Movies of 2008

Pixar has produced some of the best animation in the past decade with its computer-generated features (Toy Story, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo) that have been marked by strong story lines and vivid characters. The tradition continues in an impressive way with Wall-E. This deceptively simple tale is transformed by the emotional content told almost entirely through visuals.

A polluted Earth has become uninhabitable for 700 years, and one of its only residents is Wall-E, a small robot whose solitary mission is to be a mobile, trash compactor. In his work, he also finds and collects trivial, odd artifacts of mankind's past such as a Rubik's cube. He comforts himself with an old video, Hello Dolly, and as he learns about humans and his yearning for love, it becomes his idyllic vision of happiness amid an insulated, dull existence. Along his travels, he comes across a unique find, a live plant! One day a spaceship lands and deposits a robot probe. Fascinated by this kindred machine, Wall-E follows and eventually befriends this unit known as Eve. Eve has a directive that will hopefully return humans to Earth if only it can sustain life, and Wall-E's plant figures immeasurably. Eve is returned to her mother ship with Wall-E frantically chasing after his newly found love. On a spaceship acting as a living city for its machine-dependent, overweight humans, little robots are not only the caregivers, but in control. Wall-E and Eve must figure a way to return the humans to earth and find happiness even if it means making the ultimate sacrifice.

Wall-E's innocence and childlike wonder (think E.T.), as exemplified by how he introduces himself to everyone he meets, could almost have sprung from Steven Spielberg's imagination. It's in the small details that enrich Wall-E as a character. He brings to mind an amalgam of past robots like Star Wars' R2-D2 and the little robots in Silent Running, and his fears and joys are expressed through body language and squeals. When he shuts down each night to sleep, he rocks himself as a child would. He is clumsy around Eve, and when he takes her to his makeshift home of robot parts and paraphernalia, he is like a little kid. Ironically, he is the catalyst to bring the humans back home.

Writer and director, Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo), takes a huge risk by basing the film's premise almost entirely on a song from Hello Dolly. I can't think of an animated film that relied so much on visual storytelling. Even Fantasia and Allegro Non Troppo were collections of musical sequences not narrative features. In a way, this film is almost too sophisticated in its display and execution for little kids but is just right for adults. Remarkably, this is a tale with nary a spoken word by the principals. One has to think of silent films to approach this achievement. The operative word here is pathos like the best of Charlie Chaplin's little tramp and, amazingly, this film earns its stripes by emoting body language, action, and sound effects. Yet most of the characters aren't even human!

Fred Willard has an amusing small role as the corporate president. Sigourney Weaver, as the ship's computer voice, is an inspired choice since, like Eve, she was a female hero (in the Alien movies) and had to deal with computer voices in those films. The animation is almost 3-D in its rich detail and simulated, fluid camera-work. The interior of the mother ship, the Axiom, is a futuristic view of a commercialized (think Blade Runner) city in space.

Yes, it is a thinly veiled message for all those 'save the earth' and 'think green' people, but that never detracts from the main theme of saving humanity amid a touching love story. There are moments when you think a scene could have played out a bit better, but that is minor. It is likely that Wall-E's reputation will grow over time as a shining example of stretching the art form by challenging and trusting its audience. Bravo to the folks at Pixar for taking a chance and for entertaining and moving us.

This is a fantastic comic book/superhero movie - easily my favorite. The actors are very good, especially some of the minor roles. The action, gadgets - every staple of Batman Begins - is there in full force and better looking than ever. The movie is gorgeous.

The real highlight of this movie is Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker. Some might be under the impression that all the talk and hype about his performance leading up to the theatrical release was because of his unfortunate early death. That impression, however, is definitely not accurate. Ledger's Joker is everything that was hyped and promised and then some. It is simply spectacular.

Thanks in a large part to Ledger, Dark Knight is surprisingly emotional. There are parts that are (unsurprisingly) dark. But the mannerisms of the Joker and what he thinks and what he says are extremely funny. He has the ability to instantly change the tone of a scene - something that Nolan used to great effect.

