thefinisher_23 Reviews

The Losers (I) (2010)

Well it Doesn't

[7/10 · 27 April 2010]

Does it make sense to take a movie on its own terms? Does it dumb us down as moviegoers to say "yeah this is as implausible as Cubs World Championship but I'm going to sit here with a dumb smile on my face for two hours" ? Quite simply, no. Movies are about enjoying yourself. You can be riveted and terrified by a film like "Shutter Island" or bewildered by something like "Kick-Ass". That me brings to "The Losers". It's by no means a masterpiece but it is (for me) rather enjoyable. Why? Well that's what the other four paragraphs are for.

"The Losers" follows the idea of the A-team but are hardly the same story or the same men. They're a military special ops unit sent in to off a South American drug-dealer turned terrorist or something of the sort. Anyway they happen upon his base and see a bus of children being used as mules. The group acts. They radio the pilot of the inbound F-18 to hold off. On their radio pops a voice they've never heard before. His name is Max (Jason Patric) and he knows the kids are there, nor does he care. Now the group is on their own. They predictably rescue the kids before the bomber does his run. They then put the kids on a chopper and stay behind because "there wasn't room for both". Stop here. I'm making this a movie-rule. If the would-be heroes of a film have to stay behind we know what's about to happen to those who didn't. Even cute little Bolivian kids aren't immune to here. "That should have been us" replies Clay (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). Now our five heroes are on their own, pronounced dead and marooned in South America. "The Losers" consists of a silent but deadly sniper Cougar (Oscar Jaenada), hot head Roque (Idris Elba), soon-to-be family man Pooch (Columbus Short), and my personal favorite Jensen (Chris Evans). He's the manliest Geek Squad guy you'd ever meet. While kicking the tires around in Bolivia, Clay is confronted by Aisha (Zoe Saldana). Stop again.

The very first scene between Morgan and Saldana is a pretty accurate summary of the entire film. The two beat the hell out of each other in rather stylish fashion. Only, there's no reason for them to fight (yet). They meet, Clay is suspicious but all Aisha says is that she wants to do business. You will know after this scene whether or not this film is for you. If you say "why the hell are they fighting?" Then walk away and go see "Oceans". Every action scene has a smirk of implausibility to it. Thankfully they're easy to embrace because they're done with a wink and some stout set-pieces. Take the major-shootout in the middle of Miami. Our band of heroes MacGyver's their way out of that one all while none of the bad guys can really shoot straight and the local bystanders just seem to watch. That's not a criticism in any way because it's somehow very cool. It might sound snippy but the truth is that this film's lack of self-importance makes it all the more fun. If the movie doesn't question or explain its own absurdity why should we? None of it would really work if "The Losers" were just a bunch of hunky guys with guns. They're own characters, not cardboard cut-outs. Morgan turns in a sly performance as the groups would-be leader. His steamy scenes with Saldana seemed a little tacked on but their just quick cliché. Elba has always been able to play the jerk with poise and disdain and he's the chief one here. While the rest of the crew are in it together he just wants things to stop exploding around him, and for that he blames Clay. Jaenada's Cougar has the least dialogue and it's for the best. If Evans is the funniest one of the group he's definitely it's biggest badass. Evans and Short make the group seem real and charismatic though. Short has a baby on the way and as much you'd think someone like him would have a reason to bail he simply can't. That doesn't seem like a plot-point but an honest character call. Evans provides comic relief without prancing around like a dumbass. In one scene he rocks out to "Journey" while attempting to hijack some precious computer files. In a film with wise-ass streak a mile long it's this scene that really put a smile on my face. There's not much to say about the villain Max or Aisha. One is just eye-candy. The other plays your typical villain except he's far funnier and thus less sinister.

It's hard to fault a film that knows it's supposed to be fun and not a masterpiece. "The Losers" nails that basic premise. While the action scenes aren't particularly groundbreaking or unpredictable they have the quality of looking realistic while not actually being anything of the sort. Many films lose their identity as they go along. Something simple and enjoyable like "The Losers" never does.

visit me at celluloidlove.wordpress.com

Kick-Ass (2010)

Most Self-Explanatory title ever?

