Free Films of 2009

I wish there were more stars to bestow upon this film. It is truly a modern masterpiece and easily the best film of the year (that I've seen.)

Everything about this movie was engaging and enthralling. The story of a man who ages in reverse might seen like a gimmick that might grow old half-way through the movie after the novelty has worn off. But, what happens is the complete opposite.

Where most movies tend to sag (plot-wise) this film continues to extrapolate on its theme of time, loss and fresh starts.

The execution by director David Fincher is both ambitious and rewarding. Every shot in this film is exquisitely photographed and brilliantly transports you and your imagination not only to a different time--but to a different world where this allegory takes place.

Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett both give beyond-stellar performances. Though, the real stars of this film are its cinematographer and it's make-up artists. Watch the film and you'll know why.

I can definitely understand why critics labeled this movie "the one to beat" after having seen only 20 minutes of footage. Though the finished product is close to three hours long, it never dragged (at least for me) and it always kept my mind going with how joyful an experience I was having while watching it--and how I was unlikely to see anything better for a long, long time.

Most people will complain about being three LONG hours older at the end of this film--but they'll do so not because they actually hate the movie (though they might say that.) They'll say it to be clever and come up with a snappy headline that'll sell more papers or get more blog hits.

This is, by far, David Fincher and Brad Pitt's best film together--and, likely, their best individual work.

The story is epic in scale, heart-warming in its plot and dialogue; and it's mesmerizing in execution. A movie pretty damn near perfect!

This movie is the damn nearest thing to a masterpiece as I've seen a "comic book" movie be. The true masterpiece was The Dark Knight--but Watchmen comes a very close second place. Possibly even tying for the top spot.

Being completely unfamiliar with the storyline and characters, I came into this movie with no expectations other than the ones I'd built up from watching bits and pieces of TV promos.

Let me tell you: it was amazing. The plot, the characters, the script, the special effects, the action sequences, the philosophical and political implications; EVERYTHING about it worked to create a sweeping epic as I've never seen a superhero movie try to take on in the past.

Of course, the more hype there is surrounding a movie, the more people's expectations seem to rise into the unreasonable territory. But I can safely say that this movie will dazzle, tickle your intellect and cause you to think.

From the opening credits sequence to the desolation of a Martian terrain to the streets of a distopian New York City--the art direction and cinematography in this movie are brilliantly executed. Zach Snyder really has an eye for aesthetics (as evidenced by his turn directing 300.) But this movie brings more character development and introspection than 300 would ever be able to offer.

Many may be put off by the film's length, back-and-forth editing, and its pacing at times is steady and unusually calmed for a "superhero flick." But the rewards are plentiful--and you'll be glad you stuck around for the whole thing.

Standout performances are turned in by Patrick Wilson and Jackie Earl Hailey. But it's Hailey's performance that takes the cake--and you'll know why once his story takes him to prison.

This film is both sexually and violently graphic. But, considering it's based on a graphic novel, I would say that's pretty appropriate. This movie is definitely graphic and it's definitely novel. A welcome change of pace in a stagnating superhero genre.

Thanks Mr. Nolan--and thank you, too, Mr. Snyder.

What an adorable movie. Of course, it wasn't as heartbreaking as WALL-E or as endearing as Bolt...but Monsters vs. Aliens has its own attributes that make it an exciting movie all on its own.

First off, there's the 3D aspect. With the novelty of the 3D resurgence wearing off now, it's great to see that it's definitely not wearing thin. As seen with last month's release of Coraline, movie studios are taking advantage of the 3D medium instead of using it as a mere gimmick to attract viewers. They're actually taking advantage of the technology to make beautiful films that don't saturate you with POPPING OUT, SPILLING or BULGING characters and goofs.

The second thing this movie has going for it is its stong, talented voice actors. Reese Witherspoon is perfectly cast as the bride-done-wrong-by-a-crashing-meteor. She is peppy where pep is called for and really sweet and endearing where the emotion is cued up. Seth Rogen as B.O.B. is another standout. Hugh Laurie, Keifer Sutherland and Will Arnett and The Office's Rainn Wilson as Galaxar are other voices that will be familiar to those who follow.

The effects in this film are brilliant. The colors, the action sequences and slapstick humor--are all great fun for the kids and the visuals should amaze adults enough to keep them engaged as well. A cool sequence throughout San Francisco serves as a great tour for those tourists who haven't visited the city by the bay.

In the end, the movie ends up being 90-some minuted of pure magic and the little nod to Shrek as referenced on the Generals uniform is a kick to see throughout the film. Definitely a solid 8/10.

This movie definitely has the potential to be this year's "little movie that could." Like Little Miss Sunshine, Waitress and Juno before it, this little gem of a movie definitely has the charm, heart and talent behind it to give it hope for awards recognition.

Amy Adams delivers a very subtly understated performance--and decidedly, that's a stretch for Adams because she is hardly ever subtle in any of her films. She plays a wide-eyed single mother who is desperate to select a path in life--if only one were to open up for her.

The relationships she has with her sister, son and father are very touching and make for some heart-warming and funny moments.

The chemistry displayed with Emily Blunt (her sister in the film) is crucial for the movie to work, since it's both the girls who carry the movie--along with a dirty mattress and bio-hazardous materials.

They are forensic maids; cleaning up crime scenes after the bodies and deceased have been dispensed. They move in and try to make a quick buck by being the friendly neighborhood splattered brains cleaner-uppers.

It's really a light movie that could have run the risk of failing at charming the audience since it--superficially--shoots darker undertone at the viewer.

It is ultimately a story that everybody can relate to in that every one feels hopeless at times. Every one feels the need to lie to oneself from time to time in order to keep from falling apart. And, even in the darkest hour, everybody has at least one person in their family that they can turn to for unconditional love, support and...sunshine.

Think of it as the Spanish and Gay equivalent of Mostly Martha or No Reservations. Same plot, same twists and turns--just in Spanish and with a gay protagonist.

However, this movie does enjoy having a lighter structure and more droll situations.

Javier Camara (you'll remember him as the male nurse in Almodovar's 'Talk to Her') is outrageously funny without being too over-the-top. His performance is engaging and nuanced enough to provide diversion to the audience as well as depth to a character that could've become very boring and one-dimensional had it been played by an inferior actor.

I got to see this last night at the San Diego Latino Film Festival. It's definitely worth the extra effort trying to find a theater near you that may be playing this--or waiting for the DVD.

This film is nothing short of a masterpiece. Be forewarned, however, that this movie (like most "masterpieces") isn't for everybody.

That being said, I think this movie is brilliant food for thought; it's film for thought, actually. I love when a film, such as this one, has something to say--but DOESN'T say it. It is so full of subtext and symbolism that (like a good book) it requires the viewer to delegate what matters and how it matters. Every one takes something unique from this film.

The story of a modest Mennonite man living in rural Mexico with his wife and children-- in doubt over his behavior and the way said behavior affects his faith is simple enough. And, on the surface, there doesn't seem to be much going on in the film. Suddenly (or, at last) a secret is revealed and this secret is what the whole foundation of this film (and this man's existence) lies upon.

Reductive film-goers will argue that this movie could be an hour shorter and more fast-paced. I tend to disagree, mostly because that kind of person (of whom I know one or two) is the kind that will deem a movie to be "bad" simply based on its length.

If you are a patient viewer who enjoys to be immersed in a cinematic landscape that is alien to your own, then this movie is definitely for you.

Granted, the film IS "slow" as molasses in parts--but it never meanders into pointlessness or self-indulgence by the director. The shots are composed the way they are for a reason and for complete effect.

Previous efforts by director Carlos Reygadas include Japon and Battle in Heaven. So, there's a fair share of provocative controversy that comes attached to each of his projects--and Silent Light is no different.

You'll find this film to be, at least, an interesting exercise in cinematography and symbolic composition.

From its paradoxical title (Silent Light) to its surrealistic resurrection scene, this movie will leave you mesmerized--and highly rewarded if you've afforded it the chance to move you.

Sin Nombre is a heavy, hard-hitting dramatic thriller that breathes new life into the age-old cinematic representation of illegal immigrants and their plight. This movie is jam-packed with so much tension, suspense, visceral visuals, down-to-earth acting and memorable moments--you'll agree that this is what movie-making is all about.

A novice director and a relatively unknown cast actually help this movie detach itself from the cliches that an immigrant's story comes attached with.

This story combines not only the plot of a journey to a better land by a few--but intermingles a noir-styled revenge/manhunt storyline in the mix and you've got a brilliant movie.

A mixed-up teen named Willy is anxious to escape his life of crime while another teen named Sayra is en route to a better life in New Jersey from Honduras. A life-changing event will bring them together and they will have to travel atop a freight train (like many other immigrants) in order for them both to escape their pasts and their deeds.

The movie is a top-notch thriller and a balanced representation of what it's like to be an immigrant--and how the perils of crossing the American border is the least of these people's concerns. There are a million obstacles that they must overcome on their arduous journey across numerous borders (literal and figurative) and throughout a landscape that is fraught with predators of all sorts--including those who hunger for blood and revenge.

This was a great film to behold and it kept me more than engaged. I was on the edge of my seat watching the exploits of these vividly colorful characters--and truly empathizing with them.

The cinematography is slightly reminiscent of City of God (partly because it was the same cinematographer as the television series based on that Mireilles film.) And every shot was beautifully composed and executed. Not bad for a film shot in just six weeks with a limited budget; no storyboards and a cast comprised of mostly untrained actors and extras--by a newbie director.

This is one of those movies that is made for the simple reason of catering to the quirks and personalities of its actors. Here we have Julia Roberts playing the same role she always plays (feisty ball-buster) and Clive Owen playing the same role he always plays (suave super-spy.)

You'd think you'd get tired of it all after two hours of watching them nag each other and make-up by kissing and presumably hopping back onto their sweaty bed. But something about their chemistry seems to work. And, although you know it's been assembled and distributed to you by a major motion picture studio in order to make beaucoup bucks, somehow, it still feels genuine and honest.

Of course, there's nothing genuine and honest about the characters these two are playing. They are, after all, spies working for opposing sides of their proverbial spectrum. There are so many twists, turns and angles thrown at you--that it comes as no surprise to you when there's a semblance of a surprise at the end of the movie.

It almost seems unnecessary to have so much going on for a story that could've been told a lot more simply. But somehow, I didn't mind the fact the movie's plot was completely out of the realm of any possible reality and that it was unabashedly contrived and convoluted (on purpose) to confuse the viewer. Maybe I'm just dense--but I don't think so.

Think of it as Ocean's 11 meets Mr. and Mrs. Smith. It's fun; confusing, superficial, bloated and charming all at once. Although the individual dosages of each of those ingredients may vary
and settle wrong with you--it's still worth a try. I wouldn't necessarily recommend you see this on the big screen though. It seems more suited for the DVD viewing on a rainy day or a night in.

As a side note: along with Watchmen, Duplicty has the distinction (in my mind) of having some of the most entertaining opening credits sequences so far this year. Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson are a riot--literally.

In the realm of the sci-fi/disaster flick, this movie is a complete knockout!

I was expecting nothing more than a National Treasure rehash with Nic Cage playing the same character--except without the patriotic overtones. Instead, I got a complete slap in the face with a film so eager to please the suspense nut as well as the science fiction enthusiast. Add a little numerology for gimmick's sake and sprinkle a bit of religious undertones and douse it with a little bit of philosophy--and you've got a movie to jam-packed with something for everybody.

Of course, the movie's tone shifts relentlessly because of all those volatile ingredients. But what you end up with is not a mash of crud--but an explosive attack on the senses.

The special effects that depict certain "disasters" are some of the best I've ever seen. The seamless execution of these visual illusions are as breathtaking as those found in a full-fledged summer blockbuster. Instead, we get an early spring dynamite stick that threatens the world it inhabits with its doomsday prophecy--as well as the audience it aims to entertain with compelling storytelling that (although not for everyone) is enough to keep me engaged thoroughly.

It's not the most high-brow entertainment out there. It's a glorified popcorn flick that has the goods to give you something to think about after the butter has rushed from your head back to your gut.

I loved this romp so much. It really takes very little to keep me entertained when it comes to tongue-in-cheek comedies. This is definitely one of the most cheesy, corny, stupid, oddball spoofs I've seen. But it revels in its satirical disposition and never, ever takes itself seriously enough to expect the audience to be seriously taken by its antics.

