mOVIemAN56 Reviews

No Country for Old Men (2007)

The greatest villain since Hannibal Lecter, the best film of the new millennium, the Coen's deliver again

[10/10 · 26 November 2007]

No Country for Old Men may quite possibly be the best Coen brothers film to date. From the two men who brought you The Big Lebowski (one of the best comedies of the 90's) Fargo (one of the best drama's of the 90's) and O Brother Where Art Thou? (one of the most beautifully crafted films of 2000) comes this film. If you thought nothing could ever top those three films you are in for a big surprise, No Country for Old Men is not only the best film of 2007 but also one of the best films of the new millennium. It is the nearest to perfection one can get. It is, simply, a modern masterpiece.

The story revolves around Llewelyn Moss, a retired worker who hunts antelope in the deserts of Texas. One day Moss stumbles upon a drug deal gone wrong and also $2 million in cash. Moss takes it and flees only to have a Mexican gang and a sinister assassin by the name of Anton Chigurh. Along the way several men become part of the fray including a sheriff about to retire and a rival assassin of Chigurh's. The story follows that of Llewelyn mostly but Tommy Lee Jones as Sheriff Bell also plays a significant role. In the end it is more then a battle of wits between Moss and Chigurh, it is a battle of good and evil.

First off the acting in the film is among the best I've seen since American Beauty. Brolin, Jones, and Bardem are all Oscar worthy in my opinion. Brolin delivers the perfect portrayal of a man on the run who knows how to use his brain. We don't see Brolin running around shooting at everything that moves, instead the Coens' let us view Moss using his brain which makes the film way more interesting. Brolin's mild manner mix perfectly for the mold of Llewelyn Moss. Overall a great protagonist created by the Coens' and a great portrayal by Josh Brolin, a man we don't see too much of these days.

By far the best acting I've seen by a person this decade comes from that of Spanish actor Javier Bardem as the cold hearted Anton Chigurh. Chigurh sent shivers down my spine every time he spoke and every time he moved. His calm demeanor, mixed with his sociopathic mind makes him simply haunting. What made him the most frightening is that he is so believable. He is smart and deadly but also very much believable and very unique. Instead of the cast mold for villains in cinema (kill, kill, kill), McCarthy makes Chigurh more of like the Angel of Death, deciding who dies by the flip of a coin. His weapon of choice is unique, even how he talks is quite different from most villains of the day. I could easily see a story about a murder like this guy appearing in a paper. While Chigurh is silent and many would portray him as a one-dimensional antagonist, Bardem brings life and soul to the character. This is not the Coen's or McCarthy's work but Bardem's work that makes Javier Chigurh the greatest villain since Hannibal Lecter and one of the greatest in cinema history. Javier Bardem, to say the least, is simply brilliant.

I have few complaints about the film. Many people found a problem with the ending. I had no problems with it. I was thoroughly satisfied as I walked out of the late show. The Coens' make you think. They don't make everything obvious which most directors do. They make an audience think and that is what they do in No Country for Old Men. The movie takes us into the relationship of good and evil and some beautiful scenes are shown to explain how these two interact everyday. The film will shake you up, make you think, and always have you looking over your shoulder expecting to see the red eyes of Chigurh with his coin ready to decide your fate.

No Country for Old Men had me thinking about it for days after. The symbolic meanings of the characters and the speech at the end, the amazing, three-dimensional characters, the beautiful story that is crafted perfectly by McCarthy and adapted beautifully by the Coen's. I honestly wanted to see this movie again and again. Give the film time and don't cast your thumbs up or thumbs down on it until you have let it sit for a day and you have thought about it. I find it to be the best film since American Beauty and a beautiful film with a haunting villain.

5/5 stars

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)

Ferrell gives his best performance to date in a thoroughly enjoyable comedy/drama

[7/10 · 24 October 2007]

For the past 10 years Will Ferrell has been strictly known for his off the wall humor and crazy gags. His famous films include: Anchorman, A Night at the Roxbury and Talladega Nights. All of these films show Ferrell is very gifted at comedy but none show him as a man capable of truly acting in a drama. Up until this point there was little hope Ferrell would ever be more than a comedian who appealed to teenage audiences. Stranger Than Fiction changes all of that and brings out on of the finest performances of 2006.

Stranger Than Fiction revolves around Harold Crick, a dull IRS Auditor who is obsessed with counting and has virtually no life beside his job. One day he begins to hear a voice narrating his own life, a voice only Harold can hear. As he struggles to figure out whether he is crazy or not with the help of a literature professor, he begins to audit the attractive baker Ana Pascal (Maggie Gyllenhaal) who he begins to fall in love with. The story is different but it works and heres why.

The story is very different but not so different everyone who watches is saying "wtf?" The story is fresh. It strains away from the typical romantic comedies/comedy-dramas and makes its own little story afresh. The story also gives very in depth presentations of the characters. We begin to feel as if we actually no the characters, not just watching them. It is also a well executed story, there isn't too much to understand or any double meanings to everything, the film is straight forward with just a few questions arising every now and again which are suppose to be there to keep us guessing until the end.

Will Ferrell, in my opinion, gives his best performance to date. Not because it is a drama and usually drama actors have to work harder then comedy actors, no, thats not the case here. Ferrell actually does give his best performance mainly because he isn't constantly screaming and saying obnoxious things. It is the first look into a more sophisticated Will Ferrell, though I don't mind having him in comedy films at all. Ferrell is able to portray the dull Harold Crick perfectly. He feels as if he has been doing the same thing all of his life. He never strays away from the personality he presents and that was the reason the film works so well, Ferrell is constantly in character, on screen.

Gyllenhaal is not one of my personal favorites for films. I usually find her dull and trying to hard in her roles when I see her in a movie but maybe thats just me. I did liked her in this though. She seemed to be what was needed to make the film move along. I do feel that the relationship that develops between Harold and Ana is a bit far-fetched but nevertheless it still feels sweet as we watch the two interact. Overall Gyllenhaal's job is a job well done in Stranger Than Fiction.

The film will make you laugh, it will make you feel good inside but it will also make you sad. Ferrell is able to put just the right amount of emotion into each scene to make them work and is the glue that holds the movie together. I don't think the movie would have been as good if Farrell had not been in it. I don't think teens will find this as enjoyable as I did. It doesn't have the sick humor and loads of nudity that seems to draw teens to most comedies these days. I think couples and anyone looking for a well acted, well written film would find this film to be a great piece to spend two hours watching.

3.5/5 stars

Children of Men (2006)

A brilliant sci-fi thriller that doesn't need all the special effects to make it work

[10/10 · 23 October 2007]

Children of Men is set in the year 2027. The world has become sterile and the youngest humans are in their 20's. Chaos reigns across the Earth. The United States is in a civil war, France is on fire, and Britain is deteriorating. Theo (Clive Owen) is a man who simply doesn't care about most of it until he is asked by his ex-wife to escort a woman to the coast for safety. A woman who may be the first mother in 20 years. It won't be an easy task for Theo though as the military begins to round up illegal immigrants and force them into camps and the Fishes (the illegal immigrants resistance movement) who are attempting to use the new born child as a political tool.

Clive Owen stars in the lead as Theo. Owen put a lot of work into this film as he personally looked over every scene he was in to make sure his character never became too much of a hero. Theo is the classic un-wanting hero. He gets forced into the situation and must deal with it and Owen never strays from this presentation. He gives his best performance since Sin City and really shows that no matter who you are you can always be a hero to someone, in the movie it is Kee, the pregnant girl.

Julianne Moore is only in the movie for about 10 minutes so she really doesn't have time to show off her character in too much detail. The legend Sir Michael Caine gives an off-the-wall performance as a former political cartoonist/ex-hippie who helps Theo and his company get Kee to safety. Caine is only in the film for about 20 minutes but gives a great performance. And to round off the supporting cast there is Claire-Hope Ashitey as Kee. This is only her second or third film but she is wonderful. The connection she makes with Owen in many scenes are great and her acting is top notch for such a new star.