[10/10 · 27 April 2010]

Director Matthew Vaughn's "Kick-Ass" isn't a spoof of a superhero film at all. Rather it is its' own superhero film. It gives us a lead who wants to be a superhero not because of some higher calling, or a tragedy that would derail most of us but instead is given about 45 seconds of screen time. Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) is just looking for a little purpose in life. He's a comic book nut to boot and so he dons a green wet suit and is off to disrupt some petty crime in New York City. It's from here the movie takes off, spiraling into dark satire, hysterical parallels, gritty and gory action, etc. Did I mention it also features one of the most controversial and entertaining characters in cinema history? Dave's a pretty normal guy. He pines after Katie (Lyndsy Fonseca), has a pair of funny but dorky best friends (Clark Duke of "Hot Tub Time Machine" among them), and makes deposits in a certain warehouse. Once he takes up the mantra of "kick-ass" he finds himself way over his head. After all he's not Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent. This has shades of "Watchmen" in it. If normal people take up the title of a costumed vigilante they're just still human. The costume is a persona and a representation of an ideal. It's not who they are. Dave meets a father-daughter pair who could care less. Big Daddy (Nicholas Cage) looks oddly like Batman and his daughter Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz) has been raised to make the Dark Knight look about as threatening as Katherine Hiegl. Why would he raise her so? The movie gives a perverted sort of explanation that makes sense in some odd way. The pair are after Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong) a ruthless mob boss. This mob boss has a son who soon goes by the name of "Red Mist" (Christopher Mintz-Plasse). Is he a ruthless youngster like his dad or does he simply admire his papa? The answers all come one way or another.

In case you didn't guess Dave is in way over his head. His romance and motivations mean nothing once he realizes just what his adopted profession actually entails. That seems to be the general point of "Kick-Ass". Superheroes can't exist in the real world because what they strive to do is simply impossible. To oust organized crime syndicates and real world crisis's is the job of many men and women, not three extraordinary individuals. The appeal of a film like this is that it's set in the real world. Dave doesn't triumph in his first outings as a comic-book icon. In fact one is downright traumatic. His sobering presence in the film gives it the grounding it needs with the likes of Big Daddy, Hit-Girl and D'Amico shocking their way across the screen.

Now for the issue of "Hit-Girl". If someone were to say they hated the film or couldn't watch it because of her you really can't argue with them. Her character is violent, so mature and the very thought of a pre-teen doing what she does is so scary that present a mountain of moral dilemma? Is it wrong for someone to write her character in such a harsh yet humorous way? What's the point of her character? What about her dad? Best not to think of it all that way. She's a walking, talking, punching, kicking, shooting, swearing send-off of the genre. You want outrageous? Rorsarach would blush. You want sinister and threatening? The Joker would be at a loss for words. In a genre where disbelief must be put on-ice for hours at a time Hit-Girl is its' ultimate symbol. Forget about the fact that she utters the "C" word with the frequency of Joe Pesci, or that she has the maturity of 30 year old Soviet sniper, or that her daddy time is spent both at a bowling alley and taking slugs in the her Kevlar-protected chest. She's killing the bad guys and that's all that matters in a superhero film. The aspect of morality only matters if the good guys don't have it because we know the villains don't.

Any film is nothing without it's' performances. Superhero films are especially vulnerable in this area. "Kick-Ass" provides us with a cast that knew exactly what movie they were making and how they were supposed to fit into it. Cage is at his best here. He brings a controlled intensity to his best roles and Big Daddy is no different. As cool and ferocious as he is you can't help but be totally taken aback by him. Johnson is perfect as the not-to-vulnerable lead. His angst is presented with both hilarity and honesty. Mintz-Plasse will forever be known as "McLovin" but his character has some real depth here. He wants to follow in his father's footsteps but does he really know what his dad does, and once he figures out will that change? The film gives a classic answer. Then there is issue of his dad played by Mark Strong. He is fast becoming his generations' definitive villain-actor. He was sinister and stout in "Sherlock Holmes" but he's a downright a****** here. That's a compliment Mark, can't wait to see you in "Robin Hood".