The cast is brilliant and the plot is ingenious in carrying the old 50s and 60s fear of all things alien, monstrous and goofy. Things that go bump in the night aren't necessarily scary--and that's the fun you get when watching Alien Trespass.

It's an unabashed wreck and it wants the audience to take the leap of faith necessary to enjoy a movie like this. With its fake newsreel at the beginning, it successfully sets the tone for what's to come and it makes you feel like you're watching a midnight showing of a shitty movie--even though you're watching that shitty movie at three o'clock in the afternoon.

Never under-estimate kitsch or schlock. This movie has plenty of both to keep you from snoozing and to make you swoon for more.

This movie is a poetic allegory that makes you think hard about the meaning and strength of your faith in the face of a terrible circumstance.

How would you seek penance for a terrible deed committed? Would you seek to repair it, ignore it, or obsess over seeking forgiveness?

These are some of the questions raised in this harrowing tale of a man who is forced to protect his family from a cursed past he has built as a foundation for a shaky future with them. Is there really such a thing as self-fulfilling prophecy? How far should a man go to try avoiding what is inevitably written in the storybook of his own life?

With a family that comprises eight children, this man must starts a new life in the Mexican desert in order to escape his sinful past. But the memories of his misfortune will continue to haunt him--as well as his children--for the rest of his life.

Desierto Adentro really makes you examine what it means seek redemption. It is an indictment on the hypocrisy of a faith that would have you commit countless more sins in order to mend the original sin committed.

This is definitely a heavy movie with lots of heavy themes and ideologies and philosophies. It is not for the casual movie-goer who does not want a learning experience--or at least a thinking one.

This Mexican film is a brilliant little gem of a comedy that makes you feel fluttery and enthralled by its quirky characters and wacky plot twists.

Although "The Birdcage-esque," this movie is a lot more heartfelt and genuine than the American re-make of a great French film with gay themes.

Charly must flee from Mexico with his son, Pedro, in order to escape impending leg-breaking due to a dirty business deal he was a part of. But in returning to Chile to meet his long-estranged father, Charly (a downright homophobe) is forced to come to terms with discovering that his long-lost father is more a fairy than he finds agreeable--and is living with his lover, no less.

Of course, some gay-fish-out-of-water comedy ensues and the plot is thickened a little when Charly meets a woman named Liliana. He then is forced to pretend to be gay himself in order to make a good living working at a gay bar--called Lokas.

But despite its borderline stereotypical plot, at the core, the relationship between Charly and his son is what is the glue of the film. It also points out how important it is to have family--no matter how different they may be or how uniquely their predilections may stand.

Lokas is definitely worth your while if you're in the film festival circuit--and it's most definitely worth looking for on DVD once--if ever--it is released.

The summer has officially arrived with Star Trek.

This movies was completely action=packed and will delight both action/sci-fi enthusiasts as well as the most ardent Trekkies.

Let me tell you: I had no idea what Star Trek was all about and I was mesmerized by this movie. It had amazing special effects; great eye-candy casting; brilliant art direction/cinematography and set design.

One scene; a space/sky diving sequence, was particularly spectacular and pretty adrenaline-inducing. Very exciting, indeed.

Of course, it also had one of my favorite elements to make a good movie: an engaging, well-written script. It was witty in all the right parts and touching where it needed to be.

Although the movie pays honorable tribute to the campy 1960s series it is based on, it never delves into camp territory itself. It has just the right blend of humor, action, romance and all the things George Lucas wishes he could throw together and make work in one of his Star Wars prequel trilogies.

Some gimmicky casting (Eric Bana and Winony Ryder) actually pays off: the cast works so well together and moves the plot along without becoming too much of a character vehicle. You get little snippets and back stories here and there--but the exposition is kept to a minimum and JJ Abrams delivers a non-stop, heart-pounding feast.

Completely satisfying! Those fans of the show will not be disappointed as much of the film's spirit is still evident in this reboot. Some of the same dialogue is used, the score is epically quirky (think Mambo-inspired drumming.) And it all works out in the end. The players never set a goal to imitate the original cast--but comparisons will abound nonetheless.

It's been a long time since I've been this exhilarated at the movies--and I pray it won't be too long before it happens again. Sequel, anyone? I'm officially a 'Trek' fan from now on!

Three words: waste! of! time!

Gigantic was a movie with gigantic potential. As it turns out, it results in a gigantic, fragmented, albeit beautiful mess of a movie.

As a first feature, I wasn't anticipating much. But this movie lacked focus. It had a lot of things going for it:

Paul Dano, Zooey Deschanel, Ed Asner and John Goodman. Sounds great, right? Stay with me...

A young mattress salesman is in the process of adopting a Chinese baby. Sounds intriguing, right? Okay, stick around...

Zooey Deschanel plays her zany self again as Dano's would-be lover. Brilliant, I love Zooey. This is cool, right?

Wrong.

First-time writer/director Matt Aselton delivers a valiant effort but (like many first features) the scribes ideas are all thrown out on the page at once and they never really gel into a cohesive work.

Throw in some wacky goofs, Ed Asner's brilliantly kooky performance, some genuinely touching moments of dialogue and acting by a great cast and you would've had an excellent.

That's why I say this movie was fragmented. There were slivers of genius, but it never came together.

A recurring gag with a homeless person was confusing for most of the audience even though I felt it was more open to interpretation and I came to my own conclusions about the significance of this plot device.

All in all, I have to say that I liked the movie and I will reluctantly recommend it. It definitely wasn't a horrible movie by any stretch of the imagination. It was just missing focus and a clear vision. Everyone involved in the film was excellent and the acting was top-notch. It's just that their characters and their respective struggles came off as a bit in a vignette as opposed to being part of a fully-realized feature film.

District 9 presents a new, remarkable spin on the classic tale of alien invasion. Instead of rehashing tired story lines of whether aliens are friendly or hostile; or whether they hold the secret of the origins of the universe; or whether they've come to harvest our planet, this Peter Jackson production takes a sharp turn into territory rarely visited by science fiction--a story about the humanity of extraterrestrials.

That may seem like a paradox at first glance, but it isn't. What if a race more advanced than ours--or simply alien to our own--were to become "stranded" on our planet like a band of pirates who become marooned on a deserted island. Does the fact that they are misunderstood beings make them any less human? What makes a human HUMAN? What makes one race superior to another? Is it appearance, social status, or species? These are only but a few of the themes that this brilliant new film touches upon.

Of course, there is plenty of action and suspenseful moments entwined with biting satire about species-relations that mimic our earlier--and current--trepidations about race-relations. The fact that this gigantic spacecraft has failed to plant itself over a major "advanced, developed" city like New York, Los Angeles, London or Paris is a slap in the face of moviegoers who see America or Europe as the center of the universe.

Instead, they come to South Africa-- a country on a continent so emaciated with strife, disease, hunger and ignorance--that it makes the commentary all the more powerful in its striking dissonance. The battle between man and alien will not be fought with weaponry--unless human have anything to say about that. It is a fight that must be fought with intellect and compassion for those who are different that ourselves, without patronizing, discriminating or taking their displacement and vulnerability as a sign of weakness.

A battle does ensue between those who would be against a mixing of ideologies between the human race and the non-human race. But when things become a bit tangled between a few characters, suddenly the tables are turned and people are turned against one another--as well as against the aliens. It is a movie jam-packed with so much to say and so many cool ways to say it.

Definite compliments are due for the incredible cinematography implemented to tell a story so complex. There is over 30 years of history as well as the current unfolding events that must be told and the first-time director at the helm does a brilliant job of keeping things in line and making sense. The visual effects are top-notch and unlike anything you've seen for a movie about outer-space visitors told from a more conventional point of view. You'll be amazed that this film has a message, yet has extremely high entertainment value as well. And there's a giant visual goody bag from which it draws amazing effects to rival the likes of giant blockbusters like Transformers and Iron Man.

District 9 is not a movie that will please everyone. To some, it may seem to be too preachy. To others, it will seem as if the action wasn't sufficient. But to everybody it will definitely strike as a film that is unlike anything they've seen in quite a while. And that they're likely to see in a quite a while longer after that--unless, of course, there is a District 10.

How refreshing it is to see that "traditional," 2-D animation is still alive and well. And not only that; but that it is being used to create such beautiful films as those of Studio Ghibli in Japan. Hayao Miyazaki (creator of fine works like Spirited Away and Howl's Moving Castle,) certainly knows the value of telling a good story with nothing more than a pencil and paper. Ponyo is his latest masterpiece.

In a world where studios like Pixar have deforested the hand-drawn landscape of animation and erected sleek, glossy pictures made by computers, it is a breath of fresh air--or a gulp of fresh water--to watch the story of a little goldfish who longs to be human. Memories of Disney's The Little Mermaid will surely fill your head with that plot description--and it rightfully should. After all, this Japanese film is being presented by none other than the American-based giant itself.

Disney Animation (now run by, ironically enough, Pixar's John Lasseter) is distributing Ponyo to American audiences with a newly-dubbed version that will unincumber U.S. audience with those pesky subtitles. After all, who wouldn't rather have the voice talents of Tina Fey, Matt Damon, Betty While fill their heads with wonderment to accompany the stunning imagery of this beautiful motion picture.

It is with motion that Miyazaki paints his picture. Over 180,000 individual cells were hand-drawn and photographed to create this arresting work of art. However, it is evident that hard work isn't the only thing at work here. A child-like imagination is the foremost ingredient presented in this visual feast. An imaginative storyline is hard to come by these days, but with a burst of color and subtext about man's footprint in nature, it is Miyazaki who nurtures Ponyo's environmental message ever so gentlyso that it becomes all too important for anybody to ignore but subtle enough for most to look past it and enjoy the goings-on.

It was a great privelege to have seen this movie during Comic-Con this year and to have a film I'd so eagerly been anticipating be introduced by its legendary creator, Miyazaki, himself. The insight he conveyed to the audience about his intentions for Ponyo was enlightening and it inspires everyone to spark their imagination and to just start "thinking, thinking, and thinking."

The little goldfish's adventure to change the life of a little boy and the world itself is so much more poignant when you realize that this is a film for children of ALL ages! Because it's in the mind of a child that a story with so much wonder can sustain itself as plausible and have its inherent message of coexistence with and love of nature become attainable.

What do you get when you put Quentin Tarantino and Nazi Germany together? Will you get an epic story of redemption or a classic retelling of a familial story with lots of strings, tear-jerker moments and happy endings? Hell no! Your final product will inevitably be what Tarantino serves up in Inglourious Basterds: a riotous, unashamedly politically--and historically--incorrect version of events. But you'll have a hell of a time watching a history so alternate; so ridiculously twisted that a part of you will actually be hoping that things could be so fantastically awesome in real life. Payback never tasted this good!

In Nazi-occupied Paris, many things are the way we've come to know them from our old textbooks: German patrols were branched throughout the land and injustice was the name the game. Jews and other so-called degenerates were being rounded up by the train-ful and people were being silenced throughout the whole of Europe.

But in Tarantino's Nazi-occupied Paris, a band of "inglourious basterds" (a small group of rogue American soldiers)are hunting down the self-righteous Aryan scum and giving them a taste of their own medicine. This tiny crew of savage beasts are making quite a dent on the German military and their reputations precede them. Their acts of retribution against evil are the topics of tavern-conversation and the words on everyone's lips. Each one has even acquired a nickname worthy of any folkloric or mythical figure.

Their visceral hunger for revenge is portrayed on film quite graphically and with great zest. This is completely thanks to Tarantino's unmatched eye for seeing things from a place so honest it becomes heightened. The events that transpire in this movie are reflections of what many people wish could have actually happened but are too PC to admit to. Tarantino is unapologetic in his stance as a Nazi hater and goes as far as likening them to savage Indians on a murderous spree--the likes of which America's own pioneers had to face on the landscape as they made their way across the U.S. plains. Let's just say that scalping is back in style...

Brad Pitt does a fine job as the leader of this rag-tag team of murderous bastards. His all-American image is perfect for this character yet it is slightly tarnished by the appearance that this guy's been in one-too-many fights and has been all but killed in the process. He's suave and collected; but also vicious and a hell-raiser. In short, he's an American. And his partners are made of the same fabric as he.

If you're going for a history lesson, skip this altogether. If you're going for a kick-ass Tarantino experience, watch this repeatedly. If you're on the fence about it, make up your mind quickly before you're too late to form an opinion about the movie one way or the other--because this movie is definitely worth having an opinion about. That's true whether you end up loving it or hating it.

