True Grit

In a return to the look and feel of classic westerns, True Grit remakes the 1969 film of the same name. This take fills John Wayne’s Oscar winning role with reigning holder Jeff Bridges. The hard-nosed US Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Bridges) is on the trail of a known killer alongside a “by the book” Texas Ranger (Matt Damon) and the young daughter of a murder victim (Hailee Steinfeld). The trio is obviously an odd couple troupe of bounty hunters, but what is equally as entertaining is the difference between the actors involved.

Bridges’ obsessive commitment to the Cogburn character is unwavering, carrying the weight of the film on his shoulders, as elite actors should. With this pressure off, Damon is able to evolve with the story and portray a person more likely to be seen in real life. Steinfeld builds off the others, committed, but adapting as she moves along.

While highly popular, the original story needed to be adapted to fit modern cinematic standards. The Coen brothers did well, maintaining classic themes and characterization with contemporary elements mixed in. Pacing is relatively slow throughout, but never boring. It tends to correspond directly to Cogburn, which falls into my previously mentioned point about Bridges making the movie come to him.

It’s very easy to ignore the setting with such strong players on screen, but everything from the landscapes to set pieces are on point. Perfectly lit, while being almost completely outside, the film sticks to the fundamentals. Not to mention it’s a lesson in strong point of view filming and flawless editing. As much as I like to see new faces during award season, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bridges’ name called a few times. True Grit doesn’t need to resort to any cheap camera tricks or gimmicks to gain respect. Everything is put out there in the open and to great effect. (9.2 out of 10)

Black Swan

The highly hyped Black Swan, starring Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers, is psychologically focused look into an overworked and unstable ballet dancer. As themes and setting are established in the early moments of the film, the ballet is a bit constricting, only appealing to fans of dancing. But that didn’t last too long. Suffering from some unspecified mental problem, events in Sayers’ life soon become supernatural as the pressure of her role in the ballet builds.

What also builds is Portman’s eerie performance. With help from a frenzied script, she sneaks into the audience’s minds garnering feelings from pity to disgust and even envy at times. The character is so sheltered that there is a feeling of claustrophobia and suffocation that keeps the viewer’s attention, whether they want to give it or not. Even with the support of the less deranged supporting cast, Black Swan is painful to watch because of the shear terror Portman portrays with her character. It doesn’t hurt that the whole saga takes place in a very accurate New York City backdrop. Even with the countless people, the lead constantly finds herself in empty spaces, which often leads to a spooky event and gasps from the audience.

The frequent use of hand held camerawork and shaky close-ups add more discomfort, but give a contemporary feel to the film. Building with the plot, the film’s dramatic ending is all over the place, from a cinematic standpoint, yet is still easy to follow. The final success and definitely the most pronounced of the film is the lasting psychological effect Black Swan has on the audience. After tons of creepy/scary scenes, the ending is sudden and abstract. I found it hard to leave the theater when the credits rolled. In addition to the knot in my stomach, I had an unnerving feeling that was difficult to pinpoint. I do tend to avoid horror films, but I can easily say this was the scariest movie I saw in 2010. (9.3 out of 10)

The Fighter

The latest look into how seemingly terrible life in the Boston area is, The Fighter is the true story of boxer Micky Ward, played by Mark Wahlberg and his rise to world champion while dealing with an overly possessive family, drug addicted brother and small town politics. While there is a significant amount of boxing, the film focuses more on the anatomy of the relationships that come to define this athlete’s attempt at following his dream. This all proves to be very frustrating to watch, which is a testament to the script and the actors.

The film’s commitment to authenticity is revealed in the cringe worthy realism through the 90’s clothes and hairstyles, that are just plain embarrassing. But on a more substantial level, Christian Bale’s portrayal of Micky’s older brother, Dickie Eklund is a complete dedication to his role. The audience would have definitely accepted his performance without the extreme weight loss, but Bale has proven throughout his career that he doesn’t fool around with his roles. In fact, it is almost too much.

But when the audience can pry their eyes away from Bales rotten teeth and bald spot, there are some other quality performances. Wahlberg has become one of the strongest lead actors in Hollywood. Following up his comedy hit The Other Guys with this highly methodical biopic; he has proven to have a significant range. While his commitment was less scary looking than Bale’s, it was possible more intense after training for years and become ridiculously jacked.

It’s tough to pinpoint flaws with the movie. If anything, it could be a lull around the middle with frustrating and repetitive fights within the family. The boxing proves to be much more entertaining and helps progress the plot. While the well known actors steal the show, the unknowns’ support is of such quality that it’s like the audience could be watching home movies, very uncomfortable and painful home movies. (9.2 out of 10)

The Tourist

With all talk of the superstar duo of Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie aside, it seems most people, including myself, knew nothing about The Tourist. Well, I should be fair. I knew that Jolie would strut across the screen for no cinematic purpose other than showing off some designer clothes the audience could never afford. And Mrs. Pitt obliged my anticipated peeve. But in regard to any type of story, I had no idea. Turns out Depp plays an American on vacation in Europe when he’s believed to be a wanted criminal with a surgically changed face. Jolie plays the real criminal’s love interest and accomplice.

While The Tourist is considered a thriller, it doesn’t contain the urgency that the genre should muster. The pacing is, in fact, quite slow, but that allows the simplicity of Depp’s performance to feature. Playing an everyday person for the first time in many years, it is an interesting presentation to watch because with all the talk of the actor’s depth as a performer we rarely see him play people that could actually exist in nature. So, combine the two actors and it is an interesting mix of real and overstated.

The film’s puzzle type plot is more out in the open than other movies in this element. The viewer’s attention is held throughout the entire movie, even if it isn’t always the most exciting developments on screen. I’m not the biggest fan of the resolution, but that is a matter of opinion. Similar to my review of Faster, it’s tough to believe that this movie had enough depth to be made without the attached star power. Though The Tourist is filled with quality acting involved in an intriguing plot. The aesthetically pleasing Venice backdrop doesn’t hurt either. It’s definitely worth watching. (7.8 out of 10)

The Warrior's Way

We still have some time before the highly anticipated Jon Favreu movie, Cowboys and Aliens, but in the meantime The Warrior’s Way can act as a warm-up. While there are no aliens, there are enough superhuman ninjas for it to be called Cowboys and Ninjas. Dong-gun Jang plays Yang, an expert warrior who helps his clan eliminate all remaining members of their rivals. Though when he refuses to kill the infant that separates the enemy from extinction, he is forced to flee to the United States. There he integrates into a small society of circus performers to raise the girl. Abandoning the fighting of his past, he is forced with the dilemma of battling again when a band of evil cowboys come to town.

No matter what actors were involved with this project, the fighting was always going to be the strength. The weapons based sequences prove to be as good as any martial arts film. Unfortunately, after the first few scenes there is only sporadic fighting until the final battle scene, which is outstanding. But beyond the fighting actors, there are some question marks. Geoffrey Rush’s, Ron is a drunk who is never entirely necessary to the plot, even at the end when his coincidental past is revealed. Danny Huston and Tony Cox’s characters are what would be expected from the actors and never confront their lack of development. And Kate Bosworth who is believable despite dialect issues creates an interesting bridge between the Americans and the warriors.

The Warrior’s Way is by no means a perfect film. The opening scene contains text that is as amateur as can be. The ninjas, who I’ve already praised, go a bit over the top at points. One example being how they fall from they sky like they can fly. The last unexpected positive to the film is the setting. A run down circus town in the desert is distinct and eerie enough to separate this film from other B martial arts efforts. It’s probably not for everyone though. (7.3 out of 10)

Faster

With a marketing campaign relying completely on the draw of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, very few movies have looked as generic as Faster. Though it is better in execution. Johnson plays Driver who, after being released from prison, goes on a calculated rampage to take revenge on the group of men involved in killing his brother after a bank robbery. The film has long stretches of mindless action with instances of conspiracy type adventure mixed in, the latter being much more entertaining the former.

Johnson gives a consistent performance, but it is by no means a complex one. With the occasional action cliché thrown in, I can’t help but think he could have done better. The same could be said for Billy Bob Thorton’s strung out cop character. The most interesting player of the bunch is Killer played by Oliver Jackson-Cohen. The hit man is shown as a rich daredevil facing an internal struggle between retirement and the thrill of the job. Most other characters in the film are played by a who’s who of “what are they from” actors.

