moviegeek310 Reviews

WALL·E (2008)

Best Pixar Film EVER

[10/10 · 8 July 2008]

Imagine for a second a movie with barely any dialogue, about a lonely computer generated robot and his quest for love. Now how could a movie like that generate a 97% positive tomato reader on rottentomatoes.com? Or be number 20 on IMDb's top 250 movie list? Well, to find those answers you'll just have to see it for yourself. What you will find is one of the sweetest and funniest family films ever made. And the best Pixar film to date. What? Better than "Finding Nemo" or "Toy Story" you say? Oh yes, I wouldn't lie.

"Wall E" has a very simple yet effective plot about a cleaner droid left on earth to tidy up our very dirty planet while the humans go on a "space cruise". After many, many years Wall E is the only droid left and his only companion is a little bug. That is until an investigator droid named Eve comes and leads him on a grand adventure.

Something about this movie really connected with me. Everything was so well done, like the film was made by ultra high strung perfectionists. The filmmakers convey a world of emotions from Wall E, yet all he ever says is "Eeva!" Sorry R2-D2, I have a new favorite robot. They have gotten so good at the CGI that everything looks like it's completely real. You will laugh so hard at parts that you might fall on the floor. Like a scene on an immaculate spaceship where Wall E makes a mess and an obsessive-compulsive robot throws a fit.

And don't even get me started on the short film called "Presto" which opens the film. It's about a hungry little rabbit and his magician owner who refuses the poor bunny his carrot unless he does tricks. I will warn you not to partake of any popcorn during this short lest you want to choke and have to call an ambulance and miss the amazing movie.

Pixar just keeps stepping it up movie after movie and they never fail to please and enchant with quality films that kids and adults alike will adore for ages. "Wall E" will go down as one of the greatest family films of all time.

Juno (2007)

Weird, Sharp and Witty

[10/10 · 7 January 2008]

You can now add "Juno" is my ever-changing list of favorite movies. This film so accurately portrays the awkward teen years, and every second of it is brilliant and inspired. "Juno" is about a teen girl of the same name – think that's weird; her sister's name is Liberty Bell – played wonderfully by Ellen Page who gets pregnant from geeky boyfriend Michael Cera of "Superbad" and "Arrested Development" fame. At first she wants an abortion but quickly changes her mind and decides to give the child to a nice husband and wife, played by Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner, who can't have children, instead.

Ellen Page, who most likely won't win any major awards because of who she's up against, definitely carries the movie. She has acting chops that surpass that of the most seasoned professional. She carries out to perfection someone deeply confused and pregnant and all the while spouting off obnoxious remarks. Diablo Cody has crafted a sharp, weird and witty script worthy of an Oscar, and the cast delivers the dialogue with cutting precision. Michael Cera, once again playing awkward so well, and J.K. Simmons as Juno's loving yet strange father especially stand out.

There are so many good things to say about this sweet, heartwarming film. The opening sequence features Juno, half real life and half drawn, walking through a cartoon town drinking a jug of juice while crayon-drawn credits come on then get erased off with beautiful folk music playing in the background. That is what kind of movie this is. And oh the music, it was so good I downloaded it right after seeing it. "Juno" also raises some interesting questions and has some great life-lessons. So basically this is all around superb.

The Mist (2007)

Extremely Disturbing yet Well Made

[8/10 · 28 December 2007]

Before reading this review and if you're even considering seeing this movie I'm going to say this straight away; if you get queasy or are easily scarred during movies, read no further, this movie is not for you. But if you're still thinking it looks interesting, I'll tell you the plot, and then maybe you'll reconsider.

This film is based on a novella by horror mastermind Stephen King, and follows a group of people who get stuck in a supermarket after a large mist covers the entire town. At first they think it's just a harmless bit of fog but they soon find out they're dead wrong. In the mist lives creatures, horrible monsters from another dimension who one by one take someone every night and kill them. But one guy played with gritty realism by newcomer Thomas Jane is determined to get out and when he does he stumbles upon unspeakable horrors.

Still find it appealing? I thought not. Director Frank Darabont who made King's other books "Shawshank Redemption" and "The Green Mile" into masterpieces has created a grotesque, disturbing film about the things humans will resort to when confronted with fear. Kind of like "Lord of the Flies" complete with a sacrifice, which is definitely the most disturbing part in the film. And I'm not saying that this movie is badly done, no, this movie is extremely well made, and a truly horrific movie but its not because of the giant mutant bugs, but because of the characters.

In this movie is a character that, without a doubt, will become the most hated villain of the year; it's a religious lady played by Marcia Gay Harden. Though it bothered me that the villain was religious she isn't religious in a Christian sense, she's a demonic extremist who believes the only way to appease the creatures is to kill the non-believers and offer them as a sacrifice. It is truly sick and twisted.

So I don't recommend this film to anyone unless you're a gore-loving fanatic. And it doesn't even end happy, the end sequence is shocking and depressing and will make you leave the theater feeling in the dumps and like you've been pounded repeatedly with a sledge hammer.

For entertainment value I give it 2 out of 10. But for being well made, engrossing, and truly scary I give it 8 out of 10.

Beowulf (2007)

Breathtaking and weird

[8/10 · 28 December 2007]

Two years ago "The Polar Express" was released and it was done entirely in 3-D motion capture. The result was amazing landscapes but the people looked glassy and their eyes were soulless and lifeless. Two years later the same thing has been done for "Beowulf" and this time the result is even better. The landscapes, people, and creatures all look better than real life, but the eyes still look soulless, which is why the motion capture idea will never fully work. You can never animate that look in our eyes, that little twinkle, and since they can't it takes away from the realism. That being said this movie is stunning, amazingly well done, and a man's movie. Sure, girls will like it, if they like seeing a guy battle eight sea monsters, simultaneously flying from monster to monster. So this is defiantly for us geeks. Another sequence features Beowulf battling a dragon for a good seven minutes, and it is one of the best action scenes this year. Geek-out time!

Though there are many battles, some parts in-between do drag, all you can think while the characters chat away is, "How are they going to blow me away in the next scene?" And they always do, "Beowulf" will fry your senses. This is not the "Beowulf" you remember reading though, the only thing that remains the same is Beowulf battling Grendel.

