<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Resonance &#187; Dustin Hoffman</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/tag/dustin-hoffman/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance</link>
	<description>Popular Culture Disruptions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:02:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>Skadoosh!</title>
		<link>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2008/07/20/skadoosh/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2008/07/20/skadoosh/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:57:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Children's Film Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Angelina Jolie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Cross]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dustin Hoffman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ian McShane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jack Black]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jackie Chan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lucy Liu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Clarke Duncan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Randall Duk Kim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seth Rogan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/?p=268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While a film for kids, Kung Fu Panda is awesome for anyone!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/kungfupanda.jpg" rel='lytebox[skadoosh]'><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-270 alignleft" title="Kung Fu Panda" src="http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/kungfupanda-64x100.jpg" alt="" width="64" height="100" /></a>I know this is a bit late, but summer tends to be very busy. I have a backlog of films to reviews and this has to be the top of the heap. <strong>Kung Fu Panda</strong> is perhaps one of the best kids films I have watched in awhile (Yes I did see <strong>Wall-E</strong>, which I cannot honestly consider a kids film).  Even though the story may be a bit predictable, it&#8217;s nice to see a different take on the &#8220;knowing the hero inside&#8221; plot.  My daughter summed it up best in one word: awesome!<span id="more-268"></span></p>
<p><strong>Kung Fu Panda</strong> is about a panda bear, Po, who inadvertently becomes what he dreams of becoming, the Dragon Warrior.  We follow him from his father&#8217;s noodle shop (somehow his father is a bird) to the Dragon Warrior naming ceremony where the Furious Five are vying for the crown.  After a fireworks mishap, Po lands in the middle of the ceremony and hence, becomes the Dragon Warrior.  The rest of the film is about Po&#8217;s acceptance of the title, Shifu and the rest of the Furious Five&#8217;s acceptance of Po, and the villain Tai Lung.  Ultimately, Po finds the hero inside to become the true Dragon Warrior.</p>
<p>I was excited and worried about seeing <strong>Kung Fu Panda</strong>.  When my daughter and I went to see Horton Hear a Who, we saw the trailer and were instantly wowed.  Then every other marketing outlet had something Kung Fu Panda related.  As the hype grew I was getting all giddy waiting until we could go and see it, but then it hit me.  How many times does a film actually live up to the hype?  In this case, it does.  Living up to the hype was vital for me because I did not want my daughter to leave the theater with a bad experience.  Here we had Happy Meal toys and Lunchables with Po all over them, imagine the disappointment if the film sucked.  Thankfully, it is now in her top three films of all time (yes all time is short to a four year old but none the less), only behind both <strong>High School Musicals</strong>.  So what makes this film wonderful?</p>
<p>The number one reason this film works is because of the voice acting.  I don&#8217;t know how many times I&#8217;ve been put off by the actors behind the voices, and with Jack Black being the lead, I hoped we got the reserved actor rather than the off kilter one.  As Po, Black brought out the sensitive humorous side in the character.  We had the charming jokes and the tenderness with only limited Jack Black flair.  Check out the title of the post to see the most Jack Black thing about the character.  It was great being able to see beyond Black and see Po.  Even the other voice actors worked.  I loved Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and Oogway the turtle (Randall Duk Kim).  They gave their respective characters the needed wisdom while still getting a few laughs.  The biggest surprise came from Crane (David Cross), who carried most of the conversation of the Furious Five.  He was aloof yet caring.  The rest of the cast was decent, but perhaps faded a bit due to the lack of dialogue; which may have been for the better.  Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Mantis (Seth Rogan), Viper (Lucy Liu), and Monkey (Jackie Chan) fit their roles fine, but were relegated to back seat status.  Since I can&#8217;t stand Seth Rogan, this worked out well.  Even Tai Lung (Ian McShane) and Commander Vachir (Michael Clarke Duncan) where perfect for their roles.  McShane gave the villain the needed growl while Duncan just made sense as the head rhinoceros guard.  You could really tell that the actors believed in the film and gave each character the needed personality without overwhelming the character.</p>
<p>The second reason this film is wonderful is the animation.  Pixar is known for its computer graphics, but DreamWorks took it one step further with an amazing animated style.  Even from the opening dream sequence that looks like <strong>Samurai Jack</strong>, you knew that time was put into the animation.  Not too mention seeing Tai Lung&#8217;s fur move with the breeze.  These may be minor things, but these minor things brought out a tremendous amount of emotion.  It just worked, plain and simple.</p>
<p>I did have some reservations, mainly that it was rated PG.  Since my daughter is only four, I did consider skipping this because of the rating.  I am so glad I didn&#8217;t since the rating was mainly for animated violence.  Duh, it&#8217;s a film about Kung Fu.  So how bad was it?  No worse than any other kids show, in fact perhaps better since it was timed perfectly and fit the story.  The fight scenes were never bloody or overdone, in fact many cut away before any major violence happened.  This was no worse than watching professionals spar.</p>