The confused script proves to be the main problem from which all others form. The three intertwining storylines, focused on the previously mentioned characters, are not of similar strength, which makes for some variation in pacing that is not always desirable. Though Johnson and Jackson-Cohen’s pieces of the puzzle are gripping most of the time.

There is something to be said for a movie that can use basic action and keep an audience entertained, as is the case with Faster. Even a cookie cutter resolution that is eye roll inducing doesn’t compromise it. In the future, I can only hope that Johnson expands his horizons, but it’s nice seeing him back on screen with a gun because as charming as he is, the Tooth Fairy was a bit soft for “The Rock.” (6.3 out of 10)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

Director David Yates’ third Potter film has the unique task of converting one half of the final volume in the series to the screen. I was anxious to see if this process would result with a whole movie with it’s own arc and development. I found that it did and while all the questions weren’t answered, many were. The story follows Harry, Ron and Hermione as they try to find and destroy the horcruxes that make up the fragments of Voldemort’s soul. In the meantime, Voldemort is busy controlling the Ministry of Magic and attempting to find a powerful wand that can once and for all finish off “The Boy Who Lived.” A handful of conflicts are resolved before the credits role so Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a successful stand-alone film.

While the cast is an abundant grouping of actors doing their best to make an impact on this mammoth film, the three leads steal the show. Rupert Grint transforms the deadpan Ron Weasley he spent six films creating into a layered character full of flaws and quirky habits more like an actual living person. Emma Watson’s Hermione Granger battles all sorts of emotional turmoil in a well-acted journey through a battle with remorse, high expectations and even physical torture. The much-improved sidekicks would lead the way if it weren’t for the chosen one himself, Harry Potter, well at least the actor who plays him, Daniel Radcliffe. With the toughest and most complex character in a multi-billion dollar film franchise, it’s unbelievable to consider the high level performance Radcliffe consistently gives with very little experience acting in anything except the scar and glasses role. Though Deathly Hallows Part 1 showcases his ability to play everything from comedy and action to horror with a hint of romance.

The film is lengthy at over two and a half hours, but the pacing fluctuates between edge of your seat hectic and comfortably slow. It doesn’t weaken the film however. With the full array of genres on display, the tempo fits and allows for the actors, music, and special effects to impress. As David Yates has done in his prior two Potter films, there are a good number of beautifully shot scenes that hold up against any Academy Award winner. In this case, paired with fine acting and some pretty darn good writing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 crosses the boundary putting it in the same territory as award winning sci-fi and fantasy epics like Lord of the Rings. Overall, the film does the book justice and makes the fans proud. I loved it in the most biased way possible. (9.4 out of 10)

Due Date

Robert Downey Jr’s involvement in a movie automatically leads me to anticipate it these days. But Due Date has reminded me that he can’t turn a stinker into something worth seeing. Downey Jr. plays an expectant father who, through a series of misunderstandings, is put on the no fly list and must find his way across the country before his wife’s scheduled delivery. Of course, as would only happen in a movie, the only way he can make his trek is with the weirdo who caused him to get kicked off the plane in the first place. That weirdo is played by Zach Galifianakis.

Due Date’s first of many issues lies with Galifianakis’ character’s complete lack of positive character traits. He is so annoying and frustrating that it’s hard to follow the compassion of Downey Jr’s character. Then throw in the disgusting habits and dangerous moments that make the audience cringe instead of laugh and I think the movie would be more successful as a psychological thriller rather than a comedy. Downey Jr. gives a good performance to an extent, but since the audience isn’t given a thorough view into his life, it’s not as strong as it could be. About the only thing that’s told is that he has “anger issues.” Smaller roles by Danny McBride, Jamie Foxx and Juliette Lewis don’t really make anything funnier but add to the embarrassment and overall dilemma the story faces.

With awkward/odd couple films the resolution needs to show some kind of relief or understanding, and Due Date tries but is ultimately unsuccessful. The slow moving film spends too much time trying to make ridiculous situations unbearable and little time building camaraderie. I’m not buying it that these two complete opposites can get high while driving following a near fatal car crash and suddenly become best friends. The over the top antics worked for director Todd Phillips in The Hangover but not this time. (4.0 out of 10)

Unstoppable

I am so sick of movies about runaway trains in rural Pennsylvania. What an overdone plotline. I am clearly kidding. Unstoppable, which is based on true events is the latest of many films featuring director Tony Scott and Denzel Washington. This one adds the talents of Chris Pine and Rosario Dawson in the story of an unmanned train that is accidently set to power. Carrying an abundance of hazardous chemicals, it must be stopped before it reaches a sharp turn in a highly populated area and will derail. Pine and Washington, who are driving another train, devise a plan to stop the runaway even in the face of serious personal risk.

For a story that features great periods of sitting around and waiting for disaster, it is highly dramatic. Every turn could contain a head-on collision, gruesome death or heated dialogue. While it’s mostly the last of the three don’t be fooled, the viewer’s stomach is in knots constantly. Washington and Pine give strong performances toggling the line between average joe and hero. This leaves the majority of the frantic running around to Dawson, who plays the yardmaster leading the charge to stop the train and playing mediator between the different parties involved. In terms of overall film quality, Unstoppable is a well-made feature from the acting to editing.

Even in the wake of the unrelenting drama, there are many moments where the viewer asks if there are easier solutions than those being presented on the screen. The lack of productive ideas from most of the characters exposes such an ignorance of their profession that it takes away some level of believability in the overall scheme. But when compared to the general realism of the film, the lack of expert train talk is a miniscule problem. There is excitement from end to end. (8.0 out of 10)

Hereafter

Clint Eastwood’s look into the controversial topic of mediums and life after death presents a subtle medley of strong characterization and human emotion. The plot follows three individuals from different parts of the world. Matt Damon plays George, a psychic medium attempting to escape his ability. Across the world, tsunami survivor Marie investigates a vision she has at her moment of near death. And the third storyline follows Marcus, a young boy coping with the loneliness of losing a loved one.

Due to the obvious connections between stories, it is apparent that the three protagonists will become intertwined at some point. However, at times the stylization defuses the emotional connection made with the characters. For example, experiencing Marcus’ numbing sadness loses its grip when the viewer doesn’t see him for the next 20 minutes. Individually, the pieces are sturdy enough to stand on their own as short features. Thanks in large part to the powerful performances of the three leads; the tales play at the audience’s sympathy to great success. Damon emerges as the most likeable of the characters even with the other two facing more sudden and tragic events. The simple pleasures in his life, like his interest in Mark Twain are so genuine that the viewer constantly feels a connection to George and a fondness to his calm demeanor.

Part of Hereafter’s overall intricacy lies in how very subtle everything develops. There is no quick resolve. Among the more noticeable themes present, the frequent instance of flowers, usually at flower stands, is a sign of life among the death. Sometimes this theme is foreboding and diminutive, but other times it appears as a vision for hope. The film’s resolution proves the latter. Hereafter is an accomplishment of patient storytelling. Eastwood never goes over the top with his filming techniques preferring a more classic Hollywood approach. Plus something must be said of the incredible tinting that gives a softness to the entire movie. This is an unmatched quality of Eastwood’s films that connects the events on the screen to the real physical world with a sincerity to truth. (9.4 out of 10)

Megamind

I tend to prefer the quirky cross-generational humor of Dreamworks animation to the depressing and preachy Pixar breed. Megamind, the latest Dreamworks film, continues the trend of creating comedy marketed towards children but fun for all demographics. Will Ferrell stars as the voice of Megamind, an alien super villain in a constant struggle to defeat his archenemy, Metro Man, voiced by Brad Pitt.

The film has a similar premise to this past summer’s Despicable Me in that it addresses individuals who aren’t particularly evil but live as villains. It is an interesting angle, however it has become somewhat cliché. In Megamind, the title character finds himself emotionally attached to his frequent “kidnapee”, Tona Fey’s Roxanne Ritchi and I dare say they have more chemistry than their real life counterparts would. Fey and Ferrell both provide strong voice performances contributing great personality to their characters. The main disappointment comes from Jonah Hill’s contribution. Playing an individual that goes through great transformation, the viewer is unable to separate any type of character from the sound of what is clearly Hill reading from a script.