And the character of Grendel is a huge achievement. He is so grotesque and yet at the same time you feel pity for him. Props to the designers for making a creature that beats even Gollum of "Lord of the Rings". Ray Winstone as Beowulf does a great job making a regularly bigger, older guy into a muscular warrior all thanks to CG. And of course there is Angelina Jolie as Grendel's serpent like mother, and that's all I'll say. And when you see it, be sure to see it in 3-D, because unlike other 3-D films released lately where they fry your eyeballs, this one doesn't hurt your eyes. And it is so cool seeing snow and arrows fly in front of your eyes, and buckets and buckets of creature blood that dump all over you.

Battles, monsters, and Angelina Jolie, what more could a guy want?

I Am Legend (2007)

Enjoyable yet not scary

[7/10 · 28 December 2007]

I didn't quite know what to think of "I Am Legend after it ended. I liked it, but at the same time there was just something about it that made me dislike it. In the tradition of "Cast Away", Will Smith is alone, and the only thing he can talk to is his dog and some store mannequins. His character Robert Neville is part of the 1% of survivors of a virus that turns everyone into zombie/vampires. He is totally alone in Manhattan, and watching him speed through deserted Times Square is extremely eerie. During the day he hunts and tries to find a cure for the virus, and at night he hides from the "dark seekers".

There is one of my problems, the trailer promised a freaky movie, and it is until we see the creatures, then we find out they look almost laughable. Though a scene when Neville is in a pitch black warehouse, before he first sees them, will scare the daylights out of you. Even though the dark seekers are not scary, the director still manages to make you jump at least 8 times. The most I've ever jumped in a movie. The creatures look like poorly done CGI; bald humans with rotting teeth and red eyes. And that's not very scary to me. Also, towards the middle, some scenes start to drag since you have realized that it won't be scary.

That aside, Will Smith is brilliant playing a quiet, dark, brooding character instead of his usual one liner cracking macho men. He literally carries the movie on his own and actually makes otherwise tedious scenes, like giving his dog a bath, interesting, or talking to his mannequin friend, Fred, believable. Director Francis Lawrence did a good job for the most part creating an eerie and dark movie, yet he failed horribly in making a believable, scary vampire hybrid, and with tons of plot holes in an otherwise interesting concept. Also, the ending is sorely lacking, if they would've come up with a better ending the movie would seem even better, but sadly they did not.

This is a very enjoyable movie for the hour and forty minutes that it plays out, but the second it's done it becomes mostly forgettable. "I Am Legend" is one of those movies you see once, like it, but then never see it again. Already this film has made 76 million in the first three days, so see it mostly because it'll be the "thing" right now, and also see it because of the amazing Will Smith.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)

Brilliant and Twisted

[10/10 · 28 December 2007]

What a messed up, yet brilliant movie "Sweeney Todd" is, Oscar-worthy also comes to mind. Though because of the extremely dark subject matter, it might not do as well. Based on a play by Stephen Sondheim it's about a barber played by Johnny Depp is living the good life until evil Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman) wrongfully throws Sweeney into prison and takes his wife and child for his own. When Sweeney gets out, revenge is the only thing on his mind, so he opens a barber shop but instead of shaving faces, he slits throats in preparation for when the Judge sits in his chair. But what does he do with the bodies you may ask? He lets his tenant Mrs. Lovett, owner of the worst pie shop in London; make the bodies in pies, which sell like wildfire.

So as you can see, this is a truly messed up movie, even more so because it's a musical, and a comedy. You may think it sounds disgusting, it is, but not as bad as one would think since everything is over the top and done lightly. The genius who is Tim Burton puts his signature Gothic stamp on the film and makes 1800s London look like a bleak, almost black and white city. If it gets no other Oscars it should get Best Art Direction and Best Director for Burton who is long overdue. And oh-my, the actors, almost all of them are superb. And yes, Depp can sing. It's about time he gets an Oscar as well, especially for making us care for a mad, crazy, slightly demonic barber. Now that's tough. Alan Rickman is brilliantly creepy and evil as the horrible judge. Sacha Baron Cohen as Sweeney's rival Signor Pirelli is hilarious. The one weak point of the film is Helena Bonham Carter as Mrs. Lovett. Her acting chops are great as always, but her singing is on the weak side. And one wonders whether Burton cast her simply because she's his wife. Otherwise "Sweeney Todd" is an engrossing, Gothic, twisted, fun, and just plain weird movie, much like Burton's other films. Though this is my favorite, second only to his masterpiece, "Big Fish". I highly recommend this, but the easily queasy should definitely not see this, in fact, stay far away. Fans of musicals, Johnny Depp, Tim Burton, or weird movies will be enthralled and delighted by "Sweeney".

The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

Weird and not very likable

[4/10 · 28 December 2007]

"The Nightmare Before Christmas" has been called a Halloween classic by many respected reviewers, yet after seeing it in 3-D re-release, I don't see what is so special. The story is this; the king of Halloween Town, Jack Skellington, has become bored of the same old thing every year, so after wandering through a haunted wood he comes upon Christmas Town. There he discovers what he has been missing all along: warmth and joy. So Jack kidnaps Santa and tries to make Christmas happen himself. Here's the thing though, it's a kid's movie, so it was very boring for me, but if I was a little kid I would've been scared silly of this movie. The visuals are dark and quite Gothic, and the main character is a lanky skeleton with dark holes for eyes.

I must say, even though the visuals are Gothic, they are stunning. The whole movie is done in claymation so what they did is amazing. The opening sequence "It's Halloween" is a great song to introduce the movie with great eye candy, but all that quickly gets tiresome as you start to realize how truly weird and twisted it all is. Even Santa and Christmas Town looks somewhat creepy with a Gothic touch, it's slightly depressing. All the songs are in minors and flats which sets the overall tone, and none of the songs, except the above mentioned, are any good. You're probably thinking, "I'm a big Tim Burton fan though, so I'll like it!" Wrong! I'm the biggest Tim Burton fan ever and I didn't like it. Plus, contrary to popular belief, this film is not directed by Burton, he only produced it, it was directed by veteran clay puppeteer Henry Selick. And the script was mediocre, not bad, but not particularly good either.