Forget about Ethan Hunt. Forget about Jason Bourne. You can even forget about James Bond. The name you really need to remember is Ric O'Barry. In The Cove, O'Barry--a former dolphin trainer and technical adviser for hit television show "Flipper"--orchestrates one of the most brazen and dangerous missions I've ever seen on film. And it just so happens to be a real-life mission. No fiction here, people.

This documentary about the plight of dolphins in Japan and around the world plays out like a spy caper than it does a straight-to-DVD sequel to The Little Mermaid. There are thrills and suspense splashing at every corner and you will be genuinely gripped to learn what happens next.

The premise is simple enough: dolphins must be rescued from a secret cove in Taiji, Japan that could spell doom for the creatures and disaster for the sleepy village dwellers if the world were to find out about the goings-on at said cove. The plot unfolds at pace that makes you wonder if you're actually watching a documentary. It's so jammed with information about the events that transpire but it has tremendous entertainment value due to the structure of the film and the way said events are edited together.

The logistics of the operation to uncover the secret and catch people in a lie are put together better than any plot devised by the likes of Danny Ocean (from Ocean's 11.)

Some of the footage in this film is quite graphic; but by no means is it gratuitous. And, for the sake of getting its point across, the film does a great job at presenting a wake-up call that is alarming enough to incite true and genuine emotion from the audience; emotions that go beyond feeling literal disgust from viewing harsh images and transcend to feeling collective disgust against those who are perpetrating such injustice against a species of defenseless creatures. If the information in this is presented to us, and ignorance ceases to be a pretext for our apathy, what will be our excuse for inaction after watching this film? Watch this film and you'll understand what you need to do.

Adam is a film that tries to make you relate and empathize with its characters so much that eventually you do. Of course, the premise is ripe for empathy: a young, socially-inept, reclusive Asberger's Syndrome-sufferer falls for a young, socially-savvy, extroverted Asberger's Syndrome-NON-sufferer. He's a child in a man's body and she's a woman who teaches and writes for children.

It may sound somewhat contrived; and to a certain degree it is. But what ensues is a heartwarming story of love told from the perspective of a couple that really has nothing going for it from the beginning. The chances of its survival are slim to none. With a father who is over-bearing in his opinion of Adam (Hugh Dancy), Beth (Rose Byrne) must learn to cope with outside forces that attempt to interfere with her looking past her own prejudices and preconceived notions about Adam in order to ultimately love him.

What is the hardest for these characters, however, is the lack of emotional involvement that Adam himself seems to display. Of course, there is really no way for Adam to know what others are feeling for him unless they tell him. But Adam himself--despite his inherent bluntness and straightforwardness, lacks the ability to be completely honest himself.

There are themes of love and loss woven throughout the entire film that will strike a chord with many people who have dealt with a challenging relationship. It will also resound with those who have ever felt for someone in need and tried to help them in order to discover something new about the world.

Whether you wind up learning about the way the big bang works or the rate at which the universe is expanding isn't what matters. What's important is that you learn that two beings who seem inexplicably incompatible can sometimes converge--nay--collide and create a spark so fervent that it will resonate throughout the remainder of their lives. Sometimes a little bit of love is all that's needed to halt the velocity of the ever-expanding universe and bring it back together.

The life of Julia Child was one of excellence and great virtue. Her culinary prowess was surpassed only by her exuberant personality and charm. In each of her recipes lay a great deal of personal touch that could any bland dish turn into a grandiose masterpiece if only for the fact that the great Mrs. Child created it.

In the new movie, Julie & Julia, the life of Julia Child is portrayed of one of contentment. But, also, it was with a splinter of curiosity lodged into her hands that she finally discovered the path which she was to follow. From studying a Le Cordon Bleu in Paris to writing her signature book, Mastering the Art of French Cooking, Julia was a woman who would stop at nothing to achieve her goal of being someone and helping those who did not have help to cook a meal.

Flash forward half a century later and we meet Julie Powell; a mid-level pencil-pusher working at a job she hates and other people hate her for working. The only remedy Julie can find for relief to her listless existence is cooking, blogging and--eventually--blogging about cooking. Her passion for Julia Child her method of cooking inspires Powell to venture into territory that would require her to finally accomplish something in her life filled with unfinished business.

The stories of these two women, though parted by more than 50 years, share such striking parallels that it makes you wonder how much fictionalization took place in the process of making this film. But, ultimately, the film flows beautifully between the two plots and eventually merge to become one story with a tenderhearted final chapter that brings things in perspective for all characters involved.

Meryl Streep has turned in yet another fine and Oscar-worthy performance as Child. Amy Adams, on the other, suffers from playing a lesser-known character who is contemporary and, quite possibly, less likely to receive empathy from an audience. I, however, felt that Adams gave a great, nuanced performance that showcased her sensibility to play her usually sweet character with an edge. The similarities between the two women make for great drama for both actresses playing those women and also forge an indelible on-screen alliance the likes of which haven't been seen since last year's Doubt. (Just kidding.)

Even though Adams and Streep share not a single scene in this film, the composition of the movie is so great that it's almost as though they'd shared EVERY scene. Both women are relatable in their trials; their convictions of character; and in their respective joie-de-vivre.

Certainly this movie will make you hunger for more than just food. It will likely inspire you to learn more about Julia Child and Julie Powell. Maybe it'll inspire some to take up blogging or cooking--or both. Whatever it inspires you to do, make sure you do it with good company and with good food. Bon appetit.

Back in the day, G.I. Joe was nothing more than a glorified commercial for the U.S. military put in the guise of Saturday morning cartoons. In 2009, the film adaptation of the popular series and Hasbro action figures is exactly what its predecessor was all along: a glorified commercial for the U.S. military put in the guise of Saturday morning matinée at the cinema.

What sets this movie apart from its "cheesy" progenitor is that it keeps the cheese, shtick, and camp but seriously upgrades the entertainment value through enhanced visual effects. From the director who brought you the first two 'Mummy' reimaginings comes this sleek look into the covert division of rogue heroes knows as "Joes."

That's pretty much where the positivity ends with the movie. For, although it was jam-packed with glossy visual sequences and some kick-ass martial arts combat, the movie lacks in every other aspect what it makes up in popcorn-flick viability. And that's exactly as it should be.

The "love story" that lingers on the fringes of the plot is watered-down, at most! It's objectification of women (particularly the Sienna Miller character) is typical of a movie that is made by men and for men. The comic relief is provided by Marlon Wayans in predictable and measured doses so as to not upstage the "star-making" presence of Channing Tatum and his stunning physique.

Ultimately, though, the lack of gravitas in a film so blatantly frivolous and patronizing is expected. People go to see a movie like this for the exact reasons it was made: fun, fun and more mindless fun. There's no profound or meaningful message included for anyone except for those who take their patriotism all-too seriously (and who need a Hollywood action film to validate it.)

I had fun, I enjoyed it and I left the theater completely unchanged or unfazed by anything I may or may not have learned. In fact, I may have lost a few neurons along with my two hours...but I didn't lose my sense of humor. I certainly didn't lose anything that would prevent me from recommending this film strictly for its platonic merits. Who knows; it may have even deepened my superficial attraction to Mr. Tatum himself.

You live in Temecula, California. Your marriage is "dead" and your used car lot is in shambles. What do you do? You call Don Ready; because, although he isn't able to relocate you or fix your broken marriage (and your late-night male-craving-induced cruising that caused it,) he does "move cars, motherf*cker!"

From the creators of Talladega Nights and Step Brothers (yes, that means Adam McKay and Will Ferrell,) comes a new slant on the used-car salesman. This movie is essentially for auto salespeople what Waiting... was for restaurant workers and what Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy was for newscasters across the country: it's a skewed, graphic and ludicrous depiction of a class of worker that is prone to ignorant stereotyping to begin with. Well, The Goods intends to demystify the car seller and create an even harsher and more pronounced parody to laugh at.

Jeremy Piven (of "Entourage" fame) is back playing his usual cocky, self-righteous, smart-ass characterization of a grown-up, albeit stunted, fratboy. In this movie, however, he just happens to be an overzealous, patriotic, strip-bar-loving, alcoholic car mover who can sell any car to anyone. Is there any other kind of dealer?!?

The script can sometimes spill into patronizingly atrocious dialogue of the kind that tries too hard to pull a laugh (like teeth at the dentist.) But ultimately it is the performances by the supporting players that brings it all into one cohesive ensemble piece that shoots darts of comedy into the audience at a breakneck speed. Most notably, it's the performances by James Brolin as an ambiguously gay straight man; and a riotous turn by Kathryn Hahn as a semi-pedophile closer (whose carpet matches the drapes, by the way,) and what you've got is comedy gold.

As if that weren't enough, we get some more gold nuggets with a cameo by a certain curly-haired producer-funnyman and a backpack full of accessories that are never to be mentioned in the same breath with "Abraham Lincoln." A hilarious, potty-mouth set of angels that sing dirty gospel verses is also a highlight to look forward to.

All-in-all, this movie wasn't as bad as I thought it might be. Considering that we live in a culture where gas is pricey (to say the least) and where our junkyards are filled with "clunkers," this movie couldn't be more topical. But, ultimately, that isn't what it's all about. It's just about having a good time for a few hours with characters as irreverent as those you'd wish would actually approach you at a real-life car dealership. Maybe then, they'd get you to buy something. But in case you're ever on the flip side of the coin and you have wheels to get rid of, call Don Ready. Because he "moves cars, motherf*cker!"

Where do I begin with this one? There so much to speak of for a movie that had so little to say. Shall we start with the horrible premise? The horrible dialogue? The horrible acting? Or the horrible everything else?

Let's put it this way...I walked out. I never walk out of a movie ("never" = "hardly ever.") The plot was "spread" so thinly on a wafer-thin canvas. There was no drama to speak of; no characters to empathize with; no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Basically, we have Ashton Kutcher solidifying his status as worst actor of all time--seriously, he's worse than Hayden Christiansen. And the "acting" should have come easily for him in the role; since he's practically playing himself: a good-looking (debatable), charming (even more debatable) womanizer who has a predilection for loosening up already loose 40-somethings in order to gain prominence in society. Does the name "Demi" ring a bell, anyone?

Even with the real-life parallels, Kutcher blows it so badly that every scene in which he appears (which is sadly EVERY scene) is atrocious. And don't get me started on the horrible narration he provides.

The story arc for these characters were non-existent. Pretty people behaving badly has been done so many other times--and so much better than this tripe. Why would I want to go and see beautiful people getting themselves into the worst situations and not learning anything from it? Oh, that's right. I didn't sit through the whole thing, so technically I don't know if lessons were learned in the end. But let me tell you...it didn't look promising.

The movie was a complete waste of celluloid and I fear that my review of it may be an even worse waste of time and cyber real estate. I shouldn't even finish this review at all. Just spread the word: this movie is unfulfilling, vapid and incomple--

This movie lived up to my every expectation. It was sappy, melodramatic, romantic and intriguing all at once. It's not often that I build expectations for a movie; much less hold the film up said potential prejudices. But this movie looked to be a very syrupy dose of romance tinged with bittersweet longing for an intangible loved one.

They lay it on thick from the get-go when there is a devastating loss that someone suffers. The theme of love and loss is weaved throughout the story as Henry (Eric Bana) is forced to weave himself in and out of his own life (past, present and future) and inextricably remain unscathed by the fact that no amount of time travel can, will or ought to change the course of his history.

Claire (Rachel McAdams) is said time traveler's wife and plays this role with such candid effervescence, that you can't help but long to be in her shoes--despite her own plight (which you see unfolding before your very own eyes.)

The film's "predictability," if any, can be attributed to the fact that there is plenty of foreshadowing and clues strewn about the plot, not because it is necessarily a shallow film with no intrigue. There is enough of that to spare. But the little gem uncovers itself from the rough in a manner that lets you know that there isn't a twist to expect; there isn't a puzzle to solve or a timeline to keep track of. The only thing you should be aware of is that lump in your throat and the film makes no apologies for putting that lump where it's meant to be.

I'd have to say that this was one satisfying little movie to watch. Not because of any grandeur or gravitas it may or may not have been aiming for. But because of the way it caused me to react personally.

There are many circumstances, events and characters to which and whom I was able to relate--and that is, for me, the most important part of a film--no matter how sentimental that film may be. Sentiments are meant to be felt, not shunned away from. I like my romance films to be chock-full of sentiment. The kind of emotions that persist and tug at you without avail--unlike our protagonist who will travel back and forth until the end of time...