The film will be known for its cinematography more than anything. Several single shots exceeding five minutes in length are present within the film. If you are unfamiliar with this then it means the same shot is being taken the whole time without a switch to another shot or perspective. This is really cool cause the whole time your watching one long cut thinking "Holy sh*t, how did they do this?" The cinematography sets the mood and makes the film even better then it already is because it gives a sense of artsy look to the film.

Cauron sets the mood early and never strays from the feeling of destruction one feels the entire movie. This isn't a post-apocalyptic setting, it is set during it in a way. The film is not without scenes that brings hope to the audience. The last 20 minutes are truly moving as it shows Theo's sacrifices to save Kee and her baby from harm. Cauron holds nothing back in the film. It has its violent moments, its course language and its nudity but it is all needed to set the mood of the film.

The film is set in the future and therefore would be considered sci-fi. Instead of showing a world with hovercrafts and aliens we are presented to a world destroying itself. The films cinematography and setting makes us feel as if we are right in the middle of this hopeless world. The film also shows that lasers, aliens, and outer space are needed to create a great sci-fi film. On the contrary I think the film as better for not having any of these present. Truly a modern day classic that won't be forgotten, make sure to see this amazing picture.

5/5 stars

The Descent (2005)

The scariest film in recent cinema

[9/10 · 2 September 2007]

I rarely get the treat of viewing British cinema so I was quite pleased when I was able to stumble upon the British horror film The Descent. The story follows that of six woman from the United Kingdom who love to do wild things. Not wild things in the terms of erotic films but in the terms of being daredevils so to say. After a freak accident claims the life of a woman named Sarah's young daughter and husband, the six friends travel to the United State to bond while they go spelunking (cave diving). What happens in the caves becomes a living nightmare as they become trapped inside with strange creatures out to kill them.

At first when I read that the film was nearly an all female cast I had my doubts. The only time you ever see all female casts in the States is when a romantic comedy is the basis for the plot. However, one must remember, this is British made and are more adapt at acting then most anorexic, beauty queen wannabe's that act in the US. I liked the all female cast, they all did a great job and looked like they actually knew what they were doing while spelunking which added to the realism. All the girls are relatively unknowns outside of the UK but it doesn't matter, films don't have to have big stars in order to be great films.

The horror is top-notch even before the Crawlers (monsters) show up. You feel a strong sense of claustrophobia and foreboding while the woman crawl through narrow tunnels in the pitch. Honestly, I was freaked out even before the monsters began wrecking havoc. Once the monsters do arrive you are really in for a treat. They are easily the most believable, scariest looking things I have seen in a horror film since the original Alien. Needless to say you will be scared out of your mind by the end of this and will be thinking about it even more when you turn off the lights to go to be that night. (recommendation: watch at night in the pitch black, it's even scarier)

What makes all horror films is atmosphere. A strong sense of innocence and amusement must be present early on then that innocence must be smashed in bloody fashion. The film throws you right inside the caves with the six women and makes you feel just as claustrophobic and scared as they are. That is why The Descent works so well, it makes you feel as if you are there and as if you are going to be the next attacked. This is what so many horror films fail to do, there is a bunch of flash but no show, for the Descent there is not a lot of flash but a ton of show. This is why it is one of the best horror films since Alien.

4.5/5 Stars

Superbad (2007)

Dirty, very dirty but did I mention it is absolutely hilarious

[8/10 · 28 August 2007]

I must admit I wasn't expecting what I got out of Superbad. Seth Rogen is one of my current favorite actors in the comedy genre and I knew he would perform well and bring some laughs but as for the rest of the cast I was hesitant. Jonah Hill was completely unknown to me and I only knew Michael Cera as the cute, innocent kid from Arrested Development. I was very skeptical if they could bring the laughs that I desired. To top off my hesitation to watch this was the fact I am not a big fan of teen oriented comedies. But I gave it a shot and was on the floor laughing.

The story follows two seniors who are about to graduate from high school and who wish to do something 'superbad' before they graduate. Both seek to loose their virginity at a party a fellow student is having with the girls of their dreams. They are told to bring the large amount of beer required and both seek off to obtain. What follows is their zany adventure to obtain alcohol and make it to the party all with the help of their friend Fogell a.k.a. McLovin who has an interesting connection with two local police officers.

I must admit I was dead wrong about every question that arose in my head when I saw the previews. Michael Cera and Jonah Hill are both more than capable of bringing tons of laughs to the screen. Even when opposite of more experienced stars like Seth Rogen and Bill Hader. Cera turned out to be more funny of the two though he is actually the quieter one. Hill got annoying a few times in which I had to turn away in disgust but was fine 90% of the time. I guess it was his whinny voice, it just got on my nerves.

The movie really did bring back my high school days and some of the crazy stuff that went on during it. Everything was quiet believable, maybe a little hard to come by but nothing seemed impossible that was portrayed in the movie. I guess that made the film even funnier. Everything made sense (unless you count the crazy cops). It really brings back great memories of times of innocence back when we were seniors in high school. Anyone wanting to get back to those times and remember high school memories way want to check this out.

Now the film is really dirty. They say f*** around 190 times and most of the time it's uncalled for or at least most parents would say so. There are sexual innuendos at every turn and sex is usually the reason behind most jokes. Heck the plot is based on getting laid. Therefore I would definitely say if you are a parent don't take your kid to this if they are under 16. They won't get it and they'll just learn a lot of words they shouldn't be saying yet. For everyone between 16-30 I think they'll find it hilarious. I don't know about older age groups though.

Superbad is funny though it is extremely dirty. It is one of the funniest films I've seen in years. It is a new teen comedy classic that outdoes almost every other comedy coming out nowadays. The film does drag a little in the middle. For about 15 minutes I didn't laugh but other than that the jokes are none stop. Everyone contributes to the comedy and makes you laugh at least once. Just a great comedy in my opinion and hope you feel the same way. Just go see it, give it a chance and you may very well just like it. Look at me. I was very hesitant and found that I loved it.

4/5 stars

Rush Hour 3 (2007)

Rush Hour 3 = stupid and unbelievable

[4/10 · 19 August 2007]

I had seen the previous two Rush Hour films and had loved both of them. The goofy antics of Chris Tucker mixed with the amazing martial arts moves of Jackie Chan made both of the previous Rush Hour films funny and entertaining. Rush Hour 3 is missing both the heart and the feel of the previous Rush Hour films. It is neither enjoyable or believable. It is simply a mess with little humor and is the proof that is needed to show the when a comedy film has a good sequel, another attempt shouldn't be made.

The plot is rather complicated. Chief Inspector Lee is now the bodyguard of Ambassador Han (who is from the first film) who is on the way to give a report at the World Criminal Council concerning the Triad crime organization. After and attempt on the Ambassador's life, Lee and Carter seek to find out who is responsible. After a cheesy scene where the promise the Ambassador's daughter they will find the men responsible, they are off to Paris to investigate. Along the way they meet a strange cab driver, a sexy dancer who may have connections with the Triads, and a man who may be linked with Lee besides being an enemy.

The main problem with Rush Hour 3 is too many things don't make any sense at all. To start it out the plot is a bit hard to understand. Tho whole movie I was waiting for a plot to be revealed to discover by the end nothing had really happened. There are villains that are just added on and mirror images of previous villains, particularly the knife throwing girl who reminded me a lot of the girl from Rush Hour 2. Also the main villain is never properly addressed and at the end when Lee and Carter 'save' the day, you feel kind of empty inside.

Most of the movie did not flow well. There are a few funny scenes but I found the camera turning a bit too many times to Chris Tucker for him to go on one of his now famous rants. There is no character development. Lee and Carter both feel like statues on the screen. Mix that with very poor writing (I almost threw up when Jackie Chan was on a swing singing to Chris Tucker, I am not lying) and you get a poor film. Even the action scenes, which the Rush Hour films are known to be good for, aren't any good. They are boring and unbelievable to say the least.

I found Rush Hour 3 to be a big let down. I rarely laughed. The jokes were too far-fetched and unbelievable for my taste. I did like the fight scene on top of the Eiffel Tower but even that got out of hand. Tucker has a few good moments but I am really beginning to wonder what exactly Jackie Chan is considering doing with himself. His parts were some of the cheesiest and most unbelievable parts of the film (and I am not talking about his martial arts, which there is little of). All in all avoid Rush Hour 3 and pray there is no Rush Hour 4 in the works.