The only other sequence I liked was the signature picture of Jack in front of the huge full moon. Otherwise, the 3-D was nothing special, though it does add some nice depth perception and makes you feel like you're watching it all in a box. The only reason I'd recommend this movie is if you already have seen it and loved it, or you like twisted, downright weird and boring movies.

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

A Great Return for the Western

[9/10 · 19 September 2007]

Finally the western genre has returned. In 1993 "Tombstone" was released and was a big hit; it revitalized the dying, or already dead, western. Since then, even with as big as hit as it was, Hollywood just hasn't released any westerns, at least not mainstream ones. There just wasn't money to be found in them, and audiences largely ignored them, until now. Talk abounded surrounding a trailer for a movie called "3:10 to Yuma" starring some of Hollywood's biggest stars. For once, wanting to see a western was the "thing" again. And the movie that promised a "cool" western really delivered.

"Yuma" is based on a 1950s movie based on a short story. This time directed by "Walk the Line's" James Mangold and starring Christian Bale and Russell Crowe. Bale plays a down and out farmer, Dan Evans, who has a huge debt to pay to the local baddies, so when notorious outlaw, Ben Wade (Crowe), is captured and sentenced to death in Yuma, Ben is more than willing to collect the ransom to take Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma. But Ben's old gang isn't about to let that happen.

Christian Bale is once again brilliant as he will be for every movie he ever makes. Crowe is equally great as he balances on the line of pure evil and showing some good side. And that's the cool thing, Ben is such a dark, suave, well mannered guy one second, the next he's putting three bullets into his gang member for messing up. Other notables are Ben Foster as Wade's right hand, Charlie Prince, who is so extremely evil he makes Wade look like an angel. And Peter Fonda as a mean-tempered, revenge bent sheriff is great as well. The cinematography is stunning switching from the serene desert, to a fast-paced, intense gun battle. Everything is just so well paced and directed, it's all around a great movie.

"3:10 to Yuma" is chock full of heart-stopping shoot outs and non-stop intensity, so fans of modern action films will love this, as will fans of westerns, and anyone who just likes a good time.

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

Exxxcellent!

[10/10 · 7 August 2007]

Without even reviewing "The Simpson's Movie" I could tell you to go see it and you probably would. If you have seen the "Simpson's" on TV in the past 18 years and thought it was hilarious or even semi-funny then you'll love this movie. Of course, if you think "The Simpson's" are boring, crude, not funny, and don't get the humor, then steer clear of this film. For those who are fans, you won't be disappointed. I laughed probably once every ten seconds, no joke. In fact, this movie is so funny and well made that it is already #148 on IMDb's Top 250 Movies of All Time list.

I won't disclose any plot details for fear of ruining a funny joke or gag, but I will say that there is actually a plot. It's not just 90 minutes random humor, though there is plenty of that. Everything about "The Simpson's Movie" is great, it all flows so nicely, and the jokes fly so fast and furious that you wish the movie would go on forever. I will caution some of you though, while it is a very mild PG-13, the film still makes fun of everything, and I do mean everything. From global warming, to republicans and democrats, to homosexuality, to Christianity, to making fun of itself – at one point Homer asks why we'd pay money to see something we could see for free on TV – and even makes fun of the rock band Green Day. So if you're easily offended, I wouldn't recommend the "Simpson's Movie"

Just like the TV show the voice talents fit their characters like a glove. Especially Dan Castellaneta as Homer and about 20 other characters. So take my word for it, "The Simpson's Movie" is downright hilarious, and very smartly done. It's just all around great, easily the best cartoon film ever made. I give it 10 out of 10. It's rated PG-13 for crude humor throughout.

Ocean's Thirteen (2007)

Great Film

[9/10 · 30 June 2007]

If you liked "Ocean's 11", and hated "Ocean's 12", then you'll love "Ocean's 13". But if you hated "11", and loved "12", I don't know what planet you're from. "Ocean's 13" is a great return to form of "11" after the disappointment of the second film. All the fun one-liners, the chemistry between the cast, and the smart script are back, and even better than before.

This time around, Rueben helps casino tycoon/bad guy Willie Bank (a wonderfully evil Al Pacino) design and build the ultimate casino. But when the time comes to open it, Willie strikes Rueben out of his share of the money, which results to Rueben having a heart attack. This angers Ocean and his ten heist-planning pals, so they devise a plan to sabotage the opening night of the hotel and avenge Rueben.

The best parts are watching the characters sabotage everything, from fixing slot machines to win jackpots at certain times, to fake earthquakes, and even annoying a hotel critic (David Paymer) to hilarious results, while posing as a various hotel employees.

The thing that makes this film is the actors. Everyone and more is back excluding Catherine Zeta-Jones, and Julia Roberts who are only mentioned in passing reference. Personally I'm glad they're not back. It's an ensemble piece so everyone has to be good, and everyone very much are. Among the best are Andy Garcia, Matt Damon, Don Cheadle, Bernie Mac, Casey Affleck, and many others. The best though are of course George Clooney and Brad Pitt, the chemistry between them is amazing and hilarious to watch.

Kudos also go to the writers Brian Koppelman and David Levien who wrote a smart, complex, and witty script, and director Steven Soderbergh (who also did the cinematography, and produced it) who crafted a sharp, enjoyable film. My one complaint is that it is a tad confusing at times, but by the end, everything makes sense.

This is a great film, and even better film-making. "Oceans 13" is probably one of the smartest films since "Oceans 11".

Surf's Up (2007)

Surf's Up hilarious and original

[8/10 · 30 June 2007]

Once again, I've been won over by an animated movie. Normally, I'm not a big fan of cartoon films because they aren't smart, engaging, or geared to anyone older than eight. There have been a few I've liked; "Over the Hedge", "Open Season", the "Shrek" films, and some Pixar. Now "Surf's Up" has been added to that list.

The film follows the tale of young penguin Cody Maverick who loves to surf, yet lives in the Artic. One day a talent scout for the annual Penguin World Surfing Championship finds young Cody and brings him to Penguin Island, the penguin surfing capital. There, Cody must compete against the best of the best, but he can't do it without the help of a mentor, an old famous surfer.