The pace runs a bit slow for a feature with such quality characters and concepts. Surprisingly though, the slowness seemed to help certain aspects of the film, allowing it to present characterization in the same vein as serious films more likely presented in live action. Either way, I can’t help but think more could happen in the overall story arch.

Comparing Megamind to other genre bending animated features, it ranks somewhere with the lower quality Shrek films. To translate, that’s still pretty good. Due to the evolution of the characters, a sequel would prove difficult, but like I said before, I can’t help thinking that there are still tons of possibilities for these characters. Overall, just a fun film that adds another quality title to the Dreamworks catalog. (7.8 out of 10)

Red

As one of the least anticipated comic book films this year, DC’s Red proves to be a political thriller without a hint of the scale that that the Batman and Spider-Man films have made synonymous with the genre. DC Comics’ openness to bringing all or any of their stories to the big screen has resulted in a strange catalog of good films and forgettable mistakes. Red leans more towards the positive side. It was miles better than June’s Jonah Hex; let’s just say that.

Red stars Bruce Willis as a retired CIA agent who finds himself the target of a political conspiracy because of an event in his past. He teams up with former friends/agents (and his love interest) to try and figure out the puzzle and fight the pursuers head on. The other former agents, played by Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich and Helen Mirren, make up a quality ensemble cast with Willis. Freeman however, gives a rare forgettable performance as Malkovich and Mirren steal the show with laughs and brutal action sequences. Mary-Louise Parker rounds out the group providing surprising chemistry with Willis. I could have gone without her bickering throughout the film’s first half though.

The unwavering Willis proves he can still bring it as an action star, and when matched up against the very likeable Karl Urban, the film carries a strong sense of the blurred lines between good and evil. The story’s conspiracy doesn’t end as full circle as other films in the genre, but it made sense. With so much polish on the strong character development, there’s a bit of a sacrifice with the progression of the plot. Ultimately, everything is understandable, but there are a handful of “what just happened” moments. With a cast as fun to watch as this one, I hope to see them together again in future projects, maybe in a different color next time…. Get it? Because the movie’s called Red. (7.6 out of 10)

Jackass 3D

With the over-the-top of antics of Johnny Knoxville and company reaching the mark of three successful motion pictures, I’d like to comment on the absurdity of how my local theater labeled the film as Jack*** 3D on all their marquees. There is no question the film is not appropriate for all audiences but a jackass was always one of the go to insults for us bold ones in my kindergarten class. Leave the title as it was intended.

Now let’s get on to the movie itself. While it is tough to judge the film due to its disjointed focus-free documentary nature, it is possible to look at the depth of the comedy. I have no knowledge of the actual budget, but it appears that a large portion of it went into the 3D aspect. The large-scale stunts came nowhere near the multi-layered ventures of Jackass 2. Instead the majority of the ideas seemed to be replays of their past successes on a slightly bigger scale (and sometimes smaller). New ideas, such as Steve-O’s bungee jump inside of a port-o-potty, give the film some life but the laughs have gaps between them. The 3D didn’t add much to the experience, except for higher ticket prices.

Possibly the most disappointing aspect of this third film is the elimination of a portion of the cast’s chemistry. In the past, the group had natural pairings, much in the same way Monty Python always did. Steve-O would be with Chris Pontius, Bam Margera with Ryan Dunn etc. This time, the full group tends to be present in most of the skits. This leads to a lot of footage of the group laughing, which can be funny but ultimately the goal should be for the audience to laugh.

I am pointing out weaknesses in Jackass 3D, which is kind of a ridiculous concept. The whole point of the series since it’s earliest days on MTV is for a group of friends to do what they think is funny no matter how shocking it is. The sheer amount of poop the audience sees in Jackass 3D shows that they still know how to shock their now adult audience. I can’t say that this collection is their best work, but there are plenty of classics in there. (7.0 out of 10)

It's Kind of A Funny Story

It may just be me, but isn’t it an odd marketing strategy for a movie that doesn’t look very funny in the previews to have the name, It’s Kind of A Funny Story? That is likely the reason behind the complete lack of interest shown by the movie going public. The story follows Craig, played by Keir Cilchrist, as he deals with depression and checks himself into a psychiatric ward. Inside the hospital he meets a variety of people who give him new perspective on what’s really important in life.

Gilchrist’s character develops slowly making the early portion of the film slow and boring. That could have been intentional for the audience to relate to the feelings of the character, but it just creates a dozing audience. Though after the lengthy process of introducing the characters, both lead and supporting, a story arch finally emerges. Zach Galifianakis makes his most convincing attempt at a serious role as Bobby. He’s mostly comedy driven but the relationship between Craig and Bobby develops in a realistic and powerful way that becomes the strength of the film.

The supporting cast, made up mostly of psychiatric patients, tends to be the butt of insensitive jokes. None were terribly offensive, but I just don’t think it’s right to laugh at the random outbursts of a schizophrenic patient. I was laughing but I blame the movie for putting that situation in front of me. In the end, the relationship between Craig and Noelle, played by Emma Roberts is presented front and center as Bobby, who is crucial throughout most of the film, fades out and vanishes. The exchange in role is fairly rushed and comes across as a quick fix resolution.

It’s Kind of A Funny Story suffers from a classic case of genre ambiguity. Its comedy isn’t strong enough to carry the film and the teen angst often comes off as whinny and predictable. The exchanges between Galifianakis and Gilchrist are the biggest successes of the story and make it worth seeing. (7.1 out of 10)

The Social Network

As the film ended and the crowded theater filed out, I couldn’t help thinking that many of them didn’t consider how important this story actually is to their daily lives. It doesn’t tell of any brave war moment or anything, like you'd expect, but in reality Facebook is a bigger part of the daily lives of Americans than war is. This film tells of how a few college students changed the way people communicate and keep in touch. On the surface it looks like the story of how some jerk screws a lot of people out of the credit and money they deserve. But the film is by no means an unbiased account of the events.

The plot follows the origins of Facebook and the ensuing disagreements and lawsuits between the parties involved. Jesse Eisenberg plays Mark Zuckerberg, the controversial CEO of the website and the main target of all of the allegations. While Eisenberg’s performance strays from impersonation, he does a remarkable job of growing more dislikable with every scene and somehow resolving the plot with sympathy from the audience. Soon to be Spider-Man star Andrew Garfield plays the roller coaster ride personified in CFO Eduardo Saverin, who is left in the dust while Zuckerberg expands Facebook with Napster founder Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) at his side. The three lead actors, whom are all making their first impact in the world of Oscar-buzz, are quite strong in making their individual cases to be Hollywood heavyweights.

It’s obvious that this fall is the anti-blockbuster season with a lot of intellectual stories invading the screen. I am absolutely loving it. The Social Network is an incredibly gripping film that is written in the context of revealing the origin story of a worldwide phenomenon. The actuality that every event is not a concrete fact does little to hurt the film, but the script keeps a realness that can convince an audience and get them interested. And on a closing note, is it just me or are all these big fall releases preaching the same thing? It sure seems that pursuit of success through money leads to destroyed relationships and loss of self. Wall Street 2, The Town, and The Social Network seem to think so. I better look out because I’m making buckets of dough off this blog. Let’s all roll our eyes together. (9.5 out of 10)

The Town

After seeing The Town and August release, Takers I believe I can now successfully rob a bank. It’s a shame I already spent all that time and money on college. It’s tough not to draw parallels between the two films because of their bank robber plotlines and how close they were released to each other. But they were very different in the lifestyles they exposed. The Town tells the story of a group of bank robbers from a poor neighborhood in Boston. Directed by Ben Affleck, the film is a dramatized presentation of an individual’s search for a way out of their negative lifestyle.

Affleck also stars in the film as Doug Macray, the architect of a gang, who falls in love with a witness of one of their jobs (Rebecca Hall). He is then forced to balance his relationship against the temper of his lifelong friend Jim, played by Jeremy Renner. The close pursuit of the FBI, lead by Jon Hamm’s character doesn’t help things much. The powerful cast paints a convincing picture of urban crime. With trophy collectors Hamm, and Renner present, it’s no shock. The question mark was Daredevil himself, Ben Affleck. I actually tend to think Affleck is good or better in most of his films. The Town is one of his best performances. While not very multi-dimensional, he played the part and played it well. Maybe he should direct and star in all of his movies.

