Aug 09 2005

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

A darker version of the first film, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a surprisingly fantastic remake that is just as entertaining as the original. It is visually stunning with its elaborate sets and breathtaking special effects. The acting, led by a bizarre yet brilliant performance by Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka, is high quality. Even the children give an admirable performance. The truly unique plot is much more similar then the first film was to the book by Roald Dahl.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Aug 17 2005

The Dukes of Hazzard

The Dukes of Hazzard is exactly what you would expect it to be, a fun movie filled with cars and beautiful women. The casting is pretty much on target, and the acting was quite good, yes, even from Jessica Simpson. Johnny Knoxville and Seann William Scott, the lead actors in the film, were terrific together. While the plot was simple and very predictable, it still managed to be entertaining. That is, if your idea of entaining is watching cars jump over highways.

2 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Aug 24 2005

March of the Penguins

Beautiful, charming, and heart-warming, March of the Penguins is the must-see family movie of the summer. Being a film which can not depend on special effects or performances to elevate it, this documentary relies almost solely on the story. And what a story it is. It ranges from funny and sweet to tender and heart-breaking. Morgan Freeman's deep voice narrating and beautiful classical music are the final perfect touches to this perfect film. March of the Penguins receives four out of four stars.

4 stars out of 4

Sep 03 2005

The Transporter 2

It's certainly action-packed, in a mindless way, and on the whole, Transporter 2 is a quite fun. In it, Frank Martin (Jason Statham), an ex-mercenary, is a chauffer to the young son of a wealthy family. When the son is kidnapped, Frank must spring into action to save him. However, he soon realizes that it was more then a simple kidnapping. The acting was surprisingly good, especially from lead actor Jason Statham. Amber Valletta, Matthew Modine, and Alessandro Gassman also give strong supporting preformances.
One negative point is that this film is extremely unrealistic. In one such scene, the villain's have attached a bomb to the bottom of Frank's speeding car. So Frank flips the car off a ramp, does a 180 in midair, and bumps the bottom of the car with a dangling construction hook, which, obviously, scrapes the bomb off of the car right before it explodes. However, the fight scenes (of which there were many) were expertly and creatively choreographed, and the visual effects were decent. If you like action, you will like this film. If not, then you would be better off to avoid it.

2 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Sep 26 2005

Corpse Bride

Corpse Bride by Tim Burton, the producer and writer of Nightmare Before Christmas, is an original and well written film that ends up being quite entertaining. Victor Van Dort (Johnny Depp) is getting married. He doesn't particularly want to, but after he meets his bride-to-be Victoria Everglot (Emily Watson) the two fall immediately in love. However, after Victor forgets his vows during rehearsal, he flees in embarrassment only to put the ring on what appears to be a tree branch and by grave misunderstanding marries the corpse bride (Helena Bonham Carter).
Johnny Depp shines and fits perfectly into the role of timid Victor. Emily Watson and Helen Bonham Carter also bring their characters to life. The script is cleverly written with lines such as "Isn't the view beautiful? It takes my breath away. Well, it would if I had any." Danny Elfman, Tim Burton's longtime composer, adds in a few amusing, if a bit unnecessary, musical numbers. In the end Tim Burton creates another visually stunning and wildly creative animated comedy that's worth watching.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Oct 09 2005

Into The Blue

Into the Blue is anything but boring, but it is, ultimately, forgettable. Paul Walker stars as Jared, a treasure hunter who has yet to find any treasure. He and his girlfriend Samantha (Jessica Alba) live in a trailer on the idyllic beaches of the Bahamas. Things get complicated however when Jared's friend Bryce (Scott Caan) turns up, and they come across a shipwreck full of gold which happens to be right next to a sunken plane full of cocaine. The owners of the illicit cargo will stop at nothing to find and recover it.
The acting is, well, bad by nearly all of the cast members. However, by the end, there is far to much action to care. Of course, the script isn't terrific, and at 110 minutes, it is just a bit too long. On a positive note, the scenery is gorgeous, but that is hardly enough reason to see a film. Into the Blue is entertaining and does what is expected, just don't expect too much.

2 stars out of 4

Nov 14 2005

Zathura

Based on the book by Chris Van Allsburg, Zathura is by no means perfect, but actually turns out to be quite an entertaining film. Six-year-old Danny (Jonah Bobo) and his older brother Walter (Josh Hutcherson) are rivals and compete for the attention of their divorced father (Tim Robbins). But when their father has to briefly leave them and Danny finds an old board game titled “Zathura” in the basement, the two have no idea that they are about to start a wild adventure filled with meteor showers, an out of control robot, carnivorous, cold-blooded aliens, and a mysterious yet heroic astronaut.
The two child actor stars give decent performances as does Dax Shepard as the astronaut. The visual effects that there are are stunning, although for the most part, director Jon Favreau opts to use more models and large-scale puppets then computer-generated imagery which is not at all a bad thing. Zathura is an action-packed film that is fun enough for all ages to enjoy.
Based on the book by Chris Van Allsburg, Zathura is by no means perfect, but actually turns out to be quite an entertaining film. Six-year-old Danny (Jonah Bobo) and his older brother Walter (Josh Hutcherson) are rivals and compete for the attention of their divorced father (Tim Robbins). But when their father has to briefly leave them and Danny finds an old board game titled “Zathura” in the basement, the two have no idea that they are about to start a wild adventure filled with meteor showers, an out of control robot, carnivorous, cold-blooded aliens, and a mysterious yet heroic astronaut.
The two child actor stars give decent performances as does Dax Shepard as the astronaut. The visual effects that there are are stunning, although for the most part, director Jon Favreau opts to use more models and large-scale puppets then computer-generated imagery which is not at all a bad thing. Zathura is an action-packed film that is fun enough for all ages to enjoy.

3 stars out of 4

Nov 20 2005

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

The much anticipated fourth film of the Harry Potter series finally arrives, and does so astonishingly. Now in his fourth year, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) finds that the TriWizard Tournament, a dangerous competition in which three champions from different wizarding schools compete in various tasks, is being held at Hogwarts. The champions are chosen by the Goblet of Fire itself, and, obviously, Harry is chosen as one of them even though he is under the age restriction for the tournament. So, he must compete in three perilous tasks, ending in an unexpected encounter with Harry’s nemesis Lord Voldemort (played impressively and most menacingly by Ralph Fiennes).
Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint give their best and most realistic performance yet. The rest of the adult cast, though in many cases only briefly seen, remain as brilliant as ever. The only one who seems off is Michael Gambon whose portrayal of Dumbledore appears a bit rough, although much of that probably has to do with the new director Mike Newell. The film also has astonishing special effects which are especially evident in the scene involving a massive dragon. On another note, don’t expect a perfect replica of the 734 page novel. Even at 157 minutes, the film still cuts out very many things from the book, particularly towards the beginning. Still, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is arguably the best Potter movie yet.
As most are probably aware, this is the first Harry Potter film to receive a PG-13 rating, and, a warning to parents, this rating is fully deserved. It has many intense moments including an unnerving scene of Voldemort’s return and a very creepy maze. It is unlikely that any of these scenes would be extremely frightening to an older audience but could scare many younger children. Having said that, this is still a brilliant film and definitely worth watching.

4 stars out of 4

Dec 10 2005

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

The enchanting first installment in the masterpiece by C. S. Lewis comes to life in an adaptation that is nothing short of stunning. It is World War II, and the four Pevensie children, Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy, are sent away to the country for their protection. They live in the house of the eccentric Professor Kirke where Lucy discovers a wardrobe while playing hide-and-seek. When she steps inside of it, she is transported to the magical yet troubled world of Narnia where an evil witch is keeping the land is a state of perpetual winter. Soon, all four siblings become involved in a war against the witch, aided by the great lion, Aslan.
Tilda Swinton is particularly impressive as the White Witch, who plays her character with more then enough unearthly intensity, and the four kid’s performances, though not perfect, are much better then could be expected. The movie manages to not be dominated by special effects, yet it has plenty of them and first-rate ones too. They are most noticeable in the final battle which is visually spectacular, though it pushes the PG rating as far as it will go. The plot sticks pretty much to original story with only a few things changed or added, and those few things only make the film more enthralling. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is well worth the price of admission.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Dec 18 2005