The coolest thing is that it's filmed documentary style, so the camera is a little wobbly, and the "film crew" conducts hilarious interviews. It's a totally original movie; who ever would've thought to do a film about a documentary about surfing penguins? It's a silly concept that works so well. Not only that, but the visuals are spectacular. Imagine the painstaking process of creating wave upon wave of water, frame by frame, it is simply amazing. The main voice talents – Shia LeBeouf, Zooey Deschanel, and Jeff Bridges – fit their characters so well. As does all the other voices in the film. But what I liked most was how they didn't let you stop laughing. In the first ten minutes I laughed probably thirty times, and not just chuckles, no, a few times I got close to tears.

"Surf's Up" also has a great message about going for your dreams and never giving up, but it's not like we've never heard that one before. On top of that, parents will find nothing objectionable, so take all the kids, they'll adore it. As will you.

Shrek the Third (2007)

Pretty darn good!

[8/10 · 26 May 2007]

Unlike the first two "Shrek" films, "Shrek the Third" is getting roasted by many critics. Most are saying it's pointless, mediocre, not as smart, and not funny. While I agree with the first three comments, the part about not being funny is not true in my book. The plot goes something like this: When his new father-in-law, King Harold falls ill, Shrek is looked at as the heir to the land of Far, Far Away. Not one to give up his beloved swamp, Shrek recruits his friends Donkey and Puss in Boots to install the rebellious Artie as the new king. While Shrek is away, Prince Charming gathers a band of fairy tale villains to take over Far, Far Away, and it's up to Fiona to stop them.

You can probably tell just from reading the plot that the filmmakers are running out of ideas for "Shrek", and that this film was made only for the hundreds of millions it would make. This stands to reason. Director Andrew Adamson of the first two "Shrek" films doesn't return for this one, which might explain why it wasn't as good, Chris Miller, who hadn't directed at all previously, took over. Many jokes are a rehash of things we have already seen before, and not done any better. Still, I laughed quite a bit, and I know you will too.

The entire original cast is back yet again – probably for the last time – to voice the huge line-up of characters. Antonio Banderas as Puss-in-Boots once again steals the show, as does new character Merlin, voiced by Eric Idle. Another welcome addition is Amy Poehler, Cheri Oteri, and Maya Rudolph from "Saturday Night Live" as cranky princesses. One character I didn't like was Artie voiced by Justin Timberlake, he is the annoying, bratty, and stupid prince who just gets on your nerves.

The animation is excellent as always, and for every two bad jokes, there was one good one –a school pep rally tells you to "Just Say Nay". So, like "Spider-man 3", which wasn't as good as the first two either, "Shrek 3" is entertaining. It's a good way to spend 90 minutes, and for the most part, you won't regret it and your kids will adore it. Critics need to realize we don't see movies like Spidey and Shrek to watch a great movie, we watch it to be entertained. But frankly, I don't think critics even know the meaning of the word.

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

Third Times a Charm

[9/10 · 26 May 2007]

Third times a charm with "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End." In my opinion it is the best of the trilogy hands down. I think I would be quite hard to find a movie as fun as this one this summer. Every scene is a blast to watch with the hilarious visuals or dialogue, or a great battle scene. Here's the downer though, the plot is so muddled, and confusing, there are so many times that you have no idea what's going on. Even director Gore Verbinski said he was confused at times. It's not a good sign when the maker doesn't even know what's going on. On top of that, half the time you have no idea who is on which side, as everyone backstabs each other at least once. So I won't even attempt to explain the plot, I would probably mess it up. But did I mention the movie is fun?

Johnny Depp, as always, is spectacular as Captain Jack Sparrow. There were times in the second film when it seemed that the filmmakers were forcing the Sparrow humor, but he has found his niche in this film again. There are scenes, like one with fifty Jacks in Davy Jones Locker, where you'll bust a gut laughing. Keira Knightley actually stepped it up for this one. She no longer seems like just a pretty face, she actually does some serious acting, and has some hilarious scenes. Orlando Bloom, is, well, he's just Orlando Bloom. A huge 'welcome back' goes to Geoffrey Rush who returns as Captain Barbossa. He not only is extremely cool, but he also may have passed Jack Sparrow as my favorite character. He is that good and you'll see why. Let's see, there are so many new and old characters I could mention that were amazing, but that would take up the whole page. There is one more worthy of mention though, Keith Richards. Yep, the Keith Richards as Jack's father. It is only a brief scene, but it is certainly a scene-stealer.

The C/G in "Pirates" has stepped it up even more than the amazing effects we saw in the first and second "Pirates". For example, the last battle takes place in a huge maelstrom, a battle scene that'll go down in movie history. Your jaw will be on the popcorn-covered floor of the theater. Just a word of warning though, This "Pirates" is the most brutal and violent of the three, with the body count innumerable.

This is certainly not going to be the best film-making of the summer, but it will be the most fun and entertaining one. And clocking in at just under three hours; be prepared to spend lots of time with pirates. For me, I could watch 'Pirates of the Caribbean" movies forever, so a three hour running time didn't hinder me, and it shouldn't hinder you. Everything is wrapped up nicely in the end, but you can tell they are hinting at many more stories for Captain Jack. Oh boy, I'm excited! And like every other blockbuster released so far, critics are roasting it. Don't they ever take a break? People watch "Pirates of the Caribbean" for fun, not for excellent film-making. Why can't they get that through their heads? Don't listen to them, see this film and have the time of your lives and be sort of confused.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Possibly the best!

[8/10 · 12 May 2007]

Well folks, summer is now officially here! The first summer blockbuster has been released, and it has broken six box office records. And rightly so, "Spider-Man 3" is easily the most entertaining, if not the best of trilogy. It is darker, more action-packed, and funnier than either of the first two. Though I thought it was the best, I still have way more quibbles with this one than the first two Spidey's combined. I will get to that later, but first, I will gush about it.