Heist films are inherently stressful. In this instance, the audience is permitted to breathe at points as Affleck and Hall’s characters build their relationship. That element balances the script and adds the human element a lot of crime films neglect. I don’t claim The Town is a completely unique story, though it’s a pretty strong motion picture. If those cool masks they wear in the trailers don’t draw you into the theater, I don’t know what will. (9.3 out of 10)

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

Even with the lengthy time lapse since the original Wall Street, it was hard for me to a picture a way for director Oliver Stone and company to continue the franchise in a fresh way. Though if I were to name a topic I know the least about, big banking and the stock market would be right near the top. But, those who obviously do know something about these sorts of things based Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps on the real events involved with the bank bailouts of a few years ago.

Shia LaBeouf stars as a Wall Street trader trying to balance financial uncertainty and a new life with his fiancé, played by Carey Mulligan. Also, there’s the little coincidence that her character happens to be the daughter of former billionaire ex-con, Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas.)

The film is thick with dialogue as expected, which means that the acting needs to be spot on, which it is. LaBeouf continually proves he has the ability to carry a film. Then when he’s paired with Michael Douglas you get a quality old vs. young dynamic that shows the core differences between greed and ambition. The other leads played by Mulligan and Josh Brolin are on an even playing field with LaBeouf and Douglas in terms of quality but a bit less interesting.

That honker of a script is the most interesting aspect of the film to me. A good number of the scenes use dense dialogue in place of any type of special effect or gimmick typical of big budget Hollywood. I may not know much about the subject matter, but I’m convinced the characters run close to what their real life counterparts went through in their time of stress. The second Wall Street proves that educated films still have an audience even without a single gunshot or explosion. Hopefully LaBeouf enjoyed it while he could because I doubt we can say the same about the upcoming Transformers 3. (8.8 out of 10)

Legend of the Guardians:The Owls of Ga'Hoole

Zack Snyder, you sneaky bugger. The acclaimed director known for his adaptations of 300 and Watchmen, makes his animated debut with Legend of the Guardians. For those who aren’t familiar, this movie is about owls, badass owls. Not enough of a description? Okay, the story follows Soren (Jim Sturgess) and his brother Kludd (Ryan Kwanten) as they grow from friends to enemies after being kidnapped by a cult of bigoted owls. Soren embarks on a journey to find the guardians, legendary heroes of their world. Kludd takes the opposite road of brainwashed evil soldier jerk.

It takes time to adjust to the fact that everything happening is in a world of cartoon owls, though at some point that campiness transforms into an epic movie. I didn’t think that was possible. Though I did find that gizzards found their way into the script too much. Personally, I don’t relate very well to owl-type things like owl pellets, but the second half of the film is focused more on the characters and less on what their species is. Plus, with the use of voice talent that strayed from Hollywood’s A-List, the voices belonged to the characters and not the talent’s past performances.

I am told (by Wikipedia) that the film is based on the first three books of a series of around 20 stories. While that presents plenty of material for sequels, the film is self-sustaining and will only have a sequel if its cash pull is enough. In regard to Legend’s pacing, I found it to be a fitting length for a movie searching for the epic feel it presents. However, after months of being billed as a children’s movie, I must say that it was slow at times for a younger audience. I just can’t help but think that Legend of the Guardians would be a fun franchise for kids to grow up with. Especially, with a director like Snyder, who continuously shows he knows how to adapt well-known stories to the big screen. I enjoyed it deep down in my gizzard…. Sigh. (7.5 out of 10)

The American

Early September releases are a big question mark in the film release schedule. Usually a George Clooney movie would have enough interest to garner the summer spotlight. The American, however just missed the cut. The film follows Clooney’s Jack, an aging hit man who grows weary of the stresses of his job while in hiding from his own enemies. The premise was not presented very clearly through the shoddy advertising campaign, which more than likely contributed to the lack of buzz the film created. But, in the long run that may have been for the better. The American is not for everyone.

With only minor supporting players preventing this from becoming the Clooney show, the development of the lead was crucial to the film’s overall success. It’s hard to say if the script met such a criteria, but Clooney pushes it that extra inch with a strong performance. He will always be remembered for his charming roles, but his presentation of the character’s numb personality was at the very least convincing. Subtlety is not always the easiest thing for an actor, but Clooney had no trouble at all.

The pace of the film is the aspect that wouldn’t have translated to the summer vacation masses. To be honest, a ton doesn’t happen. Some gunfights and such, but the realism left my stomach in knots more than most blockbusters could. Every time he goes to sleep, or walks down the street, the silence presents an ominous moment that leaves the audience on the edge of their seats paranoid for what’s to come.

While I don’t know the film’s lasting value, it has the feel of a classic with Italian influence both in front of and behind the cameras. The scenes flip-flop between the deep shadows of film noir and the structure of classic Hollywood productions. I have read many reviews where critics judge a picture for borrowing techniques of the past and overlapping styles, however, it’s refreshing to see a well thought out film with focus on tradition and the art of film making. The American shows this can be done without the contentious superiority in the modern independent movement. (9.0 out of 10)

Machete

Stereotypes are cool. Aren’t they? You agree Robert Rodriguez? Machete is the story of a military trained Mexican immigrant who tries to bring down a radically conservative politician who enjoys shooting Mexicans for sport. The film has an obvious political agenda that is placed side by side with excessive gore and shallow nudity. The gore and nudity are expected with Rodriguez but the preaching was stuffed down the viewer’s throat.

So, firstly southern border enforcing Americans are presented as uneducated white trash that have no respect from human life. Then the illegal immigrants are shown as day laborers and expendable workers. To add insult to injury, they all eat tacos and burritos throughout the film. I think a movie that tries to show the worth of a group of people would do better presenting their potential. Maybe a clearer showing of the conditions in Mexico or showing what they can amount to in the US would have been more affective. I seem to be completely over thinking this intentionally campy film. But, in my opinion, if a film goes political they need to back it up more than Machete does.

The big names in the cast aren’t overly successful. But, the script allows for usually mediocre actors to appear stronger through over the top comedic sequences. Michelle Rodriguez, and Jessica Alba fit that bill. Danny Trejo holds his own in the title role that doesn’t really demand that much. Machete is kind of a less classy James Bond. Charm is definitely not his selling point, though he is comically promiscuous. 007 never seemed to enjoy spurting blood as much.

The film’s over-the-top antics provide a comical and exciting experience. As I not so subtly said above, the politics shroud the positive elements of Machete. One thing is sure; nobody can leave this movie without feeling some type of emotion. The only problem is if too many people feel immense disgust. I only felt moderate disgust. (7.1 out of 10)

Takers

Rappers seem to enjoy being in movies these days. Though, I must say, it doesn’t always instill a great amount of promise in the project before hand. I mean Chris Brown was pretty good back in his three-episode arch on The O.C, but come on. Takers stars a combination of actors and rappers in an old fashioned heist movie. The group comes of their biggest heist yet only to be thrown into another job when their former colleague is released from jail. As expected, things to don’t go as expected.

Sandwiched in between a promising opening sequence and explosive ending, is an incredibly slow story. The character development is half-cocked because of the number of lead characters involved. Interesting parts played by well-known actors, like Zoe Saldana and Hayden Chrisensen, are completely one-dimensional with no real attempt at making them more than place fillers. That’s not to say the actors would have been able to carry any kind of complex storyline to the bank anyway. Idris Elba and Matt Dillion would be two of only a few players I can fairly say gave strong performances. The others ranged from pretty good (Jay Hernandez) to laughable (T.I).

In addition to the acting and script flubs, Takers Suffers from thinking they’re more epic than the parts. I shall exclude any spoilers but the “down in a blaze of glory” type ending is too much for the audience’s connection to the characters. While a slight emotional connection is drawn, this isn’t a three-film epic. It’s actually just a 90-minute movie with some bank robbing and a ton of plotting and planning, and then some scheming after that. The familiar names will most likely bring an audience to the theater. A good number of them probably won’t be disappointed. I was just a little bored. Takers will be a nice addition to everyone’s Paul Walker collection. Hey, we all have one. (6.5 out of 10)

The Expendables

The concept for The Expendables sounded much better during the early casting stages. The prospect of teaming up some of the biggest action stars in film history is a fun idea. There was the issue of multiple big names turning down roles and then being replaced by low-level actors. For example, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Steven Seagal and Kurt Russell all turned down roles. The part played by Terry Crews was intended for Wesley Snipes. The list goes on and on. Those big names that did appear in the film are as advertised, but some of others only have one or two lines and that is too many.

