyneth Paltrow) CEO of Stark Industries. Meanwhile Starks laziness has left him vulnerable for a Russian physicist 'IvanVanko/Whiplash' (Mickey Roark) who holds a deep and boiling grudge against Tony's blood to team up with one of his rivals Justin Hammer(Sam Rockwell) to better Stark at the next expo resulting in some pretty sweet battle sequences.

Ok, first off this is defiantly not as good as the first Iron Man. The first Iron Man had a much more solid plot and the main character portrayed his genius much better than he did in this movie along with his responsibilities. I mean a few good chuckles from Stark when he's not being Iron Man is ok but when he's using that suit as a tuxedo that really makes me sulk my head down in shame. The opening of the film was extremely boring and slowing down the plot in my opinion and I didn't really wake up until the fight sequence between Iron Man and Big Machine. I think the major problem with this story is that now that his identity has gone public he cannot hold onto the identities of two namesakes and because of it he leads the praise of being Iron Man goes to his "Tony Stark" head and he falls back from being the great hero in Iron Man 1 leading this movie to loose some points from me.

However I would say that although the acting wasn't perfect it is still good enough to qualify with the first Iron Man and the first two Spider Man films. But let me assure you its way better than Fantastic Four (2005). I thought the best acting came from Mickey Roark as Whiplash who's vendetta against Stark causes him to be a bit more of a tragic villain who is doing his deeds to avenge someone he loves rather than Hammer who's just doing whats he's doing to prove he's better than Stark and even in his darkest moments you can still feel the good in Roarks performance. I thought Roarks performance was good but not as good as Randy the Ram Robinson from the Wrestler (2008).

Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as Lt. James Rhodes and although I thought Cheadle was good in his part. I found Howard a better actor in the position of Starks right handman. Although uncertain I would like to see how Howard would have handled being War Machine in comparison to Cheadle who I thought did ok as it.

My biggest compliment of this film is its great use of special effects. Its only been two years since Iron Man 1 so the technologies pretty much the same as in the first one but this movie still packs heat with its effects, especially with its fighting and flying sequences.

So I think Iron Man 2 is just ok and it really isn't as electric as its predecessor some of the other Marvel or Superhero films that took the name superhero seriously. Well at the very least I have gotta praise it for not adding a scene where Robert Downey Jr. struts his stuff down Wall St in his Iron Man suit looking really bass ass, that would have landed this movie very deep in the mud.

My Rating 2/4 Shamrocks

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - How to train your Dragon - Dreamworks Animation SKG

Well it looks like Dreamworks has finally learned something from their rivals Pixar by not only making a film that has a decent to good story but has also made full use of their animation system by making their best written and best animated since the first Shrek; It's a bit a three way mix in about the classic coming of age genre with the boy – dog, son – father and man – woman relationship film with the boy – dog (or in this case dragon) being the showcase of the film.

Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) is a viking in training who has big dreams of being a powerful viking like his father (Gerard Butler) but has one problem he is the physically weakest warrior in his village and is picked on by the other vikings in training for it but most harshly by his love interest Astrid (America Ferrara). However Hiccups life takes a turn for the worse when he successfully captures an extremely rare dragon. Doesn't seem so bad at first but when he finds his capture in the forest he is reluctant to kill it due to his gentle nature and chooses to study the dragon and begins to believe that maybe his peoples belief about dragons may be wrong thanks to forming a bond with the Dragon he has named Toothless.

I loved this movie. It was funny, well structured and the flying sequences are gorgeous and epic. But a small problem is that although the flying sequences are epic the film does seem to rely on them a bit more than dialogue but the good thing is that the movie doesn't try to over produce itself with their special effects because if so than the film would considerably flop. At the start of 2010 I saw an independent film called Over Canada that showcased the beauty of the Canadian landmass from coast to coast. Although Over Canada was live action and How to Train your Dragon isn't both films are able to showcase what it wants the audience to see it through the most beautiful manner from eyes of the sky. Because of how they showcase it the audience can have their breath taken away and can then follow the plot and see that the cinematography is helping to tell the story since the effects for How to Train Your Dragon are so good they help expand on the relationship between Hiccup and Toothless while Over Canada was trying to showcase how beautiful Canada is to its people. Although different intentions both films get their point clear through their cinematography and effects.