First off, there isn't just one villain, or even two, there are four villains in "Spider-Man 3". Some may say it's overwhelming, I say it was flippin' awesome. In the last battle sequence, Spider-Man battles all of them in one of the coolest super-hero fight scenes ever made, a major geek-out for fans. And the actors who play the villains are equally great. Thomas Haden Church as the Sandman does very well, though sometimes his performance seems a bit stiff and forced. Topher Grace as Eddie Brock/Venom was perfectly cast; he does brilliantly as a cocky reporter, then amazingly creepy as Venom. I will also say this, the way director Sam Raimi portrayed Venom was right on, since he is my favorite villain, I would know. He will definitely send chills down your spine. James Franco returns as the New Goblin/Harry Osborn and does very well as a comic relief for some of the film, and a troubled, downright evil villain the rest of it.

All the other original cast members are back, with Tobey Maguire doing spectacular showing a darker side of Spider-Man. And once you see it, you'll know what I'm talking about. Kirsten Dunst is nothing special, in two scenes she sings and it is the worst lip synching I've ever seen. There is no expression in her eyes, most of the time she seems wooden. Of course J.K. Simmons as Peter Parker's boss, J. Jonah Jameson, is hilarious as always. A new addition to the cast, one I really enjoyed, was Bryce Dallas Howard as Peter's new love interest, Gwen Stacy. One addition I didn't enjoy was a random butler for Harry Osborn, who just popped out of nowhere, like he'd been there all along. OK, now to get down to the nitty gritty.

The CG was absolutely spectacular. A reported 258 million dollars was spent on this film, a record high for a movie, which means, great CG. The score was not as great as the other two, since Danny Elfman opted to do "Charlotte's Web" instead. The music did its job though, and moved the film along. My major nitpick for this film is the scriptwriting. One too many scenes felt like a soap opera as almost every character cried at least once. Another problem was the corny dialogue, which never was a problem in the first two "Spider-Man's". It's one of those things where you sit there and think, "Just give me a pen and paper, and I'll write that scene a million times better, please!" The runtime is another minor quibble, the film clocks in at 150 minutes, the longest "Spider-Man" yet.

Still, as I said before, it is such an entertaining film. You will laugh, cry, jump out of your seat, and all that fun stuff that always accompany blockbusters. So just be prepared to have a good time, and not expect some deep, emotionally moving, thought-provoking film, because you'd be sorely disappointed. You will have fun, I guarantee it.

Shooter (I) (2007)

So-so movie, pretty awesome action.

[7/10 · 2 April 2007]

I really had no idea what this movie was about going into it, and I still don't really know coming out. Basically, it's your run-of-the-mill action movie, where the guns never stop blazing. I did like this film; it just wasn't extremely well made. Mark Wahlberg plays Bob Lee Swagger – what kind of name for an action hero is that? – a retired sharpshooter. Fresh off his Oscar win, Mark does a good job as the Rambo-type character. In one scene he even fixes a bullet wound with basic items from a grocery store, MacGyver style. He's the type of guy that if you saw him walking down the street, you'd cross to the other side of the road. Director Antoine Fuqua (King Arthur, Training Day) does a good job at pacing the film, and keeping it interesting, and though I haven't read the book the movie was based on, apparently he kept it faithful. The cinematography was nothing special, but at least kept the movie intense.

What I caught from the plot in between explosions is that Bob Swagger is hired to prevent a sniper assassination of the president. Instead, he is set up and is made to look like the assassin. After, it's just your classic tale of revenge on the bad guys. There is much more to the plot, but I didn't catch it or remember it, because I was to excited for the next slam-bang shootout. Another problem aside from the plot is that by the end of the two hours, you get a little tired of the same action scenes over and over, but it still is cool. "Shooter" is a movie pretty much catering to testosterone loving dudes, and the girls will just find it repulsive, and stupid. So guys, this one is for you, and if you're like every other guy and like non-stop action, then you're in for a treat.

"Shooter" is rated R for strong, graphic violence and language.

Meet the Robinsons (2007)

Great flick for kids and adults alike!

[8/10 · 1 April 2007]

When you see "Meet the Robinsons" you'll have a choice of seeing it in 3-D or regular. Do the 3-D; it's worth the extra two bucks you have to pay. The 3-D enhances an already enjoyable, fun family flick, and makes everything more vibrant and sharp. Plus, while most 3-D glasses end up giving you a splitting headache, these do not. And it isn't the normal 3-D where things randomly pop out at you just for the sake of looking cool, no; this kind makes you feel as if you are right there with the characters. The 3-D version is a must, as is the movie itself.

"Meet the Robinsons" is the story of a genius young orphan desperate to meet his mother. He is also an inventor, but when one of his inventions gets destroyed by the evil, but stupid, Bowler Hat Guy, young Wilbur must go to the future to fix the past. If he doesn't, his entire life will be changed all because of his destroyed invention. While in the future he stays with the kooky, slightly crazy Robinson family, and by the end of the film, finds out something remarkable about that family.

It is a very well done movie, and actually quite funny. The trailer made it look loud, annoying and not the least bit funny. It does the movie no justice at all. The funniest scenes in the film are with the Robinson family, who'll make even your weirdest relatives appear completely normal. There are some parts that drag a little or other scenes that border on tipping the corny scale. Nonetheless, minor complaints for an otherwise great 90 minutes of cartoon heaven. It finally looks like Disney has done something right. Lately all they've been dishing out are inane sequels (Cinderella 3?! Come on Disney, you're better than that). I'm glad they've finally returned to form and made a film that I'm sure Walt Disney would be proud of. The movie even ends with a great quote by Uncle Walt. So don't skip this cartoon, it is a excellent film for kids and adults, and I promise you'll be entertained.

Rated G.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

An Instant Classic!

[10/10 · 9 March 2007]

Ever since I first heard about "Pan's Labyrinth" I thought it looked amazing. Then it ended up winning three Oscars; Best Achievement in Art Direction, Cinematography, and Make-up, and almost won Best Foreign Film. After that, I knew I had to see this film. I made the short trek to Flint to see it, and I am so glad I did. The movie is actually better than the reviewers or trailer ever made it out to be. "Pan's Labyrinth" is a haunting, beautiful, fairy-tale masterpiece that beats "Children of Men" as best film of last year.