In the world of thrillers, you always know there's a good chance of there being a twist. These things are preordained, you see. From a screenwriter's point of view, there has to be some sort of loop you have to be thrown through in order to feel like you've invested yourself in a movie--hence feeling like you need a return on your investment.

In A Perfect Getaway, the screenwriter -- or "screenplay writer" (as referred to in the film itself) -- tries too hard to impress. The "twist" isn't that twisted or inspired. You kind of see it coming and you'd think that, for something so evident, it would be more creative, but it's not.

The movie itself is too self-aware and uses contrived movie jargon which, in and of itself, feels terribly out-of-place in a plot that takes place on one of the most beautiful places on earth: Hawaii. It's like watching a movie made by a film student who's all-too eager to throw everything he's learned into one project and show off to his peers that he can regurgitate information (even if it isn't pertinent.) It's like a magician showing the secrets behind his trick before you've even asked him how it's done.

The first, "twist-less" half of the movie is rather intriguing and mysterious. We meet a young couple on their honeymoon. They come across some shady characters and some events transpire that really tend to grip you and your attention. But then the twist comes--and it all goes downhill from there.

For one thing, the revelation comes too soon in the film. Then, it seems like a sloppy mess is trying to be cleaned up by adding never-before-seen footage that would conveniently fit into the gaping crevasse of any potential plot hole. Well, there are plenty of such holes in the movie regardless of the tidy tying up of any proverbial "loose ends."

The cast, comprised of capable, if not good, actors like Steve Zahn and Timothy Olyphant, are totally wated in roles that make them seem like idiots for not steering away from such a bad script. Milla Jovovich, who has some pretty decent acting chops (not great, just decent) is another wasted talent in a film that turned out to be slightly more than mediocre.

Not to mention the cinematography goes from ordinary to sudden MTV-music video from one moment to the other. I guess if you add shaky camera techniques and three-way split-screens, you can distract the audience from noticing how crummy your movie just became.

Well, my dear screenplay writer, you need a better story.

It's funny how a movie entitled, Funny People turns out to be something more poignant than what you'd expect. Take, for example, the casting. Seth Rogen: funny! Leslie Mann: funny! Adam Sandler: funny! These assessments are definitely relative and subjective; but these actors are definitely not know for their serious chops; therefore, they must be funny.

Well, that's all well and good, but this movie takes unexpected turns into dramatic territory that tinge the goings on with a bittersweet melancholy that is rarely seen in most major studio "comedy" releases.

Judd Apatow, writer of hits Superbad and The 40-Year Old Virgin is definitely taking a departure from his usual teen-angsty, sardonic, sex-encrusted films and has adopted a more effective, "grown-up", sex-ecrusted film style that actually works better than you'd think. Sure, it's different and sometimes you don't know whether to laugh or feel a slap of sadness for what you're watching unfold on the screen. But when you're meant to laugh for sure, you definitely know it.

Adam Sandler plays serious as a comedian who receives rather annoying news from his doctors. His life is turned upside down and he must learn to cope with his newfound short-term prospects in the only way a stand-up comedian can: by deflecting. Eventually he may find himself in a better place; or perhaps he may find himself as being a better man. What's really important is to watch the quirky events around him unfold delicately and somewhat awkwardly.

The last third of the film definitely drags a bit with a miscast Eric Bana playing an Australian hubby with a mean streak. The domesticated, soap-like melodrama that is written for Leslie Mann could definitely have done with humor, if not less screentime. But, eventually, it also adds to fact that we're watching a comedy unlike anything we've seen come from either of these actors and/or the films creator.

Overall, I'd recommend seeing this movie if only for the fact that it is interesting to see actors who live so one-dimensionally in most people's mind--and watch them as they try to branch out and maybe falter a bit. The good that comes from the bad is that they get right back up and brush themselves off as if nothing had happened. The movie is by no means unfunny, but your definition of what should make you laugh may change a bit for you--as it does for the funny people in the film itself.

With the recent success of The Reade, the notion of a German woman receiving empathy from an audience is kind of the hot issue. Especially if that German woman is portrayed to be, or have been, a Nazi sympathizer. Well, enter A Woman in Berlin.

In this real-life story (inspired by the anonymous writings of a journalist woman who lived in the conquered city of Belin during the final stages of the war,) is a true work of art and storytelling. It's inspired and striking all at once. No screenwriter, however clever or prominent, could have ever been able to come up with a story so divisive and emotionally manipulative. No, only real life could have concocted such a miserably cold and true depiction of event rarely portrayed in film.

Our anonymous woman takes us on a journey through her world, and the world of those remaining in Berlin during the end of Hitler's Germany. In essence, we see that the remaining civilians (comprised primarily of seniors, young children and the so-called "weaker" sex) were victimized brutally by the invading (or should it read: liberating) forces of the Red Army (Russia.) Furthermore, it is with brilliant efficacy that our anonymous writer conveys that is was these women who were the remaining soldier's on the front lines of Germany's scarred urban battlefields.

We meet our protagonist in an era before the height of war. We meet her in a time in history where we may presume her to be a sympathizer of hate and prejudice. She is vibrant and idealistic about the future of her country, blindly subscribing to manipulative ideas and philosophies that were shrouded in a blanket of national pride.

Flash forward to a time where misery prevails and the tables are turned. Many themes are evident in this film and is reveals and unravels itself slowly, yet efficiently -- like the speed at which a woman sheepishly undresses for her male predator moments before her body's inevitable ravaging.

Obviously, the plight of women is magnificently portrayed in this film. More specifically: the dismal day-to-day living of the German women who were to be punished for the wrong-doings of their country's leaders, none of whom they'd ever met.

Defenseless and battered, the women must fend for themselves as their remaining men find themselves spirited away to Siberia or worse for the crimes that their father have committed. It is with great success that other shades are painted around what is considered to be right and wrong in times of war.

The are a myriad moral subtexts to be gathered. Namely, who is the liberator and what does liberating mean? How do you avoid succumbing to the thirst with which revenge nags? What lines must be crossed or avoided in order to keep yourself from becoming the very essence of the hate you've hoped to extinguish?

Ultimately, as we learn from our anonymous heroine, such judgments are irrelevant when your only goal in life is to remain attached to life itself. Your perception of the world and its concepts can never remain in your mind unscathed or unblemished. That way of seeing the world will always be altered and affected by the events that transpire in it. Therefore, the way you love; the way you fight; the way you live will never be the same again.

After a failed medical experiment (presumably for the good of mankind,) a young Catholic priest is subjected to the evils of the underworld. This is a premise that is meant to elicit the kind of curiosity that will keep you intrigued to find out more. And, for the most part, my attention was captured during the entire length of this Korean-vampire flick.

What starts out as an exercise in standard vampire metamorphosis, turns out to be a bizarre series of events that unfolds in front your very eyes and you can't look away despite its unconventional approach at the vampire genre. It's not that the movie is bizarre in a bad way. It's just that it is so unorthodox in its execution and in its plot, that it unsettles the unprepared viewer.

As I had never seen a Park Chan-wook film before, I was one of those viewers who didn't know what to expect aside from what I'd seen in the film's trailer. Let's just say that the clip really under-sells this film. Or, depending on your point of view, oversells it. It's definitely not for everybody.

The film definitely turns from typical vampire flick into a meditation into the essence of evil, love and the battle for maintaining a balance between this world and the netherworld that eludes us. What does being evil truly mean? And what about those who would, seemingly, be impervious to such evil infiltrating their soul? What happens when someone who is supposed to fend off the malevolent forces in the world is precisely the person who fall victim to its seducing allure?

This movie really has so many layers; but its brutish style and storytelling may put some people off. For me, it works. After all, the characters in this film technically cease to be human at one point or another, so it would be foolish for us, the audience, to continue expecting them to behave rationally and within the realm of expected behavior.

When you're going through hell as a living entity on Earth, what awaits you in the actual eternal pit of doom? Or does this mythical burning soul orgy actually exist? As one of our protagonist ponders, maybe "when you're dead, you're dead." But if you're part of the walking dead, this point of view seems rather skewed, no?

And what of love? Or, as depicted in this movie, lust? Is that an evil greater than that of being consumed by a wicked force of the undead? Which deed is more lascivious and worthy of eternal damnation? The act of taking life to sustain your own appetite for blood? Or laying in the arms of a person who's all wrong for you and whom you're doomed to be in love--lust--with?

Essentially, this movie brings up a lot of valid moral and spiritual implications (if you care to watch the film from a strictly philosophical stance.) But if you're looking for a straight vampire fright, this movie provides plenty of goosebump-inducing moments (i.e. a brilliant subplot of spousal drowning,) as well as quirky humor that you'd only find in a foreign-language film (which this movie is, in case I didn't mention that or in case you failed to surmise it from my review.)

And from a cinema enthusiasts side of it, the technical aspects of this movie are nothing to sneeze at. The cinematography is breath-taking and all-too-real. Especially in instances where the reality becomes torrid fantasy. It isn't a day-and-night switchover, despite the night-only shenanigans our vampires get into.

In a franchise that was starting to see its potent thrill factor wane in recent years, we get what is presumed to be the "final" chapter. Of course, in Hollywood, a final movie in a series is as sure as a diva retiring from the stage. But, if we are to believe this is the final film in the "quad"rilogy, it's quite a disappointment.

Not that the previous three films were anything to regard as high drama or a fine collection of American cinema, but this last movie has really nothing going for it except for one thing. And this thing is what saves the flick from complete disaster...it's in 3-D.

And, the fact that these movies are built around gruesome death sequences and elaborate set-ups, executions and payoff, the 3-D format is essential to your enjoyment of this chiller.

Of course, you know the formula: hot teen with a premonition saves friends from certain death only to have death certainly knock them off one-by-one anyway. It's definitely nothing you'd be upset with me for spoiling (unless you've been living under a rock the last 10 years and aren't aware of the 'Destination' movies and its gimmicky plots.) But what makes this installment stand apart from its preceding trilogy is that the 3-D delivers on its promise to make you jump and flinch.

I wouldn't recommend seeing this film in 2-D unless you're a die-hard fan of the films. But if you're even a bit hesitant to see it because of its storytelling (and acting) pitfalls, I'd say see it in the version that'll require you to wear stylish glasses. It's definitely worth the extra fee to see bodies suffer unimaginable trauma in the third dimension.

How does Mike Judge follow-up his immensely popular (especially among cult-followers) Office Space and the little-seen (even among cult-followers) Idiocracy? With a gamble known as Extract.

In the ten years since Office Space -- a comedy about the working class pencil-pusher -- Judge has done little film work as a director. But with Extract, he returns to his "working class" roots. This time, he depicts a couple days in the life of a straight-laced extract flavoring factory owner and his motley crew of dysfunctional workers.

What ensues is a very adult-oriented accident that should make every male in the audience cringe and tighten his thighs together. This moment is really the heart of the film's trailer. But what comes next is really the heart of the movie itself...

A beautiful and suspiciously interested temp is hired on to work at the extract factory. She is played by the beautiful and suspiciously interesting Mila Kunis. She has ulterior motives, of course, and begins to wreak major havoc on the sensibilities of all co-workers including a horned-up, perverted floor manager; a pot-head slacker who's in a blasphemous band; and a couple of chatty-Cathys who never seem to get anything done because of their incessant complaining about others never getting anything done.

Jason Bateman plays the straight-man to the hilarity that ensues all around him and the outlandish characters that fill in his colorful cast of co-workers, friends and companions. Bateman stands his ground as a brilliant subtle comedian who doesn't need to take physical humor cues from the likes of Jack Black or Jim Carrey in order to be absolutely sad and drop-dead funny at the same time.

As Bateman's character tries to hold his company together and afloat in a seemingly impossible situation, he is thrown off track by a less-than-trustworthy Ben Affleck and a developing affection for the new temp. This interaction leads to Bateman making another adult-oriented mistake that turns his little existence upside down.

What I liked about this movie is that, while the movie looked to be like a non-stop pothead fest, it turned out to be a movie about the consequences that stem from a decision that is poorly thought out. One moment (as they say) can change your life forever. And that is what happens in this quirky comedy on so many levels--literal and figurative.

What you are to take away -- or "extract" -- from the moral lessons laid out before you is really irrelevant. After all, you don't go to the movies to learn your values from them, or do you? If you're looking for unadulterated fun -- as in fun not diluted with extraneous matter -- then a full dose of Extract is what this doctor orders for you.