King Kong

Three hours have never gone by faster in Peter Jackson’s epic remake of the classic story, King Kong. Kong begins in the Depression-era where out of work vaudeville actress Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) becomes desperate enough to attempt to steal an apple. That’s when Carl Denham (Jack Black) notices Ann and offers her a role in his film, and Ann, desperate as she is, accepts. They travel to the mysterious and undiscovered Skull Island along with screenwriter Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody). There they encounter hair-raising natives who eventually kidnap Ann and offer her up as a sacrifice to Kong himself. Then the action really starts to pick up as Jack, Carl, and the rest of the crew encounter dinosaur stampedes, giant insects, and repulsive, man-eating worms while Ann and Kong run into trouble themselves, namely three ferocious T. rexes.
While Watts, Black, and Brody are brilliant in their roles, the real star is Kong thanks mostly to Andy Serkis. He embodies Kong, and when you look into the ape’s face, you can truly see sadness, love, and pain. Not to mention that the special effects that create him are completely convincing as are all the numerous CGI creatures which leads to many edge-of-the-seat action sequences that never seem to let up. All of that makes for an exciting and entertaining film, but what truly makes King Kong epic is that, amidst all of the expected action, the heart of the story is still one of love and is, quite simply, beautiful

4 stars out of 4

Jan 01 2006

Pride & Prejudice

You may have to look around to find the latest adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel in theaters, but this is one gem of a romance that, for fans of the genre, shouldn’t be missed. The tale begins in the late 1700’s with the lively Bennet family. With five unmarried sisters, there is great excitement when wealthy, single Mr. Bingley (Simon Woods) moves in nearby. Along with him comes also single and also wealthy Fitzwilliam Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen) whom the second eldest Bennet daughter, spirited Elizabeth (Keira Knightley), takes a great dislike due to his seeming arrogance and pretentiousness. However, inevitably, Darcy becomes smitten with her even if it takes a while for Elizabeth to realize it.
In the lead, Keira Knightley is a perfect choice for strong-willed and opinionated Elizabeth and gives a most layered performance. The same is to be said for MacFadyen. The rest of the roles are cast flawlessly as well, from Tom Hollander as the laughably self-satisfied Mr. Collins to Judi Dench as the menacing aunt of Darcy, Lady Catherine de Bourg. In addition to the acting, the film is heightened by breathtaking shots of English countryside, masterfully choreographed balls, and a score that is most passionate. The classic romantic story is given a new, fresh look in Pride & Prejudice and is quite a joy to watch
You may have to look around to find the latest adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel in theaters, but this is one gem of a romance that, for fans of the genre, shouldn’t be missed. The tale begins in the late 1700’s with the lively Bennet family. With five unmarried sisters, there is great excitement when wealthy, single Mr. Bingley (Simon Woods) moves in nearby. Along with him comes also single and also wealthy Fitzwilliam Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen) whom the second eldest Bennet daughter, spirited Elizabeth (Keira Knightley), takes a great dislike due to his seeming arrogance and pretentiousness. However, inevitably, Darcy becomes smitten with her even if it takes a while for Elizabeth to realize it.
In the lead, Keira Knightley is a perfect choice for strong-willed and opinionated Elizabeth and gives a most layered performance. The same is to be said for MacFadyen. The rest of the roles are cast flawlessly as well, from Tom Hollander as the laughably self-satisfied Mr. Collins to Judi Dench as the menacing aunt of Darcy, Lady Catherine de Bourg. In addition to the acting, the film is heightened by breathtaking shots of English countryside, masterfully choreographed balls, and a score that is most passionate. The classic romantic story is given a new, fresh look in Pride & Prejudice and is quite a joy to watch

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Feb 27 2006

Eight Below

Despite a few moments of predictability, a solidly entertaining and touching story can be found in Disney’s film “Eight Below”. It is the tale of eight dogs that are left below in Antarctica (hence the title) after an incoming early winter storm and injured man force Antarctic scientists to abandon the camp in a helicopter that can’t support any more weight. Survival guide Jerry Shepard (Paul Walker) only deserts his beloved sled team after reassurances from pilot Katie (Moon Bloodgood) that she will return to retrieve the dogs as soon as possible. As it happens, the storm gets worse, and that as soon as possible turns out to be next spring. For over 150 days, the dogs must fend for themselves.
Walker’s performance may be one-note, but it hardly matters for the dogs are the real stars and rightfully so. One particular scene even belongs to a monstrous leopard seal whose startling appearance is sure to make anyone jump in their seats. Director Frank Marshall makes sure that the gorgeous snowy scenery is taken full advantage of, and the effect is dazzling (although, the film was actually shot in Canada, not Antarctica). “Eight Below” is a less tragic version of the true story, yet still tear-jerking enough to bring a lump to the throat of any dog lover.

3 stars out of 4

Apr 23 2006

The Sentinel

For a thriller “The Sentinel” sure manages to not be very thrilling and settles for an average at best level. As the tagline for the movie asserts, in 141 years, the Secret Service has never contained a traitor- until now. The prime suspect is veteran agent Pete Garrison (Michael Douglas) who took a bullet for Reagan years ago. Instead of turning himself in and cooperating, Garrison flees in a move that pretty much reaffirms his guilt to those pursuing him. In lead of those pursuers is agent David Breckinridge (Kiefer Sutherland), once a friend of Garrison’s. Will Garrison prove his innocence and catch the real mole? Boy, that’s a mystery.
A plot to assassinate the president, a race against time, and a mole in the organization- “The Sentinel” has been compared to television’s “24”, and fortunately or unfortunately, it’s true that Sutherland basically reprises his role of Jack Bauer. As for Michael Douglas’s performance, there is nothing specifically wrong with it but also nothing particularly special in it. Concerning the screenplay, there are too many plot holes to count and little character development in anyone but Garrison. While it's true that it’s nearly suspense-free and contains characters that nodiv class='review'particularly cares about, for all its faults, “The Sentinel” is still entertaining, if only mildly so.

2 stars out of 4

May 08 2006

Mission: Impossible III

There isn’t an intricate or realistic plot to be found in “Mission: Impossible III”, but what can be found instead are two hours of solid entertainment and nearly nonstop action. Sometimes there isn’t anything wrong with that. The plot centers on now retired super-spy Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) who is called back into action when rookie agent Lindsey Ferris (Keri Russell) goes missing. He leads a mission to rescue her and from there gets involved in an attempt to stop the calculating villain that is Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman) from selling a substance called the “Rabbits Foot” (what exactly it is is never specified, but it’s obviously given that it sure is dangerous).
Whatever Tom Cruise may do in his personal life, there are no arguments here that he fits perfectly into his role and gives a terrific performance. Outshining even Cruise however is recent Academy Award winner Philip Seymour Hoffman whose portrayal of his diabolical character is nothing short of chilling. Director J.J. Abrams, best known for his TV shows “Lost” and “Alias”, also brings in his own flair to the franchise, and indeed “M:I III” does resemble an elongated, bigger-budget episode of “Alias”- not necessarily a bad thing. “M:I III” certainly delivers what it promises- nonstop thrills and pure escapism. The season of summer blockbusters has officially begun.

3 stars out of 4

May 22 2006

The Da Vinci Code

When you think about it, “The Da Vinci Code” has just about everything going for it- a stellar, well-known cast, an Oscar-winning director and writer, and enough publicity to just about make sure that there isn’t a person left in the country who hasn’t heard of the film. However, with all of that comes great expectations, and for the most part the movie manages to live up to those expectations. The film begins with a murder in the Louvre- a very cryptic murder as the victim had placed clues all around him before his death. Harvard symbology professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) becomes the prime suspect and flees with cryptologist Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou). From there they become involved with a conspiracy of epic size that if revealed could shake the very foundations of Christianity itself. (Yes, technically the entire movie is Catholic-bashing, but the claims made are so preposterous that they could be no more obviously fictional.)
It’s the supporting actors who are the real standouts acting wise in “The Da Vinci Code”. Paul Bettany as the self-flagellating villainous monk and Ian McKellen as the Grail-obsessed Brit rival even Hanks in their scenes. In fact, it isn’t until McKellen makes his first appearance at the beginning of the second hour that the movie really starts to hit its stride. Veteran director Ron Howard and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman do a decent job adapting Dan Brown’s novel to film and wisely stay rigorously close to the book. You shouldn’t go into the theaters to see “The Da Vinci Code” expecting a perfect film or one that compares to the novel that has sold 60 million copies, but nevertheless you can expect an intelligent and engrossing thriller that is worth two and a half hours of your time.