The movie centers on a young girl named Ofelia in 1944 Spain. She and her pregnant mom are forced to live in a military hide-out with Ofelia's evil, dictator stepfather until her mother has her baby. A little ways away from the compound, Ofelia finds an ancient labyrinth. Upon entering she meets Pan, a faun who has been waiting for her for centuries. Ofelia discovers she is actually a princess, and uses this fantasy world to escape from her harsh, war-ravaged reality.

The plot sounds like a kid-type fairy tale, but it is not. "Pan's Labyrinth" is a dark, intense, and violent, with a Tim Burton type look to it. By all means though, older teens and adults will be enthralled by director Guillermo del Toro's film. The cinematography and costumes are brilliant, hence the Oscars. The originality of it all is great; we have never seen a film quite like this before. The music is haunting yet beautiful, and will stick with you long after the film ends. What I especially enjoyed was the contrast between the real world and Pan's world. It leaves you with the question of whether or not it is all in Ofelia's mind or if it is actually real. Ivana Baquero who plays Ofelia is absolutely amazing! Normally child actors don't do much for me, but Ivana blew me completely away, she draws you into the movie with her brilliant acting. Sergi López as Captain Vidal, Ofelia's stepfather, is extremely believable as the worse than bad, bad guy. By the end you will loathe Vidal with a passion. Just to give you a little heads up, "Pan's Labyrinth" is in Spanish with English subtitles, which I love, but most people hate. And for those who thought the trailer looked scary, don't fret, there is only one scary sequence, but nonetheless, it is VERY scary.

So for those who are up to braving an artsy, subtitled, dark, graphic film, then you are in for a wild ride. Believe me when I say, "Pan's Labyrinth" is a masterpiece.

It is rated R for graphic violence, and some language.

Ghost Rider (2007)

Ghost Rider is Just Fun Eye Candy

[6/10 · 17 February 2007]

I went into "Ghost Rider" with zero expectations. I was expecting some cornball, cheesy superhero movie like the "Hulk". I actually was surprised. It was still cheesy, but in a deliberate way. But how can it not be cheesy when you have a plot like this. It's about as unbelievably as you can get. Johnny Blaze is a motorcycle stunt rider along with his father. But when his father gets cancer, the devil comes along and makes a deal with Johnny. He will cure his father as long as Johnny sells his soul and becomes the next Ghost Rider. So he accepts. Nothing happens until many years later when the devil calls Johnny to bring back the devil's son, who has decided to go behind his father's back and take over the world. Instead, Johnny chooses to fight against both the devil and his son to rid the world forever of their evil. That's the premise, it's quite implausible, and actually, it's downright silly. Especially since the devil is just an old guy in a trench coat, and his son and his friends look like a Gothic, punk rock band.

Even though the plot aspect is stupid, the rest is descent. Usually I'm not a big fan of Nicolas Cage's, but he actually did fairly well as Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider. He added some intentionally humorous scenes. The action scenes carry the film, and are what earns the positive review. Seeing the Ghost Rider ride his motorcycle up and down skyscrapers while doing battle is pretty sweet. Mostly the visual effects are good as well, but there are some scenes where all you can think is, "What?!?!" One scene had Nic Cage in a towel and had CG sculpted abs that looked absolutely horrible. I almost choked on my popcorn. Sam Elliot as Johnny's mentor added a certain grace to the film. He is always brilliant, and always looks like a cowboy with his huge mustache. Ironically, he is a cowboy in this film. Eva Mendes who plays Johnny's girlfriend is really bad. Fortunately, she isn't in the action scenes, so she didn't ruin those. Unlike most Marvel films, this one has some scary visuals that you should probably be aware of before you take your 8 year old along. Just a little caution for you.

Otherwise, this is a great geek-out movie. People who enjoy Marvel movies or comic books are going to adore it, and others will think its garbage, and compare it to "The Hulk". I liked it for the most part, but still had my quibbles. "Ghost Rider" is mostly just mindless, fun eye-candy. It is Rated PG-13 for horror violence and disturbing images.

Epic Movie (2007)

One of the Worst Films Ever Made

[1/10 · 28 January 2007]

First off, all I have to say to sum up this movie is this: "Epic Movie" is one of the worst films of all time, and certainly the worst comedy of all time. I could leave it at that and hope you take my advice and save yourself the $8.00, but I know many of you will see it anyway. "Oh, but the trailer looked so funny," you'll say. I almost thought about asking for a refund, and not only that, but also my hour and a half back, and my lost brain cells. I will explain the reasons this film is a literal piece of garbage, and should be buried thousands of feet beneath the earth where it will rot away, never to be seen again.

The trailer promises hilarious spoofs of films ranging from "Pirates of the Caribbean", to "X-Men", to "Narnia". I tell you this; the only funny scenes in this film are in the trailer. So watch the trailer a couple of times and you've seen the movie. Every other scene is boring, retarded, unfunny, and horribly made. How the studio actually ended up OK-ing "Epic Movie" is beyond me. The acting is dreadful, granted it is a spoof, but even spoofs need semi-good actors. The continuity is non-existent; the stunt people will play the characters in a fight scene on full on display for the camera. I think the directors thought it would be funny to show bad continuity, and it isn't in the least. I'll wager that the writers all got drunk and said, "Ok, everyone say something funny." "Let's have Captain Jack dance!" "Great! Let's go film the movie dudes!" Anyone could make a movie like this, absolutely anyone. What's funny in their stupid mind isn't funny to the smart, movie going public. I should've expected this since they are the same guys who made the horribly unsuccessful "Date Movie". In fact, it is apparently so bad it made IMDb's 100 worst films of all time list. "Epic Movie" will undoubtedly make it as well. It is the worst film of the year, and next year, and probably the year after.

So save yourself and your brain cells and don't see this sad excuse for a film. It is rated PG-13 for crude humor, and language.

Children of Men (2006)

Alfonso creates a stand out, brilliant film once again!