The story follows a team of mercenaries who try to overthrow a dictator to help a Latin American community. The majority of the film follows the two leaders of the team played by Jason Statham and Sylvester Stallone, who also wrote and directed the film. The pair had good chemistry, and with Statham being one of the more modern actors in the group, the story developed well, with a bunch funny moments. Jet Li also receives top billing on the project but is terribly underutilized. In his few moments to shine, the script has him being continually beaten by gun toting thugs. The movie doesn’t worry about being realistic in any other aspect, so I wanted some classic Jet Li fight sequences.

Excluding the cameos from Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the rest of the group is fairly unimpressive when it comes time for any sort of acting. Some of the fight sequences are strong but not as strong as the classic action films. The Expendables is like a less muddy Rambo movie. With that being said, it does what is advertised. There’s action at every turn with different styles being represented. Stallone’s machine gun slaughter, with Statham’s British street fighting and Li’s martial arts offer a variety rarely seen on the big screen. It is an action movie at its finest, bad acting and big explosions. (8.2 out of 10)

Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

Really, another comic book movie? Well, yeah, but it’s not a Marvel movie its one of those weird comics that the general public doesn’t know exists. I actually love comic book movies so I’m not complaining. Scott Pilgrim vs. The World is a graphic novel story told in the motion picture format with a strong video game influence. Let’s dissect that a little bit. The film is based on the six part graphic novel series about Scott Pilgrim and his quest to win the opportunity to date the girl of his dreams. First he must defeat her seven evil ex’s in a series of death matches.

Scott is played by eternal teenage geek, Michael Cera. This time around he was actually able to expand a little bit on the role he plays in every single one of his movies. Able to build on the quirkiness of his supporting cast, Cera expands his usually one-dimensional persona into a strong lead character. There are also some contributions from some other established actors that take the pressure off the lead. Brandon Routh (Superman Returns), and Chris Evans (Fantastic Four) play two of the evil ex’s and create two of the funnier sequences in the film.

Then there’s the film’s unique twist. The insertion of video game themes, graphics and sound effects seems shallow in the trailers and the films opening scenes. Though as the plot develops, and the references become more frequent, they actually contribute in the same way music can. But don’t fret if you’re as bad at video games as I am. The references are generic enough to be relevant to most demographics (excluding the elderly and infants). Now the originality of the script really pointed Scott Pilgrim in the right direction. If some of those moments that try to convey the superiority of the indie music scene were toned down, this movie could have ranked among the summers best. I guess I’m just not cool enough to understand. (8.9 out of 10)

Step Up 3D

I am brave enough to admit that the trailer for Step Up 3D got me very pumped for its release. I didn’t necessarily think it would be a good film but the dancing looked, what’s the phrase? “Dope.” Saw I went and even threw down the extra five bucks, or so, for the 3D specs. I usually pass on that scam but this time I felt compelled to “experience” this motion picture event.

Pretty much everything that I expected from the movie came true in the end. First, there is the obvious strength, the dancing. I am no professional but I’ve watched enough dancing shows to know that break dancing is pretty incredible. The use of professional dancers as opposed to actors in the majority of the roles makes the battles and random acts of dancing quite impressive.

Then throw in that aforementioned money making tool known as 3D and I can genuinely say that Step Up 3D is the best utilization of the 3D method in a motion picture I have seen to date. That, of course, does not include the cool Disney World attractions. I wasn’t even that impressed with Avatar in 3D. I apologize to all the ‘Avatar-ds’ who take this as sacrilege. Step Up 3D actually has things pop out at the audience. It may be shallow and it contributes very little to the effectiveness of the film but if I’m paying for the stupid glasses I want some actual 3D happening.

Now to bring this review back to reality a bit. The acting is terrible. The best moments of dialogue are jokes, where the audience is distracted, and those aren’t that funny. None of the actors are terribly unlikeable but none have the ability to carry a successful film. Then when the main premise of your movie revolves around a group of dancers who live together in an abandoned factory and seem to lack jobs and an understanding of the outside world, the chances of Oscar worthy performances tend to be unlikely. Step Up 4 should just be a 90-minute dance-off and my score for it will be much higher than this. (6.7 out of 10)

The Other Guys

For whatever reason, Will Ferrell has become an enigma of the comedy world. His films range everywhere from instant classics (Step Brothers) to bitter disappointments (Semi-Pro). Cue director, Adam McKay, who worked with Ferrell on SNL, Step Brothers and a number of other projects. The Other Guys uses the pair’s ability to push the boundaries of a realistic situation into something that just wouldn’t happen. The result is hilarity.

Ferrell plays a sheltered cop, weary of actually participating in police calls. His partner, played by Mark Wahlberg is out of favor in his precinct. Then in an attempt to earn back their respect as cops, they embark on a big case that they constantly screw up. They also get to know each other and build an odd couple type of respect.

This is not the sort of film where inspired acting performances are necessary. With that being said, Wahlberg seesaws between likeable and over the top but is funnier in the straight man role than other regulars, like Paul Rudd. While Ferrell’s movies are not always a sure thing, his performances tend to be solid and when the jokes are funny he’s even better.

There’s no way to know if The Other Guys will be added to the heavily quoted cannon of Will Ferrell’s incredibly successful career. After first viewing, I imagine it will be. Outshining the other comedies of the summer, this film has a combination of funny and quality actors and a story line that actually has a plot underneath the jokes. Personally, I always love a good Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson cameo… and he’s side by side with Samuel L. Jackson. It doesn’t get much more badass than that. (9.0 out of 10)

Salt

I read an article in an established film magazine that claimed Angelina Jolie had the acting ability to play a female James Bond. Now I will let you tally off the many problems with that statement. But how many women do you know named James? I can’t think of any that I know of. With her performance in Salt, I don’t think she channeled the Bond films but instead showed she has the ability to be a, sort of, Ethan Hunt/ Tom Cruise international thriller type, without the dimples.

The film starts strong, introducing a far-fetched plot too crazy to be true. Jolie’s character, Evelyn Salt, is a federal agent accused by a defector of being a Russian spy. Though in an attempt to find her husband, she runs from government custody. The majority of the film’s front end is a spectacular chase scene. I couldn’t help but wonder how many tractor-trailers a person can leap on before they fall onto the freeway. But hey, if anyone can do it a blonde Jolie can. After the chase winds down, a maze of conspiracy and hairpin turns make for one tense result. The cast was solid throughout. One of the main strengths was the film’s willingness to let Jolie be ugly, dirty, and beat down. It was kind of unexpected to see the glamorous lead look so disheveled. In addition to her, I always expect good things from Liev Schreiber. However in this case, the more dynamic Chiwetel Ejiofor overshadowed him in the federal agent role.

The main issue with Salt is one that many in this genre encounter. The heart-pounding events cross the thin line between amazing and ridiculous. An army of Jedi would have a difficult time completing the tasks that Salt completes with hardly a hiccup. Plus, I like to believe that our federal agents and police officers, here in the U.S, would be able to prevent such incidents. But it is a movie and I understand that. I wonder if the sequel will be called “Salt & Pepper”… Har, har, har. (7.7 out of 10)

Dinner for Schmucks

As I learn time and time again, funny actors and interesting concepts don’t always make a movie successful. The first issue came when I learned the film is based on a French film, Dinner for Dolts. European humor is not the same as American and if this film defines what the U.S finds funny then I’m embarrassed. From the mean-spirited ridicule to the cringe worthy situations I was saddened more than I was entertained.

Schmucks stars Paul Rudd who plays Tim, a businessman who strives for a promotion in order to impress his girlfriend. His boss then invites him to a dinner where each person brings an “idiot” with them and the group proceeds to make fun of them. He then meets Barry, played by Steve Carrell, who creates detailed dioramas using dead mice dressed as people. A gut-wrenchingly sad story ensues in the build up to the dinner party where the audience learns about Barry’s loneliness, and witnesses Tim’s relationship go down in flames. It completely disgusts me how the packed movie theater was laughing hysterically as these characters suffered.