3 stars out of 4

May 31 2006

X-Men: The Last Stand

The third and supposedly final film of the adventures of the X-Men mutants may arrive in theaters with a bigger bang ($120 million gross over the weekend) then the previous two movies, but in reality, the film itself is less involving, has less depth, and is downright less enjoyable then its predecessors. However, that still by no means makes it unentertaining. The plot is straightforward enough. A cure for mutancy is discovered and creates mixed feelings among the mutants it concerns. On one hand you have those mutants who strive to fit in and jump at the chance to be normal. Then you have those with drastically opposite opinions such as Magneto (Ian McKellen) who view the so called cure as an attempt to exterminate the mutant race. Fighting brews when Magneto forms a powerful group who set out to destroy the source of the cure. Charles Xavier’s (Patrick Stewart) X-Men are drawn into the conflict along with newly resurrected Jean Grey (Famke Janssen) or rather her alter ego Phoenix whose powers are limitless and very deadly.
The main problem with “X-Men: The Last Stand” is that it tries too cram too much into it’s relatively measly 100 minute runtime- too many characters, too many story lines, and too much action (yes, there is such a thing as too much action). While there is nothing wrong with its numerous visual effects spectacles and climactic battle scenes, they leave little room for the character development that was so abundant in the first two films. The huge number of characters (at least a dozen) also doesn’t do the movie any favors. Many of the old ones are killed off early on to make room for the new, and the presence of other previously prominent characters, Anna Paquin as Rogue in particular, are nearly reduced to mere cameos.
While all of that may sound harsh, the movie really is quite decent as far as summer blockbusters go. It certainly succeeds in its goal to entertain. While director Brett Ratner may be criticized at superficiality of the film (which in reality was mostly the screenwriters’ faults anyway) he certainly does know how to make a heart-pounding action film, and that’s evident here. Viewers may find their heads spinning during one particularly eye-popping sequence that involves the redirection of the Golden Gate Bridge. One additional aspect of the movie to look forward to is Ian McKellen as Magneto who is the only one whose screen time does not seem squashed and delivers as delightful a performance as ever. Hardcore fans of the “X-Men” comics or the previous two films are sure to be disappointed at the effects-driven rollercoaster ride of action that is “X-Men: The Last Stand”, but for those of us who are looking for some decently-made grand entertainment, this movie will serve us well.

3 stars out of 4

Jun 30 2006

Superman Returns

Return he does and with quite a bang in Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns- a sequel of sorts to Superman and Superman II made more then twenty years ago. It may have been over two decades since the Man of Steel was last on the big screen, but in the movie his absence has lasted only five years. After spending that time searching the remains of his planet Krypyon, Superman (Brandon Routh) along with his second identity Clark Kent return to Earth and finds just how many changes there have been. One of the most devastating for him is that Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth), who is now a Pulitzer Prize winner for her piece "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman”, has moved on and gotten herself a young son and fiancé. However that’s only one of the hero’s troubles for the moment because Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is out of jail and at his nefarious schemes again. This one involves, you guessed it, world domination, and you guessed it again, only Superman can stop him.

Director Bryan Singer’s reverence towards Richard Donner’s 1978 Superman is obvious from the start. We are immediately treated to John Williams' score from the original, the familiar swooshing opening credits, and borrowed footage of the late Marlon Brando as Jor-El. Then there’s also the fact of Brandon Routh's resemblance to Christopher Reeve. On the matter of Routh, he has perhaps one of the hardest jobs which is recreating the role of the Man of Steel himself. Routh certainly doesn’t fail and brings believability to both the mild-mannered Clark Kent and the heroic Superman. The rest of the cast is a mixed bag. While Kevin Spacey seems to revel in the evil nature of Lex, Kate Bosworth lacks any real pizzazz as Lois. At 23 years old in real life she also looks too young to be either the mother of a five year old son or a plausible Pulitzer Prize winner. The special effects are as spectacular as anyone would expect, and in a way the same could be said for the movie. However, as sleek and beautiful as it is, Superman Returns can’t quite call itself perfect. We’ll just have to wait for the inevitable sequels.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Jul 08 2006

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

There shall be great heartbroken crowd if Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest fails live up to it’s predecessor as evidenced by the three packed theaters full of pirate costume wearing, fake sword-bearing, fervent fans at just one midnight showing, but have no fear for this sequel has all the high sea, swashbuckling action and adventure you could ask for and then some. Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) is back, and this time around he’s got a debt to pay to the legendary captain of the Flying Dutchman and ruler of the ocean depths, Davey Jones (Bill Nighy, unrecognizable under 50 pounds worth of makeup and CGI). If he doesn’t find a way out, he faces eternal damnation as one of Jones’s barnacled, mutated crew. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Swan (Keira Knightley) and Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) are having legal troubles of their own, and Will is blackmailed into obtaining Jack’s compass for the East India Trading Company. Before long our three heroes are together and pitted against Davey Jones along with his favorite minion Kraken- a gargantuan, tentacled, squid-like sea monster that swallows up ships whole in seconds time. Aargh.
If there is any fault to Dead Man’s Chest it would probably be that it just didn’t quite recapture the charm of the first, but that’s a minor quibble because what could? The sequel does put up a good try though and contains all the elements that made the first so successful. The visual effects were spectacular- that was a given, and of course all locations, costumes, makeup and so forth were the best a 200+ million dollar budget can buy. All of that however is second to one of the most important aspects- the acting- and Depp doesn’t disappoint. Captain Jack is as insane as ever, and for us that’s a good thing. Keira and Orlando are as solid as ever, and Dead Man’s Chest benefits from bringing back nearly all the supporting actors from the original. Concerning the story- it’s intriguing enough once we get to it (a good part of the first 45 minutes or so is spent on a bounty of action scenes occurring on an island that have absolutely nothing to do with the main plot, but are fun all the same) and provide endless opportunities for swordfights of the most creative kind. What more could any self-respecting Pirates fan ask for? Simply put it’s a piece of grand, good old swashbuckling fun that at two and a half hours never drags once, but that’s to be expected- it’s Pirates after all. Three and a half stars out of four..

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Jul 30 2006

Click

The fact that it’s an Adam Sandler movie should tell you all you need to know about “Click”—that for all its fleeting moments of real humor, there will be many more moments where you sit and ponder “What was Sandler thinking?” We start with Michael Newman (Adam Sandler) in the overused busy-workaholic-has-no-time-for-his-family scenario. After a meltdown at home, Michael goes out at night to buy a universal remote to help him control the numerous household gadgets, and lo and behold in the “Beyond” section of “Bed, Bath, and Beyond” Morty (Christopher Walken) has just what he’s looking for. Of course as we all know this is no ordinary remote. Michael soon discovers (and continually demonstrates) how the miraculous technology can be used to put his barking dog on mute, hit a kid on the head with a baseball, fast forward through a cold, and punch his boss several times in the face. Oh joy. However then (Oh no!) the remote starts fast-forwarding by itself and Michael begins missing all of his life. Though fear not, for (without giving anything away) all culminates in the single most amateur and undignified ploy a writer can possibly resort to give an audience some finality.

So what was Sandler thinking? Sure the premise is promising enough. In fact in the hands of the right people (here meaning in the hands of different people) it could have been a nice, entertaining sci-fi comedy. However why would Sandler ever settle for that when he has the chance to demonstrate some of his own immature, raunchy so-called humor? Although, the low-brow comedy isn’t actually what makes “Click” so offensive. Nor is it the numerous in-your-face product placements, less then stellar acting, or simply bad aging make-up. No, what truly makes it so detestable is the third act. Here we are, sitting in the theater, waiting through the crude first half for the thing to begin to wrap up in normal sappy Sandler fashion when without warning “Click” shifts tones to that of a shamelessly sincere drama. The words “Adam Sandler” and “heartfelt” do not go together well, and I don’t think I need to learn a life lesson from a movie where bathroom humor on an elementary school level abounds thank you very much.

1 stars out of 4

Jul 31 2006

Lady in the Water

M. Night Shyamalan has a lot riding on the outcome of “Lady in the Water”. He reportedly left Disney (who had produced his previous four films) in a huff after they expressed their dislike of the script, and Shyamalan brought it to Warner Brothers. Now, Disney will be waiting to see if they were right in passing on the film, and Warner Brothers will be waiting to see if they were right in scooping it up. Unfortunately for Shyamalan, a genre that is hard to define coupled with some of the most misleading trailers of the year make box office prospects grim. Fortunately for him however, the movie he has made is a magical tale that will invoke strong feelings (whether good or bad) in all who see it. The plot focuses on apartment building superintendent Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti) who late one night tries to catch what he thinks are troublemakers swimming in the pool after hours. Instead he finds a “Narf” (a sort of sea nymph here played by Bryce Dallas Howard) named Story who is trying to return to her world. Cleveland must work with his tenants to help her and protect her from the creatures that would stop her from ever leaving.

