taken 2

the first movie was ok, it owed its great success completely to that phenomenal trailer where liam neeson tells off the men who kidnapped his daughter.  that monologue was so fantastic that there was a lot of good will that this sequel played off of.  the only problem is that the good will is pretty well wasted.  this time neeson is in turkey on vacation with his daughter and ex-wife when the family of the kidnappers from the first movie decide they want revenge.  as one would expect, superman neeson does everything he can to get his family out alive.  the city of istanbul is beautiful, which gives the movie a cool backdrop, but the story and action itself is pretty bland.  the only thing that keeps this one out of the garbage bin is just how cool neeson is.  this is the role he was made for!  though i didn't really care for this movie, i would certainly watch a 'taken 3' if they made one- just to see neeson do his revenge thing!

skyfall

i'm not a huge james bond fan, i've only seen one or two of them from before daniel craig took on the role, so bare in mind i dont have much to go on.  even still, i would definitely say that this was the best of all the bond movies!  the story clipped along at a great pace, fast action that slowed down for the personal moments when needed.  we gained a lot of background about bond, more than any other bond movie i've ever seen.  the story starts as james bond is shot in the line of duty.  he's thought dead, but shows up a few months later and dives back in when m needs him to.  the story was good enough for what it is, a bond movie, but the thing that makes me love this film so much was the absolutely gorgeous cinematography.  this is one of the best looking movies i have ever seen in my life!  at times i forgot to even pay attention to the story because i was so drawn in my be amazing visuals!  the casino he visits in china, with candles lining the water, was breathtaking.  the action in the all glass floor of the chinese skyscraper was amazing- the interplay of the neon lights outside playing off the glass surfaces was a visual symphony.  the showdown at the old orphanage was a dirty fiery feast for the eyes.  at every moment i was taken in by the beauty of each shot, even if the action was grossly brutal.  you know, this could have been the worst movie in the world, but i was so blown away by how gorgeous it was that i wouldn't have even noticed!

ghost rider: spirit of vengeance

granted, the first one wasnt that good, but it wasnt as bad as it could have been.  it was a fairly straight forward superhero movie.  this one though?  quite different...  it doesnt waste any time with an origin story or anything like that, we are just told that johnny blaze made a deal with the devil and now, for some reason, is living in the former soviet union (at least i think thats where it takes place...).  he's got a score to settle and nothing is going to stop him!  this movie is rather crazy, although what else would you expect from the directors who made the 'crank' series?  the story doesnt make much sense, instead feeling like just a random collection of scenes for our hero to 'ghost ride' in to.  but we arent here for the story, are we?  its all about the vengeance, and this movie has a few really cool looking fight scenes.  the certainly got the flaming skeleton right- that thing was awesome!  they also got the attitude of ghost rider right: he doesnt care about being nice, he's there to get rid of the problem.  through the frenetic style and balls out violence, we get to see a rather cool interpretation of what this demon would actually be like.  when he's not the flaming head though, johnny blaze is absolutely terrible.  nicolas cage does his 'crazy guy' shtick here which does seem a bit overboard, even with the chaotic style.  i was very excited to see christopher lambert on screen again though, too bad he was completely underused.  all in all, this is exactly what it claims to be: an all out trashy 'B' movie!

john carter

everything you've heard about this one is true: this thing stinks!  the story follows john carter, a man who left the fighting in the civil war to go out west, as he miraculously transports to mars!  why?  well, never mind that, lets just get to the strange martians!  he meets up with some strange four armed green aliens and tries to learn their ways.  if the film would have stopped there and just dealt with the story of 'a stranger in a strange land' as he learns about them, it may have had a chance at being ok.  but no no no!  they go on to introduce two other races on mars that are feuding for control of the planet (which, by the way, doesn't really seem to have any impact on the green guys at all, one way or another).  these two races seem to be exactly the same as humans, except that they have have tattoos and wear red or blue to distinguish them from each other.  john carter, of course, is the 'chosen one' that all the prophecies are about, so he steps in as their leader and works with the green guys to get rid of the bad guys, which are the red ones.  or is that the blue ones?  does it really matter?  nope.  i kind of feel bad for the movie, its based on the old book 'a princess of mars', written in 1917 by edger rice burroughs (the guy who created tarzan).  its got a bunch of great ideas that were ahead of their time, but unfortunately it has been pillaged by every other author and film maker since, so any ideas that were creative and new back in 1917 are old and worn out by 2012.  sorry, i'm sure this was an interesting story with amazing ideas back then, but today it just seems cliche.  the effects look pretty good, but all of it is meaningless because of the overly complex and predictable storytelling.  i'm sure this would have been an amazing story to turn into a film back in the 1950's, but it just doesn't hold any interest today.

ides of march

this film is an exploration of one man's journey from naive wonder to hardened corruption.  the perfect showcase for someone being corrupt?  well, politics, of course!  the story follows ryan gosling's character, a political campaign specialist, as he works on getting clooney's character, an inspiring senator who seems like the real deal, to with the presidency.  along the way he makes a couple mistakes, finds out about what is really going on behind that veneer of change and hope, and realized what politics is actually about.  its a sad tale of innocence lost as he faces the reality if the political machine that uses you and spits you out like last week's garbage.  gosling tries to be an agent for change in a positive way at the beginning of the film, but we see him soon become everything he hates as the truth of who clooney is comes crashing down around him.  its and interesting film that shows the journey of gosling's fall from optimism.  by the end of the film we understand how these men, thirsty for power, become the monsters we know them to be.  though the film may be slight, it does carry a sadness that comes with the loss of innocence.

girl with the dragon tattoo

having never read the book i wasnt quite sure what to expect.  the film looks fantastic, but to be honest, it kind of felt like an R rated episode of a crime drama that shows nightly on cbs.  the story follows daniel craig's character as he investigates an old case of a girl gone missing.  the uncle of the missing girl wants to truth about this cold case figured out once and for all.  as he tries to get to the bottom of it, he enlists the aid of an emotionally broken down girl who is the best there is at finding stuff out.  the two of them work together to solve the case and grow closer to each other along the way.  kind of basic stuff with a pretty sorted and dirty underlying story about rape and abuse that comes to light as they begin to crack the case.  its an ok crime drama, but i dont exactly know what all the fuss is about.  i felt like the story of the girl never really tied in to the main drive of the story, which was craig's story.  it almost felt like it was two movies for the first half.  the ending (if this is viewed as a stand alone movie and not just the first part of a trilogy) was unnecessary and felt tacked on.  did we really need to see that last relationship beat between the two of them?  it felt like it was just put there as a way of letting us know that the story of these two characters would continue in the next film.  but as it is, i dont feel that this film gives me any reason or is a compelling enough story to bother with a sequel.