I don't claim to be a comic-book geek but I get giddy over any great film. "Kick-Ass" is just that. It belongs in the pantheon with "Batman Begins", "The Dark Knight", "Spider-Man 2", "X2" and "Watchmen." Those films all chose to deal with their conflicts both real and fantasy with ferocious action and well-written and serious plot points. "Kick-Ass" certainly succeeds as an action film but never forgets just outrageous it is. The result is something affecting, shocking, thrilling and funny. Bravo.

Visit me at celluloidlove.wordpress.com

Clash of the Titans (2010)

Note: This film contains no Titans

[5/10 · 27 April 2010]

If you're going to do Greek mythology there's no need to simplify. After all it's just storytelling. Such is the problem with the mundane "Clash of the Titans." I never saw its' 1981 original but I wonder if it's more inspired than this. Director Louis Leterrier ("The Incredible Hulk" and "Transporter 2") knows how to make a kick-ass, fast paced action flick. This is neither. Nor does it have the mythology it should. Greece should serve as a backbone for an epic tale. Instead it's used something to get from one action scene to the next.

The tale at hand tells of Perseus (Sam Worthington of "Avatar") who was discovered by his fishermen family (Pete Postalwaithe among them) adrift at sea in a tomb with his mother. The fact that the infant survived and the mother did not should tell them something. Perseus doesn't know of his origin and there's the token "embrace your destiny!" "But I'm just a man!" scenes that follow. His father is Zeus (Liam Neeson) and his mother a mortal tricked into boinking him. Thus he's a demi-God which is kind of like being Penny Hardaway as opposed to Michael Jordan. Soon Perseus is discovered by the kingdom of Argos who demand he help them. Greece, Argos in particular, have angered Zeus and Co. so much that Zeus unleashes his brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes) upon them. Hades' ultimate weapon is the most underwhelming aspect of the film. The Kraken is large, impressive and fierce but its' use is so anti-climatic that you may end up thinking it was nothing more than a marketing ploy used in the trailer to make us say "ooh fun!" Trust me, not really.

The cast at hand is rather good and at times they keep the film afloat. Worthington isn't the most complex actor in the world but he makes for a likable and believable hero. He's accompanied by a battalion of Argos soldiers who must bring back the head of Medusa or their princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) will be sacrificed to the Kraken. Among them is the hardy Draco (Mads Mikkelsen; Le Chiffre of "Casino Royale"). He's sort of a mentor on the fly to Perseus, teaching him how to properly use a sword in one of the films' best scenes. He and his outmatched but savvy and witty group of soldiers give this the fun feel it sorely needs. There's also the matter of Perseus guide Io (Gemma Arterton). She can handle herself in a fight and fits in nicely with Perseus and the others on their quest. The screenplay unfortunately changes her from a character to a plot device as the film goes on. Neeson and Fiennes are fine as they always are but we've seen far better from them. Neeson isn't on screen much as Zeus and when he is, he plays his role rather straight. Fiennes always makes for a good villain but I couldn't help but thinking "man, he was a lot cooler as Volde…I mean 'he who must not be named'.

The acting isn't the reason anyone comes to a film like this. We're here for epic action scenes laden with awesome monsters, larger-than-life heroes, and some cool mythology mixed in. That's the films ultimate failure. It dispenses its mythology matter of factly instead of with intrigue and excitement. While I don't think the film muffed any of the storytelling to suit its needs, it certainly neglects most it. Where's Poseidon, Athena, Ares or any of the other Greek Gods so crucial in these stories? There's sort of a round-table of the Gods but none of it matters. They are all utterly ignored so that Zeus and Hades can bicker and plot. It's not as if ancient Greece was only about the two brothers. The mediocre and predictable plot line would be more forgivable if the action sequences still delivered. Those too are predictable. We know every battle will end and never are the fight scenes intense and stunning as they were in "300" and "Troy". The CGI effects are nice but they're nice in the way that every film looks nice nowadays. The Kraken isn't on screen long enough to make an impression. Medusa isn't nearly as terrifying as she should be. The scorpions are a nice touch. So are the things that ride them.