My only real (but small) complaint is that there are a few problems with the otherwise strong story. Dark Knight's plot does not seem as controlled as Batman Begins - the pacing of some sections is a little off. Also, Joker was an agent of chaos, destroying other's plans because he hates control, yet his actions were superbly planned - "it's all part of the plan." This criticism may be superficial, but there's no need to get into the deeper philosophy of the movie here other than to say it is engaging and fun.

In short, if you love good action with a good story with great acting, this is definitely a must see. Ledger's performance is fantastic - in my opinion, it deserves piles of awards.

Here we are with another Indy film and wait, this one is BAD!?!? I must say after all the hype I came out extremely disappointed. The movie is trying to hard to be something. There is way too much CGI and over the top action scenes. Falling down 3 water falls, swinging on vines like Tarzan, riding off a cliff to land onto a tree that perfectly places them on the water, surviving an atomic bomb, etc. The acting is mediocre; Cate Blanchett is actually bad, Karen Allen overacts, Ray Winstone is undeveloped, John Hurt's character is thrown into help whenever the hell the writers need to so they can finish the movie as quickly as possible, and LaBeouf and Ford are decent.

The story is dumb. We have a mixture of Indiana Jones and the X-Files that seems like they're promoting Scientology. There is no thinking whatsoever, they solve a "puzzle" or "riddle" in 5 seconds after they complain how complexed it is. All in all, I'll say if you're a big Indy fan it's probably best you lore away or face the penalty of ripping your eyes out.

Visually appealing and elegant with a magical score but what really hurts this film is there is no story. Nothing happens. It falls flat from anything stunning. He just wanders around the world with no conflict at all. What does the character need or want? I don't know lets sleep with 6 more women to find out.

This film is about James Bond cracking down a multi-national corporation that works with dictators to get a share of precious natural resources.

"Quantum Of Solace" has an impressive opening sequence. It has high speed car chases with lots of collision and gunshots. The ultra short scenes (all under one second each) and the shaky camera gives urgency and thrill, but it is so hard to actually work out what is happening.

There is a lot of action and adrenaline in the film, but the plot seems not to have a focus. Nor does it make sense either, as it feels like an all-action-no-information film. All Bond does is to run around the globe after his target, and viewers are left to wonder how he made it. I don't find myself caring for the plot or the characters. I don't know why this happens, but something is not right with the film and I don't know what.

Before I begin, let me start by saying that I did not dislike this movie. I did not, however, feel that it was worth paying good money to see. As tight lipped as FOX was about the plot of this movie, people were led to believe that something big was going to happen. That simply wasn't the case. In reality, this movie was nothing more than an extended mystery-of-the-week episode of the show. There was nothing about it that made it worthy of being a feature length film. It really was more of a two hour reunion episode that could have aired on FOX.

My advice? If you don't mind paying to see a stand-alone episode of X-Files, then go ahead and see it. You'll probably enjoy it. It's not a great episode, but it's good to see Mulder and Scully again. Otherwise, wait till it comes out for rental or even TV. You won't be missing out on anything ground breaking by waiting to see it.

Shyamalan has proved to us earlier that he can be as good as the best with masterpieces of cinema with The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable. Yet, since then, he has declined steadily. Signs and Village were good movies, but with Lady in the Water and now The Happening, he has touched a level of incompetence that could never have been expected of him.

The Happening is about a pandemic that is gripping north-eastern USA. It starts with a stunning sequence of events that show people succumb to an unspecified threat - the brilliance of this opening repeated only once more for a five-minute sequence towards the end of the movie. Unfortunately, Shyamalan's writing is a big let-down for the rest. As the focus moves from metropolitans to towns and from crowds to smaller groups, the sense of fear is lost - the biggest sin a horror movie can commit. In the oft repeated criticism for its director, this movie would have been best served as a half-hour episode of Twilight Zone to make it really work.