2/5 stars

The Prestige (2006)

A brilliant film. Great performances mixed with a great story

[8/10 · 10 August 2007]

I was blown away by The Prestige. I don't know what exactly it was about it. Perhaps it was the incredible performances from Bale, Jackman, Caine, and Johansson. Perhaps it was the well thought out, near perfect script. Or perhaps it was the freshness this film brings to the eyes when first viewed, the same eyes that have seen crap after crap released in theaters. I don't know what it was for me but I must admit I was blown away by The Prestige and I have watched it several more times since first seeing it in theaters that October evening.

The story follows aspiring magicians Angier and Borden as they struggle to both make names for themselves and to have the greatest 'prestige' in London. After a tragic accident, Borden and Angier become enemies. Soon a potentially dangerous rivalry develops between the two as both try to discover the ultimate illusion. What follows is a duel story line set in the past, following the reasons for the rivalry, and a present which follows the adventure of Angier as he tries to match Borden. Both stories are intriguing and will suck the audience in as they rotate screen time.

As stated above four actors give great performances. Christian Bale (Batman Begins) gives one of the best performances of his career and that is certainly saying something. Bale plays the troubled and laid back Borden who is the cause of a terrible accident that causes the rift between him and Angier. Bale gives a very strong performance. He brings depth and sympathy to the character of Borden which I felt was strongly needed. Bale made out Borden to be exactly what he needed to be, a troubled individual who regrets most things in his life.

Hugh Jackman (X-Men) also gives a tremendous performance as Borden's rival Angier. I never thought Jackman much of an actor, especially after seeing Van Helsing, however, he proved me wrong in this. Angier at first is made out to be a good hearted individual with a few flaws but none to serious. Angier goes through a major transformation that I feel few actors could have pulled off. Jackman was able to pull it off and give one of the best performances of his career.

In support are the legendary Michael Caine and the beautiful Scarlet Johansson. Both give very strong performances and help the movie be even better. Caine plays the stage director and sort of mentor to Angier. Johansson plays Angier's stage hand and Borden's lover. Both are exceptional actors who gives exceptional performances in their respected roles. Not too much screen time is given to either which is good. I had a bad feeling these two would some how end up in every scene but thankfully that was not the case.

The story is easy enough to follow... at first. A major twist is around every corner and will keep the audience guessing until the last lines are spoken. The twist isn't so out of nowhere that everyone will be wondering what the hell just happened. Most people will see things they missed earlier when the twists in the film do occur. The plot is well thought out and flows nicely. There are no dry moments of pointless dialog. Everything is important and needed to make the film work. Overall the film is one of the best written I have seen in a long time. A long time.

In my opinion it is one of the best films of 2006 if not the new millennium. The plot is great. The cast is among the best compiled group of actors one could find in one film. The acting those people do is marvelous. Everything looks and feels real and will never have an audience member questioning what is happening on screen. This is key as when a person starts to question things on the screen, the film begins to lose its magical touch. This does not happen once throughout the course of The Prestige.

5/5 stars

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Very good. I wasn't as impressed as most people but I still liked it

[7/10 · 9 August 2007]

I thoroughly enjoyed the third installment of the Bourne films. Most people I know who have seen it are praising it as one of the best action flicks of the summer and they are correct. This puts most other action films in the past few years to shame. It's a great action film that is very well thought out. It's enjoyable to watch, very entertaining, and completes a story most of us have been following the past 5 years. Beside that I didn't find anything that special about the Bourne Ultimatum beside that is was a way better action flick then what usually comes out nowadays and it was a bit smarter then most.

The film completes the Jason Bourne saga. Yet again Jason Bourne, who continues to suffer from a case of amnesia, travels across Europe and the United States, trying to evade CIA agents who want him dead, in a quest to discover who he is and what his past is. Along the way he is helped by a former colleague, Nicky Parsons, and gains a very unexpected ally. The Bourne Ultimatum jumps around like both other films taking us to various locations throughout the course of the film.

Yet again the Bourne films do not disappoint. Ultimatum has the same great action sequences that its two predecessors had. No one will be disappointed by the flash it brings to the screen. The story is again very good though I won't say it is as good as The Bourne Identity in terms of script. A few things didn't work for me plot wise but most weren't too major of problems. The cinematography is done wonderfully, the dialog is well written, and the interaction between actors is very good.

Matt Damon, yet again, gives a great performance as the amnesiac Jason Bourne. He brings out all of Bourne's traits: very very smart, strong, good fighter, and above all, without a clue on his past. What I was glad didn't happen is at the end when Bourne learns about his past Damon didn't have his character break down crying or anything. I don't know if this was Greengrass's choice or Damon's but thank God that he didn't start crying. One thing about Bourne that makes him so interesting is his lack of emotion toward almost everything.

A few problems I had with the film. First off, someone has got to show Greengrass how to work a tripod. The film is WAY to shaky at unnecessary points. I can understand during a chase or fight sequence but when a character is meeting another in a café and the camera is swinging wildly it was too much. I know the director is trying to make us feel as if we are there but it was totally unnecessary to have the camera moving so much. Second, lack of buildup. There is practically no build up to the end. Something happens then it is over. The movie is well paced then at the end everything seems to get rushed as all lose ends are tied up. I was a bit disappointed with that.

Everyone should go see The Bourne Ultimatum if they want to see it. One may use the excuse that not seeing the previous two films may make things almost impossible to understand in the third installment. My brother had not seen the middle film and still understood everything that was going on. It is very easy to follow though I do suggest you watch the first. Pretty much an amnesiac being chased by the CIA for reasons unknown as he tries to discover his identity. It has some great action scenes, a great story, and some great characters (with great acting behind them). Highly recommended.

3.5/5 stars

Robot Chicken: Star Wars (2007 TV Short)

Most parts were good

[7/10 · 2 August 2007]

I never really watch Robot Chicken that much before seeing this and it continues to be absent from the shows I do watch during the week. However, I am a huge Star Wars fan and when I heard that there would be a parody of it on Robot Chicken, I made sure I would have Cartoon Network on the night it aired. I had seen Robot Chicken before and hadn't been too impressed but I must admit I was not disappointed with the half hour special of Robot Chicken: Star Wars.

So many classic Star Wars scenes are twisted and turned into comedy with strange happenings at every bend. The Emperor on the collect call with Darth Vader asking "what the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?", Darth Vader being confronted by Jar Jar Binks aboard a Star Destroyer , and Luke and Palpatine having a 'yo mama' fight during the climax of Star Wars: Return of the Jedi. There were so many classic scenes I couldn't stop laughing through most of it. Seth Green really did a great job.

Some parts weren't so great though. During the end things didn't seem to be that great. The last sequence on ice is really really bad. A few other scenes I barely smiled. I believe that Green and the people working with him just failed to come up with stuff so they went with whatever came to them at the end. There are 3 or 4 scenes which I would fast forward through if you are watching it somewhere, trust me they aren't funny. The rest, however, is golden and will be hilarious to anyone watching it. Pretty much if you love Star Wars, you'll like this. Listen for George Lucas in his cameo and be prepared to laugh.

3.5/5 Stars

Clerks (1994)

Brilliantly laid back

[9/10 · 1 August 2007]

Clerks seems to stand in everyones minds as one of the best comedies of the 90's. A debut for not only Kevin Smith at director but also the View Askewniverse in films. Clerks is what got everything started for Smith and in my opinion remains as his best work of comedy to date (with Mallrats in a very close second). Just that freshness the first I saw it enters my mind every time I manage to catch Clerks on television. Clerks remains as a great comedy.

Filmed in all black and white, Clerks follows the day of Dante Hicks, a clerk at a New Jersey convenience store, and his pal Randal Graves, who is the laid back clerk at the neighboring movie store. It follows mostly Dante as he worries about his relationships, confronts strange customers, and takes his job too seriously. Randal stands by as the other main character who often times convinces Dante to take chances. Randal proves to be the funnier of the two with his sick humor, laid back personality, and little care for anyone beside his close friend Dante.