I understand the desire to create sympathetic characters but in this context it just made me pity them. America knows that Carell can play awkward and his Schmucks performance is a less confident Michael Scott with a psychological disorder. Keeping with that similarity to his persona on The Office, Barry flip flops between unfortunate and infuriating. Rudd continues his reign as the straight man of modern comedy. He has found a niche there and does well playing average, and likeable protagonists. The ability of the actors was not the issue in Dinner for Schmucks. Zach Galifianakis and Jermaine Clement also gave strong performances in support.

When the film finally gets to the dinner some of the discomfort is replaced with laughs but there aren’t enough. While the characters preach understanding and respecting the talents of others, it subtly covers shallow knocks meant to get chuckles out of the callous members of the audience. Movies are intended to showcase different perspectives to broad demographics of people. That does not mean they should insult the people filling up theaters by assuming they enjoy laughing at the misfortune of others to make themselves feel superior. I may be ending with a cheesy resolve but it might as well be called ‘Movie for Schmucks.’ (4.0 out of 10)

Inception

While the movie going public waits for the sequel to The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan decided that it was the right time to release Inception, which he directed, produced and wrote. The film is a concept where individuals can penetrate the minds of others during dreams to find out personal information, or in rare cases plant information. I try to see a lot of movies and Inception is one of only a few original concepts I can think of that was released this year. It’s no secret that studios are focusing on established franchises in order to make a sure buck so, the mid-July release date for Nolan’s Inception is a bit of a surprise, but a welcome one.

The film’s cast is the strongest I’ve seen in a few years with Leonardo DiCaprio receiving top billing followed by the likes of Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Marion Cotillard and others. When Michael Caine is in a movie and doesn’t get mentioned in the first handful of names you know how many great actors are there. Plus, it says something when a large ensemble goes through a two and a half hour movie without missteps. There are no cheesy lines, or scenes that should have been re-shot, just strong performances all around. Nolan’s attention to detail is what makes his big budget films successful when so many others fail either critically or monetarily.

While the plot is not the easiest to follow, the conflicts are resolved in a clear enough way that I wouldn’t deem the film confusing. I imagine it’s not for everyone though. Thinking tends to be an optional aspect of film lately, but Inception basically says keep up or get out of the theater because we’ll go on without you. I look forward to seeing the film again now that I know the conclusion, because the layers of complexity makes Inception original enough to be viewed frequently like other classic motion pictures.

Nolan’s films have developed such a specific look and feel to them that outside influences get lost behind the scale and tone that is reminiscent of The Dark Knight, The Prestige and his other projects. There is no doubt that this film will be emulated for years to come and all the young filmmakers and writers that were impressed with his Batman films have now found their icon. In my humble opinion, Inception is the best film of the decade. (10 out of 10)

Cyrus

When you go to the movies do you ever say to yourself, I hope this movie is a less funny version of Step Brothers with an independent budget and academy award nominated actors playing static, uninteresting characters? Cyrus hopes you do. John C. Reilly plays a down on his luck divorcee who meets a fun loving woman, played by Marissa Tomei. They then have the beginnings of a relationship, as Reilly’s character must deal with the possessive and weird son of the woman, played by Jonah Hill.

Reilly finds a role that is a balance between some of the more serious jobs of his past and his current run with Judd Apatow projects. The character is not the funniest but Reilly does put an awkward twist on his performance that makes, the aptly named, John a sympathetic and likeable character. Tomei is obviously a good actress and there’s not much more to add. Hill proves to be the wild card however. Playing the title character (Cyrus), he uses the uncomfortable comedy that he has become famous for to make the audience cringe. Then when serious situations come about he fails at being believable. While he tends to be funnier than Reilly in this film, the serious moments separate the actor from the comedian.

Cyrus boasts some unconventional editing techniques to pump up the “artsy-ness” of some scenes. Mostly seen within conversations, jump cuts create some interesting visuals but toy with the viewer’s ability to completely submerge into the plot. It seemed that these occurrences are mostly intended to remind the viewer they are not watching a big budget comedy, but a more civilized indie effort. I wasn’t buying it.

The script skirts the issue of Tomei’s obsessive relationship with her son to the point that I expected their to be some sort of twist or shocking realization. I don’t think that would have been necessary but since there ends up being no twist everything comes off as very repetitive. Numerous funny moments carry the film but nothing comes close to hysterical and slight chuckles aren’t enough to make a movie. (7 out of 10)

The Karate Kid (2010)

When scrolling through my film reviews they tend to be in order by release date. However, sometimes I don’t get around to seeing one for a while. The Karate Kid is one of those instances. It’s not that the trailers didn’t look entertaining; it’s just something about a two and a half hour children’s movie that is a completely altered version of a cult classic. I guess since the first incarnation was not incredibly original the studio thought it acceptable to change things.

The 2010 version follows Dre Parker (Jaden Smith) and his mom Sherry (Taraji P. Henson) as they move from Detroit to Beijing after she gets transferred. Dre then encounters some overly vindictive children who continually beat him up. With the help of maintenance man, Mr. Han (Jackie Chan), he learns kung fu in order to gain the respect of his peers and fight in a tournament.

On the surface the plot is pretty straight forward, except for the fact that some aspects just don’t add up. First, take the bullies. They are twelve year olds who brutally abuse Dre because he is different. This might be my ignorant, middle class upbringing here but children do not beat the shit out of each other just for the hell of it. In reality, I could understand some pushing and shoving or name calling but kicks to the face hurt. Adults would notice. The next problem is the kung fu instructor of the bad kids. He tells them to show no mercy in life and condones the pre-pubescent violence. This guy would not have hundreds of students because their parents would notice that little Johnny has been kicking the cat across the room ever since he began these lessons.

The last problem I will mention is the constant flip flop between touching realism and over the top video game style. A children’s kung fu tournament would not have a jumbo-tron projecting professional promo photos of the competitors. This isn’t Major League Baseball. As tough of a transition as this may be, I will now try to comment on the positives. Jackie Chan gave a strong performance for the majority of the film highlighted by a compelling scene in which he confides a past tragedy with Dre. Plus, he probably looks better than he actually is next to Smith’s forced attempts at humor and whiny brat personality. It’s hard to feel bad for a kid who constantly acts like a jerk.

The overall adaption addressed some of the flaws in the 1984 release and using China as the backdrop produced some great looking scenes. Chan and Henson did well to carry the cast of mostly children. Plus, I think it would be tough to find someone who questions Jackie Chan’s ability as a martial artist. I was very impressed when he fought… a group of five middle school kids… well at least he didn’t try to act ghetto like in the Rush Hour trilogy. (6.6 out of 10)

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

The creative team behind the National Treasure films gives their take on fantasy in a film that seems to have fallen between the cracks of the summer’s biggest releases. Nicholas Cage plays Balthazar, a former apprentice of Merlin who must train a normal guy to become a powerful sorcerer and defeat two powerful villains. Jay Baruchel plays the normal/ geeky guy, Dave, who is forced to play a part in this centuries old struggle the world never knew existed.

With Baruchel and Cage as the two leads it’s hardly difficult to predict the types of performances these actors will give you. Baruchel has become a pro at the likeable geek persona and Cage is, well he’s Nicholas Cage. If you’re not familiar with his style see any one of his films and he’ll be acting similar. The addition of Alfred Molina as Horvath, Balthazar’s archenemy, brings the quality of performance up a bit. Now don’t get me wrong, Baruchel and Cage are good, but predictable.

The story is also a tad on the predictable side, but it is well done. The film is not as complex as a Harry Potter type fantasy but as it’s based on the Fantasia cartoon it doesn’t have any kind of commitment to an epic novel with boatloads of detail-obsessed fans. This allows the story to flow well and build as a fun film that could end with this venture or continue on in a sequel if Disney sees fit.

My main gripe comes with the stuffy dialogue between Dave and his love interest, Becky, played by Teresa Palmer. Being a recent college graduate, whenever a film portrays my age group as a stereotypical archetype it bothers me. Becky is a sort of artsy, music obsessed character who at one point claims that her college radio show is the only thing she enjoys in her life. Dave on the other hand gives a similar impression with science. It was just overly dramatic. Both characters have friends in the film. The audience sees them. So, they’re not as lonely as everyone is supposed to think.