There have been two common complaints against “Lady in the Water”. Number one is that it isn’t scary enough or isn’t enough like a horror movie. Blame bad advertising on the confusion, but this is not a horror movie—the best genre to describe it would be fantasy. The second complaint has been against M. Night Shyamalan for casting himself in a meaty role. Let’s be honest, there won’t be any Oscars coming Shyamalan’s way in the near future, but that’s not to say the performance wasn’t a good one. He’s a better actor then some give him credit for. So now that we’ve targeted the complaints, let’s focus on the good points. One of those is that Paul Giamatti can act to put it simply. While Bryce and the rest of the cast are solid, it’s Giamatti who steals the show, and it’s hard to imagine the movie without him (Kevin Costner was actually considered for the role—now there’s a scary thought). Now, you may go the theater to see “Lady in the Water” and hate it. Many will—the film’s very nature makes it inevitable. However if you’re part of the crowd who falls on the other side of the fence, know that you are in for a beautifully crafted, imaginative, and intelligent treat that will stay with you for a very long time.

3 stars out of 4

Aug 27 2006

Snakes On A Plane

If you don’t giggle at the thought of an over-the-top B movie about hundreds of snakes attacking everyone in their path on a plane 35,000 feet in the air, then you’re going to have a tough time enjoying “Snakes on a Plane” because that’s exactly what it is. The plot (which is really only a means to get the snakes on the plane—it’s then that the story really starts) begins in Hawaii with Sean Jones (Nathan Phillips) witnessing a brutal murder by gangster Eddie Kim (Byron Lawson). To testify against Kim, he must travel on a red-eye flight bound for Los Angeles (filled with your stereotypical disaster-flick passengers out of whom it’s obvious who will die) and be escorted by tough-as-nails FBI agent Neville Flynn (Samuel L. Jackson). Of course, Kim won’t let him off the hook that easily, and tucked in the cargo hold are several anonymous huge boxes. Who can guess what they hold? Of course, before the flight takes off some pheromones are spread around to get the scaly critters into a proper frenzy. That’s right; it’s not just hundreds of snakes. It’s hundreds of crazy snakes. On a plane. What can you say about a movie with a title like “Snakes on a Plane”? There’s not too much you can say except that you get what you pay for. That wouldn’t include any actual innovative filmmaking. Looking for award-winning, dramatic writing? None to be found. Looking for revolutionary special effects? Search elsewhere. How about great acting? Actually, on that count Samuel L. Jackson does deliver. From killing snakes with tasers and blow torches to shouting “Do as I say and you'll live!” Jackson epitomizes cool. All other actors are dominated by him: a lead who’s all serious in a movie that doesn’t take itself seriously. The entire premise is ridiculous; nodiv class='review'’s denying that. In fact, the ridiculousness is the entire point. It’s good to see a movie come around that has no intention of being something it’s not but rather strives to become one thing: fun!

2 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Nov 20 2006

Casino Royale

Doing away with the fancy gadgets and cartoonish nature of some of its predecessors, the 007 franchise returns in the gritty, back-to-basics “Casino Royale” that’s sure to delight old fans and generate scores of new ones. For a nearly two and a half hour movie, the plot is pretty simplistic, and in a nutshell has James Bond (Daniel Craig) trying to track down and capture Le Chiffre, banker to the world's terrorist organizations. It’s Bond’s first mission, and the film even starts with a black and white scene that has him making the two kills that are a requirement to obtain ‘00’ status. Of course just because Craig’s Bond is a little less experienced and suave then we know he’s destined to become, he’s still quite deadly and, apparently, already is a masterful poker player. For when he learns that Le Chiffre is to participate in a high-stakes poker in Montenegro at Le Casino Royale, Bond signs up to play against him hoping that if Chiffre loses, he will be in so much debt to the worst kind of people the he’ll have to give himself up to the authorities. In a Bond movie there’s guaranteed to be a love interest at this point, so here enters Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) as a beguiling accountant sent to keep a watchful eye over Bond to make sure the government’s investment in the mission is prudent (although, there's obviously more to her then meets the eye).

Many may have their doubts about blonde, blue-eyed Daniel Craig as Bond, but any concerns will immediately cease within the first five minutes after they see the realism and presence Craig brings to the role. He might not have that effortless cool that was a trademark for James Bonds in the past, but when you look at him, it is actually possible to believe that he can pull off the stunts that previously have been taken for granted. The Bond Craig portrays is also more human, not invincible and indeed gets scratched and battered after fights (true, the cuts on his face mysteriously disappear within a day, but we’ll take what we can get). For the most part, the film is all Craig’s show as the supporting roles aren’t very large. Eva Green has the only other lead role. The chemistry between the actors isn’t extraordinary, merely acceptable, but the excellent writing makes up for it. The Oscar-winning screenwriter of Crash and Million Dollar Baby, Paul Haggis, was brought in to polish the drama in the script, and his effect is plainly evident in the tender moments of the film. Although there aren’t too many of those for even at the longest running time of any Bond film, the movie hardly ever slows down its pace. Indeed, by the final climax (all I’ll say is that it involves an “unstable” house in Venice), you won’t find yourself missing the gadgets, humor, or idealistic Bond of the earlier films for “Casino Royale” has defined itself as being a new breed of the 007 franchise.

3 stars out of 4

Dec 30 2006

Night At The Museum

It’s common knowledge that being a great family film isn’t exactly the equivalent of good filmmaking. “Night at the Museum” is certainly the former, but don’t go to the theater looking for anything other then a little less then two hours of some moralistic, mildly charming entertainment. Divorced dad Larry Daley (Ben Stiller), tired of constantly disappointing his son with evictions and less then stable careers, decides to take a more long term job as a night guard at New York’s Museum of Natural History. He meets the old guards he’s replacing (played by Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney, and Bill Cobbs; no one will ever say the film has a mediocre cast), is handed keys and a flashlight, and set on his way for his first night keeping watch over the silent and desolate museum. Of course shortly into Larry’s post he discovers that the museum is anything but desolate. As he walks through the halls all of the sudden the skeleton of a T-rex charges him, miniature Roman soldiers shoot flaming arrows, and a previously stuffed monkey steals his keys. The entire museum comes to life! Oh my! (So, why does it come to life? It’s because of an enchanted Egyptian tablet, just go with the flow.) Watching Larry run from the artificial beasts takes up the bulk of the film, but some plot is actually put into the movie when the tablet is stolen and Larry must help retrieve it or let the museum face the fate of never breathing with life at night again.

Don’t expect much from the generic first twenty minutes or so of “Night at the Museum” for like the exhibits themselves, the movie doesn’t come to life until Larry’s first night on the job when the digital creatures run amuck. If only special effects could make up for writing and cinematography then the movie would be all set, for there is an ample supply of some truly top-notch ones present here. A T-rex that acts like a puppy and plays fetch is sure to entrance the younger kids in the audience. One feature that thankfully doesn’t need to be made up for in the film is acting. We aren’t talking about anything Oscar-winning, but a star-studded cast including Dick Van Dyke, Robin Williams, and Ben Stiller himself make the overall performances better then the ones in your average kids flick. Anyone could nitpick endlessly at the plot holes, undeveloped characters, and stale, overused dialogue, but sometimes with a decent family film like “Night at the Museum” you just have to take it for what it is.

2 stars out of 4

Feb 13 2007

Dreamgirls

Was it a crime for the splashy musical Dreamgirls to be knocked out of the running for a best picture Oscar? No, but that’s not to say you can’t enjoy yourself watching Bill Condon’s dazzling film quite literally light up the screen. In the 1960’s, a down on their luck singing trio of Effie White (Jennifer Hudson), Deena Jones (Beyoncé Knowles) and Lorrell Robinson (Anika Noni Rose) are struggling as talent show material before being swept up by Curtis Taylor Jr. (Jamie Foxx), a car salesman turned manager. Taylor gets them their big break in the form of being backup singers for fiery sensation James "Thunder" Early (Eddie Murphy), and when the newly named Dreams are big enough, he let’s them star on their own, catapulting the group to stardom. However it’s not a dream-come true for Effie who had always sung lead and rightfully so with a voice like hers. Before the trio gets their act, Taylor decides to mix up the arrangement, pushing comely yet meeker sounding Deena to the front rather then full-figured Effie. The strong-willed Effie’s pride can’t take being pushed back, and she’s unceremoniously dumped from the Dreams, the final step in making Taylor’s unscrupulous control of the group complete.