Brian O'Halloran makes his film debut as Dante. Brian makes Dante out to be exactly what he is suppose to be. Too uptight, always a push over, and always unsure on what to do in life with himself and his relationship. O'Halloran isn't exactly funny, he is more of the set up guy for Randal whenever he is in the scene or the bearer of the comedy from most of the characters. Needless to say he causes few laughs but his serious face is needed for the other characters to bring the comedy in scenes.

Also making their film debut is Jeff Anderson as the ever hilarious and now famous, Randal Graves. Anderson portrays perfectly the typical slacker. Randal rarely cares what is going on, even when he is at his job. He watches out for Dante but rarely cares about anyone else. Anderson is hilarious as Dante just based on how relaxed he is when he says things, even the most disturbing parts he is laid back and says it as if he is constantly thinking it. Anderson is the man of many laughs in Clerks and without him as Randal, no doubt the film would have failed.

Being as the film is the first for practically everyone in the cast and crew it is amazing the amateurism did not show. The camera work is steady and solid, the writing is superb, and the setting (a convenience store for 99% of the movie) is perfect. The film introduces the now famous Jay and Silent Bob who harass passer-byers and deal drugs. Most of the cast will not be recognized but they are amazing. For a film that only cost $27,000 USD to film, it goes down as an amazing comedy.

The major turn off for most who do not like the film is its obscene humor and various explicit sexual references. People remember this is not a kids film, keep kids away and you'll have no problem. The comedy is not slapstick humor, it is mostly laid back humor written in such a way that a person will never see the joke coming. What long stands out in my mind as the genius of this film is Caitlin Bree and the bathroom though I won't reveal anymore. Just watch this film. You will not regret it.

4.5/5 stars

Commando (1985)

A bad plot makes a great comedy... with some violence on the side

[5/10 · 30 July 2007]

Commando will have you on the floor laughing. I don't know what it is about this movie that makes me laugh so hard every time I see it. Is it the extra super human strength they give Arnold through out the movie? Is it the crazy ability for Arnold to kill an entire army while he remains unharmed? Or is it just the fact that Arnold, throughout the movie keeps asking "Chenny?" (his daughters name in the movie is Jenny). I don't know what it is about Commando but I have never enjoyed such a pointless, comical action flick so much.

The story revolves around retired Col. John Matrix who's daughter has been kidnapped by a warlord. Arius (the warlord) demands Matrix assassinates the president of the warlords homeland. If he does that, he'll get his daughter back. Along with Arius is the sinister Bennett, a former member of Matrix's unit. Instead of Matrix going on the flight he escapes and begins to track down his daughter with the help of a stewardess. What follows is what I have come to describe as violently hilarious.

There is just something about Arnold Schwarzenegger that makes him funny even when he isn't meant to be. In the film Arnold is given even more strength then he is capable off such as being able to hold a man by the foot with one arm over a cliff while standing up or being able to flip a car over. Arnold has his hilarious lines and some scenes have gone down in history as just classic such as the demise of Sully when Arnold drops him off a cliff. Arnold gets loads of actions, wielding any weapon imaginable from a rocket launcher to a pitch fork. He has them all and he kills with them all.

The action is the highlight of the film. It's pretty much senseless. Arnold walks around just killing at random. I personally believe Commando was a rough draft for Terminator. The fights are pretty cool though. Even though it makes very little sense why Matrix is running around beating the crap out of anyone he can find I still found it hard to not watch. It's the case of a movie being so bad it's good. It makes you laugh when your not suppose to but there is nothing wrong with that. Most action films featuring Arnold have that effect on people.

Pretty much the movie is a train wreck. A bad plot mixed with bad acting and superb violent sequences. Mix that all together and add Arnold as the main character and a strange, Australian guy who seems to have a fetish for knife fights and you get Commando. Commando works as a decent action film and as a great comedy. Most of the violence is off the wall, unnecessary, and hilarious. You will enjoy Commando though you'll probably be wondering how Arnold can kill so many in such little time.

2.5/5 stars

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

Nothing to write home about, funny at times, a bit dry at others

[6/10 · 29 July 2007]

Many people have been waiting for the Simpsons Movie to come out for nearly 10 years. Ever since the website was launched back in 1997 people have been anticipating the film to be released. Finally it was green lit and the Simpsons Movie was released on the 27th of July, 2007. I managed to see it opening night with a packed house, some even dressed as the Simpsons characters we have come to love. I must admit I never thought I'd watch the Simpsons with 300 people around me, let alone in a movie theater.

The plot is pretty Simpson-like. Springfield has become a polluted city and the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) decides to drop a massive dome on the city to prevent the pollution and the citizens from escaping the area, all with approval from President Schwarzenegger. Russ Cargill (Albert Brooks doing great voice acting again) is out to keep every Springfield citizen inside the dome no matter what. The Simpsons escape and become fugitives but begin to work on freeing Springfield from the evil Cargill and EPA.

The voice acting is at its best. Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Nancy Cartwright, Harry Shearer, Hank Azaria and Yeardley Smith are all exceptional as the characters they have portrayed so long from the show. I did have a few problems with the characters in the film however. The film gives Bart more feelings then are usually customary for his brat-like attitude. He becomes to caring in the film and is less funny then usual. Now Homer is ten times funnier then I have seen him in the past 5 seasons of the Simpsons. Marge and Lisa are still their normal selves. A few characters are all but cut from the film including: Principal Skinner, Mrs. Krabappel, and Mole Man.

The flow of the film is a bit bad. They'll be a stretch of 10 minutes without a laugh then a bunch of laughs in another stretch. I felt they could have spread out the jokes a little more, especially toward the end of the film when there seemed to be far fewer jokes then in the first half hour. Most of the jokes are Simpson-like: easy to understand, low blows, and a bit of slapstick. A few jokes will have you on the floor crying they are that funny while others you may be like "wtf?" Though that only happened twice for me. However the jokes are way better then what have been on TV for the past few seasons.

A few downsides was that I believe the people making this felt that had to include as many characters as they possibly could. For no apparent reason some characters just show up, say something, then aren't seen the rest of the film. I didn't think that was really necessary. Mr. Burns and Smithers should have been used way more then just the two scenes they were in. Also I felt the need for celebrities to make guest appearances, while a part of the shows storied history, was also unneeded. I saw nothing funny about Tom Hanks appearing for a scene as well as Green Day being in the opening scene of the film which gets things flowing. I felt The Simpsons Movie was wasting precious minutes they could have put to more funny things (though when the barge Green Day is on begins to sink and the band members begin to play violins reminiscent of the scene from Titanic, I did laugh).

Overall, I would not call The Simpsons Movie by any means a waste of time. Fans of the show will love it as I did. There were some stretched out, overall boring scenes that could have been shortened but the comedy made up for most of it. I can honestly say it is the funniest I've seen Homer since 1998. It's well worth a visit to the local movie theater. There ain't too much language, there's a lot of laughs and I think it will give anyone who is a fan of the show a good time though some may be disappointed for the reasons I stated above.

3/5 stars

Red Eye (2005)

Finally a thriller that actually sends chills down the spine

[7/10 · 27 July 2007]

Red Eye is like a breath of fresh air for me. I have seen so many poorly done, uneventful, and overall dull thrillers the past few years that I had all but given up on the thriller genre in general. Cillian Murphy appeared on my 'Stars to Watch' list after 28 Days Later and I had been giving whatever he was in a shot. After Batman Begins, Girl With a Pearl Earring, and Intermission I came to Red Eye. Now let me just say Red Eye never looked good to me but the growing star Murphy was in it so I gave it a shot.

The film is simple enough to follow. A woman by the name of Lisa is traveling back from Texas to Miami, Fl on a red eye flight. While at the airport she meets Jack, a charming individual who ends up being her seat mate. While on board the charming fellow turns rather sinister and reveals his alternate agenda and could result in the death of Lisa's father if she does not obey everything he says. With Rachel McAdams and Cillian Murphy going head to head as the main characters, everything flows smoothly from the start.

Again, Murphy proves his talents far exceed some of the Hollywood 'greats'. He shows his versatility in this and Batman Begins as being able to play rather sinister characters. He actually sent shivers down my spine with his dark stares and smooth yet sinister speech. Murphy shows a side I'm not quite used to but thoroughly enjoyed, his aggressive side. More than once he is shown showing some of his muscle toward Rachel McAdams. Murphy gives yet another A performance and continues to chart high in my books as a great actor.