[10/10 · 14 January 2007]

Stunning, artsy, moving, well done, and disturbing are the words that come to mind when I think back on this film. Director Alfonso Cuaron - "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban"- has created a dark, dreary, and bleak vision of the future, that brings to mind Ridley Scott's classic sci-fi, "Blade Runner". It is 2027, and women have become infertile, there are wars everywhere, and immigrants are rounded up and killed. The future looks bad until Theo (Clive Owen) agrees to help the last pregnant women get to a sanctuary named The Human Project. With the baby, the scientists might be able to save the future of mankind.

I'll start my praise with the actors: Clive Owen is absolutely phenomenal. He definitely deserves an Best Actor nomination, if not win it. He draws you into his character, Theo is the hero, but at the same time, a regular joe. Newcomer Claire-Hope Ashitey as Kee, the last pregnant women, is amazing as well. I can already tell her future in film will be very bright indeed. Michael Caine as hippie/mentor Jasper is great as always. He is the kind of actor that the audience will never tire of, and will always welcome his warm, grandfatherly face. The cinematography is another huge factor. The tone, lighting, and coloring of the film is marvelously done. The grainy and dark look makes an already intense film all that more intense. You feel as if you are right there with Kee and Theo as they try and survive, because of that, I believe a Best Cinematography award is already in the bag.

As good as it it though, this movie is not for everyone. It is very violent, and depressing in its' portrayal of the future. The government goes through cities blowing everything, and anything away for no apparent reason at all. It is quite disturbing, because many of the themes portrayed in "Children of Men" are not far off from real life. One thing that bothered me was that many things were not explained, like why women where infertile, or why the government had turned on everyone. I'm assuming, in the case of an artsy film like this, that the director wants to leave it up to the viewer to decide some things for himself. One thing that really stood out in this film is that it shows what the world would be like without children, and it wouldn't be good.

"Children of Men" is an amazing achievement in film-making, that is thought-provoking, and even has pro-life themes. If I had made my top ten movie list after seeing this, "Children of Men" would most defiantly be in the top five. Superb on every level. I give it 10 out of 10. Rated R for strong violence, language, some drug use, and brief nudity.

Night at the Museum (2006)

Shawn Levy finally does right!

[8/10 · 24 December 2006]

So far the holiday movie season has delivered some good ones, "Charlotte's Web", and horrendous duds, "Eragon". "Night at the Museum" is better than "Charlotte" and, what little was good about "Eragon", put together. Ben Stiller delivers another hilarious, dead-pan performance as Larry Daly, a museum night guard. Shortly after starting he realizes the museum comes alive at night thanks to a fifty year old curse. At first, he wants to quit, but then realizes he's been given a wonderful, exciting, opportunity.

This movie is a comedic motion machine that won't let up, and let me tell you, it is hilarious. Every scene features at least one laugh out loud moment. Or at least I laughed out loud, maybe I was just in a good mood. Nevertheless, I guarantee you'll guffaw at least ten times during the movie. With as many comedians as are in this, how could it not be funny? Robin Williams plays a wax Teddy Roosevelt, Mickey Rooney, Dick Van Dyke, and Bill Cobbs, play night guard retirees. This is a wonderful return to form for these comedians. The best part is Owen Wilson and Steve Coogan as dueling miniature figurines. Wilson, a cowboy, and Coogan as a roman general steal each and every scene.

I was pleasantly surprised at how good this was. Shawn Levy, whom I normally avoid like the plague, previously directed "Cheaper by the Dozen 1 and 2", and other potty humor infested, and horribly made kid films. This was different because for once he actually tried to cater to older audiences with all the veteran comedians, and no adolescent humor. At the same time, the kids will love the non-stop wild antics of pretty much everything, and an extremely cute, slightly evil, capuchin monkey. My little quibble as a teen, is how the film doesn't slow down, but then Owen Wilson comes on and makes everything better. I recommend this film to all, it the perfect family film, that will have everyone laughing, and some rolling in the isles. I give it 8 out of 10. "Night at the Museum" is rated PG for mild language, and some slapstick action.

Charlotte's Web (2006)

Charlotte surprises!

[8/10 · 18 December 2006]

Under normal circumstances I would never have seen "Charlotte's Web". I don't like talking animals, especially pigs, and I hate the corny as heck jokes that are always included in films like these. This time was different, I saw this movie because my cousin, Kyle Peck, worked on it. Naturally we wanted to see his name in the credits. So I wasn't expecting much, but instead I was pleasantly surprised.

Most know the story of "Charlotte's Web", you've either read the book, or seen the 70s cartoon, which I used to adore as a kid. It is the tale of a runt pig who is rescued from death by Fern, played wonderfully by Dakota Fanning, who raises him. After awhile though, the pig, Wilbur, gets worried about becoming bacon. So Charlotte, a spider, helps him by spinning webs with words like "some pig" and "humble". Pretty soon, Wilbur is famous and safe once more.

Its a great story about helping one another, and friendship, so not only will kids be entertained, they will get a lesson too. They will like the zany antics of the farm animals, and adults will enjoy the impressive voice cast, which include; Dakota Fanning, John Cleese, Oprah Winfrey, Julia Roberts, Steve Buscemi, and many more.The cinematography is beautiful since it was filmed mostly in Australia. The music by Danny Elfman is great, he decided to do this instead of "Spider-Man 3" even. I didn't find myself bored either, the pace is very well set. I still didn't like the talking animals, or the occasional dumb kid joke. That's what it is though, a great kid's film, that for once, adults will be tolerate. "Charlotte's Web" is a job well done for Dreamworks, and my cousin! I give it 8 out of 10. Rated G.

Eragon (2006)

Eragon just plain stinks!

[3/10 · 18 December 2006]

I read many reviews before seeing "Eragon", all were negative, and the trailer looked campy, so my expectations were set very low. They couldn't be low enough for me to like this movie though. Everything feels rushed, the acting is absolutely horrible from previously respectable actors, and the script seems to have been written by the master of bad scripts; George Lucas. Even he could've done a better job though. Get this, "Eragon" was directed by Stefen Fangmeier, who has never directed before, all he's done is visual effects. Why Fox 2000 put so much money into a movie directed by an FX artist is beyond me. Also, every scene seems to have been ripped from "Star Wars" and made to look like "Lord of the Rings". There is no originality here, none at all. That is partly the book writer's fault; Christopher Paolini. The "Eragon" books are among the worse ever written, and I've read some real doosies. His writing is horrible to read.