Otherwise, the film is very easy to watch with lots of laughs and an exciting story. It’s your typical Disney movie. Though the most important question of course is, will it make your typical Disney movie money? (7.9 out of 10)

Despicable Me

For whatever reason I expected Despicable Me to be the best animated movie I’ve ever seen. It most likely had something to do with the colossal marketing campaign that begin last summer and the voice talents of three of the biggest comedic stars in the world right now, Steve Carell, Jason Segal, and Russell Brand. However, the result was a situation where I saw the majority of the film’s best jokes in the trailers. They were still funny in context but not as fresh.

The story follows a super-villain named Gru, voiced by Carell, as he attempts to steal the moon and win back the respect of his evil community. He has to battle a new villain in town and adopts three innocent children to unwillingly break through his enemy’s defenses with their charm.

Gru is, as one would expect from a children’s film, not that evil and in reality just misunderstood. Though what the audience does not usually get is an explanation that delves into abandonment issues from childhood and a fear of failure. Children (and probably a lot of adults) would overlook those details, as they are masked in humor, but they do provide some depth to the story.

The dozens of “minions” are probably the most memorable aspect of the film as they were used in advertising and feature prominently on screen. They provide quite a few laughs as well. The humor combined with the overall story structure and likability of the characters makes Despicable Me a hit, although I don’t think it was the best animated movie ever.

Another interesting characteristic is how the voice actors mask their voices with accents and different dialects. There is not the usual realization of who the voice belongs to when they come on screen that tends to happen in other animated pictures. This instance takes a bit longer. Brand plays an elderly scientist and Carell’s Gru has an Eastern European accent. I can’t remember either of them playing parts like that anywhere else so that should be enough to get you into the theater. Well that’s if the billions of commercials fail to do so. (7.6 out of 10)

Predators

There are tons of reboots coming out these days. One interesting idea was the decision to do a new Predator movie with Adrien Brody as the lead. The original used Arnold Schwarzenegger. That’s like 100 lbs difference in muscle. But even with that in mind, Brody was pretty jacked and believable in the position as the main bad ass.

The movie focuses on a group of elite killers who are dropped onto another planet as game for a group of brutal aliens to hunt. Yes, that description is The Most Dangerous Game with aliens. However, that story always seems to stay relevant with audiences because of how obscure a concept it is. Topher Grace, Laurence Fishburne, and a fairly unknown cast join Brody in Predators. I hope it doesn’t spoil anything when I say that the all get picked off one by one and the confusion and fear the characters feel is similar to the original.

This time the film has better special effects than the 1987 version and the aliens are superior looking to the original. But why there was no attempt to come up with a brand new concept for the franchise baffles me. It’s basically the predators hunt humans and this time they have home field advantage. Nonetheless, the film begins with a unique establishing scene that gets the viewers heart racing immediately. After things calm down, the intriguing (yet recycled) plotline often battles with awkward and campy dialogue that is a small step below laughable. Adrien Brody shows he can be an action star, but neglects some of his Oscar winning prowess as an actor.

The supporting cast presents itself as solid for portions of the film with each individual taking their turn with cheesy lines. The predator monsters are their usual bug faced, dreadlocked selves and even with their fairly ridiculous look it is one that has become Iconic in the sci-fi world. With the clicking sound they give off it made for some dramatic encounters… that tended to end with brutal murder. It is Predators after all. (7.0 out of 10)

The Last Airbender

The films released by Nickelodeon Movies have come a long way since Harriet the Spy and Good Burger in the 90s. Even with the lack of Kel Mitchell, the studio’s latest release, The Last Airbender, wound up getting panned by critics prior to its release. Based on a Nickelodeon cartoon, the story follows Aang (Noah Ringer) who must mature in order to fulfill his destiny of becoming the Avatar, who can control the elements in a world threatened by war.

The concept is an interesting one giving unique twists to standard fantasy plot elements and character archetypes. The large flaws come with the difficult task of adapting a season of television into a reasonable length movie. Characters are not given adequate time they need to develop. Along with Ringer, Nicola Peltz who plays Katara and Jackson Rathbone who plays Sokka make up a lead trio that lacks enough personality to gain attachment from an audience. Peltz and Ringer could also have benefited from some more acting experience before partaking in such a big budget project. Rathbone actually seems respectable next to the other two, but in reality that might just be because he is way better here than he is in the Twilight series (See below for Eclipse review).

The acting strength falls with the villain… or “anti- villain.” Dev Patel plays the outcast Prince Zuko, who winds up being one of the only characters who experiences change in the film. This can be attributed mainly to Patel’s performance, which rotates between vindictive and sympathetic.

Going into The Last Airbender, I wasn’t entirely sure what to expect. The trailers boast tremendous special effects presenting a neat concept. All of this proved true after screening the film. However, the biggest question was whether or not the acting could keep up. With the rare exceptions the answer is no. When seeing the movie, viewers need to be patient through a slow beginning and uncomfortable dialogue to get to the meat of the project. I hope the other two films in the series are made. Firstly, because I am intrigued to see what happens, and second because this is better than everything else M. Night Shyamalan has been making. (7.5 out of 10)

Twilight Saga: Eclipse

It’s hardly worth mentioning the ridiculous hype for this movie because it’s almost as if society accepts the Twilight films as something we just have to deal with. That is of course excluding the millions of fans who counted down the seconds until the midnight release. But this, the third in the series, has enough variety for die-hards, casual viewers, and those that were dragged to the theater kicking and screaming.

This time around Edward (Robert Pattinson), and Bella (Kristen Stewart) must deal with the threat of a newborn vampire army wreaking havoc nearby. As if that wasn’t enough, Bella wants to “do it” with Edward but Edward wants to get married first… it’s quite dramatic, well at least the vampire fighting part is. Professional vampire director David Slade (30 days of Night) takes the reigns this time and is successful in presenting quality action scenes that push the film in the direction of more traditional vampire lore. Some scenes would even fit in Slade’s 30 Days. I view this as a positive to the film, however I wouldn’t be surprised if some mothers of pre-teens weren’t pleased. But that should be the least of their worries.

In between the scenes of solid vampire violence there are drawn out and flat exchanges between Edward and Bella. I feel like everything these two insipid losers say is a repeated exchange from five minutes earlier or an earlier film. Then when the script channels the campy one-liners from the novel (yes I read it) I either laugh out loud or cringe in discomfort. So, what is the solution to this problem? I have no answer, but I know that throwing Taylor Lautner’s portrayal of Jacob in between the two just makes my laughter turn into hysterics. The whole thing is just so cheesy. A lack of acting ability sure doesn’t help either. Kristen Stewart actually has improved in that department but Pattinson straddles that line between tolerable and abysmal and Lautner has devolved to the terrible performance he had in the first Twilight film.

The increase in usage of the supporting characters didn’t strengthen the film as I expected. It merely brought into question the relevance of their being there at all. Billy Burke’s portrayal as Charlie Swan is one of the few exceptions to this. He provided some comic relief that was actually intentional, unlike the awkwardness of the three leads. Bryce Dallas Howard was also a nice improvement replacing Rachelle Lefevre as the villain, Victoria.

While keeping in mind the substantial flaws just mentioned, I must admit that there were lengthy segments that were very well done, and cinematically speaking the film looked very good. Improvements have been made since the first film in regard to special effects and how to translate certain moments to screen (i.e how the vampires die, their super speed). Now it’s just a matter of adapting the romance so that the teenage girls will still love it and everyone else won’t barf all over themselves. (7 out of 10)

Knight and Day

Knight and Day was a good movie. If only it were that easy. I, like others were anticipating this to be the return of Tom Cruise to the realm of international thrillers. This is a far cry from the Mission Impossible franchise though. Cruise plays Roy Miller who is a secret agent in the middle of dispute with his agency and finds himself defending a “normal” woman, June Havens played by Cameron Diaz, who is in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The film begins with quality action, and interesting plot twists. There was even a span of a few minutes where I could tolerate Cameron Diaz. Cruise’s performance has all of his normal traits including the charm, the wit and all that good stuff. I found him to still be convincing in the spy role, but making a movie less sophisticated and a step from his previous ventures made it seem a bit shallow. Plus, he has Diaz following him around almost getting them killed all the time. I kept wishing that Roy would leave June in a ditch somewhere because she was so damn annoying. Of course that didn’t happen because somehow Roy finds her “charming”. I wish Hollywood would realize that bumbling, and stupid does not always equal charming.