The acting in the film is good but its not excellent like with some other animated films like Up (2009) or Beauty and the Beast (1991). At first Hiccup seams to be a bit woddan and one dimensional but by id say three eighths of the way through he does start to flesh out more and expand of his actions and reactions with his fellow characters and helps the audience stay primarily focused on him. Gerard Butler and America Ferrara were also good in their roles and most of their good acting comes out of their characters relationships with Hiccup along with their later feelings towards both Hiccup and Toothless. I thought Craig Ferguson was hilarious as Gobber, Hiccups teacher who has that real sense of a Scotsman humor that both kids and adults will find funny and his scenes really made me laugh out loud due to his husky voice and raw sense of humor. I thought that the rest of the characters were played very good but a problem I had with them is that their stereotypes have been done before in both live action and animation but its not necessary the writers fault, these character traits are what audiences will remember and in about twenty years or so it wont matter because those traits will pretty much live on their own, its just passing from one film to another, so id say the supporting cast was very well done. The best acting in my opinion came from the body language and chemistry between Toothless and Hiccup because these dragons are portrayed as if they were real animals. By using their body language I think people can get a feeling that these animals are real and the bond between boy and dragon is just as heart warming as boy and dog. I am also very glad the dragons couldn't talk like cartoons because it would defeat their purpose as real animals and really be cartoon characters and I don't think the audience would take them seriously.

This really is Dreamworks Animations best film they have ever made, it doesn't have stale or weak jokes, the plot works well, the chemistry is excellent, the acting could be a bit better and the cinematography and effects are epic. I just wish I had seen it in 3D from what other critics have said. But evan if you haven't seen it in 3D its still a great film and I think it will be one of the animation milestones on the 2010's.

My Rating 4/4 Shamrocks

In the Theatre with Kevin Murphy - Alice in Wonderland - Walt Disney Pitcures

Guess what everyone watching grass grow is actually more fun than you think especially if you've seen Walt Disney's live action remake of the classic Alice in Wonderland. I'll let it out now I never liked Alice in Wonderland in any of its variations I found it to be slow, moody and just plain boring. Although their was one thing I did like from it.

Alice (Mia Wasikowska) who is being pressured into a marriage tries to avoid her idiotic fiance and looses her way as she enters Wonderland which is now in the clutches of the evil Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) but is granted help by the locals such as the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) to defeat the queen who according to them is the Alice that will kill the Queens most deadly lightning breathing beast and restore the right of ruler to the White Queen (Anne Hathaway).

I didn't think this movie lives up too much. As I said before the story is boring (from my point of view). I know I have people out there that will say otherwise but the reason I think its boring is because of the background and the texture of the film, pretty much every part of it is broken down and the look of many of the CG characters such as the bloodhound, the twins and the flowers is very mouldy and can easily make you fall asleep along with the background even if its from the imagination of a 19 year old girl.

Tim Burton used to be one of my favourite directors such because of his creative approaches to films like Batman (1989), Edward Scissorhands (1990) and my personal favourite Beettlejuice (1988) but now he seems to be losing his creative spark due to the fact that the movie business is changing too fast and Burton doesn't like it, meaning he has to reluctantly play along and do things their way. And if it means doing things Hollywoods way than it means all Burton will be able to do is remakes and although they still have a bit of his original flare they seem to lack any originality. Alice in Wonderland is really nothing more than the animated film put in live action and having all the beauty of hand drawn animation sucked right out of it just so Hollywood can think of easy idea's to make easy money. I just hope one day Burton will realize this and go back to his drawing board.

However one thing I did like was the performance by Johnny Depp who I think was brilliant as the Mad Hatter because the character has a unique way of thinking that a cardboard actor would have a difficult time portraying on camera but giving that type of role to someone like Johnny Depp would mean ideas would just come to the director and the character is nailed perfectly. I also enjoyed the acting by Alan Rickman as the caterpillar who as a figure of wisdom is able to help Alice through her quest. Alice on the other hand I found to be unbelievably boring, she hardly says anything interesting that would keep me in the mood and that the character needed to be given deeper emotion such as in the animated adaption. The rest of the cast I thought was alright but weren't as good as Depp or Rickman.

Is this a good movie.... no. It really is nothing more than Hollywood trying to make some extra money by ripping off a classic (that I wasn't really fond of) and by wasting the good time and skills off many talented actors in this bad knockoff of a classic children s story.


My Rating 1/4 Shamrocks