The first thing that came to my head when I saw Rachel McAdams was "Oh no not another no talent pretty girl in a lead role." However those words came back to kick me in the face. Rachel McAdams is what many would say exceptional as the scared Lisa. She brings out that characteristics of what a person in Lisa's situation would be like: desperate, scared, and questioning every move. Rachel McAdams may just reach my 'Stars to Watch' list but not just yet, she'll need a few more solid performances before she cracks that list. However, in Red Eye, Rachel McAdam's is damn near perfect as Lisa.

The script is a bit shaky at times. Everything, for the most part, runs rather smoothly. The movie will shake you up a bit, especially Murphy's performance as the psychopath Jackson Rippner. Don't expect a masterpiece when watching Red Eye, a few things work out too conveniently to be believable. Things do get just a tad bit corny at the end but that is after most of the plot is finished with. When you sit down to watch Red Eye, you will get spooked mostly by Murphy's performance but you'll also get some great acting from Rachel McAdams, Brian Cox, and Jayma Mays. Overall a very good thriller that gave me a few shocks and put a smile on my face.

3.5/5 stars

28 Days Later (2002)

Brilliantly crafted, shockingly captivating, a must see

[8/10 · 23 July 2007]

28 Days Later has gone down in the United States a pure work of art and genius craftsmanship. Anytime I ask a person what is their favorite horror or thriller film, 28 Days Later pops up 9 times out of 10. For the past five years I have heard almost entirely positive reviews of the film but never managed to watch it. I wanted too but had trouble finding any time to do so. Finally it appeared on HBO and I was able to view it for the first time and I must say I am very impressed with the film 28 Days Later. After a first view I was no longer questioning why people found this film to be such a good member of the horror genre.

The film begins with a virus known simply as Rage is released accidentally by a group of animal rights activist who think they are freeing harmless monkeys from a research lab. 28 days later, a man by the name of Jim awakens in a deserted hospital after being in a coma. He wanders out of the hospital to find that all of London is quiet and still. There is not a soul out. Through his wondering he is attacked by infected humans who seek to kill him. Jim is picked up by a woman named Selena who along with a few others attempt to survive the Rage infested United Kingdom and hold out some hope that somehow they will survive.

Cillian Murphy has been making quite a name for himself as of late with such films as Batman Begins and Red Eye. He has shown extreme talent and a knack for playing villains but in 28 Days Later Jim stars as the protagonist. Murphy gives a solid performance. He seems well relaxed and suited for the rule and really shows off the fear his character is experiencing during the movie. This was no doubt a role that got him on the fast track toward success in mainstream films. Murphy overall gave a solid performance though there really wasn't much to it beside looking scared and confused most of the time. Nevertheless solid performance.

In support is the beautiful Naomie Harris as Jim's companion Selena. Selena is difficult character to portray considering her complexity. She has more of a background then Jim which makes it even harder for Naomie to portray the character when their is more complexity. However, Naomie is quite strong and talented and does great in support, she also is something to look at in this overall dark film. Harris' performance is stronger then Murphy's simply because Harris had to act more, plain and simple, She is the force behind the acting in the film and I would not mind seeing her in more films.

What makes horror films is the tone and setting of the film. One of the largest cities in the European Union hardly seems like a place to focus on for a horror/thriller film. However the tone is set in the opening shot of a deserted and abandoned London, England. Not a single person is on the street and you can't help but sit there and think "My God!" It is shocking and scary just to see a city utterly deserted. The tone for the film works perfectly and helps set the stage for the story in the film. Kudos to Mr. Boyle and his crew.

Another thing that 28 Days Later does so well is the mysteriousness behind the infected. They are 'seen' numerous times throughout the film but usually very quickly for only a few seconds or in the dark for longer. This adds to the overall scariness to the infected. They are constantly hiding and can strike at any moment. This adds to the shock that many thriller and horror films fail to capture. Infected can come out at almost any moment and attack and most of the time the audience is shocked and frightened by it. I overall enjoyed the frightening moments and the dark lighting and couldn't help but feel a bit freaked out afterwards though that is not a bad thing, that is what a horror film should do to a viewer.

The film is very dark and filled with violence and gore, some rough language and nudity. Definitely try to avoid letting kids who aren't yet in high school from seeing this. They will not understand it and will be horrified by what they are presented with on screen. The plot is not too hard to understand, mostly a survivor story and quite a good one at that. One thing viewers must remember is that this film is not meant to be a happy one, it is bleak and does not care much for the sympathy of the audience. You have to adapt to the relatively despairing feeling you will feel when you watch it. You won't feel too happy afterwards but it is a horror film so why should you? Overall the film is quite good, some characters aren't developed well enough but the whole plot and story behind everything makes up for most of it. Genius work by Boyle, a masterpiece of British film making.

4/5 Stars

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005)

It really has grown on me

[7/10 · 18 July 2007]

In the past 5 or so years numerous novel adaptations and family films have come out. Two of the most popular book series ever written, The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, have been brought to the screen and gained considerable amount of praise. I, myself, liked both series of films but doubted that three in a row could be pulled off, especially how close all were coming out. Henceforth, I waited a long time to finally watch The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and when I first saw it, I was a tad bit disappointed but since then the film has grown considerably on me.

The story follows that of four British children during the Battle of Britain. Their mother, seeing it to be too dangerous to remain in London, ships them off to the countryside to spend time with a crazy uncle in a large but boring mansion. There the children try everything they can in order to pass the time. One day, the youngest, Lucy stumbles through a wardrobe and falls into a magical land known as Narnia. Soon all of the children enter into the world and are brought into a battle with Aslan, a mighty lion, against the evil Jadis the White Witch for safety of Narnia.

After I first watched it I found the four children to be rather wooden. They seemed bored and not familiar at all with the books. They seemed just too boring to be enjoyable or at least main characters for the movie. After my third viewing my mind changed. I realized something, I'm not familiar with British children personality and even less familiar with their acting skills. Once I realized this I realized they weren't at all wooden and boring, they simply weren't what I was used to from child actors. I realized how strong of performances they actually gave, especially William Moseley who I now believed portrayed an amazing Peter.

The special effects for the film are tremendous. The visual effects department really out did themselves with this film. They generated amazing animals and creatures for the film that looked entirely authentic and believable. What also made the film is that not everything is computer generated. Most of the characters were in makeup and wore costumes, not lame CGI characters fighting. General Otmin had one of the most incredible looking costumes I've ever seen. I was highly impressed by the art department and effects department with the film.

The film is not without flaws. I found some parts to be rather dry and boring especially the early parts of entering Narnia. Don't get me wrong, the set was amazing and visually stunning, the dialog was just a bit bland. Skandar Keynes really did not give a good performance. The kid tried his best but it just didn't feel like he was into the movie that much. He had the same dull expression on his face and rarely seemed to be trying. Moseley did the best of the children actors but even his inexperience showed just a little.

Now the film does have several strong points. Tilda Swinton proves yet again she is one of the top British actresses out there and can do a variety of roles, including a pretty scary White Witch. Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan (Aslan is CGI) is very good. Neeson shows he has some skill with voice acting. The Battle of Narnia, which is close to the end, is visually stunning and filled with amazing special effects and acting. I love battles in films and this fantasy battle was a rare treat. It was interesting to see animals doing combat (all staged and CGI, no animals were harmed making the film) and seeing the magic C.S. Lewis intended being brought to life with this film.

I strongly recommend the film for the lovers of the book. Some people may think it is a kids film and while there are many cute scenes and cuddly looking animals there are several frightening moments and some pretty intense battle violence for a PG film. There is virtually no language, there's a lot of cuteness to the film but also a valuable lesson to also be learned from it. I won't ruin the message though, you've got to watch it. Overall a very good film that could have been better but is still good as it is now.