The plotline begins strong and fizzles out around half way when the audience learns the weak explanation of the film’s title and June somehow finds herself entitled to top secret information and thinks she is qualified for counter-espionage. Cruise’s strong performance is then pushed to the back burner and everything that was making the movie enjoyable is less prevalent.

So, now I will try and sum up this back and forth review of a movie I both loved and hated. Tom Cruise still has the acting ability to be a top billed lead in a film. Cameron Diaz does not and brings down Cruise with her unlikeable performance. The story is interesting but not able to maintain a level that would place it among classic action/romantic comedies. It always disappoints me when a movie is on the fence but can’t deliver in the final third to win over the audience. Unfortunately, this falls in that category. (6.6 out of 10)

Grown Ups

I guess it must be time for Adam Sandler’s now yearly attempt at more mature comedy. After last summer’s Funny People my interest in Adam Sandler films dipped a bit, but this time around he turned to his regular cast mates and friends instead of going with the Hollywood in-crowd actors like Seth Rogan and Jonah Hill. The result was a better chemistry and the movie was just better all around. The film focuses on a group of childhood friends, now grown up, who spend the weekend together after attending their old coach’s funeral. Kevin James, Chris Rock, David Spade and Rob Schneider join Sandler as the leads.

The result is a group of characters that have a surprising amount of development while rarely getting preachy. Sandler is able to present a quality comedic effort with Spade and Schneider filling in the immature potty jokes. James gives his usually brand of likeable awkwardness as Rock takes a rare step away from the type A personality the audience is used to. None of the actors overshadow the others making the variety broad and all around funny. Even someone like Spade, who plays his typical sleaze wasn’t so bad.

The majority of the story is centered on the five men but their families also play a role and add to the multiple dimensions one doesn’t usually expect from Adam Sandler. This group worked well together on screen and made some fairly inoffensive humor that is family friendly.

It wasn’t the funniest movie I’ve ever seen but its good to see these actors back on the screen in a successful effort. When pinpointing the weak points of the film none blatantly stick out. The actors don’t give award worthy performances but they are good enough. Grown Ups is the movie I’d expect in this stage of Adam Sandler’s career. Not that awkward snoozer of last year, Funny People. (7.9 out of 10)

Toy Story 3

In another summer blockbuster that seemed to spike everyone’s interest except mine, Toy Story 3 takes a humungous swipe at the box office fifteen years after the first film’s release. This time around the crew deals with their owner, Andy, leaving for college and they face the prospect of being donated or, even worse, thrown away. The plot then evolves into a take on The Great Escape as they attempt to break free from a daycare center lead by a maniacal teddy bear.

It baffles me as to how this film was able to maintain a G rating in the face of violence, bigotry, and a ton of scary moments. While the first two films play with these concepts the third installment tells the audience to never throw anything away because you may be sentencing that object to death by incinerator, or trash compactor. I’m sure this does wonders for the consciences of children who are entering their teenage years and no longer need their toys.

The movie is very well done. Disney Pixar has perfected how to appeal emotionally to an audience of varying ages, and bringing back their original Toy Story characters makes it just plain heartbreaking. The contributing voice talents of the veteran actors involved definitely helps too. Tom Hanks plays Woody and this time around the character acts as a true lead dominating the screen time more than in the original two films. The other main players, Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), and Jessie (Joan Cusack), take a step back to join the deep cast of toys as support.

In addition to the sheer amount of fear experienced throughout, there are quite a few laugh-out-loud moments that almost all of the characters get a chance at producing. But, it was hard for the jokes to build on each other as they traded off with the sad incidents. It’s tough to let loose at the banter of Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head immediately after you find out that some of the less memorable toys from the other films were sold or thrown away. It seemed like doing stand-up comedy at a funeral. In the long run, Toy Story 3 might be considered the best of the trilogy but that doesn’t necessarily mean your toddler can handle it. Unless your toddler is a fan of Schindler’s List. Then they should be fine. (7.7 out of 10)

Jonah Hex

If you’re familiar with this blog or me at all you know that I tend to cling on to the positive aspects of films and come out of the theater liking most efforts. The majority of people would say I rate films too high in almost every case and I’m ok with being overly optimistic in these instances. However, once in awhile I run into something in which I just can’t find the bright side. Enter DC Comics adaption, Jonah Hex.

The concept is not the main issue with the film. Josh Brolin stars as the title character who uses his bounty hunter skills to track down a terrorist, played by John Malkovich, who is trying to blow up the post Civil War United States. Hex also has some super-natural powers and that terrorist happened to burn His family alive. Now where to start? Malkovich played his usually creepy self in a role that lacked any kind of dimension. He was a Confederate who wanted to destroy the Union… literally destroy the Union, as in blow it up with a giant cannon. The issue with developing an evil mastermind is that the film has to convince the audience someone would want to go about their evil plan. In this case, so many innocent civilians were murdered with no plan to impact the overall scheme I just couldn’t buy it.

Josh Brolin’s performance was fine. That’s really all that can be said because almost everything out of his mouth was a campy one-liner. I know better than to blame that on the actor instead of the screenwriter. Though no amount of script doctors could have saved Megan Fox’s performance. The prostitute, Lilah, that she played was not important to the story and did nothing except bring a woman into the fold. Yeah fine, Megan Fox is hot blah, blah, blah but she is a very weak actress. Her poor southern drawl came and went multiple times and the complete absence of chemistry with Brolin created a number of very awkward scenes. To draw a comparison, it was like if Alfred and Two Face started making out during The Dark Knight… exactly. Michael Fassbender’s over the top performance as Burke, the Irish henchman was a rare bright spot, and deserves to be mentioned.

The last of my major complaints comes with the glancing over of certain aspects of the film that could have strengthened it. One of the early scenes is animated with comic book style graphics. But that one scene was the only time. The theme doesn’t even return for the credits. It was as if the director forgot to film that sequence and decided it would be cheaper to draw it. That obviously didn’t happen but that’s what it looked like. The other theme was Hex’s ability to rouse the dead. It was one of the few unique elements in the film, but it’s hardly used. I guess Jonah Hex is just another reminder that all comic books shouldn’t be made into movies. I don’t want to dissuade potential viewers from seeing it however. It’s the best Post-Civil War-Sci Fi-Apocolyptic thriller since 1999’s Wild Wild West. (4.3 out of 10)

The A-Team

Who could have foreseen that a film reboot of a campy 70’s action show would have a script strong enough to bring in some of Hollywood’s best to star? O.K, so “Hollywood’s best” definitely needs quotation marks but this cast deserves recognition. The story of four military outcasts on a mission to clear their name of a wrongful charge, The A-Team is a brand that is best remembered for one of the cheesiest of catchphrases, “I pity the fool…” Luckily, those words were never uttered in the new version. But they did make a cameo as a Baracus tattoo.

Now back to the cast that is lead by the unquestionable Liam Neeson, who tends to be strong no matter how lousy a movie is. His portrayal of Colonel ‘Hannibal’ Smith was a quality performance. However, I must say that for once he did not steal the show. Sharlto Copley, previously of District 9, reinvents the over the top character, Murdock to great affect. Who knew he was such a strong comedic actor? The other two leads (B.A. Baracus, played by Quinton ‘Rampage’ Jackson, and Face played by Bradley Cooper) were high quality accomplishments as well. Rampage could still improve a bit on his acting but for a character originally played by Mr. T the bar isn’t that high.

Add those individuals to this strong multi-layered script and we have a movie that I consider to be the strongest of the summer so far. It had more laughs than most comedies and was able to combine a smart conspiracy plot with absolutely ridiculous events. I can’t imagine you can control a free falling military tank by blasting the cannon in certain directions but they made it seem possible in the film, which is enough for me. The action is pretty sick as well. I wouldn’t expect any less from the director of Smoking Aces, Joe Carnahan who helmed The A-Team. But unlike that previous effort this movie has more than just explosions and dying.

Cinematically, the film had a number of very interesting compositions that brought the viewer into the film. I almost broke a sweat watching some of the desert scenes because of the warm tint laid over the shots, and that’s just one example. It was just a great all around effort. I really wish I had an “I pity the fool” joke here, but I’ve got nothing. Damn. (9.0 out of 10)