anonymous

i dont know all that much about shakespeare, i've read a few of his plays and watched a bunch of movies based on his work, but as for the man himself? i know very little.  it is with this relative ignorance that i come into this move.  it is a movie that puts forward a theory that the man we know as shakespeare didnt actually write any of the work that is attributed to him.  the film instead insists that it was actually a duke of oxford who wrote the highest regarded works in the english language.
the film itself is a bit of a mess, it jumps around from the present, to 1601, three years earlier, and then 40 years before that.  often times, the jumps are hardly even addressed, we are just expected to know what is going on.  its a jumbled mess for the first half hour or so, but after that the story falls in to place and is actually quite compelling.  there is a lot of interplay between the duke, the actors of the plays, and queen elizabeth.  the twists and turns along the way get a bit muddled due to some poor casting (so many of them look alike i had a hard time keeping them straight!) and a bunch of time jumps, the the main drive of the story remains fairly clear.  the most impressive part of the film, though, was the visceral quality of the imagery.  all of the scenes at the theatre were quite spectacular  the staging of the plays that were performed, the audiences responses, and the dark dingy reality of life at this time.  they do a great job of set and costume design, showing the reality of dirty fingernails, ink stained fingers, and poor dental hygiene.  the theory of who the real author of the shakespeare plays is an interesting one, but the visuals alone for the film make it worth watching!

paul

there was one reason in particular that i didnt see this one in the theater: seth rogan's voice.  sure, seth rogan is funny at times, but it is so distinctive that i just could not buy it coming out of this alien.
the story follows two brits who decide to have the geekiest vacation ever: they come america to attend the san diego comic con and then travel across the country to visit all the different alien landings and other kitschy sights.  after the con they head out to roswell to see where the aliens supposedly landed.  well, they just so happen to run into an actual alien!  the three of them and their winnebago have a run in with a very innocent woman who decides to tag along and a few government agents who are hot on their tails.
this movie is made for the nerds, those who like video games, comic books, movies, and alien stuff.  i really wanted to like it, simon pegg is usually a blast.  unfortunately this one was a bit of a miss.  they did a great job of making the alien a believable character, the problem though was that the character wasnt very funny or interesting.  the humor was weak and the story fizzled out after they left the comic con, which means it fell apart after the first five minutes!

woman in black

i've never seen daniel radcliffe in a movie that didnt have 'harry potter' in the title, and i must admit, i was rather impressed!
the story, set in the 1800's, follows daniel as he is called to take care of the book keeping and will of a recently deceased old woman.  he must leave his family he finds himself in a pretty creepy town being warned by its residents to stay away from the old woman's house.  well, if he would like to keep his job, thats not really an option.  so he heads over with his dog to keep him company and begins trying to make sense of the chaotic records and paperwork at this old mansion.  as you would expect, there are a bunch of spooky things that happen along the way, and i must admit: they all got me!  each and every little scare that pops out at us freaked me out- at one point i even screamed.  i am man enough to admit it.  granted, it embarassed my wife a bit though...

brave

one thing i've always loved about pixar movies is that they always have some unexpected point of view, or a way of looking at something that shares some sort of deeper truth.  that particular trait is missing from this one.  the film follows a young rebellious princess as she fights against her mother's expectations.  mom demands that her daughter fulfill the role of the upcoming queen and all that that entails.  she just wants to have a bit of fun and have an adventure.  she cant play by your rules, man!  well, as she storms out of the castle after another big fight with mom, she happens upon a woman who will grant her what she desires and will get rid of her mom.  as always, things dont go exactly as planned, and the rest of the film is the princess trying to make right what she has done.  its a very straight forward fairy tale morality play.  there isnt much in here thats new, different, or clever, as one has come to expect from pixar.  granted, the movie looks amazing, the lush forests are fantastic, and i really love the scottish setting- it lends itself to some very beautiful landscapes.  the movie itself though was pretty generic, but any pixar movie, even this one, is better than most other animated movies out there, so i shouldnt complain too loudly, huh?

dark knight rises

we finally get the highly anticipated conclusion to the dark knight trilogy.  batman begins was good, dark knight was phenomenal, and now we get dark knight rises which is just back down to good.  not bad, mind you, but about equal to the first one.  and in many ways it feels as though it is a more fitting sequel to batman begins than to the dark knight.  granted, this one couldn't have existed without the story events, particularly those that revolved around the harvey dent character, but this one is much more connected with bruce wayne's past, his return to gotham, and his ties to the organization that trained him.
the story starts up 8 years after the events of the last film, dent is lifted up as a hero while batman is seen as the villain, which is why he has been MIA since then.  we follow bruce as he is called back into action to confront the latest bad guy, called bane, who has threatened gotham with a nuclear device.  its a good movie, but i have some real problems with it.  first of all, this isn't a batman movie, its a bruce wayne movie.  that doesn't make it a bad thing, but it is a bit decieving to think that there will be much batman in the film.  it feels as though the cape and cowl are only in the movie for about thirty minutes.  and for a two hour and forty minute movie, that's not a lot of costumed crusading!  now, that is by no means a deal breaker, a movie can still be great without much batman, but the plot itself is so epic, so grandiose, that it is completely unbelievable.  granted, its a comic book movie, but the director christopher nolan has always grounded his batman films in a gritty realism.  so the absurdity of the plot developments that happen when bane steps forward and begins his reign of terror is just too much to follow along with.  the plot holes and leaps in logic are just too much.  its been five months and the US government still hasn't stepped in to do something?  really?  the cops would be stupid enough to fall for the ploy bane uses?  how exactly did bruce get all the way to the middle east?  how did he get back in time with no resources if he had already lost all his money?
also, i dont think bane was done in a way that was very interesting.  i felt like tom hardy, the actor who played him, didnt really do anything with him.  granted, he was really handicapped by the fact that most of his face was completely covered!  as for that voice?  there was a lot of hubbub about banes voice being too hard to understand.  they fixed that in post production, whatever.  my problem with the voice was that it just didnt fit the character at all.  it was too high, british (?), and quite obviously unconnected to the character on screen.  whenever he would talk it sounded like it was a voice over, not a voice that was actually emanating from anyone on the screen.  he works fine for what the story calls for, but he is certainly not the charismatic perfection that was the joker.
what about cat woman?  well, theres not much to say, really, because there's not much there. her role in the film is completely useless and feels shoehorned in because they needed a second 'bad guy' for the film.  she serves no purpose other than eye candy.  she isnt even a bad guy at all, just a common thief who always happens to be exactly where she is needed depending on the script.
all in all, i hate to admit it, but the movie was only 'meh'.  the grand ideas and allegories presented were interesting, but the rushed pacing and haphazard logic kind of stopped it dead in its tracks.  this is obviously the end of the line for this iteration of batman, but i'm sure we wont have to wait much more than 4 or 5 years before we see another one.  i, for one, will be eagerly waiting.