And to add woe, the actors do not do much to better the experience - Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel are grossly miscast as the protagonists. Any of his previous leading men (Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix and Paul Giamatti) can be imagined to have done a better job for the Science teacher that Wahlberg plays. The camera scrutinizes the performance to a degree that requires an actor with strength in emotions - Wahlberg instead brings a physical presence that the role does not need. Zooey, on the other hand, struts around like in a Disney movie, not for once threatened by the pandemonium.

This time, though Shyamalan humbles his vanity - you don't see him on screen. He now should swallow his pride and leave the writing to the writers. Armed with a better script, we can still expect Shyamalan to make his future movies worth waiting for. For now it is only the memory of the opening sequence, which can be proclaimed as mind-numbing greatness, which is really worth taking away from this movie.

Del Toro's imagination is a beautiful thing. He has created some of the most fascinating creatures that traditional Hollywood doesn't have the guts or inclination to ever assemble. I would take Guillermo Del Toro in the director's chair any time any place, but Hellboy II shows that he is not without his flaws. Ron Perlman who is terrific as Hellboy doesn't have anything truly interesting to say or do, the world around him is magical but the plot isn't.

Hellboy is the most unique character to appear in your comic book shop. The mythology and the character are such the opposite of the main stream and to Hellboy II's credit so is this movie. Ron Perlman doesn't deliver catch phrases or gun down bad guys for the sake of doing so. He is an interesting character but he is overshadowed by this lackluster plot and the world around it. I felt as if we didn't see enough of Big Red or maybe we did we just didn't get to see the most of the talents. Del Toro constantly wants to remind you that he directed Pan's Labyrinth because visually the creatures look like they were leftovers from that film. I don't mind this per say but these characters just don't have much to do, they are there really to look at rather than them having significance. Visually I can't complain about them because they are amazing but they serve little purpose to the story.

The plot is really the weakest thing this movie has going for it. I felt it took too many liberties against the original concepts of Hellboy. Hellboy is a creature alive in our world, Del Toro tries to tell us that our world is nothing more than a division of fantasy and reality. Well we spend too much time in the fantasy that we forget the fact that this Golden Army is a threat to reality. The villain Prince Nuada is weak, we don't see any method to his madness other than the fact that the plot dictates that he be the antagonist. In the first film and to a lesser degree this one we were given details about why Hellboy has faith in humanity and would chose not to serve his purpose. It's interesting because we are given glimpses of what could have been something that could have added real teeth and tension to the story, for the first time Hellboy is tempted by evil, weakly tempted but tempted nonetheless. This mental struggle could have given our actors the chance to show their talent but instead the filler between the action scenes is just okay at best.

I didn't hate Hellboy II I just think it needed some beef in it's story. Del Toro has shown us he is a master storyteller but this time he didn't focus on the story it's self. I would recommend this film but I know Del Toro can and has done much better.

It's a typical Woody Allen movie that involves death, money and betrayal but it is also kinda different because this film is one of the few Woody Allen's films that the leading roles are supported by men and not by women.The story about the tale of two brothers with serious financial woes. When a third party, their uncle, proposes to commit a crime is interesting yet slow and at some moments tiresome. It has some good drama and suspense, some involuntary comedy and an unexpected ending. The movie haves a good cast, Ewan McGregor and Collin Farrell both with very good performances and Tom Wilkinson with a good supporting role. This is not the best Woody Allen movie, but definitely fulfills with the expectations.

This movie with such a huge premise was exactly 1 hour and 13 minutes long. WTF? With such a short movie, the writers choose to spend the first 20 minutes on literally nothing of interest. You're taken to a going away party for someone with an irritating personality. A party I would have left after 10 minutes if I was actually there. So, after a quarter of the movie is wasted here, an alarm goes off and everyone starts running. The shaky camera work at the party is annoying, and it just gets worse...and worse...and worse, and my annoyance just kept growing.