Play the Game is the type of movie for which you don't know what to expect. Very little publicity, a shaky premise about a grandfather-grandson relationship that seems implausible, and a cast that isn't quite a stellar -- or even a recognizable -- amalgamation of talent.

David (Paul Mitchell) is a ladies' man of the most arrogant and calculating kind. When he comes across a girl he can't have so easily (Sokoloff), he goes into panic mode because his usual tricks aren't working. Meanwhile, his grandfather (Andy Griffith) is the lonely old man at the retirement home who is, as opposed to his grandchild, a wallflower in search of companionship.

Now, each man (grandson/grand father) must help the other in order to help themselves achieve their goals of securing themselves a woman to be with. As it turns out, though, in playing the dangerous game of love, their roles suddenly become reversed and one is looking for long-term love, while the other is miraculously in need of instant gratification. You guess what happens next...

The movie starts off quite shakily because of its preposterous plot and initial devises which are used to induce humor (including a horribly un-funny scene with grandpa at the club.) But the movie, slowly, manages to lose its uneasiness as the script begins to deliver some tender and genuinely funny moments via its patriarchal character; grandpa Andy Griffith.

The film's execution is rather crude and choppy, and its soundtrack is incredibly sappy (with cues being brought in after almost every line of dialogue.) These erroroneous decisions often make the film seem like an after-school special or made-for-television movie that's supposed to teach you the value of family and being "tight."

The film manages to overcome its sappy trappings thanks, single-handedly, to Andy Griffith and his earnest and endearing performance as the meek old man-turned sex maniac.

Additionally, a plot twist seemingly thrown in during the final minutes was cute and made for a slightly interesting revisiting of earlier events that had transpired in the film; but was ultimately unnesessary. It really didn't pay off, considering the movie was one whose self-awareness was already well pronounced and still failed to completely rise above its own attempt at wittiness. Kudos for Griffith, though!

Cold Souls is a very polarizing picture. It definitely will not be for everybody and that should go without saying about most movies. The film starts off with an interesting premise: human souls can be removed from the body and stored away or sold/exchanged for other, better souls. The only problem is that this "premise" ends up being more of a gimmick. A trick to get you to watch, but fails to deliver its promise of quirkiness, charm or even intelligence.

Once the soul is extracted, the people don't seem to display any different characteristics than before. Their dreams become clouded with phantom memories of their new souls' previous owner. Paul Giamatti is in Uncle Vanya. You can store your soul in New Jersey and avoid sales tax. Russia is somehow (or typically) involved in black market shenanigans. The movie essentially throws too much out at the audience and never really forms itself into a cohesive, jointed motion picture. It strives to be something between Woody Allen's Sleeper and Michel Gondry's Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, but fails miserably at it. It tries to hide under the mask of randomness for randomness' sake, but it all feels very calculated.

Basically, there are funny moments; poignant situations; philosophical ruminations; religious paradigms; paradoxical questions of ethics and much, much more. But when it comes right down to it, you don't know where to focus your attention and you don't know how to feel about the characters because you don't know what kind of film you're watching. Are you supposed to be laughing? Crying? Feeling sorry? Feeling hungry?

The movie definitely has redeeming qualities--however few they may be. Paul Giamatti is a great actor and he does his best with a character in a movie that he probably didn't know was going to end up feeling so cold. His performance is as not nearly as multi-faceted as the film itself; but it is much more interesting than the film itself. If you're a fan of Mr.Giamatti (who plays himself in the film, by the way) then see the movie. If not, then don't.

You won't miss out on much.

Normally, when I think of animated film in America, I think of bright, glossy, happy-go-lucky "kiddie" fare the likes of a Pixar movie (Up, Finding Nemo and The Incredibles.) Sure, there may be adult themes, jokes or allegory presented in these movies. There may even be an insidious villain or a pragmatic moral to be learned from these features. But, in general, the movies are made with children in mind.

That may very well also be the case with 9. But this animated feature stands-out in that, perhaps, instead of simply entertaining the children, its focus in on scaring the crap out of them as well.

In a post-apocalyptic world, where humans have concocted their own demise through the over-development of and blind reliance on technology, there survives a small population of nine "stitchpunks." These little creatures -- made of burlap sacks, pillowcases and additional odds-and-ends -- are humanity's last hope. Inside of them, they carry the remaining vestiges of a human race long-since annihiliated by machine.

This is probably what the people over at Terminator: Salvation were hoping their movie was going to be like. But, alas, 9 improved upon their premise and succeeding at developing it into a story that is engaging, poignant, and thrilling. It does, indeed, teach a valuable lesson to both the adults watching and the children who are brave enough to weather the dark storyline.

In the end, of course, there remains a silver lining in a cloud-filled sky and hope, as we've come to learn, is always the last human trait to be wiped away from existence.

9 manages to be a story for both children and adults without pandering to either age subset. The voice talent is stellar and the action sequences are brilliantly plotted and executed. The animation itself is a feast to the eyes, despite what you initially might regard as a bland, mono-chromatic landscapes of brown shades. But where the films lacks color in sight, it paints a grim, disturbing yet ultimately uplifting picture with its inherent optimism about the heights our world can head into after its fallen on its head.

Be cautious when watching this film. Don't expect the usual trappings of adorable talking dogs, fishes or humans with super-human powers. Don't expect to a bright palette of color bursting in every frame. Don't expect a lively cast of characters or a mindless plot. Expect more depth, more to think about; more to chew on; more than just a kid's movie. And expect this movie to steal the big prize from Up come next awards season.

Sorority Row is a movie that knows exactly whom they're appealing to and what kind of film it has to be in order to succeed in its quest to appeal. It's a mottled mess of slasher-film clichés and campy, catty dialogue with less-than-star-making performances by a disposable cast. But it succeeds in hitting its mark so much more than most movies.

There is plenty of flesh being flashed around as the young "sisters" go around partying like it's 1999. That's exactly the way this film's plot plays out, too; like a slasher revival from the late 90s that was kick-started by Wes Craven's Scream. This new collegiate blood-fest is essentially the retarded sister engendered by the formula (the whodunnit gore-fest) that Craven's film reintroduced to hormonal teenagers over 10 years ago.

The revelation at the climax is a little bit of a let-down as you find out who's been doing all the hacking, but all the action leading up to it is well-worth the disappointment you may or may not feel by the end of the film. The methods employed to kill off over-sexed characters in this flick are definitely worthy of a creativity award. And that alone is reward enough for the patient movie watcher.

Additionally, Carrie Fisher turns in a kick-ass performance as a no-nonsense bitch of a house mother. Don't mess with this bitch, or else. But go ahead and see this bitch of a movie! Maybe you'll even learn a thing or two to use as a retort the next time you encounter a slutty sorority sister with an attitude problem.

As far as book-to-film adaptations go, I wouldn't know how to classify Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs since I haven't read the book. But, apparently, the film veers off significantly from the charm and appeal of the popular children's upon which it's based. To literature purists, this may be a slap in the face, but to an unaware film watcher, the movie will more than make up for its literary deficiencies by way of the film's own charm and appeal.

The story is a "cute" one of a boy who is ostracized because of his intellect and affinity for inventing seemingly useless creations. But when he's grown, the boy becomes an amateur scientist who, although still with a chip on his shoulder, has not given up on his dream to invent the machine that will feed his community and lift it from its current depression.

One thing leads to another and his machine not only works--but goes haywire. A feisty weather reporter comes into the mix to be witness to the strange phenomena of incredible, edible food falling from the big blue sky. A nasty mayor is greedily and gluttonously after the machine's power and a the boy's father is a pessimist who fails to see eye-to-eye with his inventor son. Oh yeah, and the community continues to look down on our protagonist by dint of his wacky reputation and slacker style.

While the story provides food-for-thought and its animation is a visual feast, overall, the movie ends up leaving the audience with an empty stomach in terms of a moral lessons to be learned. Sure, the intrinsic showcase of "believe-in-yourself" attitude is evident; but it would have been nice if all this food had served a better purpose than to benefit the town alone. Perhaps, a "feed-the-starving-world" approach would have been a better angle. That would've given the film a more urgent message to young kids (who will definitely be watching and could have been impressed upon by this film.)

Even without the gravitas or social commentary that WALL-E or 9 possessed, "Cloudy" still provides plenty of entertainment value to gorge on and a hearty serving of life lessons to digest.

In The Burning Plain, the intersecting lives of multiple characters come crashing into one story that is both gripping and incredibly layered. Until just recently, movies that skip back and forth between multiple stories were deemed to be avant garde and confusing. But with the advent and popularity of films like Memento and Crash, this method of storytelling is no longer so polarizing.

Still, the story may confuse some because it is multi-tiered and is told from different perspectives at varying times in the characters lives. But if you find yourself engrossed with the first story, everything else will fall into place and you'll find that you've been following the story without any problems.

The story itself is a richly textured one. It concerns a woman named Sylvia (Theron) who is on the verge of a mid-life crisis because of a traumatic childhood event concerning her family--more specifically, her mother (Basinger.) When Sylvia is confronted with the product of her mistake in the form of a daughter, she must come to terms with her past and the errors of her ways.

Essentially, the movie explores the delicate line on which people walk throughout their whole lives in order to avoid being hurt. There comes a point in everybody's life when one must choose to keep running from the things that cause us pain or confront them head-on and suffer the consequences and/or reap the benefits.

The film slowly unravels itself unto its audience, ultimately leaving the viewer greatly satisfied at the way the character have chosen to play out their roles in the story. The acting by Theron and Basinger is stellar as the sullen pair of women that anchor what could have been a chaotic film. Their performances are the root of the film's extrapolating branches and all the fruits that those branches bear are a direct result from the seeds that they sow with every nuance and subtle revelation in their performances.

Hopefully, the efforts of Theron, Basigner and director Guillermo Arriaga won't go unnoticed come awards season. The Burning Plain is definitely one of the best of the year so far and, although somewhat understated and slightly depressing, it is a brilliant little gem that deserves to be discovered and admired by many.

Big Fan is a great example of the quintessential dark comedy: bleak in its depiction of humor; satirical in its commentary and sardonically irreverent and unapologetic in its execution and portrayals.

Patton Oswalt delivers a knock-out performance as a more-than-dedicated and loyal-to-the-death fan of the New York Giants. His adoring admiration for the teams quarterback is nothing less than completely blind and unabashed idolatry. But Paul (Oswalt) is a fan like no other. When people say they are the "biggest fan," they're just blowing bubbles. When Paul says it, he means it.

Of course, forget about the fact that he's 36 and still lives with his mother. Forget the fact that he has a Napoleon Dynamite/Pedro relationship with his equally slackerish best friend. And you can definitely forget that he spends his every waking (and working) minute preparing slams, comebacks and editorial comments for a late-night sports radio talkshow. A job he should be getting paid for but which he's more than glad to contribute toward if only for the mere fact of being validated by a complete stranger.

But when Paul gets a chance to receive validation from the person who matters the most to him: Giants quarterback, he goes on a sad quest in stalker mode to get an autograph, a handshake--anything at all. When things go sour and the quarterback suspects him of being an obsessed fan, things get nasty for Paul and his life is changed forever.

Though he's pressued to take certain measures to have justice be served, Paul must find it within himself to either bring down the idol he worships or lift his team toward glory. The choices he make are astonishing and it goes to show how much fans around the world are willing to endure from the people they idolize and look up to.

Oswalt is very captivating in his portrayal of the loyal fan from hell. He is has an endearing aspect that brings shades of humanity to an otherwise detestable and irritating character. He is a revelation in the role and I am hopeful that he will receive an Oscar nomination for best actor. Also, the script deserves a mention in the original screenplay category simply based on the fact that it manages to deliver laugh, suspense and an overall feeling of sad and reluctant sympathy for the messed-up characters we see on the screen. I'm definitely a big fan of this one.

It's the Chinese Napoleon Dynamite!!! Except this one trades in tether-ball for ping pong (or the more "politically-correct" term: table tennis.)

The movie was a lot more funny than Napoleon was at first viewing. This is the story of a dweeb loser who is Chinese but thinks he is black.

If you think you've seen this stereotype many times before, you're right. But never will you see it be so funny and refreshing. Not to mention, endearing.

There are tons of funny situations involving a fat kid, a duo of ambiguously gay ping pong rivals, and a tight pair of shorts. This is a great romp for anyone looking for a great laugh. Nothing serious here--just a helluva good time.

Adventures of Power
In Adventures of Power our protagonist, Power, teeters between silly Napoleo Dynamite-like impersonation and seriously comedic acting--the kind seen in a Wes Anderson project. The effect of it all is that the film is, at once, fun and funny but, on the other hand, thoughtful and sweet. It marries the two worlds of silliness and poignancy effortlessly.

