OMGz prty!

As brilliant as the acting was, and as beautiful as the cinematography was, I couldn't bring myself to enjoy this. There was a dull voice over narration that made the movie feel like a History Channel special, and it's running time was a lot like it's title: Too. Freakin'. Looooooooooooooong. It's not the slow moving pace. It ended half an hour later than it should've ended.

I admire the films originality and gorgeous cinematography, and aside from Vince Vaughn, the cast was excellent, especially Vincent D'Onofrio as the film's antagonist (and his many alter-egos). But that extra something that makes me want to enjoy this movie rather than merely appreciate it just isn't there. This is one of those movies that you either love or hate...and I'm kinda in the middle.

What it lacks in substance it make up for in style. The sole reason I liked this movie is because of the cinematography, and no other movies have accomplished that. The cast may not be exceptional, but they're good enough to carry the weak plot in this stunningly shot religious thriller.

The characters or plot may not be well-developed, but the cast is so good that they make you believe in a world of vampires and werewolves duking it out for supremacy. More importantly, they make you care about the characters, despite how under-developed they are. And the cinematography in this slick and entertaining action/horror is absolutely beautiful.

This wasn't just an adaptation of Frank Miller's groundbreaking graphic novel series. It was a panel-by-panel translation. And that alone makes it worth seeing. Splashes of color add a creative, if not wholly original, touch to this already stylish black and white crime thriller. If you're a fan of comic books or film noir, it's imperative that you see this movie. It flat out rocks.

there's only one word to describe this epic film adaptation of Frank Miller's equally epic graphic novel: Epic. The blood-soaked battles are a spectacle that makes even the hardest man weak in the knees, while simultaneously making him want to stand up for what he believes in and kick some major ass. King Leonidas may be Gerard Butler's most iconic role on the silver screen, and he makes the most of every second. Plus, the music is killer, taking a beautiful traditional orchestral score and punctuating it with some balls-to-the-wall metal guitars where appropriate.

The best silent film ever made, bar none. Whether you're a Christian or an atheist, whether or not you believe God actually spoke to Jean D'Arc, Maria Falconetti gives a performance that will rip out you heart and put a lump in your throat. Mel Gibson's "Passion" of a certain other biblical figure doesn't hold a candle to this one. What happened to Jean D'Arc is the true epitome of suffering, more so of mind than body, and it's captured in this movie beautifully.

It captures the spirit of the graphic novel it's based upon perfectly. The cast is excellent, especially Hugo Weaving as the titular character and John Hurt as the ruthless, totalitarian dictator. Going deeper than the average comic book movie in terms of political subject matter and character development, this film, like the comic that inspired it, is a brilliant work of art.

This is one of those "you either love it or hate it" movies. It's beautifully shot, edited, and performed, but it's also bizarre and reaaaally over-the-top. it doesn't really make sense, and it's incredibly silly.

It's also one of the most charming and endearing movies I've ever seen. Love it, love it, love it!

Full review coming soon...

This, along with "The Birds", is probably what Alfred Hitchcock is best known for. Seeing as this movie was ahead of it's time, that comes as no surprise to me. From the performances to the music to the beautiful black and white cinematography, this gem hasn't aged a bit. With "Psycho", Hitchcock took horror out of the grindhouses and elevated it to a form of art.

The city is indeed dark, as are the shady characters who run it. A beautifully shot movie with fantastic special effects, a serpentine plot, and an exceptional cast that gives some of the best performances of their careers. The DVD's weak as far as special features go. But hey, I got it for $5.00, so I'm not complaining!

I hate Andrew Lloyd Webber and I hate Joel Schumacher. Apparently two wrongs DO make a right. This musical is spellbinding from start to finish. This movie is a testament to how good of an actor Gerard Butler is. Despite his limited singing voice, he makes the title character charismatic, sympathetic, and menacing at the same time. And I don't care what Broadway purists might say about Emmy Rossum. She's the perfect Christine, much better than Sarah Brightman. Patric Wilson puts on the charm in this one, unlike his sleazy performance in "Hard Candy", as Christine's love interest. And Minnie Driver is hilarious as a has-been soprano with an ego. To top it all off, the cinematography is downright spectacular.

Only a madman like Baz Luhrmann would think that a movie set in Boho-Montmarte should have modern pop and rock musical numbers punctuate it. And yet, here, it works. An exceptional cast rocks out to everything from "Diamonds are a Girls Best Friend" to a tango version of the Police's "Roxanne" in this groundbreaking and stunningly shot musical.

Based upon the smash Broadway rock opera of the same name, this musical absolutely shines. The cast, all but two of which are revising their original stage roles, bring this moving story to life through the late Jonathan Larson's exceptional music and brilliant performances from all involved. Unlike most movie musicals of late, this one's entrenched in it's theatrical roots, so it's understandable that some cinephiles may not like it. I, on the other hand, got caught up in the spirit. One musical number in particular moved me so much that I actually clapped after seeing it for the first time. And the two nubies, the lovely Rosario Dawson and the smokin' hot Tracie Thoms are excellent, Thoms in particular.

If you're expecting a faithful re-telling of the classic short story, look somewhere else. If you're expecting darkly lit, mildly humorous, entertaining Halloween fare that's not too gory for the little ones but still packs some grizzly scares, then you're in for a treat.