When a film is mediocre it isn't bad. "Clash of the Titans" isn't bad but it's disappointing in the sense that's it's never very thrilling. It certainly promised to be. This was even pushed back a week to be released in 3D. Don't waste the cash. While the 3D doesn't take away anything from a movie like this it isn't breathtaking like "Avatar" or even peculiar and vibrant in "Alice in Wonderland". The actors are good but they are good because they're good actors. Not because this lazy screenplay allows them to be. It's something of a shame. What could have been a grand semi-epic is just a paint by numbers action flick. There's never a sense that what you're watching is some mythological masterpiece. You can't say much about an average movie. You can say a lot though about a disappointing one. Unfortunately that's what this is.

Visit me at Celluloidlove.wordpress.com

Hot Tub Time Machine (2010)

It's "Lougle" Now?

[8/10 · 27 April 2010]

It is as it sounds. You can judge this by it's' cover (or poster suppose) and you will know all you need to about this film. Three buddies head to a ski lodge where they spent their youth partying, drinking, screwing and rocking their way into adulthood for something of a reunion. One of them brings his nephew with. The fact that he is a nephew really only is relevant because they then proceed to travel back in time where he doesn't in fact exist. Never mind much of the plot or its space-time continuum ramifications. This is all just a set-up for a wildly funny and thankfully vulgar comedy set in a decade where common sense and fashion sense were both in short supply.

The three friends in question are Adam (John Cusack), Nick (Craig Robinson) and "their ass*$%@" Lou (Rob Corddry). The nephew is Jacob (Clark Duke) and he belongs to Adam. He also doesn't know who his father is. Whilst rocking out to Motley Crew and drinking red bull/vodka in his car, Lou passes out in his garage. His buddies view this as a suicide attempt even though Lou says otherwise. They decide to take Lou to their old ski-lodge stomping grounds for a reunion of sorts. Once they get to the now-rundown town they decide to make proper use of their rooms' hot tub. When they awake the next morning Lou greets a squirrel with a relentless blast of…well see for yourself. Then they hit the slopes and as "Kick Start My Heart" blares and they begin to notice that amongst other things that "Alf" is still on the air. After the obligatory realization that they have in fact ventured back to 1986 the four are greeted by the hot tub's repairmen (Chevy Chase). He deals them some ominous advice then promptly disappears. Thus the dudes decide to do everything the same as before. That means Adam has to break-up with his "Great White Buffalo", Nick has a gig with his band, and Lou has to get his teeth kicked in. Jacob meanwhile is worried he'll be disappearing sometime soon.

The plot of a film like this is meant to zany. It doesn't have to make sense, nor does it. From what other movies have taught me about time travel, this film sort of flips the bird to all forms of science. The 80's and all their pop-culture contributions are revered here. Films like this are rather refreshing. It doesn't try to be anything more than what it advertises. There's not much seriousness to the proceedings but the relationships and characters are still formed well. None of these guys have what they want in the present so why not change it up? Well, they don't want to erase Jacob but that's all sorted out in what is the films crudest and perhaps funniest scene. There's also something of a love-lost between the three guys. Their friendship doesn't mean as much as it used to and just because they're older doesn't mean that should be the case.

The performances make this flick. Cusack channels his reluctant charm and wit with relative ease. Films like are this as easy for him as any. Robinson ("The Office" and "Pineapple Express") is his usual reserved and confused self. His honesty makes him funny. Duke seems to be caught up in the proceedings. His character isn't from these times and for that he's rather terrified. Crispin Glover also gives quite a spark with his turn as one-armed and then two-armed bellhop. Chase is used sparingly as the all-knowing repairman. The funniest man in the film though is Corddry. You get the sense that he's not different then than he is now. He says and does whatever he wants. As opposed to his friends he wants to enjoy every minute of this. He has every scheme you could think including betting with Elway on "The Drive", combining twitter and Viagra, inventing Zac Efron and preventing Miley Cyrus. He does much more, but I can't print most of it.