the devil and daniel johnston

i didnt know who daniel johnston was before i watched this documentary about his life.  judging from his musical popularity, i would guess i'm not the only one who doesnt know who he is.  the film follows his life, getting interviews with family members and childhood friends as it paints for us what daniel was like growing up.  he was a pretty normal kid who loved to draw and sing, but then when he hit puberty things started to change, he started acting weird and showing signs of mental illness.  his artistic abilities continued to increase, both in drawing and in song writing.  he tried to make a go of a singing career, becoming the hit of austin after a few memorable music festivals.  he also made an important fan: curt cobain!  positively affected by the interest, his career was about to take off when his illnesses reared their ugly heads.  the story of his life, both good and bad, is very interesting. its always fascinating to see stories of people who try to reach for their dreams but due to unexpected problems never quite achieve it.  through out the film there are many people who always talk about how daniel johnston is a song writing genius, how he is comparable to van gogh: an artist who was never recognized in his own time.  they go on and on about how amazing his songs are, as if they will change the world.  and through out the film they play many of the songs he recorded.  but here's the big problem: they arent that great.  in fact,  many of the songs sound infantile and derivative, like they were written by a teenager or something.  i found this documentary very interesting, but i dont buy in to adoration they place upon johnston.

horrible bosses

this one looked great, but unfortunately the sum is not as great as its parts.
the movie follows three friends, all very unhappy with their jobs: bateman's boss is a manipulative corporate prick, charlie day's boss is sexually harassing him constantly, and sudekus loves his job, but unfortunately his lovable boss just died and his d bag incompetent son just took over the company.  as the three friends are sitting around at dinner, they mention that they should kill their bosses.  well, things get a little out of hand and the actually act on this crazy plan!  as they get themselves in too deep things begin going very very wrong.
i was really excited about seeing this one because of all the great actors in it, but unfortunately the movie just doesnt come together like it should.  each of the roles are perfectly cast, and each actor does a great job, but for some reason the laughs are only mild, and the story doesnt take off.  i wanted to like this one, but instead it was a bit of a disappointment.

battle: los angeles

this isnt so much a sci fi alien movie as it is just a straight war movie.  all the predictable war tropes are there: brave soldiers, poor decisions by the higher ups, innocent children in danger, unexpected deaths.  everything one would expect from a generic war movie.  i would share the story, but there isnt one.  at all.  here it is as fleshed out as i can make it: aliens attack and soldiers fight back.  the end.  aaron eckhart is wasted here, he is an actor who is always at the top of his game, a true artist who can create a rich character and allow you to feel what he is feeling.  none of that is even close to necessary for this one, they just needed someone who can grunt and fight.  the special effects were pretty cool though!

rock star

i usually wouldnt be interested in this film except for the fact that one of my favorite musicians acts in it, and the movie even features a song he wrote just for the film.  the story follows mark wahlberg, who is the biggest fan of an 80's metal band, and even performs in a cover band dedicated to them.  well, the real band looses its lead singer and they give him a call.  he auditions and eventually gets the job and is now fronting the band that he was so obsessed with!  the movie is based on the real life story of the band judas priest and the replacement lead singer who joined the band.  the film deals with him having his dream come true and how that affects his relationship with his girlfriend.  the film does a pretty good job of showcasing the life of a rockstar during the haydays of the big hair metal band, but the highlight for me was seeing brian vander ark as the bass player in the cover band wahlberg leaves behind.  and the final moments of the film are filled with brian's song 'colorful', which gives the film its emotional weight as we see the relationship between the two resolve.  not the best movie, but worth it as a brian vander ark fan!

secret of my success

i enjoy a good 80's movie as much as the next guy, especially if its got michael j fox in it!  this one though, missed the mark.  the movie starts with fox leaving his provincial midwestern home to try and make it big in new york city.  he doesnt find anything because you have to have experience before anyone will hire you, but no one will hire you to give you that experience.  well, he calls in a family favor and gets a job in the mail room of a big business.  he happens across and empty office higher up in the building and starts to do the job of the guy who just got fired.  as he tries to maintain these two different jobs, he (of course) falls for a girl that he works with as a big shot.  can he manage the two jobs?  will he get the girl?  oh, how exciting!
its all well and good, a typical 80's movie and all that, but once it was all done i got to thinking...  the whole movie we are rooting for fox as he tries to trick his coworkers and the girl, but the more i thought about it the more i realized this unexpected twist:  michael j. fox is the bad guy in the movie!  they dont let on at all, in fact there would be no indication from the film itself, but the more i thought about it i realized that everything he did at the company involved him lying, cheating, blaming others, sleeping with a married woman, double crossing the only person in new york who was willing to give him a break, and eventually causing a negative hostile corporate takeover!  i dont know what to think, should i be outraged at how terrible of a guy this is, or should i be impressed that they fooled the audience in to siding with this scummy guy?

for your consideration

another funny improv movie from the people behind 'waiting for guffman' and 'best in show'.  this time they aim their bitting wit at themselves.  the film starts as a cast of almost nobodys and never weres are busy making a small movie.  we see what is going on behind the scenes and these past-their-prime actors do their thing.  everything is going hunky dory until someone mentions the possibility of awards recognition for the film they are making.  word spreads quickly as the cast and crew begin to believe the hype.  some of them dismiss the growing buzz, but most of them let it go to their heads.  the whole film is a silly farce of what happens when you begin to believe your own hype.
it is a rather fun film, certainly in the same style as 'a mighty wind' and the two listed above.  this ensemble is really amazing when they work together, you never know what role each of them are going to play, but you know its going to be quirky and real.  i appreciated this one a little more than 'best in show' and 'a mighty wind', but i think that may be more based on the topic: behind the scenes of a movie.  

spawn

i used to love this movie!  i saw it several times on the big screen back in the day when it came out.  i always new it wasnt that great, but i was so obsessed with the comic book that i convinced myself that it was everything i wanted in a spawn movie.  its not.
the story starts with our main character, al simmons, being killed by his double crossing government assassin boss.  then, mysteriously, he wakes up five years later.    the rest of the film is about him coming to terms with what has changed in the last five years and the deal he made to come back.  the comic book its based on is much much better than this film though, where the comic book is subtle and complex, this movie is blatant and simple.  it almost felt like the producers wanted it to be a generic comic book movie, so they just added in all the generic movie tropes that they felt they needed:  bad guy has gravelly voice, bad guy wants to take over the world, a young kid befriends our hero so that we can find him relateable.  none of this is in the comic book, mind you, just in the dumbed down movie.  also, one of the coolest visuals in the comic book is spawn's cape, in the movie it rarely makes an appearance, and when it does it looks super cheesy!  one question i always had about this movie even when i saw it back in the theater:  the devil confronts spawn and threatens him if he doesnt follow through on the plan.  he tells him 'do what you promised or else you will die!'  um, isnt he already dead?  how is that a viable threat?  i know so many things were much 'better' when we were younger, so i think i may have to chalk this one up to the fact that it didnt age well.  remember, at the time this movie came out we didnt have any other comic book movies, so this one was a bit of a rarity!