So much could have been done with this story, but the writers and director had it out for the audience and gave everyone a big F.U. There was about two minutes collectively where the movie was cool, but that's only if you're into special effects. If you're into extremely shaky film footage where you have to strain to see anything, then you'll love this one. This was ten times shakier than the Blair Witch Project.

I bet this movie was made for less than 100k, and most of that was spent on CGI, because the actors shouldn't have been paid more than 5k apiece. This movie jumped from totally boring to chaos without any explanations. Where did the monster come from? Why, after seeing it blown up, did it show up again unscathed? Where did it go at the end and what the hell happened? Why were buildings being blown up? Could the monster shoot fire balls out of it's ass or something? We never find out.

Apparently, the budget ran out because the movie just ended abruptly. No resolution or answers whatsoever. The characters were so weak that I didn't even care when they died. This may be a candidate for a Raspberry award. Very, very disappointing

An eccentric jungle elephant named Horton(voiced by Jim Carrey) accidentally discovers a tiny colony of people who call themselves 'Whos' and their city, 'Whoville', in a pretty pink flower. With help from the mayor of Whoville(voiced by Steve Carell), Horton makes a pact to relocate the town of Whoville(and the flower) to a safer spot; unfortunately, thanks to a stuck-up kangaroo from his own community, it won't be very easy.

What first caught my attention about this movie was the animation. If I could judge by its appearance alone, I'd say this movie looks amazing. The colors are bright, vivid, and stunning to look at. The characters' faces are realistically expressive which adds to the charm of the film. The city and jungle are not only colorful but much thought seems to have been put into every last little detail, which pays off.

Jim Carrey puts a lot of heart into his character of Horton and I can't think of a better actor to play him. Steve Carell is just as great a choice for the part of the mayor. Voice acting seems much more difficult than acting in front of a camera so I think they were really fantastic. Same goes for the rest of the cast, including Jonah Hill, Seth Rogan, Amy Poehler, etc.

This movie is funny and original from the start, with no reused jokes or useless toilet humor. At times I almost forget it's based on a Dr. Seuss book due to the creativity of the plot and character depth, but there are moments where parts of the book are implemented and it is not forced but cute and sweet.

The humor is one of the best aspects of the film. Kids as well as teens and adults are likely to appreciate the goofy jokes and in-jokes as well as random funny moments. The characters of Horton and the mayor are goofy and lovable in their own ways and the supporting characters are not just fillers but are each unique and serve at least some purpose.

Also, since most family movies do have a message, this movie has one as well: promoting imagination and creativity as well as sticking to your beliefs no matter what others say. It wasn't corny at all but very well executed.

Cliché, tedious, un-inspirational, and predictable. I surely didn't care about the story or any character in it. I recommend you see another movie.

Don't mistake "War Inc." for a sharply chiseled satire or a brainy comedy full of inside jokes for news buffs. It isn't.

This is an old-fashioned screwball comedy, with ridiculously coincidental plot twists, stock characters (given some depth in fun performances by John Cusack, Joan Cusack, Marisa Tomei and Hillary Duff) and a straightforward approach to the political content.

You see, the filmmakers' political points are things nearly all of the country already knows are true. Yeah, we understand that the corporations profiting off the war are corrupt, inept pigs, the political leaders in charge of it are even more inept buffoons, and American imperialism has never looked crasser and more out of touch than it does right now -- but none of that is the point.

Here, all of that noise is the setting that they lampoon -- sometimes in genius ways -- as the backdrop for a silly romp, as John Cusack's character (the hit-man with a heart) tries to change his life with the help of the do-gooder journalist who doesn't trust him (Tomei) and the young Middle Eastern starlet who wants to call off her marriage (Duff). Cusack's sister, Joan, plays his assistant with an almost cartoonishly enthusiastic quality. Ben Kingsley seemed to me wasted in his smaller part as a ruthless CIA boss.