3.5/5 stars

The 40-Year-Old Virgin (2005)

Solid film. Shows Carrell has talent and that the rest of the brat pack is just as good

[8/10 · 16 July 2007]

The 40 Year Old Virgin is one film I've been wanting to see for sometime now. I've been a huge fan of Carrel since seeing him in Bruce Almighty and The Office (US). Carrel has shown his talent through his various projects over the past two years and The 40 Year Old Virgin was the one that first brought him to the public. Let's face it, The Office wasn't well liked in the US until '06 and he had a small role in Bruce Almighty. I went in with high hopes for Carrel and The 40 Year Old Virgin and I must say I was not disappointed.

The film follows that of Andy Stitzer, a well meaning electronics store worker. Also working at the store are his three good friends: David, Jay, and Cal. One night while playing poker, his three friends discover that Andy is still a virgin and take it upon themselves to help their good friend to lose his virginity. Andy is very reluctant and confused by the whole ordeal but goes along with his friends not exactly knowing what to do or even if he really wants to.

4/5 Stars Carrel really does show his talent off in the role of Andy Stitzer. He brings out the character of Andy very well. He shows that Andy is a very innocent, very pleasant individual who is well meaning and really a new-bee to the whole situation on the more physical aspects of relationships. Andy is meant to be a sweet guy and Carrel makes him that relatively easy while bringing tons of laughs. An overall very strong performance from Steve Carrel.

In support are three great actors: Paul Rudd (Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy) Romany Malco (Blades of Glory) and Seth Rogen (Knocked Up). All three attempt to give Andy advice the whole movie and all three make hilarious remarks and have memorable scenes. Seth Rogen really helped his career by taking a supporting role in this, now he's in the biggest comedy of 2007. Paul Rudd has always been hilarious and he holds nothing back as the goofy and ex-girlfriend obsessed salesman. Romany Malco is rather new to me though he was hilarious throughout the film yet still the least funniest of the three friends. Overall a good combo to play the three friends.

What makes me like The 40 Year Old Virgin is how much unsuspecting humor there is throughout the film. A good portion of the film was improvised by the actors and this makes for the best humor I think. Also the film is very wise. It doesn't have too many 'dirty' jokes and the ones that are present aren't exactly overly offensive. The jokes are well thought out and, while the language is strong, there is nothing else to really turn a person away. There is barely any potty humor and most of the jokes come from the character Andy's inexperience and failure to understand certain things about women.

Carrel really breaks through with The 40 Year Old Virgin. He is quickly becoming a star in Hollywood with his role on The Office and Little Miss Sunshine. He really gives a lot of laughs in the movie and with the help of a strong supporting cast, makes the film work. The writing is very good, the directing is solid, and the actors are top notch. I had a great time watching this though the first 20 minutes I nearly fell asleep. The rest of the film is golden though and will keep people laughing until the end.

Joyeux Noel (2005)

The kind of war film that doesn't need to show epic battles in order to draw attention

[8/10 · 26 June 2007]

Joyeux Noel is set during the early months of the First World War. Germany has pushed in France and is attempting to break through the French/British lines in order to capture Paris and take France out of the war. Along the western front three different nationalities sit and wait for the same orders, to go over the top and to charge across no mans land to engage their sworn enemies. But Joyeux Noel (French for Merry Christmas) does not show us the great sacrifices made during battle but the shred of humanity these soldiers had left as Christmas Day approached the front line/

We follow three different stories. The first is that of French Lieutenant Audebert as he struggles to lead his men and look good in the eyes of his General father. The second is that of German opera singer Nikolaus Sprink's and his lover Anna. The third is that of Fr. Palmer, a priest turned soldier, who is trying to comfort those at the front as much as possible, especially through his bagpipe playing. All three countries meet on the destined December 24 when Sprinks is overhead in the opposite trenches singing for his men. Eventually everyone comes out to meet one another and a beautiful scene involving a mass with the three armies occurs.

Most of the actors in this film are relatively unknown, at least here in the States. However, I thought the cast did an excellent job. Benno Furmann does an excellent job as the opera singer turned soldier. I found Guillaume Canet's portrayal of French Lieutenant Audebert by far the best acting piece in the film. Many people may also recognize Gary Lewis as the Roman Catholic Fr. Palmer who also gave a strong supporting role in Martin Sorcese's Gangs of New York. The cast may be seemingly unknown to people in the States and abroad but they do a great job at portraying the face of humanity.

Diane Kruger I would say is your only A-List star in the film. She's been bashed again and again for her performance as Sprink's lover and partner in opera and I struggle to understand why this is. I thought she did a wonderful job as Anna. Her delivering of lines was convincing and her lip syncing, though not great, was far better than most of us could probably do with opera. She's not put into the film as eye candy or anything like that. Her character relationship with the German's is very interesting to watch and especially her going to the front lines to sing for them.

The film is full of clichés and corny scenes but you know what, they work. We don't see the corniness, we see the face of humanity. We see a real life event brought to the screen in sweeping fashion. We are shown how through just a little understanding, war can be avoided. We also come to understand is that of, is anyone really responsible for the dead during war. Is their really blood on one's hand's if they kill in war? The film brings up all this as it shows the Christmas Truce of 1914 along the western front.

Stalingrad (1993)

Right to the point. Show's war for what it truly is

[8/10 · 10 June 2007]

Having majored in Western History when I was a student in college seeing the views on World War II are quite discomforting and in a whole completely wrong. World War II was the most graphic and bloody affairs to ever occur in world history. While the Axis Powers conducted many crimes against humanity which is still the view today and the correct many people forget that not every German soldier was out to exterminate the Jewish population, not every Japanese soldier swung a samurai sword around and flew kamikaze missions, and not every Italian soldier was a Fascist. Most of these soldiers for the Axis powers were normal people like you and I caught in a terrible conflict and just happened to be fighting for a country they loved.

The Battle of Stalingrad was arguably the most lethal battles in world history with over 1,500,000 casualties sustained over the course of the battle. The film Stalingrad follows a German platoon and its leader Lieutenant von Witzland as they are reassigned to the Eastern Front to battle the Soviets at Stalingrad. Von Witzland acts as sort of the main character with two other men, Rollo and Fritzi. They all are normal men and seem to be completely unaware to what is happening back in Germany and Poland.

The film follows the course of the battle. The film is overall very bleak when it comes to its portrayal of combat and a soldiers life during the battle. We are shown numerous gruesome battles and intense violence outside of the battles (including a firing squad sequence). Overall the battles are the earliest examples that I know of that portray the loss of limbs and overall in your face death sequences and violence. Much of the inspiration for Saving Private Ryan's battle sequences seem to have come from this film.

The film does not aim to make the German's completely innocent of everything in the film. Several of the higher ranking officers of the army are portrayed in the usual view most people are use to, evil. Most of the soldiers are just normal people who often speak of home. The film makes it clear quite quickly that not all Germans were responsible for what happened during the Holocaust, most of the country and army was entirely oblivious to the fact that genocide was taking place. The film makes it clear that the soldiers in the Germany Army was simply fighting for a cause they really didn't understand and most wished just to return home rather than freezing in negative degree temperatures in Russia.

The film really shows how hellish war is, especially World War II. The battle scenes will shock you with its gritty realism and the story is quite easy to follow as you are simply following a platoon during the battle. As with most war films do not expect much happiness after seeing it. It will leave you in a bit of a depressed mood just from seeing the life most of the soldiers on the Eastern Front faced. Not recommended for children.

4/5 stars

Beavis and Butt-Head Do America (1996)

I haven't laughed so hard in a long time

[7/10 · 6 June 2007]

I grew up being told that most adult oriented cartoons were not any good. That they were stupid, offending, and damaging to one's mind. At least that is what one of my high school teachers told my class when we brought up the subject of the Simpsons. Now I'm not saying I learned anything from watching the 2 hour movie Beavis and Butthead Do America but I am saying that I haven't laughed so hard in a while and that is the sole reason I watched it, to laugh.

Beavis and Butthead, our two friendly dimwitted high school students who are always trying to 'score with chicks', are now in a movie. The story revolves around when Beavis and Butthead get their TV stolen and attempt to find where it is. Soon they are hired by a drunken Muddy Grimes to go to Las Vegas and kill his wife. Not knowing any better they set off for Las Vegas and soon find themselves traveling all over America with a sexual innuendo in their minds at all times.