north

part of the reason i watched this movie is because of my curiosity.  i remember reading one time that this was considered by roger ebert to be one of the worst movies ever made.  i always wondered what would cause all that fuss, so when i saw it on the free movie channel, i figured i'd find out for myself.
the story follows north (yes, thats the boy's first name) played by elijah wood, as he feels under appreciated by his parents.  so, he decides to legally split from them and he begins a trek around the world to find replacement parents.  along the way he meets up with parents from texas, alaska, france, china, and a bunch more.  after i watched the movie, and wondered what ebert was so mad about, i read his review. i think he is more mad about the morality of the film and the complete lack of anything remotely funny in what is billed as a 'comedy'.  each of the parents are just terrible stereotypes, and not even funny ones at that!  the texans love guns, the alaskans live in an igloo, etc.  i didnt find anything so abhorrent that caused me to react as strongly as ebert, instead i would just dismiss it as empty fluff that wasnt very well written.  elijah wood, though, does a good job as the directionless north, but its still not a good movie.

the lost skeleton of cadavra

this is a throwback sort of movie.  remember those terrible black and white movies from the 50's that always had some creepy  crawly sort of alien thing that attacked people?  well, this is a straight forward parody of those types of films.  its not a parody in the sense that its filled with jokes, but rather an homage to that style of film.  the story starts with a spaceship landing on earth, the aliens need a very rare material to fix the rocket so they can be on their way.  at the same time, the lost skeleton hypnotizes a willing victim and tells him he must find the exact same rare material so that the skeleton can be reanimated.  it just so happens that a scientist couple are on vacation at their cabin and find said rare material.  what are the chances?!?  all the characters descend on this cabin and have a dinner party.
its a very faithful recreation of those 50's campy horror movies, right down to the poor quality black and white film and the fishing line connected to the skeleton to make him move!  i appreciated the quality of mimicry, of completely recreating those old movies.  the problem is that i dont care for those old movies!  i guess i am not exactly the audience for this film, huh?  it certainly feels like a film from the 50's, not a film from the 21st century!

quick change

oh 80's movies, why must you be so bad?  actually, this one is saved by the always fantastic bill murray!  the movie starts with murray walking into a bank in his clown outfit on, pulls out a gun, and robs the place.  the robbery itself is the best part of the film, so i wont ruin for you how it goes down, but it is quite clever (it has been ripped off since, but this one was before all those, so it was quite original at the time).  needless to say, in order for there to be a movie, the robbers get away.  the rest of the film follows murray, davis, and quaid as they try to leave the city.  turns out, getting out of the bank was the easy part, but leaving new york seems nearly impossible!
i must share my major problem with this movie and so many others like it: why do characters give up on the solution when ever they face an individual problem?  along the way, they get in to a taxi, which just so happens to be driven by a crazy person, they ditch the taxi, but then for some reason never try to get another taxi.  its as if they decide that because they had a bad experience with one taxi that they can never try another taxi again.  really?  also, when they leave the bank they get lost in their car.  really?  i'm pretty sure that if they had taken six months to plan the heist that they would be pretty familiar with the area and wouldnt get totally lost just because the construction worker took down one sign.  in reality, they would have pulled off the heist, gotten on the highway with ease, and been in europe by nightfall.  granted, that doesnt make a good movie though, so they need to have some problems with easy solutions that they never use.  this isnt a bad movie, just badly written.  but even all that is forgotten when ever bill murray is on screen- this is definitely one of his sillier roles, and he does it very well.

domino

this film follows the life of domino, a bounty hunter from england who finds bad guys in l.a.  this film, as hard to as it is to believe, is based on a true story.  the film starts as domino first decides to go into bounty hunting, falls in with the wrong guys (which i guess in her line of work is the right guys, huh?), and gets tangled up in a case that eventually involves the mob and the CIA.  the thing about this movie, though, isnt so much the story but rather the style.  its directed by tony scott, he has made many strangely stylized films and this one rockets to the top of the list!  filmed in a super saturated visual style, heavy on quick cut editing and distorted images and vocals, the style is front and center while the story sits in the passenger seat.  keira knightley does a good job as the lead, she isnt very believable as a bounty hunter, but thats one of the plot points, so it turns out to be exactly what the character is supposed to be like.  then it becomes good acting, i guess?  the chaos of the story line, as the characters are on drugs, on the run, and never sure what will happen next, is very visceral for us as audience members.  it is certainly a strange one, but the visuals alone keep this one from failing.

hackers

its always interesting to look back on movies that were about cutting edge technology and see just how wrong they got it. well, this one was pretty monumental in how wrong they got it! the film tries to make computers seem like the new cool punk thing to do, and those who know how to use them are rockstars. um, actually they are pretty nerdy, no matter how much you try to convince us otherwise! the movie follows a group of computer hackers as they 'fight the system'. one of the gang hacks in to a corporate system and saves a random files so he can prove just how cool he is. unfortunately the file he copied was the one file that could cause terrible things if it were to get into the wrong hands, so the company's tech guy, also played to be a total rockstar badass, has to go and get the file by any means necessary.
yeash, all of this sounds way more interesting than it actually is! this one is truly bad. i was watching it in the living room and my wife, who has sat through some real stinkers, had to get up and leave because it was making her mad at just how stupid the movie is. i cant blame her. i did get a good laugh out of how they try to make typing look exciting! as the characters are at their computers, we see all kinds of graphics of number and letter floating around them, the camera swirling, the rock music blaring. sorry, its still not exciting to watch someone type. the only reason this movie is still remembered instead of being lost to the sands of time is the fact that it stars angelina jolie. she was firmly in her 'bad girl' phase, trying to be hard by pouting her lips and folding her arms. just embarrassing, really. not just for jolie, but everyone involved.