Taking place in a small industrial town, the film centers around a lovable, albeit slovenly, loser with a heart of gold who refuses to grow up. His one and only goal, obsession and purpose in life is to play the drums. If you find that to be disheartening, here's the kicker: it's air drums!

While the world is his cymbal, that instrument is rejecting his stick with a loud screech. Power is misunderstood and ignored by most of the people who surround him in his Texas hometown. After some exploratory roughing-up in a Mexican border town, he realizes his true calling is on the opposite end of the country--in glorious New Jersey.

If the premise sounds like a gimmick, it is. There's nothing that Power won't do or any length he won't go to in order to show the world what he's made of.

Adrien Grenier (of "Entourage" fame) makes a fun appearance as Power's boyhood nemesis who secretly shares Power passion for air-drumming despite his rich tycoon father having bought him his way into his very own "legitimate" Country-Emo band--where he plays the real drums.

In the end, both men are forced to face off in a battle of the air drums on an implausibly televised national competiton. By that time, Power has united with a rag-tag set of misfit "drummers" and become friends with them; he's found a girl who sees him as more than just a pathetic loser and hear's his heart beat in more ways than one. Despite all this hokeyness and unabashed fluff, the movie ends up feeling like a triumph in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way. It is unashamed of its sentimentality and never takes itself too seriously.

Over the years, stories of border crossings and immigrant dreams of a better life have become increasingly popular. But they certainly have not become a dime-a-dozen. Their messages of hope in the face of insurmountable adversity is ever-present and ever-relevant in a world where living among and toleratig people different from ourselves is the norm.

Cruzando is a film that explores the relatively sweeter side of coming to America. This is in contrast to recent fare lilke the brutally arresting Sin Nombre which explores the darker, deadlier side of the danger Central American immigrants face. In Cruzando provides a balanced look at a very specific reason for which someone would choose (or be forced) to visit the U.S.

Meme is a young man who has grown up without his father. His vague recollections of time spent with the man are just that: vague. He knows that his father left to make a better life for himself--but Meme was forgotten along the way. Flash forward a couple of decades and his father now facing execution in a Texas prison. Word get to Meme; and he is forced to make a life-changing decision.

The catch is that Meme is now facing fatherhood himself. He must decide whether witnessing the death of the man who abandoned him is more important that being present for the birth of the son he is now abandoning. What ensues is a harrowing tale determination, the will to persevere and friendship--as Meme brings his best pal Diego along for moral support (and comic relief for the audience.)

Cruzando ultimately feels a litte bit empty as it lacks a well-known cast and a broader, more epic scope. But the story itself is one that should be played intimately--and in that regard, the film succeeds briliantly. It showcases the hardships faced by the less-fortunate immigrants without implying that these are hardships which the immigrants are too cowardly to own-up to. Eventually, the man's decision is redeemed by a return to what is truly important to all of us. Home.

Deadland is proof that you don't need a big budget in order to tell a compelling post-apocalyptic tale. Sure, special effects may help depict the terror that will undo the world, but if it's a post-apocalyptic tale you're telling, the emphasis should be about what happens after the destruction. And this movie does so very well.

Don't be fooled by its shoe-string budget or cast of unknown actors. The movie is full to the brim with great action, suspense and drama. The story of a man in search for his long-lost wife after the seeming decimation of society is a classic tale of overcoming adversity.

This determined man must cross not only a desolate and unforgiving terrain; but also the encounter the vicious people that a shell-shocked world has produced. No zombies in this movie--although an allusion or two is made through the mysterious virus--the threat is more of, well, threat than it actually is a manifestation on film. The danger or humans becoming animals is always in the back of everyone's mind and a quest to find a cure must also be completed.

The lack of visual trickery makes this film all the more satisfying. It is a gritty, and thus more realistic portrayal of events. After all, when the world ends, there won't be high-tech bedazzlement and computer gadgetry to help us fend off the end times--there would just be people trying to survive and this is the very simple story of just that.

You'd be hard pressed to find this movie playing at any movie theater. It has been released only as far as the limited festival schedule it's on has permitted. But if you ever come across it in the video store or elsewhere, it's definitely worth giving it a try.

P.S. This movie is not, in any way, related to Zombieland. Just throught I'd clear that up.

Prince of Broadway tells the story of a "street rat" named Lucky. He's from Ghana and is living, illegally, in New York City and participating in the lucrative (for the wholesaler, not the street vendor), illegal, industry of selling counterfeit fashion merchandise.

Along the way, we see how depressed his lifestyle is. He lives in squalor in a dilapidated studio apartment in Harlem. He has a nice girlfriend who, for some reason, stands by this loser despite his being irresponsible, vulgar and an all-around uneducated macho pig.

Well, along the way comes a little boy to change Lucky's life forever. One of Lucky's former flings drops by and demands that he take some responsibility for his half of the creature. Not surprisingly, Lucky is dumbfounded and tries to evade his duties as father. But he is forced to live the the child as his mother has all but left the little one at the mercy of this stunted adult.

After a while, Lucky's incessant denial to own up to his responsibility as father and contributing adult gets a little old. His reluctance to accept the child and his negligence is a little hard to watch as the little one gets tossed around like a rag doll with no regard to his own feelings. In essence, what are supposed to come off as endearing, funny little moments come off as annoying and unbearable to endure when it's at the expense of a defenseless toddler.

But, I guess the message of this film is to depict that "upstanding" individuals such as Lucky and his uncouth clan of friends and former lovers actually exist. The stunted development of a child into adulthood is a theme that is prevalent to the point of having it clobber you on the head. The incessant belligerence of the main character antagonizes him to the point where you wish he would actually get shot or run over by a bus or something--but, in all likelihood (and in accordance to his display of negligence) it would be his son who would undoubtedly suffer such a gross fate.

Repo tells the story of two low-level car repossession agents. One is a slacker of the ultimate grade--married to a redneck party girl; the other is a tender-hearted pretty boy who is, amusingly, unlucky at love. And he's also the manager of a small apartment complex.

When times are tough for the protagonists -- and they are from the start -- they decide to embark on a plan that is both potentially life-changing and, most definitely, half-baked. They will take back--read "steal"--every car they've ever repossessed and sell it for a profit. But when the finding inside one of those cars turns out to be a large sum of money, they face consequences that are both hilarious and somewhat contrived.

The love lives of our buddies are sprinkled in throughout the movie for romance's sake. The plots are neither romantic, nor are they compelling. There is a wacky waitress who is a con-woman and tries to come between one of the pair of lovers because the other friend is jealous that he's losing his best buddy.

Ultimately, the movie ends up feeling a bit disjointed due to its lack of focus. The themes peppered throughout the film are as unsettling, varied and mismatched as the shoe selection at a thrift store. You don't know whether you're watching a heist caper, a buddy comedy, a romantic chick-flick or a really bad film. You simply can't decide how to categorize it; because it happens to be all of those things and yet none of them all at once.

It's really tough to recommend a movie such as this one because, although I liked it overall, I can definitely see it possesses MAJOR flaws and may not suit the liking of most people. But, it was innocuous and fun while it lasted. Even if you end up with an uneasy or unfulfilled movie-going experience. At least you chuckled a few times and smiled--which is probably more than you would've done if you hadn't seen it.

How do you go about getting your way--or making your way--in a world where fiction or lying (even white lies) are non-existent? In The Invention of Lying, that question seems to be the prevailing theme. Of course, things in our world are made so much more simple by the act of telling "harmless" fibs and bending the truth in order to benefit from said acts.

It would be a lie to say that this film is without its fair share of imperfections. Of course, the plot plays out more like a gimmick to keep you engaged than it does an inspired concept. But, with Ricky Gervais (who created the story) that's usually what you get. And that's not a bad thing. Usually, his films (like last year's Ghost Town) and his television work ("The Office," "Extras") is built on a whimsical foundation in order to layer on the subtext and the sardonic, acerbic wit and the biting social commentary.

With "Lying," he goes out of his way to make a joke out of our preconceptions about one another. The fact that humans can be so frivolous and superficial is an instant delight to watch being parodied on screen.

But then, as the film progresses and the first lie in invented, we see that what's at the heart of the matter is how hypocritical humans are and how we're so blinded by certain truths and so eager to be self-righteous about other supposed truths--or lies--depending on which side of the fence you happen to be on.

Eventually, what you get is a delightful movie that entertains and tugs at your socially-conscious sleeve. If you happen to be against any sort of blasphemous or slanted view on what life means, this movie is definitely not for you. If you have a semblance of a sense of humor then, by all means, enjoy the film for what it's worth. It's not cinema worthy of elevating the human spirit to heights never before explored. It's simply a sarcastic comedy about the way we choose to perceive one another and the way we choose to live our lives.

P.S. If you're expecting to see the great cast of actors (Rob Lowe, Jennifer Garner, Tina Fey, Jonah Hill) employed to a great capacity, you will be disappointed. With the exception of Garner, who plays a snobbish, albeit honest woman, the cast appears more as a courtesy or favor to Gervais. His projects usually garner the right kind of critical acclaim and, more than doing Gervais a favor, the actors seem to be in the movie in order to their own careers a favor--by starring in a film with a perceived prestige factor such as this one.

Pandorum is a movie that takes place in a distant future; when mankind has exhausted its time on a single planet and vowed to conquer the rest of the universe with its advanced technology. This movie takes that concept and flings you right in the middle of a mysterious series of events that begin to unfold from the film's very first scene.

As an astronaut wakes up from cryogenic slumber, his world is turned upside down when his memory begins to fail him as to who he is and what he's doing there. As it turns out, he has been asleep for quite some time and is on a rotating schedule with other crew members to man the mission to a far-off world over extended periods of time (the years it would take to reach the final destination.) Well, low and behold, nobody is around to greet him and things start to get nasty from that point on.

As the man tries to cope readjusting, he comes across a commander who seems to be going through the same delirious side effects of a mental condition known as--you guessed it--pandorum. If the crew members can stave off the ffects of this degenerative condition and stay alive long enough to seek the truth of their mission, they will be more than okay. Oh yeah, and did I mention that something is on the ship--impeding their happy-go-lucky way to finish their task. Something nasty has mutated and is now hunting them down.

The movie is pretty sleek in visual aesthetic for being an "indie" with a meager budget. The cast, including Dennis Quaid and Ben Foster is not stellar--but the actors do a fine job at maintaining a sense of gravitas in a genre flick that could have become very stale. A decent script is probably the reason why the film really never fell flat.

Stylistically, the film portrays a far-future so interesting--even though the entire movie takes place aboard the one ship. It is in classic sci-fi fashion (like its predecessors Alien and 2001: A Space Odyssey) that Pandorum takes the vastness of space and makes you feel confined and claustrophobic. It is with these techniques and a visual flare that the movie rises above its deficiencies.

With a bunch of cool lighting effects (black lights and neon) the movie gains its visual signature and stands out as a cool-looking flick. The monsters that linger within the ships bowels are strikingly reminiscent of those in the spelunker's nightmare, The Descent. Only these guys are equiped with bad-ass laser guns.

Overall, the movie is worthy of being seen...preferrably in theaters; but otherwise watch it on a big screen.

Law Abiding Citizen is a film that disguises itself as a domestic thriller, but doubles (triples, and quadruples) as a crime film; a straight action caper; a Saw-esque gore fest and a study in vengeance-fueled psychosis. It really is pretty well-rounded. It even throws in a few gratuitous shots of a half-naked Gerard Butler for the ladies (and some men.)

What starts off as a typical, dime-a-dozen plot of a father who loses everything turns into a taut thriller filled with great action sequences, visual effects and a splash of serial killer flare. A movie only a bad-ass of Butler's caliber could pull off. He was Leonides in 300 after all. Nobody messes with him.

In this one, however, he plays an ex-CIA operative who knows his way around the legal system and who's made a living by killing people without a trace. Well, this will come in handy when it comes to avenging the brutal death of his wife and daughter.

The plot and its series of events aren't nearly as important as watching the way in which this desperate man will execute them (pun intended.) Jamie Foxx plays a sly lawyer--hungry for a D.A. position--who is in charge of Butler's case and lets it slip through the bureaucratic cracks. Well, there will be hell to pay for that for Foxx's character and many others.

The thing about this movie is that you really have to suspend your disbelief. Of course none of the stuff that happens in this movie could ever happen in real life. So don't go in there thinking that you're going to get some cheap CSI-type procedural (although that show isn't known for its realism either.)