There is a ton of comedy in the film. Most jokes from the original Beavis and Butthead series came from sexual references and jokes and while the film has plenty of these this is not where all the comedy comes from. A lot of smart humor is also present which I did not notice as a young teen when I first saw this. There is also a lot of play on words and confusion between characters which makes some great comedy (especially the scene on the airplane with Beavis talking to the old lady).

Mike Judge is a master of crude humor. Voicing several characters in the film he brings a ton of laughs both as Beavis and Butthead. A surprising all star cast was assembled for the film. Bruce Willis, Demi Moore, Robert Stack, David Letterman and Cloris Leachman all contribute their voices to the film. Part of the laughter for me came from just hearing Robert Stack voice the stern ATF Agent Flemming and his constant use of cavity searches to obtain knowledge from suspects. The characters and the actors providing the voices are all great and really funny.

The animation is well done and Mike Judge takes us all over America. Another part of what I liked about the film is taking the audience virtually everywhere in America. The original cartoon always involved Beavis and Butthead staying in their hometown but in the movie they get to travel. Judge could have easily had them stay in their old town but instead he tried something new and it works well. The bus ride sequence with the duo seeing road signs is my favorite scene of the film but too hard to explain in a review.

All together though I enjoyed Beavis and Butthead Do America. It's simple and easy to watch. The comedy doesn't slow down at all the whole way through and none of the characters are dry. I wouldn't necessarily allow a child to watch the movie. There are a lot of sexual references in the film along with some language. Unless you want your kids asking you a lot of interesting questions, I wouldn't allow anyone under the age of 12 to watch this. 12 and up feel free to watch it, you'll understand it and laugh the whole way through.

3.5/ 5 stars

Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)

An absolute must see, simply tremendous

[10/10 · 4 June 2007]

After much anticipation I was finally able to see Letters from Iwo Jima. I had left Flags of Our Fathers with a smile on my face saying now that was a great war film and it would be hard to match. Letters from Iwo Jima not only matches Flags of Our Fathers but also surpasses it and went on to tie Saving Private Ryan as the greatest war film I have ever seen. I sat numbed after viewing this film and look forward to watching it again.

Unlike its predecessor, Letters from Iwo Jima follows one story line set on the island of Iwo Jima. Saigo is a baker who was recruited into the Imperial Army of Japan and is stationed on Iwo Jima. General Kuribayashi soon arrives and takes command of the poorly fortified island. Tensions develop between army commanders and Kuribayashi as he fortifies a plan to defend the island. Soon the battle begins when a massive American Fleet arrives planning to take the island within 5 days. Kuribayashi is determined to inflict as much damage and loss of life upon the American's before he will give up the island. The whole while Saigo and his comrades write numerous letters home in the hopes of getting some sense of what home is.

The film is terribly realistic and loaded with violence. However, in no way does Letters from Iwo Jima glorify warfare. Eastwood portrays battles for what they truly are bloody and horrific. We are shown everything from men being lit on fire to being blown to bits to suicides by grenades. We are shown the true futility of war and how each side understands so little about the other. The film is a great message of anti-war just through showing what war truly is: bombardments, death, destruction, and bloody.

Kazunari Ninomiya to my big surprise is a member of a Japanese boy band. When I went to read through the profiles of some of the actors I expected to see a long list of films but was amazed to only find a few films and the bit about him being a member of Arashi (the band). Ninomiya does a fantastic job. We really feel for him but he is not made out to be entirely sympathetic. He shows much disdain for some people around him and occasionally runs his mouth toward fellow comrades, especially Shimizu. Saigo is a very believable character and Ninomiya portrays him quite well. I applaud his performance.

Ken Watanabe gives perhaps the performance of his career. His stunning deliverance of lines and the sheer look of him on the screen is enough to make a viewer sit up and listen to everything he has to say. He gives off the true sense of a man who is a great military commander but also a human being. We are shown him writing home and also told of some of his past. It is quite moving to hear his views on the war, the battle, and of his men. Kuribayashi is one of my favorite military men in history and Watanabe did a great portrayal of him.

Ryo Kase closes out the lead actors. He is a silent fellow who is looked on with much disdain from Saigo. Saigo believes Shimizu to be a member Kempeitai (the very strict and often corrupt military police of Imperial Japan). This story is eventually expanded on later in the film. I felt the most sympathy for Shimizu for he had no intention of coming to the island, is not liked by anyone for an assumption by two fellow soldiers, and represents some of the ignorance that was put into soldiers back in World War II, viewing the enemy as savages though he later states "he knows nothing of the enemy."

What the movie does so well is its portrayal of humanity and the ignorance that is at the root of international conflicts. The film portrays both the good and the bad of the Imperial Japanese Army. The good side being Lt. Col. Nishi and the bad being Lt. Ito. We come to realize that most Hollywood films that make the Japanese Army out to be savages are dead wrong and that both sides on a war are very much human. The most poignant scene by far involves this when Nishi cares for and speaks with a dying Marine. It shows that understanding must occur for anyone to have peace with another in the world.

Letters from Iwo Jima is a powerful film. We are shown the good and the bad of both sides. The film is about 98% in Japanese with three or four scenes spoken in English. The cast is all Japanese which was a must for the film giving it a more authentic feel to it. The battles are gritty and real and will shake you up. By far a tremendous film with an amazing message of humanity and survival. The one message I got from it the most was, as spoken by Lt. Col. Nishi: "Do what is right because it is right."

5/5 stars

16 Blocks (2006)

Good entertainment, a bit shaky of a story line, better acting then expected

[6/10 · 4 June 2007]

16 Blocks is a 'beat the clock' film. Jack Mosley has 118 minutes to deliver a police informant who has cut a deal with the D.A. to testify against a group of corrupt detectives and cops. Things become complicated when Jack's ex-partner comes to kill Eddie, the man being escorted, and now must go 16 blocks with Frank and his group of cops chasing after him, all of whom are corrupt and will stop at nothing to keep Eddie quiet.

Bruce Willis is a great actor and this is one of his less appreciated roles. I found him to be very intriguing with his virtually silent mood and his many problems. Willis, even with what seems to be fewer lines then usual and far from his comedic role in the Die Hard series. What Willis' character has is not much of a personality and a much darker side to him then shown in the film. I found what he did with his role as Jack to be a top notch performance for a film like this.

Mos Def, who plays Eddie, gives, in my opinion, the best performance of his career. He's a non-stop talking kind of person who seems to have little care in the world for anything besides baking and talking. I wasn't expecting Mos Def to do much of anything on screen but when Eddie and Jack began to get hunted his brilliant acting became clear. I found his acting to be a great example of under-appreciated acting in films.

The film is heavily under-appreciated which I have trouble finding out why. Yes the plot is a bit shaky. I'm pretty sure corrupt cops who are trying to silence a witness would not be attempting to kill him in broad daylight on the streets of New York City but then again I'm not a cop and I'm not a corrupt one at that. Also some of the shootouts seemed a bit unbelievable especially considering the amount of risk some of the characters put themselves into and how little they care about it.

Overall the story was a bit shaky at times but still managed to work. I found Bruce Willis' and Mos Def's performances both very strong. It's an entertaining flick. There is a lot of action and violence which I'm sure a lot of people won't mind seeing. What makes the film a little better then the typical action shoot out film is that you end up caring for some of the characters, such as Eddie. Overall not to much wrong with the film. It's a case of a sub-par story line with good action and good acting around it.

3/5 Stars

The Pitts (2003)

They have bad luck? I have the worst luck in the world for watching this

[1/10 · 3 June 2007]

Yet again Fox fails to deliver. This time it was "The Pitts", Fox's attempt at a satire. The show follows the story of a modern American family as they have terrible luck in everyday life. I guess the premise is alright, a family with bad luck struggling through life. The main problem with the show is that it tries way to hard. None of it is believable no matter how hard it tries to make it believable. Yes it was suppose to be a comedy series but still none of it made any sense.

The cast isn't that bad when you look at it. Dylan Baker is a very good actor and I've liked him in a lot of stuff but in The Pitts he is terrible. Kellie Waymire (bless her soul) is equally as bad with their children not doing much better. The supporting cast around the family made me think that the producers possibly just pulled random people off the street and tried to make them do comedy. It has some of the worst acting in a cumulative way that I have ever seen for a show.