somewhere

through out the whole movie i just kept waiting for something to happen.  it didnt.  this is the latest from sophia coppala, the director of lost in translation.  the movie follows johnny, played by steven dorff, an up and coming actor who lives at the chatau marmont, a famous hotel/apartment building in hollywood.  dorff hangs out in his apartment, then goes for a drive, then hangs out some more.  then some people show up and there is a party.  then he hangs out again.  at one point his daughter is dropped off by her mom who wants johnny to take her for a while and bring her to a camp in a week.  the mom is leaving town with no word on when she will return.  johnny and his daughter hang out.  they play guitar hero.  they swim.  it may not sound that bad, but here's the thing: there's probably only about 50-60 lines of dialog in the whole movie!  we watch johnny sit on his couch in silence for about three minutes, and this is what the whole movie is like.  i guess the movie is accurate to live, because in life not much happens, but i dont really want to watch a movie like that!  at the end we get some token moment of emotion from the daughter and a slight glimmer of change in johnny, but thats about it.  there is a moment or two that was fun, at one point johnny takes his daughter with him on a press junket in europe and they order one of each dessert from the room service menu.  but really?  thats about a two minute scene.   we spent more time watching dorff sit on the couch and stare at the wall!  i dont know where the movie gets its name because it goes nowhere.

brothers mcmullen

really?  this movie won the great prize at sundance film festival?  wow, in 1995 it must have been pretty slim pickings...  the film is a story about three irish brothers who are trying to deal with love and religion.  the oldest brother is married and contemplating cheating on his wife, the middle brother, played by the film's director and writer ed burns, doesnt want to ever get married and breaks up as soon as anything gets serious, and the youngest brother who is a strong catholic and is dating a jewish girl.  the story itself is fine, the idea of trying to understand love through the worldview of faith is rich with storytelling opportunities, the problem is the acting.  have you ever seen the movie 'clerks'?  it ignited the indie movie scene around the same time as this one, and also has terrible acting!  through out the entire film it felt like we were watching a middle school play, the actors were stilted and no where near believable.  the converstations were meant to be organic and natural, but they were the exact opposite of that- every line was delivered as if they were reading it though for the first time not sure where to put the inflection or emphasis.  terrible.  also, whenever there is a movie about faith, i get frustrated when each and every character has some sort of revelation that faith is stupid and God is dumb.  that exactly what each of the people in this film do, it changes from an authentic life choice, and instead becomes obvious that the writer has an axe to grind.  i can appreciate the work that went in to it, the director financed the film himself and amazingly went from being a nobody to now being a well known actor and director.  good for him, but this was not the great start that everyone seems to think it was!  maybe it was better back then, but it is not at all good today.

rko 281

i saw citizen cane, the movie that is considered to be the best film ever made, back in high school. we watched it for a film studies class and i fell in love with it! i've probably watched citizen cane over a dozen times since then. because of my fondness for that film, i was drawn to this one. this is a movie of what happened behind the scenes of citizen cane. the story of how the film came to be and how every studio in town wanted it destroyed is a very interesting one, and it is captured quite well in this film. as a lover of film, i also love to know what goes on behind the scenes of movies, which makes this one so riveting: its the behind the scenes story of the greatest movie every made! in it liev schrieber plays orson wells, the genius director who was the visionary behind citizen cane, and james cromwell as william randolph hearst, the inspiration for cane. it was a rather sorted mess with everyone against wells- many of whom had pretty good reasons, to be honest! as the new 'it' guy in town, wells struggles to find his first big movie that will live up to his hype. inspired by the newspaper magnate hearst, wells decides to use his opportunity to expose the tyrant, to show to the world that the emperor isnt wearing any clothing. its a move that may cost him his career, and the careers of all those around him. its an impressive recreation of the events and an interesting perspective on how and why it went down the way it did. liev does a great job as the over confident wells, and cromwell is fantastic as the self righteous millionaire 'victim' hearst. if you have ever seen citizen cane, definitely search this one out, it will illuminate the classic in a whole new way.

warriors of virtue

back when this movie came out i was just entering high school and knew i was too old to see a childish movie like this. but i really wanted too! i dont remember quite why i wanted to see it, i think i just really dug the title. well, it was on our free movie channel recently, so i figured i would fulfill my desire from all those years ago and watch it.  turns out i was not missing anything at all!  the story follows a boy who finds himself in a strange and mysterious land while trying to evade the bullies back home.  well, this land is filled with strange creatures, among them are a small group of kangaroo type figures that know some sort of elemental kung fu.  imagine teenage mutant ninja turtles mixed with captain planet.  sound good?  dont worry, its worse than you think!  the warriors' puppetry is not so great, it felt like the a step down from the first turtles movie in terms of quality.  the story line is just as hokey as you might expect: the warriors must fight against the bad guy who wants to take over, and the only way they can win is if the kid from another world learns how to stand up to bullies.  hey, thats really going to help when he gets back home, huh?  ugh.  but by far the worst part of the movie is its obsession with camera tricks!  digital filters must have just been invented when they were making this movie, because they are used way too much!  its like the director found a new toy and wants to use it in every scene.  although, maybe they just use the blur filter and motion blur whenever the warriors are fighting because they too realize how bad the puppetry is! maybe this would have been impressive back when it came out, but today it would be too stupid to even air on a children's cable channel.  

bone dry

i picked this one up on a whim.  i dig lance henriksen, and love luke goss from the blade 2 and hellboy 2.  every once in a while the local movie rental place has deals to try and thin out their old stock, and usually i can find deals for pretty cheap.  its a good thing i only paid a buck for this one, cause that about all its worth.  the story starts with goss waking up in the middle of the desert.  he has been kidnapped and now must try to survive in the brutal heat while the man responsible watches from a distance.  goss has a walkie talkie, so he knows that someone is watching him and harassing him through out the whole ordeal.  can he find it back to civilization before the man responsible does his worst?  the set up could be interesting, and the cast is pretty cool, but the movie falls into the rut of a brutal horror victim film, where the violence serves no purpose other than to see the suffering.  this one is exactly what one thinks of when the term 'straight to video' comes up.

dragonheart

good try, but not quite there.  this is a film that came too soon, the special effects werent quite ready to handle an emotive dragon yet.  also, if they had waited a few more years they could have capitalized on the whole fantasy genre that would soon come into fashion around the lord of the rings movies.  the story follows dennis quaid, a dragon hunter, as he tries to kill the last dragon.  the dragon, which is voiced by none other than sean connery himself, doesnt look as good as it should.  some of the scenes look ok, but most of them are pretty obvious that the cg wasnt quite up to the quality they needed to make this work.  also, for having a cg dragon as your main character, they do some pretty obvious tricks to keep him off screen.  hmm, maybe they realized that they couldnt pull it off too, huh?