All in all "Hot Tub Time Machine" is a hilariously easy film. It's crazy, nasty, and rude yet never once seems like it's trying too hard. That is the greatest sin any comedy can commit. It also doesn't forget that its characters may be occupying the realm of crazy but that doesn't mean they can't be real people. I make no apologies for liking this film. In fact I liked it a lot. Many who want to see a film like this will like a lot too. Credit its' truly funny and diverse cast. That includes the squirrel too.

Visit me at Celluloidlove.wordpress.com

Edge of Darkness (2010)

Edgy, ruthless thriller marked by Gibson's return

[8/10 · 1 February 2010]

He is in every sense of the word back. It has been over seven years since Mel Gibson graced the multiplexes with his presence. In that time he has directed two films (one wildly successful, the other wildly good) and for some he has ruined his ability to be seen merely as an actor by making some despicable decisions in his personal life. I will simply say that while the man is no friend of mine I am fond of his work. In this movie which would have been a good one with or without him he effortlessly slips into the persona that dominates every picture in his career. Enough about the man, let me elaborate on the character and the world he inhabits.

Edge of Darkness was a UK TV series some 20 odd years ago. The director of that series is the man behind the camera here, Martin Campbell (director of one of the previous decade's best Casino Royale). Along the way you will have to excuse some implausibility's. Notice I say implausibility's and impossibilities. The difference is often what makes a thriller thrilling or simply dumb.

Boston Detective Thomas Craven (Gibson) is picking up his daughter Emma (Bojana Novakovic) for a visit home. She doesn't come home often and there is a spring in the step of this aging cop. We can see though that something is up with her. Her nose bleeds often and there is something clearly on her mind. Before she can spill it to her dad she is murdered brutally on his front porch. Tom immediately becomes a man on a mission. Don't mistake him for someone without feelings. He is racked by flashbacks and memories of his child. This motivates him but saddens him far more. Along the way he discovers that he may not have been the target of the assailants but that his daughter might have some skeletons in her closet. His investigation of course takes him away from his normal jurisdiction as an officer of the law. He's a man on targeting revenge not righteousness. Eventually his search leads him to his daughter's former employer which is engaged in defense contracting (the shady type of course) with the U.S. government. The company's name is Northmoor and its head is Jack Bennett (Danny Huston) a man so passive and intelligent you wouldn't even think to call him a monster. Aiding or perhaps prohibiting Tom is the savvy and mysterious Jedberg (Ray "how haven't I been nominated for an Oscar yet" Winstone).

The plot of this film requires a little more detail than I have supplied but the less you know about Northmoor or Ms. Craven's dealings the more you will enjoy this. Suffice it to say that while this plot is a bit wild it is in fact in line with the characters and the world it portrays. There is always a grain of realism when films accuse of the government of quietly allying itself with effective but perhaps immoral defense contractors (Google: "Blackwater"). All this is way above the head of our hero but his intelligence guides him through his personal investigation. He's a thinker far more than an action hero. Along the way, he does get himself out a few physically improbable situations but that's okay. It's nothing over the top and Gibson's so fiercely personifies this conflicted man that we root for him instead of roll our eyes when he blasts a car off the road. The cast is aces. Winstone is perfect as a man with a mysteriously intelligent man with the skill set and persona to control the situations at hand while still seeming human. Danny Huston is becoming a true presence as a villain-character actor. We loathe him by the end of film not simply because of his calculating ruthlessness but because he is always great foil for our film's protagonists. The rest of the cast fills in nicely embodying their roles without standing out due to overacting or incompetence. Another aspect of the film is that it's Boston dialogue heavy. An accent or two is so thick that it's hard to understand.