I won't go into plot details, partly because I don't want anyone wasting money on this. But really all you have to do is think of "Star Wars" then add a dragon, and pointy swords, and you've got "Eragon" in a nutshell. The worst thing about this is that even though it's only 95 minutes long, it still feels like forever. It is so boring, and it drags and drags. Fans of the book will be infuriated at the liberties the filmmakers took. The book takes place over a year, but the movie appears to take place over a couple days, so none of the movie makes sense. In one scene the baby dragon off and suddenly grows large in little puffs of fire right before Eragons' eyes, when really it takes the dragon months to grow. The acting is another thing, perfectly good actors from John Malkovich, to Jeremy Irons, to one of my new favorites; Djimon Hounsou, are totally wasted in horrendous dialogue, and they end up just looking stupid. Newcomer Edward Speelers plays a great pansy. The only semi-good actor was Robert Carlyle as Durza, a very creepy bad guy, but even he looked ridiculous at times.

If you want to watch good fantasy, watch "Lord of the Rings" for the 24th time, or to see the story told a million times better, watch "Star Wars" for the 100th time. I feel as if the fantasy genre is fading, thought provoking, and feel good films are slowly taking over. We should enjoy fantasy while we have it, but not this. I give it 3 out of 10. "Eragon" is rated PG for fantasy violence, intense battle sequences and some frightening images

Blood Diamond (2006)

Blood Diamond better than is being said!

[10/10 · 10 December 2006]

While I was looking at various negative reviews for Edward Zwick's "Blood Diamond", I realized that while most critics didn't like it, not one has come up with a plausible reason why except one. They all say that Zwick tries to hard to pound the film's ideas into your head. That's no reason to give it two stars, or C's and D's, just for being a little preachy. And yes, it was a little preachy, but that doesn't take away from the fact that this is an exceptional film with stunning performances. "Blood Diamond" isn't preachy in a bad way either, the director just wanted to make sure the audience was educated to what was happening with the diamond trade in Africa.

I'll explain; the film opens with rebels going into a village and taking young kids and men to go work in the diamond mines, and then destroy the village. The rebels mine the diamonds and sell them to American jewelry dealers who then sell them to us. In the process, the rebels destroy innocent villages, capture the men, and train the children to use weapons for their cause. Djimon Hounsou plays Solomon Vandy, who is taken along with his son. While working in the mind, Solomon finds a large diamond, which he hides. Before he is discovered hiding it, American troops arrive and drive out the rebels. Solomon escapes and joins up with Danny Archer, a diamond smuggler –played by Leonardo DiCaprio- who promises to help Solomon find his son in exchange for the diamond. Chase scenes galore ensue as Danny and Solomon make their way across Africa.

Before seeing this film, I never realized how some diamonds were come by, and the things done to the African people for them. Though, it is true, that at times it seemed like an exciting history lesson. The acting is superb and is all Oscar worthy. Leonardo finally breaks his pretty boy, sissy mold and becomes a macho, man's man, reminiscent of Indiana Jones. The cinematography is amazing, especially since Africa is already beautiful. The camera work accentuates the action scenes just so, that it makes it all the more exciting and intense.

So even though critics are being dumb again and bashing Zwick for making a "history lesson" film, it is still important to see. Even if it's just to see Leo and Djimon's Oscar worthy performances, and the insanely intense action sequences. I give "Blood Diamond" 8 out of 10. It is rated R for strong violence and language.

Casino Royale (2006)

Bond reinvented in a mind blowing way.

[10/10 · 20 November 2006]

To tell you the truth, I had never seen a James Bond film before "Casino Royale". Yeah, I'm a movie buff, yet had never seen one of cinema's most iconic characters on screen. That means, unfortunately, I won't be able to compare this Bond film to the others. That also means I won't be biased against anything, saying things like, "Pierce Brosnan was so much better, no one will ever replace him." But in my unbiased opinion, Daniel Craig as the new, darker, blond Bond did amazing. And I'm wagering, even if I'd seen the twenty-one other films, I would still say Craig's was the best. His deliverance is gritty, and oh-so suave. Every man in the world will wish to be as smooth and suave as Craig's Bond.

"Casino Royale" opens in black-and-white showing James getting his double O status in a slam bang way. The film then proceeds with psychedelic opening credits, minus the famous Bond theme, but with an equally cool song. For the next twenty minutes a huge, mind-blowing chase scene ensues as Bond chases a bomb maker in Africa. This scene will get your adrenaline pumping big time, and the rush never stops. Clocking in at 140 minutes, not one scene is boring, or drags. It makes every dollar worth it, you feel that you finally got what you paid for. Hand to hand combat, a high stakes Texas Hold-Em game, a cool Aston Martin car, and just about every other cool thing you can think of, and that's just in the first hour. So, basically, I loved "Casino Royale", LOVED IT! The plot was great as well - I hear it's the best Bond plot yet- but it is too complicated to explain on paper. It's pretty much a reinvention of James Bond, like what Christopher Nolan did for "Batman Begins", director Martin Cambell does for this franchise. It's Bond…James Bond for a new generation.

What made the film even better was the audience. When a particularly awesome car gets totaled the audience let out a collective, "Nooooooooooo!" It was so much fun. And the theater was in digital, so the picture and sound were crystal clear. It made my first Bond experience all the more fun. That's what it is, just plain, good ol' fun, as well as a great piece of film-making. You know, I bet all the critics, and folks who practically rioted over the decision of Daniel Craig to don the suit and bow tie, are kicking themselves. The other actors including Judi Dench as M, and Eva Green as Vesper Lynd did extremely well. And an honorable sentence goes to Mads Mikkelsen as the new Bond baddie, who is so bad, he weeps blood. I can't wait to see "Casino Royale" again. It was the best time I've had in a movie all year. And the best line in a movie all year goes to this line; Bartender: Would you like your martini shaken or stirred. James Bond: Does it look like a give a damn. I give it 10 out of 10. "Casino Royale" is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violent action, a scene of torture, and sexual content.