30 minutes or less

i liked the set up, but the follow through was a bit lacking.  our main character, played by jesse eisenberg, delivers pizza for a living.  its not the best job and he knows it, but it pays the bills for now.  well, one night, on his last delivery, he brings a pizza over to two crazy guys who strap a bomb on him and tell him he has twenty four hours to rob a bank or else they will blow him up.  yikes!  some of this premise is pretty funny, following the two friends as they try to deal with this ridiculous situation has quite a few laughs, but that could be more due to the fact that eisenberg and aziz ansari are really likable and fun.  but just as much of the film doesnt work, namely anything with danny mcbride in it.  sure, i've enjoyed mcbride in other rolls, he is great in 'eastbound and down', but everything he does in this one just falls flat.  the fun of the two friends cannot overcome the terrible failure of the guys behind the bomb.  on a side note, it was kind of cool to watch this movie because it was filmed in my hometown of grand rapids, michigan!  it was pretty cool to recognize many of the different locations and know the places where the story took place.

intolerable cruelty

a love story about a divorce lawyer.  kinda strange, huh?  well, its directed by the coen brothers, so its very strange!  clooney plays a divorce lawyer who is the best in the business, he is able to take husbands who are caught in the act of cheating, and get them to win their divorce settlement.  he is doing well in his job, he even gets congratulations from the mysterious head of the law firm.  and then he gets a case where he meets catherine zeta-jones, the ultimate divorce law player.  she has been married so many times that this whole divorce thing is a game she plays in order to make a fortune for herself.  well, clooney is smitten and she is showing interest in him as well, but is it real or is she playing him too?  this could have been a pretty straight forward romantic comedy, but in the hands of the coen brothers it becomes this strange quirky thing.  from their rhythmic dialog to the strange secondary characters, the twists and turns along the way are quite unusual.  the brothers did this sort of strange love story again with 'burn after reading', and if you ever saw that, then you know how differently the coens can twist a normal story.

the rite

another catholic horror movie, huh?  these things were really big for a while back in the 90's.  writers would find one strange belief from a couple hundred years ago in the catholic church, and then exploit and extrapolate on that, trying to make it as strange and creepy as possible.  well, this one is a bit more basic.  it deals with the practice of exorcism as it is today.  we follow a young man as he enters the training to become a priest even though he doesnt really believe.  after nearly completing the program he submits his resignation letter, citing his lack of belief.  at this, his headmaster invites him to spend some time with one of the priests in the area who he might be able to learn something from.  this particular priest, played with scenery-chewing gusto, by anthony hopkins.  this film rises above the rest of those older catholic horror movies by taking the act of faith seriously.  through out the movie our main character is always skeptical, never really accepting the 'religious' reasoning behind what is going on.  this period of doubt and questioning creates an opportunity to deal with what faith is and if it is important to actually believe, or if you can get away with just 'talking the talk'.  it is a bit 'by the numbers', but anthony hopkins is, as always, fun to watch!

exporting raymond

does humor translate into different cultures?  this is the question that the subject of this documentary is trying to examine.  the film follows phil rosenthal as he tries to bring his hit comedy 'everybody loves raymond' to russia.  we follow phil as he travels to russia a couple times to try and get this translation off the ground and on the air.  he faces many challenges, not the least of which is the huge cultural barrier between america and russia.  the film examines rosenthal's struggle with the burgeoning field of television in russia.  rosenthal runs into problems with writers not entirely understanding the style of humor, actors being cast who dont understand the role at all, and just about every other thing you can think of!  its a very interesting look at the culture clash between two different people and how, when all the extra stuff it peeled away, we are all basically the same and can find humor and joy in the universal experience of love and family.

mod squad

its pretty easy to see why this one failed when it first came out: because it is not at all interesting!  i know i'm not exactly the target audience for this one, i have never seen a single episode of the original tv show, in fact i didnt know there was a tv show called 'mod squad' until this movie came out!  the story follows these three criminals who have now joined the police squad as inside agents trying to get rid of the bad guys.  their one advocate on the police force is killed and now the rest of the police want to get rid of them.  well, it turns out, unsurprisingly enough, that the cops are corrupt.  so the three of them have to work outside the system to take it down.  perhaps its due to my lack of knowledge (or interest) in the source material, or maybe its the fact that these three good actors are really slumming it here, or maybe its the lame story thats been told hundreds of times better.  i'm not sure what it is, but this movie was no good at all!

the dilemma

this wasnt quite what i expected!  knowing the two guys invloved, vince vaughn and kevin james, i was expecting this to be a pretty silly comedy.  turns out, its a pretty dark character driven story about fidelity and friendship.  the premise follows two friends as they work together.  as one is planning on proposing to his girlfriend, he discovers that the other friend's wife has been cheating on him.  this can go a few different ways, but what surprised me was the fact that they didnt go for the more comedic route, but rather wrestled with the darker truth of marriage and how some marriages arent perfect.  this felt like new territory for a movie, especially a comedy staring vaughn and james!  though i was impressed with the handling of the subject matter, i was still frustrated by how it played out.  at times these two characters acted like real people living in a challenging world filled with shades of grey, but other times they acted like really stupid characters who would make terrible choices just to keep the struggles going.  for example, vaughn's character really struggles with what he should do, should he tell his friend about what is going on, even if it hurts their friendship and their work?  his responses at times are thoughtful and organic- like someone who would actually struggle with this choice in real life.  but then other times he acts in a way that is not even remotely logical, and in fact goes against everything we know about the character!  are we really supposed to believe that he would be so emphatic about being honest with his friend while telling lie after lie after lie to his girlfriend?  especially when it would be 1000 times easier to just tell her the truth?  there is no reason for this story to have so many difficult problems, other than that it helps the story.  not based on what would actually happen, but rather the characters act in a way that keeps the 'kooky high jinx' going for a little while longer.  too bad, there are really moments in this movie of greatness, but it too often gets caught in its own formulaic nonsense.

mr. poppers penguins

yup, its just as bad as you think it is.  the work obsessed dad neglects his kids and is trying to land an important deal that will allow him to be really successful at his work.  everything is going his way right up until he receives six penguins as an inheritance from his recently deceased absentee father.  these pesky penguins ruin everything!  his important deal with a client suffers, but his son and daughter suddenly like their dad again so he keeps the penguins as a way to connect.  many hilarious penguin related high jinx ensue.  dad finds his heart and realizes how important family is and even lands that important client and closes that great deal.  oh, and he gets back together with his ex wife, because that's what every child from a divorced home wants, so lets make sure we gloss over that and do a little fantasy fulfillment while we are at it.  this is cheap sentimental entertainment at its worst!  none of the character developments are earned or in any way represent reality, but it feels good, so we are expected to go with it!  the bad guy in the film is an animal care person from the zoo, you know, someone who actually knows whats best for the penguins and has the best interests of the animals in mind instead of using them to fix the family that popper selfishly broke in the first place.  tacked on ending aside, these birds would have been much better off if the zoo worker had won!  always a great lesson for the kids to learn, that the mature responsible person is evil, and the careless selfish person is the hero, right?  mr. carrey, you can do much better than this.