At the end of the proceedings, Edge of Darkness is a very good and satisfying thriller. It's easy to buy into its twists and turns and even be riveted by a few. It's not as dead on intelligent or seem as stunningly real and huge as last year's State of Play but this is a Gibson star vehicle and I am more than happy for it. He has always been an actor who seemed to be playing a real character in every single thing he's done. He's got range to. Whether it's the comedy of the Lethal Weapon series, the intensity of Braveheart, or the reserved emotion of Signs we are drawn to his character. Baggage and all, Mel the actor is back right where he left off.

Legion (2010)

Bring up at your bible study this week...lemme know what happens

[6/10 · 24 January 2010]

Is it blasphemous to describe a film in which a Christian God decides to usher in the end of days as being sort of, you know…fun? Fear not omnipotent deities, Scott Stewart's Legion isn't really that good but I'd be lying to if I said a part of me didn't enjoy the campy action/scares, the deep cast, and the back and forth between two Archangels. Amongst all these positives though there is one underlying truth here, this plot is a mess and a half. In a film where dialogue is at a surplus for our band of survivors both human and divine, you would think a lot more time could have been spent on the motivation of the God in question.

For those frequent and veteran moviegoers out there you will certainly recognize some obvious Terminator parallels. Not necessarily in plot but in some key scenes. Our protagonist Michael (Paul Bettany…typically commanding here as he usually is) arrives in a dark L.A. alley at the film's start. After his intro we get to know Paradise Falls (obvious no?), which is a diner out in the middle of New Mexico. Here resides Charlie (Adrianne Palicki) who is pregnant with Jesus: The Sequel. She is accompanied by Jeep (Lucas Black…and yes he does have deep Southern accent; what 'Jeep' didn't give it away?) who is truly smitten with her even though the child isn't his and nor is Charlie. Jeep's dad is Bob (Dennis Quaid, who puts his accent on a little easier) who co-owns the diner with Percy (Charles S. Dutton). The two men are a contrast of one another. Percy is upbeat and is a believer. Bob is an aging cynic who doesn't even bother with a possibility of a higher being. They are joined by a snobby family (Jon Tenney as dad, Willa Holland as the immature daughter and Kate Walsh who seems to have fun as soon-to-be out of her mind mother), and lastly by hard ass Kyle Williams (Tyrese Gibson, who adds attitude to any picture he is in). All have no idea what they are in for. A possessed Golden girl gives them quite an idea.

The real success of a film like this hinges on the ability to balance campy with chills. We may smirk at the idea of a grandma cursing her head off and taking a chunk out of a cast member or two. However we also might have the hair on our necks stand up at the idea of a possessed toddler attempting off our supposed savior. The Casting director deserves a bonus. In the hands of lesser actors this probably would be straight-to-DVD. I suppose that is because of how miserably the plot fails here both in the common sense and biblical departments. If God really wanted to 'Noah' us all again would he not have simply sent all the angels down to do the job, instead of having them possess humans who can be killed like zombies? Or can the angels only come down through a human? How come Gabriel can come down from the heavens wielding one hell of a hurt stick? The film doesn't answer. Nor exactly does it answer why God's breaking point came at this point in time. Normally I would pass this off as movie logic but I just so happen to attend church. I'm no adamant disciple but I know enough, or perhaps believe enough, to say that the logic and ideology here needs to be explained because it is simply unbelievable.

Redeeming the film of this flaw is Bettany and the relationship between his Michael and Gabriel (Kevin Durand, please give him a full role Hollywood). Bettany's characters command our attention with their confidence and tenacity. Michael is no different. Thankfully he doesn't get bogged down in too proclamation. He knows what he believes he must do and he does believe in it. The exchange between him and Jeep is perhaps the film's best. Gabriel is his foil, a noble soldier and that is it. He too has belief in his commander. Despite the vast storytelling shortcomings these two give the movie some serious credibility. The performance of Palicki is good in its short supply. She simply doesn't want this, and her immaturity to begin with is surprisingly real.