The names of people and places are the same, but that's where any connection to Washington Irving's tale stops. Ichabod Crane, masterfully played by Johnny Depp, is a skeptical forensic scientist in this incarnation, rather than a superstitious schoolteacher. The Headless Horseman is an actual vengeful ghost rather than an envious Brom Van Brunt in disguise, and the Van Tassel's ... well, to prevent giving anything away, let's just say they aren't quite what they seem.

Yes, boils and ghouls, this isn't Washington Irving's legend. This is Tim Burton's tale, and although it's not quite as good as some of his other work, it's still a helluva lot of fun. The cast is superb, the cinematography is gorgeous, and the music is excellent. Throw in the occasional "Nightmare Before Christmas" homage and a straightforward plot rife with witty dialogue (or, in one characters case, a monologue), and you got yourself a nice little fairytale for a Hallow's Eve night...

Apparently, the third time's the charm for Darren Lynn Bousman. Not only did he finally craft a sequel that matched the first "Saw", but he actually managed to top it. It's a combination Bousman's traditional use of over-the-top traps and torture devices with character development and an actual plot, two elements that made James Wan's original so engaging in the first place. Best are the scenes that explain the origins of Jigsaw, or rather, the business mogul and loving husband he used to be before a personal tragedy made him snap. I love it when I have low expectations for a movie, and it wins me over. Not many movies have been able to do that, and this is one of them. I only have two complaints:
1: That in order to understand most of what's going on, you have to see the other films first, and that unfortunately includes "Saw II" and "Saw III".
2: They ended this one with yet another cliffhanger, meaning that a fifth "Saw" is in the works (Bousman confirmed this on the DVD commentary, but he's not attached to the fifth installment).
I only hope that it manages to be as good as this one, and that it's the FINAL installment of the series.

Walks the fine line between art film and softcore porno, but despite all the unnecessary sex and incest, I thought it was a really well made movie with a very good script. If you're mature enough to handle gratuitous nudity, check it out.

Guillermo DelToro's vision of Mike Mignola's cult-classic comic of the same name is a fun action/fantasy with visual flair. And is anyone better suited to play the title character than Ron Perlman? I think not.

This excellent fantasy written by "Stardust" author Neil Gaiman and directed by cartoonist Dave McKean is one of the most original, creative, beautiful, and bizzare (in a good way) movies I've seen in a while. The cast is superb, especially Jason Barry as the eccentric Valentine, and the digital effects are a sight to behold.

I'm not much for cop thrillers like "The French Connection" or "Dirty Harry". This one is set apart from those films by stylish cinematography and an exceptional cast. And the cops aren't total hard-asses like Harry Callahan or Popeye Doyle. They're as human as you or me.

It's a beautifully shot movie with a great cast and an excellent story to tell. It's missing something that makes me want to love it rather than simply like it, though. It's kind of like "Silence of the Lambs". It's a good movie, but it makes me want to read the book to find a little more satisfaction and fulfillment that the movie, good as it was, was unable to deliver.

The cinematography and score are superb in Tim Burton's visceral adaptation of Stephen Sondheim's musical thriller. Johnny Depp is solid in the titular role, and the supporting cast made up of both stars and noobs are at the top of their games. The only complaint I have is that some of the musical numbers I enjoyed were either trimmed down to size too much ("Ladies in Their Sensitivities") or cut out entirely ("The Ballad of Sweeney Todd"), but that's coming from a theatre nut who's being too nit-picky. If you're not familiar with the play, though, there's nothing to prevent you from liking what this bloody revenge tale has to offer.

I tried so very hard to like this movie, because everyone involved in it tried so hard to make it a good movie. Despite the effort, unfortunately, it wound up being an incredibly boring and pretentious little fantasy flick. And no, it doesn't suck just because Uwe Boll directed it.

What makes this film not really work is Doug Taylor's disjointed script. It was pretty obvious Taylor was striving for the lyrical, poetic language used in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, but the dialogue in this movie was laughably cheesy. Also, unlike Lord of the Rings, you never had a feeling of being immersed in another world. Rather, Taylor throws archetypes and cliches at us and hopes it somehow forms a plot. Guess what, Doug? It doesn't!

The cast that has the honor and privilege to fill the shoes of those archetypes is a mixed bag. Statham surprises by doing an exceptional job as the main character, and Matthew Lillard is fantastic as a slimy traitor to his king. Ron Pearlman, John Rhys-Davies, and Leelee Sobieski are solid in their supporting roles, as well.

Unfortunately, for every good performance in this movie, there's a bad one to counteract it. Burt Reynolds is good when cast in the correct movie, but he's the last person on my list of people to play a medieval king. His performance as such a character did little to change my mind. Equally as unimpressive was the equally miscast Ray Liotta. He was amazing in Narc, but he was stiff as a board in this movie! Compared to him, Keanu Reeves should have got an Oscar for his portrayal of Jonathan Harker in Dracula! As for Carlie Forlani and Kristina Loken, they did the best they could with what they were offered (thankfully, Loken didn't reprise her god-awful English accent that she used in Bloodrayne), but neither were given much. Loken was the leader of a pack of tree-hugging hippie feminists that only showed up in two scenes, and Forlani was nothing more than a reason for Statham's character to go after the villain.

On the plus side, it's a stunningly shot movie, and the music was beautiful. Unfortunately, that wasn't enough to make this movie any good.