For all the hype, it isn’t the actual music in Dreamgirls that blows you away. All is acceptably glamorous, but there aren’t many tunes that are so catchy as to be in your head for days after. The story isn’t enthralling either; we’ve seen all of these musical cliches before. Visuals are where Dreamgirls really stands out of the crowd. The sheer glitz of everything is overwhelming from the first act—the costumes, the lights, the sets—and here overwhelming is a good thing. The style is reminiscent of Chicago which makes sense as Bill Condon played a part in that production as well in the form of screenwriter. By now, nearly everyone has heard the acting standouts, and it’s true—Jennifer Hudson has got her first acting role down, and Eddie Murphy proves that he can still put some gravity into a role while being as spirited as ever. Dreamgirls covers two hours and over a decade in terms of the plot, and it can’t be said that it’s one of those movies that completely “flies by”. What can be said is that even if the scenes don’t go by quickly, they still dazzle, move, and entertain, and perhaps it’s a good thing they take their time doing so.

3 stars out of 4

Mar 04 2007

Pan's Labyrinth

The haunting melody that opens Pan’s Labyrinth is symbolic of what the film itself becomes, a resonant experience that remains with the viewer long after the final notes have died out. “A long time ago, in the underground realm, where there are no lies or pain, there lived a Princess who dreamed of the human world.” In Spain, 1944, a mythical faun speaks these words and tells eleven-year old Ofelia (Ivana Baquero) that she is the princess of this land. In order to return to her world, she must complete three tasks, including facing a horrendous monster from a twisted imagination, the Pale Man (Doug Jones, who also plays the faun). Or does she really face it? Could her fantasy world just be a creation to help Ofelia cope with the cruel reality of fascist Spain towards the end of World War II? She lives with her step-father Captain Vidal (Sergi López) and pregnant mother in a military outpost, where brutality is second-nature. The sadism of Vidal, by far more ruthless then the Pale Man, and the savagery of war contrast with the magic of Ofelia’s imagination which may provide her a means to come to terms with an overwhelming life.

For such a brutal tale, Pan’s Labyrinth has a unique beauty to the way it’s shown. Writer and director Guillermo del Toro must have certainly had a vision for he presents such a rich visual feast of a world. A blend of digital effects, makeup, and puppetry create the creatures onscreen, and the makeup artist team deserved their Oscar for the job done on the Pale Man alone. Of course, you couldn’t have a movie without actors, and little Ivana Baquero gives a heartrending performance. Sergi López as the captain is just as remarkable and manages to make the audience loathe and fear him within his first minutes on screen. While the film is a tale told about the imagination of a child, it is by no means a children’s film. Its violence is strong but not excessive for it is necessary. It is just as necessary as the fantasy storyline, for it is the interweaving of brutality and supernatural, the real and the miraculous, that give Pan’s Labyrinth its impact and make it a sure masterpiece.

4 stars out of 4

Apr 17 2007

Perfect Stranger

You know a director is in trouble when early on in a movie he places flashbacks of scenes that had taken place two minutes previously. There wasn’t much else James Foley could do in Perfect Stranger though, for it was a film that was sunk the moment the script’s final draft was given the okay. The plot shares the same structure with 90 percent of all mediocre psychological thrillers made in the past few years. We’ve got an introduction to the plucky, resourceful type character, investigative journalist Rowena (Halle Berry) in this case along with the obligatory computer-wiz side-kick, Miles (Giovanni Ribisi). Then there’s the eerie setup complete with plenty of shadowy shots, Rowena being approached by her old friend Grace (Nicki Aycox) who shares with Rowena her sultry affair with big businessman Harrison Hill (Bruce Willis) and his putting an abrupt end to it. When Grace turns up dead, here being the unapologetically contrived plot turn, Rowena goes undercover both in Hill’s office and in a steamy online chatroom in an attempt to gather evidence to convict him as Grace’s killer. This cat-and-mouse builds up to that final twist you know every thriller feels required to have. Luckily for this one, it’s a twist that actually feels pretty twisted.

If ever in need of an example of how a star cast can be potentially useless, Perfect Stranger would be the perfect choice. Halle Berry and Bruce Willis do not display, to be fair, weak acting in the film, but it would take a lot more then what they deliver to lift the movie from drowning in its own pretentious complexity. Therefore, the blame must go to the screenwriter. And the editor. And the director. In fact, there weren’t too many areas of production that couldn’t have used a lift (maybe if they hadn’t spent so many super-inflated salaries for big name actors…). The editing was choppy and certainly not in a good way, the cinematography drew too much attention to itself (think one too many “artistic” shadowy shots) and the entire story was bogged down by an unwelcome air of improbability. Shockingly to say however, Perfect Stranger is not a bad movie, true as it is that it’s a carbon copy of other films of the same breed. There has to be a manual somewhere given to screenwriters that lists a step-by-step process of creating the structure of a thriller that is responsible for all of these identical motion pictures. Still, Perfect Stranger is a moderately entertaining way to spend the afternoon and is not boring, or slow, or outright laughable (though that is debatable). A little credit can be given just for that.

2 stars out of 4

May 07 2007

Spider-Man 3

A quarter of a billion dollars. Where exactly does a quarter of a billion dollar budget go in a movie? Apparently not into a decent script, and as Spider-Man 3 proves, money can't buy critical acclaim. What the story is suffering from is a bad case of overkill; too many villains, too many action scenes, and too many plot developments. Things are going great for Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire), aka "Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man," at the beginning. He's got his girlfriend Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) whom he wants to propose to, has success as a photographer with the Daily Bugle, and his alter ego is finally celebrated as a hero throughout New York City. However, things begin to change for Peter as he is lying with Mary Jane watching the stars, and a meteor crashes to Earth nearby. Riding on the rock is a black, squirming goo, a "symbiote" as is later said (Why did it crash there and where is it from? Don't ask the screenwriters.) Hold off on that plotline for a while as here comes into play the "new" Green Goblin who is Harry Osborn (James Franco) looking to avenge his father's death on Spider-Man. Of course, there's also Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church), an escaped convict who as Peter/Spider-Man learns is the man actually suspected of murdering Peter's Uncle Ben. While on the run, Flint falls into a sort of molecular sand test and turned into, you guessed it, Sandman. Back to the goo, it attaches itself to Peter, creating out of him a vengeful, black-suited Spider-Man who's soon out to get Sandman, and later the substance drops onto another bitter soul who turns into the fanged nemesis Venom. Follow all of that? For those counting that makes four villains including Spidey's dark side in a movie that should have drawn the limit at two.

Apparently there are nearly one thousand CG shots in Spider-Man 3. Now we know where all of that money went. Whether they were worth it or not can be debated, but one thing that's clear is that the visual effects are magnificent. Flint's "rebirthing" as Sandman particularly stood out as a staggering technical achievement not only because of the authentic textures and movements but because of the emotion churned out of the computer-generated character. It could be said that the emotion rivals any put out by the actual actors, but that wouldn't be saying much as most of their performances are best described as lackluster. Maguire, Dunst, and Franco's styles may be impaired by the cheesy dialogue, but expertise can overcome even bad writing. The trio lacks that expertise. The blame could also be placed on sheer scale of the picture which had as many as seven working sets at a time. Director Sam Raimi spent much of his time zipping between them, never being able to truly work things out with his actors. No wonder the movie has a sprawling feel. However, in the end does the studio really care if the film is cinematic genius? Of course not. They're going to make a billion dollars on it in any case, because what movie-goers want in a summer blockbuster is some loud, action-packed entertainment. On that count, you can be sure Spider-Man 3 delivers.

2 and 1/2 stars out of 4

May 25 2007

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End

In a season of mega-budget threequels that fizzle after all the hype, there is something to be said for a movie that rivals the charm of the original and surpasses the scope of the second. There’s also something to be said for one brimming over with more sword-fighting, cannon-blasting, tentacle-waving action than ever before seen. That which has to be said is one word—whoa. Avast ye mateys, Pirates of the Caribbean is back, bigger and more ridiculously delightful than ever. It’s also ridiculously convoluted, more than any normal pirates movie would have a right to be. The general arc of the story is thankfully clear. With Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) down and out of action after being swallowed whole, Will Turner (Orlando Bloom), Elizabeth Swan (Keira Knightley), and newly ressurected Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) set out to rescue Jack from Davey Jones’ Locker, where Jack has his own surreal purgatory slowly melting away at his sanity (not that he had much to begin with). They’ll need all hands on deck for Lord Cutler Beckett (Tom Hollander) of the East India Trading Company takes control of Davey Jones’ (Bill Nighy) cut-out heart, bending the tentacled captain to his will for his desire to wipe out all pirate scum of the seas. It will take the united help of pirate lords from all corners of the world to fight an epic battle for freedom on the high seas. Throw in the goddess Calypso who is trapped in human form and out for revenge, the fact that Will is looking to free his father’s soul from debt on Jones’ ship, and a trip to Singapore to see infamous pirate Sao Feng (Yun-Fat Chow) and you’ve got the makings for nearly three hours of swashbuckling adventure. Load your cannons!