There is a lot to consider when watching any film where a specific religion is the focal point. Legion doesn't ask us to check our beliefs at the door, but it still sorely fails at giving us the depth we need in regard to its source material which will seriously turn some of its audience off regardless of how they spend their Sundays. Thankfully the cast provides some likability, and the action provides the thrills. At the end of it all though conflicted and unintrigued the best words to describe Legion. I think the cast and crew were aiming for 'entertaining.'

The Book of Eli (2010)

Yeah its okay to bELIieve

[8/10 · 24 January 2010]

Denzel Washington is an elevator. He lifts the talents of a script, cast, setting, to a level he sort of demands them to reach because he is already there. The Book of Eli is a prime example. On its surface this is really just another post-apocalyptic, desert wasteland flick designed to make us imagined a world without society. With the presence of Denzel, that is to say Eli, it becomes something far more entertaining and surprisingly rewarding. If you have already guessed what the book could be that is fine. You may be right or not. I am no clairvoyant. Either way, don't feel like you figured anything groundbreaking out. I guessed right too.

Eli never identifies himself as Eli. He has been walking for thirty years since "the blast tore a hole in the sky" and the sun came down and finished us off. He carries in his possession a book that we will protect from anyone. Where is he going? "West" he says. He has a specific location in mind. It's a good thing he didn't tell us right away, otherwise I'm not sure I could call the film rewarding. The journey is so bleak that even the possibility of a destination is a positive.

Eli stumbles across a town run by Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who is its' resident degenerate in a town full of people who seem to get more barbaric by the day. Carnegie possesses something Eli has and that is, experience and intelligence which is why he stands out in a world of illiterate survivors who never knew the comforts of 4 walls and a bed. They were both alive before the world turned to dust. Therefore they both know of the book and only Eli has it. Carnegie is such an awful man that Eli really is the only one who deserves its content. Before he leaves town, Eli takes on Solara (Mila Kunis…if she ever has to call someone "Donna" in a movie here career is over). Solara is the daughter of Carnegie concubine, a blind woman. She is far from innocent but is still rather green when it comes to understanding the world she lives in. Like so many, she is just surviving on what she knows. What commences then is a series of stellar gun-fights and violence in this barren landscape.

Washington truly is one of the six best actors of his age group. His characters always know their motivation, have enough cool in them to make them appealing, all while being strong enough to bring intensity, ferocity and fear to any situation. Eli is no different. The material here is in fact tried and true. We've seen it before the cannibals (The Road), the roving gangs (Mad Max), and the stark, lonely landscape (I am Legend). The difference here is we are given a protagonist to sure of his journey, so confident in his purpose that we can't help but be intrigued by it all. You can see it in Solara and Carnegie. Solara sees him as a man from another time, which basically makes him from another world. Carnegie views his resourcefulness as a legitimate threat in a place where he is the only one. After all, he wants that book.

The movie's directors are the Spreig Brothers (From Hell) who give the film are crisp look and a barren and bright palette. None of this looks cheap and in fact keeps our attention during the times when Eli is just walking through it all. I suppose the best credit to the directing duo is that they know the recipe for success lies within their legendary star. In the end, this is a picture about faith in something we have every reason not to have faith. Oh yes, religion is present but really it adds to the story and its character. It is never preachy or overzealous. In a time of extreme opinions and extreme religion that is most refreshing even in a violent action film. Regardless of anything else in the picture I take this away: we can all have faith in Denzel. The Book of Eli, like so many in the past, is a testament to that.

Daybreakers (2009)

Ehh...

[5/10 · 24 January 2010]

Some films contain better ideas for another film. That is exactly what we have here in Daybreakers. In the future, we are all vampires. Only this isn't I am Legend. We walk, talk and do as we used to do. The major difference being that we must obviously drink blood and avoid the sun. Thus any and all humans are captured and farmed for blood until the day they die. We have found a way to do these things and maintain the semblance of our day-to-day. This is the film I so wanted to see. A function society of vampires living in a world built for humanity. Sadly, we don't get enough of it.