<p>So how about my developing film critic?  She love this film.  She connected with the relationship between Po and Shifu, she was appropriately scared and understanding of Tai Lung, and even had a girl to like in Tigress.  She goes around the house showing us her Kung Fu (limited to Hiyaa! and a front kick) and sleeps with her stuffed Po as a protector against bad dreams.  There may not have been songs to sing like in <strong>High School Musical</strong>, but she found that sometimes a good story is all you need.  It was also nice to see her become interested in Chinese culture.  It may not be much, but the film allowed her to venture away from her own cultural background.</p>
<p><strong>Kung Fu Panda</strong> is an awesome film that will no doubt be repeatedly viewed in my home once it hits DVD.  As a kids film, it has everything you could want including interest for adults.  There may not be the adult humor of a <strong>Shrek</strong>, but who needs it when the story is so good.  See this film, buy this film, and get ready for a sequel!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2008/07/20/skadoosh/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Was I Conned?</title>
		<link>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2006/02/23/was-i-conned/</link>
		<comments>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2006/02/23/was-i-conned/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:38:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Film Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andy Garcia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Donal Logue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dustin Hoffman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Edward Burns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Franky G]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Carroll Lynch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Luis Guzman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Morris Chestnut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Giamatti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rachel Weisz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tommy "Tiny" Lister]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/?p=26</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is all due to one of my students lending me this film and hyping it a bit. At first I was skeptical of his intentions, but once the film was over I understood why he was so excited. Even though the film is by no means a great film, it was certainly a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/confidence.jpg" title="Confidence" rel='lytebox[was-i-conned]'><img src="http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/confidence.thumbnail.jpg" alt="Confidence" height="100" width="68" /></a>This post is all due to one of my students lending me this film and hyping it a bit.  At first I was skeptical of his intentions, but once the film was over I understood why he was so excited.  Even though the film is by no means a great film, it was certainly a fun ride.  Are you confident enough to find out what I think about <em>Confidence</em>?</p>
<p><span id="more-26"></span><br />
The film is a typical who is scamming who caper with various nuances that place this film a little above other con films.  For me, these types of films will never be recognized as works of art.  However, who says film always has to be highly critical, why can&#8217;t a film just be entertaining?  First let me set you up a bit with the story.  Basically, Jake Vig (Edward Burns) and his crew get themselves involved in a con that ends up placing them in trouble with a big time crime boss Winston King (Dustin Hoffman).  To pay him back, Jake sets up another con to help King take down his rival.  Jake assembles his crew, including sultry Lily (Rachel Weisz), and begins the scam.  From here on out, the film leads the viewer to believe they have the entire con figured out, only to twist the tale.  Part of the reward of watching this film is that moment when you go, &#8220;Oh, now I get it.&#8221;</p>
<p>The plot does not make the movie, it only gives the actors a place to shine.  I really enjoyed the acting, which can be a problem with ensemble casts such as this.  One of the only other films I think does it this well is <em>Snatch</em>.  Ed Burns does a great job of being the glue of the film and also bringing out his character through the voice-over narration.  But it&#8217;s his supporting cast that really makes the film work.  Let me just list some of the names involved in this film to give you an idea of how chocked full of talent it really was.  Dustin Hoffman, Andy Garcia, Morris Chestnut, Paul Giamatti, Donal Logue, Luis Guzman, Rachel Weisz.  Phew, not to mention great performances from relative unknowns such as Franky G and Tommy &#8220;Tiny&#8221; Lister.  One of my favorite scenes involves Franky G as Lupus, one of King&#8217;s henchmen, assigned to the con to ensure the King gets what he wants.  The crew is sitting around a table trying to convince a VP he should get involved in giving them a corporate loan when the VP (John Carroll Lynch &#8211; Drew Carey&#8217;s brother on <em>The Drew Carey Show</em>) mentions that most dot coms went bust for specific reasons and that their little company seems to be heading down that same path.  As the rest of the crew seem to falling back, Lupus (who up until this point seems dimwitted and has kept quiet through the entire dinner) spots off a very convincing string of business talk with so much passion that the VP immediately changes his mind.  It made me laugh, which is a good thing.</p>
<p>Beyond the characters, the story is told in a different way than most con films.  The first shot begins with an overhead shot of Jake on the ground while he narrates &#8220;I&#8217;m dead.&#8221;  Even though it provides a neat angle, I can&#8217;t help but think it is a bit cliche.  But I am always comparing films like this to <em>The Usual Suspects</em>.  I also found that it was all wrapped up a bit too neat.  The big con itself begins well into the movie and it&#8217;s a really fast downhill to the finish.</p>
<p>Overall, this will never win an award but it does have a special place in my heart.  Okay so that&#8217;s a bit overboard.  I enjoyed it and had a good time, which is all a movie has to do to be good sometimes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.fadedrequiem.com/resonance/2006/02/23/was-i-conned/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