Fox made a series mistake ever deciding to green light this project. Each episode was terrificly bad in its own way. The episode with the VW bus wanting to literally marry Lizzy Caplan's character stands out to me as one of the worst experiences of watching TV I have ever had. I seriously sat stunned that I had just watched the whole thing afterwards and didn't move for at least 20 minutes after. It was probably the biggest waste of time of my entire life. Trust me, if a re-run ever comes on TV run. Don't think about it, just run from your living room and don't come back for about an hour. Trust me you'll save an hour of your life.

.5/5 Stars

United 93 (2006)

Emotional, powerful will leave you frozen in your seat

[9/10 · 28 May 2007]

When United 93 started to be advertised in theaters there was one thing I heard over and over again: "Too soon." Many could make the argument for the film being to soon but I do not see it this way. I found the film to be very much needed and a very important film in general. This film shows us that though how terrible the events of 9/11 were for the United States, it also shows how there was heroism occurring during these terrible events from ordinary people who were simply on a flight to San Francisco.

The film just follows the events of September 11, 2001 centered around United 93 and its passengers. It also shows in depth the work from air traffic controllers and the military to prevent the attacks though they are virtually unaware of what is happening on United 93. About how the film shows us the passengers and the terrorists on board the plane and what may very well have been happening in ill-fated flight. No one knows for sure what exactly happened, all that is known is that the passengers saved hundreds by attacking the terrorists. I get goosebumps just thinking of the film.

The actors are virtually all unknowns. I did not recognize one face in the film but that does not mean it was not amazing acting. The actors bring out the characteristics and realism needed for the film. The actors are practically ordinary people and the people they portray (all real people, no fictional) are ordinary people. No one is made out to be an overarching hero. They simply decided to stand up for themselves which makes the film even better. No fictional heroes makes a better film in any case.

There are no sappy scenes. Yes we do see the passengers saying their goodbyes to family members, wives, children, etc but this is all true. There are records of this happening and the film simply tells the story how it was, no matter how sad it is. Trust me you will tear up during this film. I'm 25 years old and my girlfriend is 26 and both of us were still not able to hold back tears. The last scene is one of the most emotional sequences I've ever seen. Just powerful and emotional in every way imaginable. I sat stunned after seeing the film.

I only have one complaint with the film. There is a character put on the plane who happens to be German. Well he is made out to be the only man to show appeasement to the situation. He wishes to negotiate with the terrorists whether then attack them. He wants to let them do what they want so they don't get hurt. I believe this was taking the story a bit too far. Details are still unclear about what exactly happened on United 93 and to make a passenger out to be giving into the terrorists I think does not fit when it is clear that the passengers weren't giving into the terrorists and were ready to attack. It doesn't matter if that is what he really felt. They shouldn't have made him out to be this way. They should have just made him to be normal.

Other than that one complaint I have no problems with the film. It is exceptionally powerful. I teared up more then once and was haunted by some of the images, including real footage of the towers burning and being hit by the other planes. The portrayal of the terrorists is done right. Obviously they had been corrupted by Osama bin Laden and no jabs are taken at the Islamic faith by the film which is very important. The film shows heroism can occur even in the worst of times. It also shows that when we work together we can accomplish anything. Islam is not portrayed in a bad way and the events seem to be pin point accurate from the knowledge we have.

4.5/5 Stars

Suikoden II (1998 Video Game)

A classic RPG, I can play it over and over again and never get bored with it

[10/10 · 27 May 2007]

I don't know what it is about Genso Suikoden II but I can't stop playing it. I've played it countless times and love it each time I do play it. It's simply a surreal experience. It drew me in as one of the first RPG's (Rule Playing Games for anyone wondering) and made me love video games of his genre in general. Maybe it is the amazing characters, maybe it is the massive battles, maybe it is the wonderful story line. I really don't know why but I find Suikoden II (as referred to by everyone in the States) to be one of the best video games I have ever played.

You get to run around the City-State of Jowston as you begin to lead an uprising against the oppressive and tyrannical Kingdom of Highland as Luca Blight leads terror across the country. You play as the Hero (you name him) as he battles personal problems with being attached to one of the 27 Runes of Destiny and the betrayal of a close friend. Through the game you must unite the City-States and gain allies, unite the 108 Stars of Destiny (which is loads of fun) and go to battle with Luca Blight and the Kingdom of Highland across Jowston.

The lead characters are amazing. The hero and Nanami are great lead characters. What makes the game work like so many other games is the villain. The supporting characters: Viktor, Flik, Shu, Apple, etc are all great characters. They all have stories behind them, pasts that can be unlocked in the games that make for an even more believable experience. Vikotr and Flik have become two of my favorite characters in video games. They are simply hilarious and great.

Without a strong villain this game fails. Luca Blight turns out to be one of the best video game villains of the 1990's and makes this game work. He is cynical, mad, and overall malicious. He stops at nothing to get what he feels is right. He'll kill anyone he wants without question. Only your main character may oppose him. It is simply an incredible villain that beats out any of the other Suikoden villains, past and present. Luca will always be remembered for being true fear to the player playing the game.

What is featured in all of the Suikoden games is the building up the castle idea. You collect the Stars of Destiny and your castle grows and grows and grows. You can simply wander around it exploring anywhere you want. I love this feature of the game and makes it so you are not simply restricted to following the story line. You can take as much time as you want. You are also able to roam all over the country, go to cities and forts, meet people, collect books, recipes, and various other things that may improve your castle. It is the minor things in this game that make it so great.

5/5 Stars

Facing the Giants (2006)

A great attempt at making a religious sports film but its amateurism shows more than anything

[4/10 · 26 May 2007]

Facing the Giants attempts to be both a sports film and a religious film. It's a feel good movie in which your suppose to walk out from it with a smile on your face and a skip in your step. I didn't walk away like that. I walked away a bit disappointed and a bit annoyed with the whole film. I give the Sherwood Baptist Church much praise for such a bold attempt at making a film. Few people have that much dedication to make a feature length film but still I did not like their finished work.

The story focuses on losing coach Grant Taylor as he tries to inspire his losing group of players at Shiloh Christian Academy. Grant is also faced with the dilemma that he wishes to have children but may be infertile along with his car being a heap of junk and his house smelling of road kill. Grant puts all his trust in God and miraculously everything begins to go right for everyone. Side stories follow one of the players who is the kicker for the team and also of Grant's wife, Brooke.

Now, I am a Roman Catholic and I do have a lot of faith in God but the film just took it one step to far. Christianity teaches us that God works in mysterious ways and that sometimes what we want won't always happen. What Facing the Giants says is that if we put all of our faith in God we'll go undefeated in football with a team that could lose to a grade school team. Now the film tries to be inspirational but for anyone who doesn't believe in God, this film won't make them believe in Him and just find the whole film ridiculous.

Alex Kendrick, who directed the film, is the lead in the film. He does have a few good moments. His character just gets to mushy when something doesn't go right. He's crying one minute and the next he's standing up to people. I don't mind a character with faith but Kendrick's character is made out to be a priest. He is constantly wandering around reading the Bible and preaching to his players. His character just comes off as being to unbelievable with his constant preaching and little focus on anything remotely related to football.

Now the film does have some good acting. Alex's two assistant coaches, Brady and J.T., are both very believable and both actors give good performances as them. They both provide comic relief and break away from that common white people hate black people in the south. Instead they are good friends and are always providing laughs to the audience. Both are the most believable characters of the film and could do regular work in films if they wanted, they are that good.

However, strong performances from two supporting characters isn't enough to bring this film up from what it digs itself into. The films tries to make it understood to people who have little knowledge of God how He can do anything. But for anyone outside the Catholic faith, they will have no idea how all of a sudden everything goes right. The story is just too unbelievable. Nothing makes sense and the preaching takes up about half the film. Sure the football scenes are done right, except for the last scene which is utterly ridiculous but that is all that is right. Most of the dialog is flat and boring and the actors show how inept they are at acting. Overall a film made with well intentions but fails miserably.

2/5 Stars