That's all, and it works. It's simple fun, but if somehow you can't see reality and you think the war is going well and everyone involved with it is doing a good job and there's no corruption and people in the Middle East wish our Western culture would supplant theirs, then you might not find it as funny.

For all the rest of us, it was a light comedy with a political edge.

After an hour and 10 minutes I couldn't take it anymore. I had to shut it off. It's an extremely unrealistic and stereotypical portrayal of high school. My school is nothing like that! But despite its pretentious nature, Robert Downey Jr. is still awesome. I just love the guy too much.

The trailer for this film would suggest fair like 2007's Shoot 'Em blood bath with a bit dark sense of humor. Instead, this film is totally different. No fast killing starts off this film, but a bit of profanity and a strangely tortured main character named Ray, who is supposedly a hit man. Things do not become crystal clear until about midway and then things take off crescendos to a slam-bang finish full of blood, but that is not what makes the film. What makes the film is its bitingly sharp sense of black humor where characters are mean to those around them trying to get away from their own problems. I never thought I would come away impressed by a Colin Farrell film, but this film made me immensely mirthful and laugh hard than I have for a while over this winter season of films. It is sad, but has a nice message packaged inside, which takes its time to get to the surface.

Not a bad film on the whole. There was a hell of a lot of premise to this one, not entirely sure it was worth all of it, or at least not in the way it was sold in particular. This was a quality British heist movie, not just a bunch silver foxes forgetting to cash their pensions and robbing casinos instead. This film is structured around a true story, where fact runs true and fiction begins i'm not sure, but with a bit of creative writing they've managed to put together a plot full of characters you can empathise with, with side plots you actually care about and still have a bit of the true British beating from Statham lobbing bricks at bonces. Its kind of Lock Stock crossed with the Italian Job. Worth a watch, not sure if it's worth two, but I'll see in a few months.

After seeing the previews of "The Strangers" I thought I was in for a ride. Sadly, I am left disappointed. Though the movie is suspenseful and creates a claustrophobic atmosphere, it ends up being too predictable and cliche. It relies on cheap thrills and proceeds to do so through the whole film. Nothing new, just a constant masked stranger popping up here and there. It becomes tedious and maddening. Other than that, we have good acting, good soundtrack, decent direction, and great cinematography. I was pleased to see it didn't rely on gore and violence. Something we really see today in horror films.

Overall The Strangers is a decent and fun thriller with some scary scenes. I think it's worth the watch.

One of the worse movies ever made. It's worse than the novel itself. But it wasn't a surprise to begin with. I hated how they put 15 Steps by Radiohead in the movie. A band that good shouldn't be labeled with such a dreadful film. Blah, defiantly skip it!!!

Okay, here it is.....The truth about "jumper"

Jumper is not really a film at all, though you could be forgiven for thinking differently after watching the intense trailers.

You see it starts like a real movie with real actors and a real story. In fact the start gave me a deep feeling of "hell yeah, I'm gonna enjoy this" But then comes Christensen, sporting a monotonous voice that could put David Duchovny to shame and looking nothing at all like his younger and better acted character from the first scene. Now the so called "movie" shows it's true colors. A flat series of boring uninteresting events, dragged out over an hour and a half and offering no reason for its crazy-ass antics. no wonder Samuel L. is so angry in this movie.

Want an explanation? Well i didn't get one so neither do you.The "making of" documentary holds a lot more plot than the movie itself but still didn't give any answers as to why an angry, white haired Sam Jackson is chasing a super serious and ultra talentless Christensen over all the world vaguely yelling something about god. It offers no explanation for Christensen's powers or why he is still employed in the film industry and not doing voice-overs for the robots.and above all it does not in any way explain why people spent money on this utter whiff of fart called Jumper.

CONCLUSION: Jumper is not a movie but a boring dry piece of dog turd, cleverly disguised with expensive special effects.

Very poor movie. Even if you forgive the plot which is like something written by a person whose brain was seriously damaged in a bad accident.. Thats exactly what this movie is. A bad accident. It starts off fairly promising though. I deliberately didn't read any reviews or anything about it because I like to be pleasantly surprised by a movie which I have no pre-conceptions of.