rising sun

based on the novel by michael crichton, this movie follows the investigation of a death that may be linked to a very important japanese business deal.  snipes' police detective is called in to deal with the situation and he has to work with a japanese liaison played by sean connery.  they have to figure out how and why a woman was killed in the boardroom the same night as, one floor above, and important business party that plays heavy on weather or not this japanese deal will go through.  we follow  the pair as they try to get down to the truth of what happened, following false leads, discovering new clues, and all the challenges along the way.  this is an older film, and it certainly is now showing its age.  a lot of the plot hinges on different technological advances, which today is taken for granted, is marveled at by the people in the movie.  what?  digital video can be manipulated?!?  no way!  what was cutting edge at the time, today is considered elementary.  there are still enough twists and turns to throw us off the final reveal, but even with the unexpected conclusion, the whole thing feels pretty standard.  i'm sure this was an interesting movie back before there were 5 cop shows on tv every night of the week, but today it fills a bit flat.
oh, and on a side note, how funny is it that sean connery never changes who he is no matter what the role calls for?  in this one he is supposedly one of the most learned men when it comes to japanese culture and understanding the mindset of business, but still he acts and sounds the same as he did in every other movie he has ever made!  now thats a movie star!

fast five

i've never been a huge fan of the 'fast and furious' movies, in fact i have only seen the first two, and those only because i have friends who are in to cars.  this one though, has the rock in it, and he's always cool!  not having seen the last two, i may have been a bit behind as far as it goes with story, but this film does a pretty good job of filling me in with what has been going on since last i saw (though i have no idea why paul walker is a bad guy now.  wasnt he a cop in the first two?), reviewing the relationships between the characters as well as the death of another.  the story follows the gang as they try to take money from a crooked bad guy in rio.  the story isnt fleshed out much, but this is a car movie, so the plot really isnt the point, is it?  the key here is the action- and there is a ton of it!  we see cars racing, cars jumping, cars turning, cars crashing, cars doing just about anything they could think of that would be both fast and furious.  though i would not really consider myself a big car guy, i must admit i rather liked this film!  perhaps it was the 'oceans eleven' sense of getting together all the greatest characters from previous entries in order to do a big heist, or maybe it was the tight editing and absurdly illogical action, or maybe it was just the fact that the rock is awesome.  i dont know exactly why, but this movie was a ton of fun to watch!  it was kind of funny to see two big muscly bald guys fight it out in the same movie, with the rock and vin diesel being basically the same thing.  good thinking having the rock grow a goatee for this one, otherwise there would be no way to tell them apart!  i must say, if the third or fourth one are nearly as fun as this one, maybe i should go back and check them out.

something borrowed

first of all, you know you are in for a terrible movie whenever it has kate hudson in the cast, right?  well, the wife wanted to watch it and i got suckered into it.  at least the rest of the cast is pretty likable- its got ginnifer goodwin (from 'once upon a time'), john krasinski (from 'the office'), and steve howey (who i loved from 'reba').  though it has the huge strike against it of having kate hudson in it, it kind of worked because she is supposed to be someone you dont like.  well then, perfect casting!  the story follows two friends who fall for the same guy, the problem is that one of the friends keeps quite about it for six years while the other dates him and is now about to marry him.  well, wouldnt you know it, its time for the silent girl to finally speak up!  the whole thing is pretty predictable, but i do give it credit for having an ending that is somewhat realistic when it comes to the aftermath of the climax.  one of my big problems with it, though, is the casting.  sure, its filled with some pretty good actors, but for some reason the decide to have krasinski as the best friend, not as the romantic lead.  what?  they had two actors that are a ton of fun to watch every time they are on screen: krasinki as the best friend, and howey as the ex.  what a waste!  instead they fill that role with a charisma-free random guy who kinda looks like jared leto.  okay...  as an audience member i kept wondering why these two girls care about the boring guy when they have two other guys who are infinitely more interesting and funny!  ugh.

his way

this film is a documentary about the hollywood legend jerry weintraub.  'who is that?' you might ask, well thats a good question.  i didnt know who it was either until i saw this movie!  it seems that he is a very highly regarded hollywood mogal, meaning that he was someone who worked behind the scenes making things happen.  the film go back to his early life when he was a boy and first learned to get things done by taking after his salesman father.  from there it talks about his role in managing a tour for elvis and finding great success, working with frank sinatra and a bunch of others to great success, and eventually setting his sights on movie making.  he would sweet talk his way to millions, creating his own quarter billion dollar empire.  though there were some rises and falls along the way, the film creates a loving portrait into the life and mindset of this entertainment icon.  i learned a lot about him and really enjoyed to interesting story and the great anecdotes about what life was like for him through the years.

let me in

a simple story of childhood friendship.  this film tells the story of a boy with no friends who gets beat up at school, as he befriends a neighbor girl who seems a bit unusual.  a premise we have seen before, but there is one big difference: the girl is a vampire!  yikes, that sure changes things, huh?  the two kids do a fantastic job of creating believable characters, the boy is kind of sad and withdrawn, when he meets the girl he sees that she is the same way, not exactly realizing that there is a reason for that!  the movie is slower paced, allowing the audience an opportunity to get to know the characters and their situations well.  i feel that this movie would benefit a lot from knowing as little as possible about it.  in fact, my telling you its a vampire movie kind of ruins what could be a really interesting reveil.  i figure i would just go ahead and tell you about the vampire part anyway since it was all over the marketing, posters, interviews, etc. so they certainly did not try to keep it a secret.  too bad because i would have enjoyed it more if i didnt know what to expect.

real steel

this one is pretty predictable but still fun to watch.  in a world where robots do the boxing now, hugh jackman is cast as the down and out former boxer who, due to a good run of bad luck, is stuck at the controls of a low end robot boxer.  the story follows as he must take care of the son he never wanted, and try to get back to the top of the robot boxing game.  you know exactly where the movie is going, we've seen it all before, all but analog, in almost every sports movie ever made.  they do just enough to take the old tropes and keep them fun to watch.  and those robots are pretty cool!  one huge flaw with the film: that kid!  every time that child actor is on screen i would get annoyed- his voice is grating, the character is a self entitled pompous kid who seems to magically know how to program and rebuild these robots even though he's never seen one in person before, and has every annoying kid quality that these films always seem to give so that the young audience can relate to them.  thankfully hugh jackman's charisma covers a multitude of sins!  with almost anyone else in the lead, the predictability and annoying child would have suck this one immediately, but jackman is able to keep it afloat and even fun!