Think the 250 million dollar budget for Spiderman 3 was indulgent? At World’s End tops off at 300 million. Unlike Spidey however, every penny of the money is visible onscreen, redefining the term “eye candy.” From a colossal arctic landscape to one of vast desert dunes, the locations the film takes you to and cinematography that captures them are wondrous to behold to even the most begrudging viewers, and those are just the non-CGI shots. When visual effects come into play, the extraordinary become supernatural, all building up to a final half-hour climax which locks two ships together inside a churning, godly whirlpool. Spectacular as CGI is, it merely sets the stage for the performers. You’ll find yourself looking more at Johnny Depp than any monstrous vortexes, for while he was just plodding along comically in Dead Man’s Chest, Captain Jack is here given ample room to commandeer the film. Knightley and Bloom are not merely present to play second fiddle to Depp though; their progress in acting can be tracked through the trilogy and ends on a high note. Of the three films, Curse of the Black Pearl remains master of summer blockbuster territory. The novelty and escapism of the surprise hit four years ago will not be matched for many summers to come. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End can only be a fine way to wave farewell to Jack Sparrow and crew, wave while the man himself sails off to sea and away the overdone, commercial and thoroughly satisfying franchise that’s bound to stay around for a long time.

3 stars out of 4

Jun 10 2007

Ocean’s Thirteen

To those who appreciated the effortless cool of heist-flick Ocean's Eleven and felt let down by the lively yet self-indulgent Ocean's Twelve (Did that movie even have a plot?), there are three reasons to love the third installment, Ocean's Thirteen. First and most importantly, it's back to glitzy Las Vegas for the setting. Thankfully the crew got out of Europe, for please, these guys were born for Vegas. Secondly, the villain is played by none other than Al Pacino. Enough said. Finally, with director Steven Soderbergh having admitted not taking Twelve too seriously and promising to return to the top of his game with Thirteen, how could it not turn out sensational? In a dark, under-construction office of a nearly completed Las Vegas casino and hotel, owner Willie Bank (Al Pacino) double-crosses partner Reuben Tishkoff (Elliott Gould) and cuts him out of ownership in the hotel. When poor, gullible Reuben realizes the betrayal, he suffers a heart attack and is left to die by Bank. Of course, Reuben doesn't die, and he's got friends. Ten of them in fact. Ten friends who had knocked off three casinos in Ocean's Eleven and paid it all back in Twelve. Now they're back on the strip with a painstaking plan to make Bank's hotel's grand opening a fiasco.

Step one: orchestrate a Vegas vacation out of everyone's nightmares for the hotel critic (David Paymer, credited in the movie as "The V.U.P." or Very Unimportant Guest).

Step two: Rig the casino in any and all ways possible to make everyone a winner,everyone except Willie Bank.

Step three: Sit back, throw a few dice at the tables and watch their revenge in action. Of course, when the plan runs into some obstacles, it will take more than Danny Ocean (George Clooney) and Rusty Ryan's (Brad Pitt) crew to pull a job on the strip's flashiest new monstrosity. Two more will do the trick; it'll take thirteen.

For a movie that throws the audience into the action immediately with no preamble, it still takes half an hour for the film to start to warm up. That can be forgiven as there's still an hour and a half for Ocean's Thirteen to dazzle. Dazzle it does, carried along by star power not to be matched in any other blockbuster this summer. All of the old crew are back, minus the unmissed Julia Roberts and Catherine Zeta-Jones who's presence is dismissed within the first five minutes ("It's not their fight."). Newcomers to the series (though not to Ocean's crew; they're the villains of course) are Al Pacino along with the sole woman of the cast, Ellen Barkin as his right hand. Hilarity ensues when Matt Damon playing Linus, a member of the crew of thieves, tries to seduce Barkin armed with pheromone laden cologne and an elongated prosthetic nose. While not strictly a special effects movie, Ocean's Thirteen nevertheless does have its fair share, and Bank's hotel is a marvel of towering, spiraling glass. As could be expected, cinematography captures Las Vegas in all its glittering glamor, perhaps not realistically, but it heightens the film all the same.

Sorry Spidey, Shrek, and Captain Jack, but for sheer style, substance, and revelry, Ocean's Thirteen is the reigning summer threequel, at least until The Bourne Ultimatum in August.

3 stars out of 4

Jul 06 2007

Transformers

Has your appetite for big, dumb summer blockbusters not yet been satisfied? Did May and June’s dosages of explosions, battles, and special effects leave more to be desired? Transformers is just the right counter to the documentaries, Oscar hopefuls, and “thinking man’s” movies, so sit back, relax, and let your brain cells take a rest. You’re about to watch a movie about giant robots taking over the earth. That aptly sums up the story; this isn’t the movie for subplots. Autobots (good robots) come to planet Earth to save the human race, and decepticons (bad robots) come to exterminate it. Their tool is the Allspark, a powerful cube that fell to Earth years earlier. These alien robots can transform into virtually any machine, as teenaged Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) discovers when his recently purchased first car turns into a giant autobot named Bumblebee.

Bumblebee is his “guardian” against the decepticons, for in Sam’s possession is an artifact passed down by his explorer great-grandfather that contains a map to the almighty cube. Sam, along with love interest Mikaela (Megan Fox), must help these autobots (including leader Optimus Prime) get to and destroy the cube, lest evil decepticons get their hands (or claws?) on it first and harness its power to annihilate mankind. Care for a little melodrama, anyone?

Michael Bay, helming such recent projects as The Island and Pearl Harbor, has honed blowing stuff up into a near art form. A movie such as Transformers certainly plays to his strengths as a director—minimum character development, maximum action, and the latest and greatest visual effects. Steven Spielberg unexpectedly shows up as an executive producer, and perhaps some of his touches were what counteracted Bay’s smash ‘em up style. Not that this style isn’t present as well, from the opening battle set in the Middle East and edited to a breakneck pace to the final doozie of a battle featuring the first major machine on machine violence. With such a blockbuster, acting generally takes a back seat. However, rapidly rising star Shia LaBeouf truly does shine in his first mega-budget lead role. In fact, the young actor outshines even some of his older costars, with neither Josh Duhamel as a soldier fighting the decepticons nor Rachael Taylor as a bright government analyst breaking out of their stereotyped, tiresome roles. Still, no actor could bring down the film a great deal, for the robots are front and center and take most of the screen time. As hinted at before, they are masterfully created, putting Transformers in the class of movies that has throughout history shaped the way we look at special effects. They look real, and there is no higher complement then that. If only they had been in a little less of, well, a blockbuster, then Michael Bay would have made a real achievement. As is, these computer generated creatures are plugged into the formula that has been serving Hollywood summer tentpole pictures for years, and of which the product is glossy, cinematic junk food. Junk food that is in this case wholly worth taking a piece of.

2 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Jul 10 2007

Ratatouille

There is more than spelling in common between Ratatouille and ratatouille. Ratatouille, a French vegetable stew, is a simple dish, “peasants’ food” as it is called, yet in the film with a little effort it is turned into something extraordinary, something to please even the harshest of critics. Pixar’s latest addition to their growing list of achievements takes the same approach. Ratatouille has the heart and story of a simple family film, but add in a dash of spices and some originality to the recipe and the resulting confection is complex delight that begs to be savored by all ages. These food metaphors have purpose, for Ratatouille is set in Paris in the once renowned gourmet restaurant Gusteau's, stripped of its acclaim by the owner’s death and a ravaging review by food critic Anton Ego (Peter O'Toole). It is now under the direction of Chief Chef Skinner (Ian Holm), who only wants to use the Gusteau name to sell frozen corn dogs. In comes a chef, or aspiring chef, by the name of Remy (Patton Oswalt), who is ready to turn around Gusteau’s misfortune and cook up the most delectable dishes this side of France. There’s only one problem. Remy, as it happens, is a rat. Kitchens don’t tend to be very welcoming towards rats, even if they do secretly help prepare a soup that impresses a food critic. Remy’s solution? Why, hide under the hat of Gusteau’s newest employee, desperately untalented Linguini (Lou Romano), secretly control him with his hair like a marionette while they create their dishes, and watch them together become the biggest new culinary sensation! It would be the perfect plan, if only Remy’s rodent family was not convinced that cooking food was a dangerous waste of time, Anton Ego didn’t decide that he was not yet finished with Gusteau’s, and Skinner wasn’t determined to find the “phantom rat” he kept on spotting in the kitchen.