It's a movie that's been done a million times before (from Charles Bronson, o Steven Segal to Mel Gibson and back.) But it's definitely a movie that uses that familiar plot and delivers excitement through its outlandish methods of getting back at the perpetrators of harm and mayhem. It's not always the bad guys who wreak havoc on a city and its desciplinarians. Sometimes it takes a good old law-abiding citizen to show just how badly the system needs a shakedown.

Nowadays, using zombies in movies as a scare tactic has lost some of its shock value. Of course, there is the occasional legitimately scary zombie flick (28 Days Later.) But, overall, the genre has been abused to death and revived one too many times in order to remain effective in its goal to scare. So, what's the next step for the zombie genre? Parody!

The culture is ripe for parody and, recently, movies like Shaun of the Dead and, now, Zombieland are employing the quirks of the living dead concept to their advantage in order to make people laugh. Where was a biting British comedy, Zombieland is a biting American one.

From the opening credits sequence, you get the point that what you're watching is definitely a balls-out joke of a movie that isn't taking itself too seriously. Of course, they would run the risk of falling into B-movie territory; but somehow, it doesn't seem that way. The movie is fresh and funny and satirical all at once. It provides enough relevance for the die-hard zombie fans as well as enough deprecation for those who may be inclined to despising the genre for various reasons.

One of those reasons is the brilliant and witty script. The cast (including a never-better Woody Harrelson) is top-notch and worthy of praise. The fact remains that even with a brilliant script; knowing that this movie is intended to be parody could have skewed one's perception and could have made the film seem cheap and uninspired. But rather than being insipid, the movie is vibrantly trendy while leaving its stamp on a cliché genre of film.

Some of the gore in the movie is hilarious to watch--as opposed to cringe-inducing. Some of the acting is better than most Academy Award nominees--including that of Harrelson and Little Miss Sunshine herself, Abigail Breslin. Oh wait--she is an Academy Award nominee. You see what I mean? And the visual signature is almost literally seared into the film as cleverly-placed subtitles are placed throughout the film. These visual aides are not a hinderence or crutch for the film but, rather, a truly inspired technique employed to enhance the entertainment value of an alread entertaining film.

You'll probably die a little from laughing so hard while watching this movie. But don't fret. It's a zombie movie, after all. So that just means you'll jolt back to life in no time--hungry for more.

There are times in life when love simply takes over. It takes over logic and reason. It supersedes any sort of common sense or social stature. And there are times in cinema when the portrayal of such romance goes off without a hitch. And Bright Star is one of those instances.

The tale of Victorian poet John Keats and his lover Fanny Brawne may not be exactly that of Romeo and Juliet; but its merit as a heartbreaking love affair is no less poignant because of its relative obscurity to modern-day audiences. The love that touches both of these real-life characters seeps from the page of the script onto the celluloid that we see flickering in the movie theater and into our own consciousness like an arrow through the heart.

In an age where social status and cold civility (if not sterility) was the norm, the lovers Keats and Brawne meet as next-door neighbors. John Keats is a renowned, albeit penniless poet who has just released a new book of verse. Fanny Brawne is a feisty, progressive lover of fashion and design who is independent of her own gilded cage and her social station--however more elevated from Keats's it may seem to be.

So, already we get a sense of the stars being crossed as these lovers begin to position their burgeoning feelings for one another on their constellation of hope. The world continues to revolve around them as if they themselves were the star hanging in space and their love were the flame that threatened to make that star die off in supernova.

A tale of the plight of love that's too far ahead of its time, Bright Star is filled to the brim with fanciful (yet never pretentious) acting and dialogue that is both beautiful and romantic. The film, by the very nature of its subject matter and the fateful events that transpire, borders on melodrama; but it never dials in the sorrowful violins as a manipulative method to extract tears. It does so in a genuine fashion that is both universal and heartbreaking.

In the midst of a brilliant film with a brilliant cast, costumes and a cacophony of credibility for its depiction of an era long gone shines Abby Cornish. The actress playing one half of this ill-fated duo is a revelation and a joy to watch. Her skill as as a subtle interpreter of grace and petulant feminism is in full display and virtually eclipses all performances in the film. She burns into the back of your mind the way that our dying, bright star called the Sun does when you look directly at it. It's no wonder why the film's namesake poem (a Keats composition) was written about Fanny Brawne. And the title is an appropriate adjective for Ms. Cornish herself.

What would a Michael Moore film be like without a slanted point of view? Without a one-sided dialogue that tells the story primarily from one perspective? You'd have a PBS documentary, I imagine. Well this is not the kind of film you watch if you want a "fair and balanced" take on things. Of course, media outlets that have to disclaim that they're "fair and balanced" usually aren't anyway. But that's another story.

This, however, is the a love story. A story about America and its love of money. Its love of affluence without thought as to how it's achieved. It's a love story that borders on lust story about America's incessant hubris and the people we step on in order to get what we've been brought up to believe is our natural-born right to attain. It's the story of capitalism. And its a love story of the ill-fated kind...

Michael Moore has never been known for delivering an objective documentary; and Capitalism is definitely no exception to that fact. However, whether you agree with his opinion or not, he does have a very manipulative way at getting you to reconsider your own. Whether or not you choose to alter your mindset is ultimately not his goal--probably. But at least a dialogue is started and people start talking about his ideology.

With his latest project, Moore finds himself in the midst of a country in financial turmoil. A housing market gone bust and the bubble in which citizens saw their American dream exist suddenly burst into nondescript residue. Of course, it's never pleasant to see people suffer on film what so many in the audience have actually experienced: repossessed homes, liquidated funds and being part of a system where we were told that everything would be okay--and it suddenly isn't.

But Moore has a funny way at pointing out the truth in all the crises. He finds humanity in every single topic he's discussion; putting a face (a real human face) to match the hopeless situation he's presenting. He introduces us to people who are just like us and have gone through the same madness we've all had a taste of. Whether a person who was laid-off due to being employed at a so-called "recession-proof" bank or a lost their home to unscrupulous bank executives who scoop up your house as they fly by on their golden parachutes.

Ultimately, this movie is about finding a commonality with others. It's about knowing that system is flawed and that it's up to us to fix it. And, as flawed as a Michael Moore documentary about our capitalistic shortcomings may be, at least he gets people some more information than the nightly news is willing to provide.

In today's saturated media age; with the advent of YouTube and Facebook and our relative ease of connectivity to one another, it's rare for a movie to garner so much word-of-mouth buzz. And positive word-of-mouth at that. It's even more rare that that should happen because of society's increasingly skeptical attitude toward almost everything nowadays.

But, thankfully, Paranormal Activity is a film that lives up to all the hype. Of course, that is an incredibly subjective statement, but this is also a review of the film--one of the most subjective things you can write as it relates to the very subjective art of cinema itself. But let me tell you: I was glued to my seat and perspiring heavily!

Not only does this movie succeed where its predecessors, The Blair Witch Project and White Noise failed. It surpasses any level of comparison between those previous films and elevates itself unto a genre of its own. A truly frightening film.

As we follow the daily lives of a young suburban couple, we come to find out that one of them is haunted by some sort of a "presence." This entity has been following our protagonist for the better part of their life and doesn't seem to want to leave. Everything has remained rather harmless up to this point; only some nightmares and some strange sounds have been manifesting themselves as evidence of paranormal activity. So, they decide to videotape their lives in order to see what they can see.

And what they see (and what the audience sees) is incredibly startling.The mere fact that there isn't a blood-thirsty boogeyman or a nefarious monster hunting after these two lovers is incredibly refreshing. And the fact that so much is left to one's imagination is also an brave and inspired risk the filmmakers took. In today's horror market, it would seem that the gore-for-gore's-sake mentality has taken over. But this little film-that-could provides much needed relief to a genre that has been pelted to death by so many clichés and re-hashed ideas.

Of course, some will not be affected by this film in the least. But if you are the least bit succeptible to feeling creeped out, watch this movie. You will definitely have an eerie sense of abysmal fear when you return home and you'll want to check under your bed and in your closet for anything that's been turned or may be lurking within the darkness. Or maybe you'll go home and sleep like a baby without a shred of trepidation. But I think not. Whether you're too proud to admit it, Paranormal Activity will definitely possess you with some semblance of fear. That's as subjective as it gets, really. But it's also as much of a promise as I can guarantee.

Over the years, the story of the victimized illegal immigrant has been told countless times. The struggles and trials of a seemingly innocent people are always played out to manipulate an audience into feeling empathy toward their plight despite their getting themselves into it.

From Mexico with Love is a story that is no different in what it depicts--and even less different in how it makes you feel. At times, there are nuggets of poignancy as we see the rise of a young farm worker in Texas; from mere seasonal picker to a bona fide boxing star (in his own right.)

Overall, however, the plot lacks scope and ends up feeling too inwardly focused. What the film is trying to be is a mock-up of a Rocky sequel gone south of the border, but it ends up feeling like watching two kids playing boxers in their backyard.

Other questions of morality and family values come to the surface. The ruthless American farm owner (stereotypical as the Mexicans portrayed in the film) aims to thwart the hopes and dreams of our little Ricky--eh, Rocky--character. Some insipid romantic antics are thrown in as a desperate attempt at inciting some sort of connection to the female audience; but that ends up feeling forced and, ultimately, ends up being unnecessary.

If the tribulations of a people are to be taken seriously by outsiders who may already have a skewed opinion on the matter then movies like this one definitely do not help the cause. But, as far as entertainment goes, this movie meets the demands of an audience who may just be into seeing a pretty boy overcome obstacles and "better" himself. Through boxing. If the stereotypical glove fits...

Picture
In keeping with the trend of literary updates; adaptations and "re-imaginings," the film Where the Wild Things Are ran the risk of being just another dime-a-dozen book-to-film creation. Fortunately, the book one which this film is based had 40+ years of giddy anticipation from its devoted legion of fans.

This film, based on the acclaim children's book by Maurice Sendak, extrapolates upon the book's mere ten sentences and creates a visual masterpiece that is both entertaining and artistically impressive. From start to finish, the movie drips rich droplets of golden art direction; cinematography and and costume design.

The whimsical story of a boy with a wild imagination is a familiar concept in literature and an even more similar idea when it comes to film geared for children. However, this movie--with it's darker tone and, at times, more complex digressions into psychology--is decidedly more for adults than it is for kids. And that's a good thing, considering that the adults this movie is made for are the kids who grew up fearful of but eventually being enamoured by the ideals of this delightful story.

It goes without saying that this movie will strike a chord with most of the adult-viewing audience simply because of the fact that they grew up reading the book. But what really makes for an emotional connection is how filled with subtle nuance and brilliant acting it is. Newcomer Max Record (who, appropriately, plays Max) is a joy to watch and is the embodiment of dwarfed masculinity in a child--a concept that any kid growing up thinking he was a cowboy or king can relate to.

Supporting, almost cameo-like performances by Katherine Keener and Mark Ruffalo provide the film with a grounded sense of hominess and comfort. The soft, yellow glow of the lighting invites memories of a childhood where one might have grown up in a warm house on a rainy day. The petty, yet inextricable behavior displayed by the child protagonist is a striking reminder of the struggle for an identity that we all grow up longing to overcome.

Essentially, as you follow Max along his journey of self-discovery from a cozy, almost stifling home into the vastness of where the wild things are, you realize that self-discovery is overrated. Sometimes what is needed is discovering that knowing and loving those around you--no matter what--will ultimately lead you to knowing and loving your inmost truth.

Rather than watch a movie and experience one director's cinematic rhapsody, with New York, I Love You, what you get is the same experience--only multiplied.

A series of short films interpolated into one "cohesive" story of interweaving plots; shared characters and overlapping time lines is essentially what this film is all about. The gimmick worked for its similarly concocted predecessor, Paris, je t'aime (Paris, I Love You.)

The eclectic cast including Natalie Portman (who doubles as actress in one segment and director of a second splice in which she doesn't act); Mira Nair, Ethan Hawke, Chris Cooper, Robin Wright (-Penn), and Julie Christie and many many more.

Essentially, at the heart of the film, is a hodge-podge outpouring of sympathy and--yes--love for a city which we've seen represented in film far too many times to count. But, somehow, this disparate collection of shorts seems well-meaning and innocuous despite its inherent art-house pretenses. It really doesn't feel like an art-house snob-fest--although some segments are more dense and inaccessible than others (the Julie Christie segment being the overstated example.) This is counter-balanced by other segments that snappy, quick-witted and a joy to watch (the Ethan Hawke segment being the underrated gem.)