It all goes wrong when the main character is in a drug-store getting his panic-attack pills and Angelina Jolie suddenly appears beside him and starts telling him his father is an assassin and he just died, then all hell breaks loose and so begins the painfully over-the-top chase scene which eventually leads to more ridiculous scenes such as a bath full of wax which is meant to heal all his wounds in a day, and a magic loom that magically spells out secret binary messages in the stitching of people they must assassinate. Of course what we're not told is which side of the piece of cloth we should look at, at which stich we should start reading from, and when we do get a person's name, how do we know who to kill if there happens to be more than one person with that name.

I am usually able to suspend my disbelief during a movie, and thus enjoy and be entertained by it. But with this movie I just couldn't, and if your I.Q. is above 50, you won't either.

Like so many great movies that became dragged-out trilogies, the newest Mummy falls right in. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved the first movie. But like so many sequels, this story line becomes repetitive. The first rule of sequels is to keep the cast. Rachel and Brendan and an amazing chemistry, but Maria Bello was abysmal as the new Evelyn. Her fake British accent and melodramatic acting was inexcusable. The sets looked like they were built by 3rd graders, the effects were overwhelming, the scenes were disjointed and the cheesy one-liners got old fast. Sure, Brendan Fraser still looks hot in a tux, but he still looks 35 even though his son is in his young 20s. Overall, I was terribly disappointed. I wouldn't even bother seeing it in theaters...and please tell me this series is finally over.

Though the movie was commendable in portraying the real India, but the script was all too dreamy to cast any effect on the viewers. It was clearly evident that it is made by foreign guys who only knew one thing about India that it is poor and poor people abuse. Direction was good and so was the camera work. The kids who portrayed the younger version were so brilliant that you won't believe that they are kids. Though the main character was well chosen but I guess the casting people were too busy on the lead that they forgot to take interest on other characters.The script had too many loopholes but I guess the slum-boy turning to millionaire sympathy saved the movie. Overall it is a nice entertainment with some excellent music score by A.R. Rehman, but don't go expecting too much while watching the movie. Overall I will give only 4/5 to this movie with credits to the lead actor, direction, music and excellent camera work and the producers should blame the script writers and poor casting for loosing the magic figure of 5/5

The Wrestler is a drama centered around an aging professional wrestler past his prime. It's so much more than that. You don't have to be a fan of wrestling to enjoy this film. The wrestling part of it can be put aside as a back story. Randy "The Ram" could be in any other profession, doing any other thing and could be in the same situation. That's what's so great about it. He's just a lonely guy, whose life seems to have passed him by. A middle aged man who doesn't have much going for him. Sure, he's a wrestler, but he needs wrestling more than wrestling needs him. He needs it to feel important, to feel like a somebody. He really has nothing to show for himself, no wife, just a daughter he hasn't been there for his whole life. Missed opportunities. He's sad and alone and we really do feel for him.

A closer bond seems to be forming between him and his stripper friend, played by Marisa Tomei, who seems to be in a similar situation as he is. The middle aged stripper who seems to have a real connection with "The Ram" is shown in another misunderstood profession. We all may not be as different as we may think. Health problems compromise his wrestling career as he tries to deal with the real world and rebuild his relationship with his abandoned daughter. The scenes with Evan Rachel Wood (his daughter) are touching. Beautifully done. Rourke's character portrayal of the Ram is one of the best in a long time. He's not just acting, he transforms into the character on screen. It's amazing to watch. All the credit he's getting is truly deserved.

The film is Directed by Darren Aronofsky, who also directed Requiem for a Dream. He does a beautiful job showing the sport with realism. The film respects the wrestlers and their world, and expects the same from the audience. This film is done in a style that's so real, so honest, so amazing, in easily one of the best films of the year. All around great performances and great direction. Definitely worth checking out sometime.