Just like the case of CGI in mega blockbusters, the technical quality of computer animated films is evolving as fast as studios can churn them out. Ratatouille is the pinnacle of current animation, from every waving hair on Remy’s div class='review'to the enticing French dishes that will have mouths watering at pixels. Pixar is not yet at the level of photorealistic animation, but at the rate they are improving, it may not be as long as one would think before it is achieved. The finest technical realism counts for nothing of course if the voices lent to the characters don’t serve to bring them to life. Ratatouille does not fall to current trend of tacking ill-fitted celebrity voices onto characters for the sake of marketing. The filmmakers are rewarded with distinctive, well-suited characters for their use of a modest cast, with the exception of the star Peter O’Toole who is nevertheless chosen for suitability and brings some of the most memorable moments in the film with his haughty tones. Finally, there is the story, usually the shakiest aspect of family movies as many writers feel it necessary to cave to physical humor and dumb down the plot until there isn’t anything left that would be of interest to movie-goers past toddler age. The writers of Ratatouille however have faith that they will not lose their audience at the mention of such sophisticated language as sauciers and sous chefs and of course a mouthful of a title. Instead of indulging a craving for an average junk food blockbuster (I’m looking at you, Transformers), why not take in an even more satisfying treat, the gourmet cuisine of studio-made cinema, Ratatouille?

4 stars out of 4

Jul 12 2007

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Watching Order of the Phoenix does not feel like watching a movie or any form of story. Instead, it seems to be one long, clumsy montage, a blur of characters, settings, and bits of plot thrown together and separated with choppy transitions. Hey, look over there, is that supposed to be Tonks in the background in a few shots? And isn’t that Lupin with only two lines and whose name is never even mentioned? Now where is Harry? Hogsmeade you say? How did he get there? Those few in the audience who have not read the series haven’t a hope of understanding many details, although the main plotline is obligedly clear. While all Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) can think about is his dread at the return of the dark wizard Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) during the previous year, the rest of the wizarding world doesn’t share his feelings. Despite Harry and Hogwarts School’s headmaster Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) insisting that he has risen again, the Ministry of Magic resolutely refuses to believe them because what accepting it to be true would mean. It would be easier for the Ministry to simply use their influence to discredit the supposed rumormongers. The only wizards doing anything to stop Voldemort gaining power is a small, secretive band of those loyal to Dumbledore called the Order of the Phoenix. And so Harry returns to his fifth year as a student at Hogwarts, facing peers who have been constantly told over the summer through the newspaper what an attention-seeking liar Harry is. It seems that his friends Ron (Rupert Grint), Hermione (Emma Watson), and bemused Luna Lovegood (Evanna Lynch) are some of only a few who believe his story of how he witnessed Voldemort’s return. To make matters worse, the pink-clad new defense against the Dark Arts teacher, Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton), is sent by the Ministry to take control of Hogwarts and prevent the students from learning magic that the Ministry fears could be used to rebel against them. Instead of letting authority keep students from being able to defend themselves against Voldemort, Harry, Ron, and Hermione decide to take matters into their own hands.

Writing an ultra-faithful adaptation to a novel may be feasible when said novel is in the 300 page range. However once a book enters into 800 page territory, a screenwriter has to accept that the story must be restyled to suit a two hour and a quarter hour film. Michael Goldenberg, a first time screenwriter for the world of Harry Potter, would not accept it. Fans may complain that Goldenberg left out too much of the story, but in this humble opinion, he did not leave out enough. The awkwardly built up romance between Harry and fellow student Cho Chang could have been one of several subplots to be eliminated, giving other sequences room to breathe and reach their full potential. What’s more, a talented screenwriter should have been able to rebuild the entire main plotline to a cinematic format rather than copying large chunks of the book. The screenplay and resulting disjointed pacing were obviously Order of the Phoenix’s main weaknesses, with several poor acting performances on their heels as a third. Emma Watson and on occasion newcomer Evanna Lynch left one cringing at their respective overacting and underacting styles. There are no prodigies among the rest of the teens either, but most range from acceptable to decent with Daniel Radcliffe coping well with the pressure of having to carry much of the movie. As always with the Potter movies, the adult cast is made up the finest British actors that a budget can buy. Imelda Staunton utterly mastered making Umbridge loathsome, and Helena Bonham Carter, small as her role was, commanded full attention as the twisted Voldemort follower Bellatrix Lestrange.
The one category which Phoenix fully conquered was the visuals of the wizarding world. Special effects? Check. Cineamatagraphy? Check. Perhaps director David Yates did merely imitate the style of his preceding directors but at least he did so skill and flair. Fans of the Potter books will doubtlessly flock to Order of the Phoenix regardless of what any reviews might say, and they will probably be thrilled to see their beloved novel play out on screen. However, the adaptation had little magic to offer those uninitiated in the books and who are simply searching for a decent film.

2 stars out of 4

Aug 18 2007

Rush Hour 3

To say that Rush Hour 3 is by far the worst in its genre would be a lie. There’s Rush Hour. And then there’s Rush Hour 2. That’s not to say that the threequel is actually better than its predecessors, but rather that it would be impossible to deem any one of these exhibitions of dim, shallow commercialism at its worst to be better then the others. The plot, shoehorned in among “funny” improvisation and gimmicks, centers on buddy cops James Carter (Chris Tucker) and Chief Inspector Lee (Jackie Chan). When the Chinese ambassador is shot in an attempted assassination, the pair investigates a Chinese Triad gang suspected of the crime. After the questioning of the ambassador’s daughter and a quest to get to a locker containing key evidence, the trail leads to Paris where they discover a woman named Genevieve (Noemie Lenoir) who is somehow central to the gang’s mission. If this doesn’t sound riveting or original, it’s because it’s not. The six year delay between Rush Hour 2 and 3 due to script troubles obviously wasn’t enough time to think of a story that didn’t seem thrown together as an excuse to extend the franchise past its due.

Is there any actor more irritating than Chris Tucker, who spews out his coarse and arrogant brand of humor in screeching tones? Though a franchise that once started as a star vehicle for Jackie Chan, Rush Hour 3 now gives Tucker top billing and equal screen time. It’s good for Tucker, but the ultimate loser is the viewer. Some see the fact that the actor has not acted in a single movie in the six years between Rush Hour 2 and Rush Hour 3 as laziness on his part, but that laziness is a blessing if it meant that people didn’t have to listen to his grating sidetracked monologues in any other pictures. The aforementioned Jackie Chan doesn’t add any redeeming value to the film’s acting. His less than perfect command of English can normally be forgiven for the inventive stunts Chan himself performs in his movies. However, even here Rush Hour 3 doesn’t deliver, and it plays no better as a martial arts film than as a comedy. Of course, most of the blame could be pushed onto director Brett Ratner, specialist in brainless “entertainment”, but what would he care? His movies have grossed 900 million dollars total. If your idea of humor is Chris Tucker holding a gun to the head of an anti-American French cabdriver and forcing him to sing the Star-Spangled Banner, then go ahead and add your dollars to that total. Or, easier yet, you could just rent one of the previous Rush Hour films, because this film adds nothing new to the franchise other then a number three at the end of the title.

1/2 star out of 4

Aug 21 2007

Hairspray

Try, just try, to resist the bubbly exuberance of a movie that is Hairspray, and you can be guaranteed to be won over midway by what may be the happiest, most buoyant movie this year. Dancing is what the cool kids do in 1962 Baltimore especially on its local teen dance program The Corny Collins Show on TV. Every day after school, Tracy Turnblad (Nikki Blonsky) is glued to the television from the time the show starts, ogling at her crush Link Larkin (Zac Efron) and dreaming of becoming one of the stars. She’s certainly got the right moves, taught to her by some African American friends, and when a spot opens, Tracy’s only desire is to audition. She’s got some big problems though. Velma Von Tussle (Michelle Pfeiffer), the television executive to the station, won’t accept the girl’s plus-size figure or draw any attention away from her own starring daughter. Even Tracy’s mother Edna (John Travolta) is an obstacle, fearing that if Tracy tries to get noticed, people will make fun of the girl. There’s no dissuading this energetic young dancer though, who catches the eye of Corny Collins himself and achieves her dream to be a member of his show. However, not all is perfect in Tracy’s world, and she can’t understand why her black friends are only allowed on the show on one special, monthly day. Even if it means she has to give up all she’s accomplished, Tracy resolves to change the way the people of Baltimore look at those who are different, stopping on the way only for a few catchy musical numbers of course.