As stories of lovers, fighters, hookers, teenagers, Jews, Indians and other ethnic, relgious and cultural subgenres paint the canvas on film, the film feels more than a little disjointed. It really doesn't blend well enough to be called a one-shot, straight forward piece--but the films aren't suffiently displayed as independent, stand-alone short film to merit being called "short films."

In the end, however, I did find the concept of it all very endearing and, dare I say, rather engaging. Even with its faults (and there were a few), the film felt genuine in its depiction of everyday life in a metropolis so filled with wandering souls in search of connecting. New York, I Love You turns out to be a touching, albeit messy ode to a city that wouldn't have you worship at its feet in any other way.

Picture
If you're a fan of sleek computer animated fare the likes of which Pixar is known for: spot-on casting; impeccable animation; and a powerful, nearly perfect plot--then you've come to see the wrong movie. Astro Boy is nowhere near the level of a Pixar film, but you already knew that. Just look at the film's trailer and yuo will notice the more crude style of animation and the atypical voice cast including--Nic Cage?

But, then again, it's never Astro Boy's intention to compete with its upper crust superiors. It simply exists to appease the appetite of fanboys who have been following the Astro Boy saga for decades. It is a film tailor-made for people who appreciate nostalgia over substance--and even over style. That's not to say that this movie is bad, by any stretch.

After a brush with tragedy, Astro Boy is reconstructed and shaped to be a stronger, more agile version of a boy whose father is blindly seeking to replace. But soon, things take a turn into the fantastical realm of adventure as the boy finds out that he's capable of being much more than just a "good boy." He can fly, scale building and use his jet propulsion to ward off the enemy (in this case voiced by a malevolent version of Donal Sutherland.)

The movie is campy; not very well-animated and still a pleasure to watch. It's not really important in which medium the story is told--but that it's being told to begin with. And, although the story may be somewhat predictable and done a million times before, the film is evidently a labor of love by those who were dedicated to its creation. It's nothing to be ashamed of by any means.

So, while some fans may not appreciate its levels of execution, the die-hards will surely feel appeased and may even go as far as saying they enjoyed it. I have never really been a fan; but I found myself having a good time (once I got over any preconceived notions of what I was going to watch.) It's good family fun with a nod to the kids who grew up wondering what it would be like to be a boy with such power. To those who may still be wondering, all you have to do is step into the world of Astro Boy and find out for youself.

In yet another adaptation from book to film come Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant. If you haven't noticed that we're living in a current vampire craze, you must be living under a rock--or perhaps in a coffin of your own. Although, The Vampire's Assistant is, thankfully, a movie about blood-suckers geared toward the thumb-sucker crowd.

As two best friends are forced to be "secret" best friends due to ridiculous societal pressure, the ties that bond are strained between the two young boys. Steve is, decidedly, a "bad boy" who comes from a broken home and revels in acting irresponsibly. Ultimately, though, he has a heart of gold and should be deemed to be harmless and misunderstood. On the other hand, you have Darren; a straight-laced boy who comes from a well-to-do family and well-bred background with nothing really going for him except for what his parents expect of him--which is a lot.

When they fatefully come across a flying invitation to a freak show circus; the two boys are enthralled to break the rules and attend the midnight event. So they do. And what they find is a truly freakish collection of exhibits that includes a real-life lizard boy (Patrick Fugit); a rib-less man (Orlando Jones) and a beautiful bearded lady (Salma Hayek) among others.

But the real star of the show is John C. Reilly, who proves again just what a versatile actor he really is. He inhabits the role of Larten Crepsley, the #1 vampire of the cirque du freak. His abilities as vampire supreme are unmatched except by those evil vampires he is against. The clan that feeds off of people for the pleasure of it instead of for sustenance. Darren is forced to become a "half-vampire" in order to protect his friend Steve--who has gone to the dark side.

Although the vampire elements are decidedly dialed-down for this teen-geared movie; the thrills are still in full force. The story is full of quirky gags and whimsical little pockets of delightful humor, camp, art direction and dialogue. And, even though this film is Twilight-for-the-guys; it's really a lot better than Twilight by dint of this movie's self-awareness and intentional camp. Twilight actually thinks it's a great vampire film. The Vampire's Assistant doesn't care if it or not.

When it comes to biopics, the audience is always teetering on a fine line between learning the facts and being entertained. Usually, by their inherent nature of being fact-based stories, biographical adaptations can succumb to this and either tell a very informative story or completely ignore the history and present a dazzling piece of entertainment. Very rarely does a movie come along where you get a balanced dose of both history and "popcorn" value. Sadly, Amelia isn't one of those rare exceptions.

Although the life of Amelia Earhart (especially the events leading up to her death--or disappearance) is widely regarded, it has never been fully or richly adapted to the screen the way the current Mira Nair-directed film attempts to do. Unfortunately, the movie suffers from having an A-list actress filling some very big shoes--and doing a fine job at it. But the movie really offers no other novelty than the fact that it's being made about 70 years after the events have transpired.

Sure, the movie is visually stunning and a joy to watch because of its attention to detail; the period clothes, mannerisms and the archival footage used. But the movie really doesn't present anything new or that you didn't already learn in your fourth-grade history class. It simply wraps up the Earhart drama into a tidy little box and puts a big pretty bow on it.

Since most people already know the outcome of this film, it would have been nice if there had been more of a conflict presented in the film. Perhaps more of the terrifying final dialogue between Earhart's lost plane and flight command on the ground where she was to have landed. Instead, we are dealt a melodramatic love-triangle plot between Earhart, her husband and her flight consultant which was really not an interesting way to pass the time between watching Amelia fli high.

Overall, the movie was not atrocious (as some of the critics have proclaimed.) The movie is quiant, well-produced and very appealing to those who consider themselves aficionados to Earhart's cause or of aviation in general. But what should have been an epic tale of adventure and high-flying emotions, instead, treads familiar water and flies the turbulent skies of familiarity because of its conventional point-of-view and predictable romantic skew.

If The Fourth Kind supposed to make you believe in aliens or, at least, make you re-evaluate your beliefs, let me tell you: it probably won't. Even though it's being marketed as "based on the actual case studies," the movie ends up feeling more phony than anything concocted in fiction could have ever felt.

When a group of Nome, Alaska residents begin to encounter strange dreams and eerie night-time episodes of sleeplessness and feeling a presence in the room a Dr. Abigail Tyler (psychologist) begins to sniff around. She thinks, of course, that these strange occurrences have something to do with her own husbands mysterious death some time before. He had been investigating similar, paranormal events in the small frigid community before his demise.

When things begin getting tragic in Nome, Tyler is forced to reconsider what may be happening to the residents. She must hastily acknowledge that the only explanation is that someone or something is controlling the events. When she decided to videotape some of the patient sessions, that when things start to get really bad.

And I mean that in more ways than one. Not only to the events in the plot become more strange and mysterious--but that's when the movie itself begins to dwindle. The gimmick of this film is that the "real-life" evidence recorded by the "real" Dr. Tyler is interpolated throughout the film with the dramatized version of those events. Often, you get split screens with both the real footage and the phony footage. The phony footage being (in my opinion) the real-life videotapes.

It all seems beyond the realm of belief, even for a film that is science fiction. But if anything is supposed to be grounded in fact, it's that this movie would have been better being either all "real-life" or all dramatized. The whole splitting your attention for credibility's sake makes it all too distracting and not engaging enough. It's too much of a ploy to manipulate your discretion and ability to discern fact from fiction.

In the end, all you really end up witnessing is a bunch of static on a videotape. It really proves nothing more than you already may or may not have believed. If anything it cements the skeptics' opinion even more and clouds the murky faith of the believers even more. It really proves nothing or has anything new to say in terms of alien science fiction film.

If the fourth kind of alien contact is abduction, then the fifth kind must be boredom.

When a story such as "A Christmas Carol" is so widely known and regarded, it can be difficult to retell it in a way that can recapture the imagination and wonderment of an audience. Luckily, Robert Zemeckis' latest incarnation, Disney's A Christmas Carol, succeeds magnificently. And it does so not only by the merit of its original source material (the brilliant story by Charles Dickens.) It triumphs so magically by dint of its eye-popping, dazzling execution.

What this story may lack in its "failure" to modernize the story or provide quirky, fluffy pop culture relevance; it makes up for by being an honest-to-goodness, faithful adaptation of a familiar story that doesn't need modern tidings. The story was written as a depiction of Victorian life in England during the 19th century--and it mirrors today's economic world stage so much so, that any more modern-day tie-ins than that would have been superfluous. After all, what good would it do to tell a Bernie Madeoff joke in a movie that takes place in the 1800s? Even with Jim Carrey as the star, it would seem rather ridiculous to see it in this film--and even more ludicrous for audience to expect such an incontinent misgiving.

The sheer amount of visual delights are too many to count or even remember individually. What imprints most in the mind of the viewer when watching this movie is that these are a collection of images that will not be soon forgotten. If the medium of film is one in which to tell a story you must show your story, then this story is told in a cinematic language lined with opulent velvet. Style is never placed over substance; but there's enough style to fill the stockings of a nation.

Jim Carrey is in fine form (primarily) as a voice actor. Never before have his over-the-top thespian skills or his predilection for the idiotic been more in check and subdued than in this holiday feast of a film. Carrey brings significant amounts of gravitas to a film that could have meandered into kiddy nothingness. Instead, Carrey brings enough quirky humor to his "acting," but manages to dial down the heightened comedy for a more nuanced performance--adding another dimension to his presence in the film.

And if another dimension is to be commended, it certainly is the third dimension which Zemeckis ingeniously chose to include in the production. The 3D, stop-motion animation has never looked better. Of course, there are certain technical hurdles that have not been fully eradicated since the likes of The Polar Express and Beowolf. But overall, this movie is boundlessly more sophisticated than its dwarfed predecessors in that the technology has advanced to proportions of unreal realism. What once seemed like eerie, hollowed-out versions of human expressions is now (for the most part) like looking into an eerie menagerie of mirrors pointed at real life.

At times, the mood is brooding and much too frightening for children under the age of eight--possibly even ten. But, then again, what good is a story that's supposed to teach children valuable lessons if it cannot strike some sort of fear in that child that will make the lesson much more poignant? Although quite thunderous, the sounds, sights and sentiments showcased in the film are meant to signify much more than mere entertainment.

It goes without saying that this film is a visual masterpiece; and that it has, once again, raised the bar for the standard at which animation of this class should be produced. And all the acting talent, random access memory and money couldn't supercede what's at the heart of the experience when you step into the theater to watch this film: the amazing story of Ebenezer Scrooge; his cursed greedy soul and the redemption he must learn to attain. That's more than a lump of coal at the heart of it--that's box office (and awards) gold.

The Blind Side is a truly inspirational, true story that leaps from the real-life annals of its history onto the big screen with effortlessness and comfortable familiarity. It is a film that we've seen in one plot form or another, but somehow feels genuine and poignant despite it familiar trappings. Even though it's a movie that's been "done-to-death," this one is different.

Sandra Bullock delivers one of her best performances as a southern belle who is determined to improve the life of a down-on-his-luck, black teenager. The boy (played by Quinton Aaron) strikes a chord with his subtly diffused performance as the displaced fellow from the wrong side of the tracks who is caught between two worlds.

The story of a man rising from the ashes of a broken home; non-existent childhood and illiteracy is truly inspirational. But it is the help of Sandra Bullocks character that all of this is made possible. It is because of the spunky, relentlessly no-nonsense approach of this woman that this young man is able to achieve what he never thought possible. And, after he becomes a real part of her family, everything is within reach--and he's grateful.

The dynamic of the family and Michael (the boy) is one that is so great to watch. It's truly a joy to see people embracing someone so different from themselves and taking them in without question as to their background or color. It is inconsequential to them and all that matters is helping out another individual in need--whether that poor, homeless boy had been black or white.

Eventually, the success of Michael as a high school football star and a college-bound student is a remarkable story. The boy ultimately finds it within himself to persevere not because someone is forcing him to; but because he finally realize the value of his life and discovers what having dignity truly represents.

Of course, there are occasional sappy moments; saccharine dialogue and predictable black vs. white encounters and snide, snappy, bitchy episodes with Bullock's character. But, ultimately, the movie moves along quite well; provides more than enough humor mixed with enough heart to make for a more than satisfying time at the movies.