paranormal activity 3

the wife and i went to see the first two in the theater to diminishing results, so we figured we could wait this one out until video.  wise choice.  we both loved the first one and may or may not have slept with the light on for a couple nights after seeing it...  the second was ok but not nearly as good.  this one would probably go in that category as well.  the 'found footage' element is still used this time around, the big change though is that these videos are from when the characters in the first two films were little girls growing up and is a series of recordings their father made when things started to get a bit weird during the night.  i think this film suffers from being the third entry into the series- we've seen all the tricks before and can see the scares coming minutes ahead.  some of the tense moments are pretty good, but the newness is gone and so is the intensity.  also, the ending for this one is pretty weak.  they pull in some lame elements at the end to explain it that the series has so far been pretty good at avoiding.  oh well, the first one was still really good!

earth girls are easy

i remember watching this movie a lot growing up.  my friend aaron had recorded it off of tv and thought it was hilarious, so we would watch it regularly when i would go over to his house.  upon rewatching, i was a bit confused...  first of all, i realized that i havent ever actually seen the whole movie.  i guess he just recorded about half of the movie, because the first half of it was completely new to me!  the movie was way different than i remember, thats for sure.  all i remember was that there were these three hairy aliens who bother gena davis and go to a dance club.  i mostly remember that one of the aliens was super funny- turns out that its jim carrey before he hit it big with ace ventura!  as we rewatched it, it turns out there is a whole plot about davis' character breaking up with her fiancee and her as a hairdresser.  and also its kind of a musical.  what?  there are a few musical numbers in the film which i didnt remember at all!  the totally 80's style is rather embarrassing as well- this thing is totally a relic of its time.  i'm pretty sure that you can pass on this one without missing anything!

waynes world 2

i really loved the first movie, but this one is pretty bad.  i realize the first 'wayne's world' was pretty bad too, but my nostalgia for it blocks out all the detractors.  well, i never saw this one when it came out, only now catching up with it after recently rewatching the original.  unfortunately, this one doesn't hold up very well when compared to the original.  it makes sense, since this film is basically a rehash of the first one, not really adding anything new to the premise.  in this film wayne is trying to find some direction in his life and decides that he is going to create a music festival in downtown chicago.  along the way they hit the exact same beats as the first film, singing a song in the mirthmobile, stopping at the hockey donut shop, going to a concert, problems with wayne's girlfriend, etc.  which brings up a really frustrating this about this film: one of the driving forces is wayne's relationship with his girlfriend cassandra.  i know we are supposed to root for our hero wayne to keep the girl, but everything he does proves over and over again that he is a jerk and she would be better off without him!  he is constantly questioning her, he is a controlling boyfriend who wont let her be around any other guys or else his jealousy really kicks in, threatening to break up with her at the drop of a hat, and as soon as she starts to find success he becomes bitter and angry toward her.  also, he never does anything at all that should endear her to him, he never shows her any sort of affection other than objectifying her as 'hot'.  anyway,  back to the movie itself: the jokes are recycled and the plot is lifeless.  for some reason, as was the case in the first movie, garth has a completely unrelated story that never plays into the narrative of the movie.  this is definitely wayne's movie, with only a couple minutes here and there dedicated to his long suffering sidekick.  over all, these problems far outweigh any silly gags (which are just reinterpretations of gags from the first film anyway) or humor that may have been intended in the movie.  an unfortunate follow up to a pretty funny original movie.

relic

this movie is a rare anomaly: the movie is actually better than the book!  i remember reading this book when i was in high school, in anticipation for the movie.  the book, though, was filled with generic characters and a really really bad ending.  it was so bad it kind of ruined the fun tension of the rest of the book.  the movie, though, fixes that problem and gives an impressively explosive ending that corrected the major failure of the book.  the story is set in a museum and follows the workers there as they prepare for a big fundraising ball to show off their new exhibit.  a few crates recently arrived from the congo, but they were strangely empty.  well, they weren't really empty, instead what was in them leads to a bunch of gruesome deaths.  as the mystery behind these deaths escalates, the ball is about to begin.  this is, in its simplest sense, a creature feature.  there is a really cool looking nasty creature who is causing all these terrible murders and one of the policemen and an important museum employee must try to get rid of the creature before it ruins the museum's biggest fundraiser of the year.  the creature itself, a stan winston creation, is pretty cool and very creepy.  i remember being blown away by it when i first watched this movie in the theater back in 1997.  the special effects hold up fairly well, especially when the creature is lurking in the dark.  when we finally get a good look at it, the effects are a bit dated, but the suspense and build up do a nice job of creating tension and setting up the action packed final act.

red riding hood

from the director of the first twilight film.  that's really all i need to write.  she tried to take the exact same elements that made twilight successful and incorporate it into the little red riding hood story.  except that those elements are not successful here, and its not really the red riding hood story at all.  i must admit i didn't understand this film at all.  the big bad wolf is turned into a generic monster that attacks a small town.  nothing in this film works because the only thing that worked in the first twilight movie was the cast- even overcoming a terrible script and an even worse director.  here she is up to her same tricks which failed the last time out too.  this one is just bad on top of bad on top of bad.

contact

i have mixed feelings about this movie.  on the one hand i really like it, its one of those rare big movies that has heart and really challenges the mind. but on the other hand, they so totally botch the ending that i walk away from it annoyed.  the film follows jodie foster's character, an astronomy scientist who has dedicated her life to finding life on other planets.  she spends her days listening to radio signals in outer space, hoping that she will hear a signal or response from somewhere else.  she is mocked and jeered by everyone else, about to get her funding taken away, when she finally hears something!  the signal she hears makes the news and everyone scrambles to try and make sense of it.  along the way she befriends a man of faith, played by matthew mcconaughey, who challenges her stance on scientific proof.  she blows off his beliefs because they cannot be proven.  as the extra terrestrial signal is decoded they discover that it is actually blueprints for a giant device.  the planet unites to try and build this device and the world prepares to find out what this device does.  the story itself is very interesting: uncovering the meanings, deciding what to do about it, dealing with the different opinions about how to proceed with the realization of intelligent life out there.  all of it is really cool!  the main theme of the movie is a weighty one: proof versus faith.  an interesting conversation and one that is dealt with seriously.  the frustration though, is that the last minute or two of the movie throws everything out and makes it a moot point by banging us over the head with an answer to the question of faith and proof.  all the wrestling over the struggle is thrown out the window in order to give a pat answer, and in so doing, destroy all the progress made in defending both points.  arg.  if this movie would have left off the last two minutes, it probably would have deserved a 5 star rating, but as is- only 3.

time traveler's wife

oh man, give me a time travel movie and i am one happy fella.  give it a melancholy mood and i am totally in!  well, this one has those elements in spades!  a man stuck out of time, traveling back and forth without his control, and the woman who loves him and must deal with the reality of never knowing when or if he will ever show up again.  this one is so moving and sad i could hardly stand it.  and that's why i loved it!