This cast and crew may have even the most undemanding viewer skeptical. After all, it would seem unlikely that newcomer Nikki Blonsky, Disney Channel’s Zac Efron, John Travolta in a thirty pound fat suit, and Christopher Walken who has recently been stranded in second-rate comedies, all under the direction of Adam Shankman who is responsible for some truly dreadful films (example: Cheaper By the Dozen 2), could possibly pull of something remotely watchable. Well, they managed it. Blonsky is practically bubbling over with enthusiasm onscreen, as could be said of all her young costars. Then, of course, there’s John Travolta about whom everyone has been talking about whether approvingly or not. Though his odd feminine turn takes getting used to, by the time he and Christopher Walken are sharing their own romantic song, “Timeless to Me,” Travolta has the audience convinced. In case you’re wondering, tradition from the original 1988 movie and Broadway play is what demands that Edna’s shoes be filled by a man in makeup. That makeup along with costumes galore does add impressively to snazzy production value that will certainly receive some attention come awards season. Hairspray has got its faults, namely some musical numbers that run indulgently long and rough patches of editing, but it’s a movie that can sweep its audience past with a wink and grin right until the music stops, letting them see nothing but fizzy, gleeful entertainment.

3 stars out of 4

Sep 30 2007

3:10 to Yuma

For decades, the gunslingers have not drawn their weapons, the stagecoaches haven’t been menaced by outlaws, and the heroes have not drifted into the sunset, but now the cowboys can ride again. Judging by the quality of 3:10 to Yuma, hopefully they’ll be galloping for years to come. It’s a return to the classic western in its purest form for this remake of the 1957 film of the same name; the villains are vicious, the hero is pure, and the outlaw is roguish in true form. That hero is Dan Evans (Christian Bale), a rancher in some of the worst years of his life. He can’t afford to pay for his land or family, is thought of as a failure by his wife and eldest son Will (Logan Lerman), and is literally one leg short, a reward for his service in the Union Army. Fate gives him a chance to renew his life after infamous stagecoach robber Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) is captured, and the need for an escort, a paid escort, arises to guard Wade on the way to the 3:10 train to Yuma, where the death sentence is to be swiftly carried out. Evans is not in for a romanticized ride through the desert, as the mission is complicated by Wade’s ruthless right hand man Charlie Prince (Ben Foster) and gang, who are set on freeing their boss no matter how many bullets it takes (quite a few, as it happens.) For Evans, what begins as a quest towards a two hundred dollar reward that will save his ranch morphs into a journey for his own dignity and moral honor in the eyes of his son and a taunting psychological spar with the man he is sending to death.

What would a western be without an open, panoramic view of a brown, ceaseless desert? What would be a western without horses galloping in the distance, their riders seemingly in hidden ecstasy at the freedom of the plains? It certainly wouldn’t be a film with the magic of 3:10 to Yuma; those shots are on no cramped sound stages. The riders, Christian Bale and Russell Crowe fit right into their saddles. The film is a celebration in character, and the two actors bring out such richly realized individuals that they prove that a movie can be absurdly entertaining and thoughtful. If it’s true that a film is only as good as its villains, then Crowe and Ben Foster have already shot the 3:10 to Yuma into brilliance, with Crowe providing a psychological foe and Foster as the born-without-a-conscience, brutal knave. The conflict that rises with a swell of powerful, sweeping music builds into one powerful, sweeping movie, trotting out emotion and gunslingin’ action in the same ragged breath right up to the end, on which the viewer needs to know one thing: prepare to be shocked.

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4

Oct 29 2007

Into The Wild

A mournful glisten in audience’s eyes at the end of a film is not proof of a its brilliance, but Into the Wild is rarity that truly earns its power over the viewers; it captivates with its beauty, disturbs with its message, and takes the audience on a journey, like Christopher McCandless, into the wild. Based on the true story of the novel by John Krakauer, the film begins with Chris (Emile Hirsch) already in the Alaskan wilderness, tramping though the snow in solitude and discovering an abandoned bus, a “magic bus” as he calls it, which is to be his home for over one hundred days. The journey is more important than the destination though, and the movie jumps back to Chris’s days after graduating from college, emotionally alienated from his parents and yearning to escape their restrictions. Why not escape? A promising future of law school and wealth holds no interest to a free-spirit, thus his life’s savings are given to charity (and a few extra bills are burned). “If we admit that human life can be ruled by reason, then all possibility of life is destroyed,” says Chris, and there is certainly no reason to the odyssey he sets out upon, one that will take him north and south, from city to country, and into the raw wilderness, hunting, foraging, and living, simply living. Living free.

Oh, the visual opportunities the setting of “Alaskan wilderness” conjures—panoramic scenes of a lone man trekking through the snow; the regal, white mountains; caribou galloping in a still forest. Sean Penn, gifted director as he is, misses none of them. Not only that, but the lush landscapes of white water rapids in the Grand Canyon to the golden wheat fields of South Dakota and more are harvested of their beauty for the screen. Rivaling even the awe of the cinematography is the film’s acting, for Emile Hirsch proves he has all the charm and talent to carry a movie where for a third he is alone in the woods with only himself to talk to. The quirky characters that Chris encounters on his journey add equal depth; look for an especially poignant performance by Hal Holbrook as Ron Franz, an old man living alone in the desert who acts as a brief surrogate father to the young adventurer. Trust Penn, also the screenwriter, to provide the most affecting dialogue. “When you forgive, you love,” says Ron Franz when giving the advice to return to his family. If only Chris had heeded the words before heading to Alaska. Whether one sees Christopher McCandless as an irresponsible rich kid desperate to rebel, a reckless societal nonconformist, an independent, free-spirited idol, or all three, his story will move one just as powerfully to a place of awe and wonder with the lengths a man will go to escape the triviality of the world by trekking Into the Wild. Four out of four stars.

4 stars out of 4

Nov 21 2007

Darjeeling Limited

If whimsy was a genre, Wes Anderson would be its master. His films are an acquired taste, there’s no question, but once acquired are some of the most delectable, bizarre, and well, whimsical cinematic journeys one can embark on, bypassing the mainstream and heading straight for indie dramedy. All in one and a half hours. In Darjeeling Limited, one would be embarking with the three brothers Francis (Owen Wilson), mummy-like with heavily bandaged scars from an ill-destined bike ride; Peter (Adrien Brody), an obsessive hoarder of their dead father’s trinkets; and Jack (Jason Schwartzman), a seducer and semi-fictional story writer armed with pepper spray. Gathered by the eldest, Francis, the ill-paired trio takes off for a spiritual, itinerary-filled journey to reform their lost brotherly bonds in India (if they ever had any to begin with.) Thus, the train (named the Darjeeling Limited, curiously enough) pulls out of the station, with a destination of nowhere save for the possibility of meeting a mother who ran off and abandoned her sons to become a nun. Of course even if it’s a road with no end, it’s the journey that matters, in this case one filled with venomous snakes escaping from a skull and crossbones bearing crates, plenty of Indian cough syrup, rituals involving peacock feathers being buried amid human sound effects, and Anjelica Huston looking downright scary in heavy eye makeup. Anyone mention this wasn’t mainstream?

The appeal of the film to the individual viewer teeters precariously on the question of if they “get” the characters. Luckily, mix equal parts comedy, drama, and Anderson’s writing and the result is one brilliant script. Still, despite sharp acting or perhaps because of it, to call the film quirky would be an understatement; be prepared. The word “meticulous” would be another understatement. If directing doesn’t pan out with the box office, Anderson could have a future in art direction, so carefully does he construct his worlds within the frame. Perhaps they are a touch too careful; there’s not much feeling of spontaneity left in what could seem a most uncontrived story. Darjeeling Limited may have very “limited” prospects outside of the art theater which is unfortunate for average movie-goers simply looking for a decent film. It won’t make converts; audiences who know their opposition to “indie” types of movies in all likelihood won’t be swayed, but it’s a gem worth seeking for the rest. It’s funny. It’s sad. And whether one loves or hates him, they’ve got to admit, Wes Andersons got style!

3 and 1/2 stars out of 4