What's left of humanity survives by day and dodges at night. Hematologist Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke…wow its' been a while) is sympathetic to their cause because he does in fact still possess his humanity. His boss (Sam Neil) simply wants capital which should have far less importance in a world where blood is the only real necessity. Dalton's goal is to find either a cure for the disease (never explained) or a substitute to replace human blood which is dwindling fast. If the powers that be can't find a solution we will all change into a creature resembles a mutant bat and Mickey Rourke's face from The Wrestler. Dalton stumbles upon a group of humans who have found a way to cure the disease. This method is explained so simplistically it's stupid to think another vampire or two wouldn't have stumbled upon it by accident too. Among this group is Audrey (Claudia Kraven) and Elvis (Willem Dafoe…here setting a precedent for cliché' sadly). Elvis has been cured thanks to his love of fast cars. Don't ask. I'll only groan.

Daybreakers is far from a bad film but it's certainly a stubborn and frustrating one. There is such a fantastic idea here that is tossed aside because we are supposed to identify more with the humans than we are expected to be fascinated by this vampire-urbanity. The action scenes are rather clunky as well and not at all thrilling. That's quite peculiar because some shots in the film look so stellar you'd think they are from a different budget. Characterization is also at a bare minimum. Dalton for example has a soldier brother who serves simply as someone who can move the plot along, he doesn't have to provide any real emotion. Neil also has a daughter (Isabel Lucas last seen as chick-bot in Transformers II) whose screen time and presence in the film is really an utter waste. I suppose it provides Neil some motivation later on in the film but again, this only serves the plot. It doesn't make the film any better which can be said about most of the scenes here.

A lot of folks…scratch that a lot of DUDES will like Daybreakers simply because it is not New Moon. The vampires actually bite things, are dangerous, act like they are vampires and not CW stars, and the blood flows freely (the last 10 minutes may be the goriest since Planet Terror). I didn't make this comparison as the two films only have the term vampire in common. Instead I saw a film that used a genius premise to set-up a rather boring, dull and far too conventional 2 hours. I wish there was more to elaborate on but truthfully any mediocre film will make you say this: I don't care to.

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

"We in Tarantino-lovin business. And cousin, business is a boomin!"

[8/10 · 21 September 2009]

Quentin Tarantino may be the most unique American filmmaker to date. He is one of the best. He finds a way to make himself both scarce and unique all at once. His latest, "Inglorious Basterds" is no exception to his norm. It is an entertaining, thrilling, unique and character driven movie that excels at making us pay attention. Not to the lights and sounds of the movie but to the dialogue and those saying it. Does that not sound like the typical description of Tarantino? Anyone who has seen the trailer knows that Brad Pitt is Aldo Raine and that he leads a group of Jewish-American soldiers masquerading as a group hell-bent on scalping Nazi's. Along with Sgt. Donnie (Hostel director Eli Roth), Hugo Stigglitz (Til Schweiger who will forever be identified with this role) Lt. Raine and succeed in making such headway in the "Nazi-killin business" that Hitler mentions in outrage that a certain team member is not to be referred to as "The Bear Jew." Did you know that one of the main characters in this story has never heard of the Basterds nor will she ever meet them? The lone survivor of a blatant slaughter, young Shoshanna (Melanie Laurent in an Oscar-nomination worthy role) resurfaces as the owner of a movie theater in Nazi-occupied Paris. Soon she becomes object of Pvt. Frederick Zoller's (Daniel Bruhl) affection. Their relationship or lack thereof, is the most prominent one in the film. The one intertwining character is the film's best. The charming, curious, intelligent, disgusting, immoral, well-read Col. Landa (Christopher Waltz, who becomes the hands down front-runner for Best Supporting Actor) pursues not only the Basterds but keeps bumping into Shoshanna. Even he would have been surprised by just exactly the fire started.

The plot of this film rewrites history but only the crucial parts. The funny thing not only is change meant for us to revel in but I barely stopped to think on the lack of textbook accuracy. This movie is full of images that will stick with you far after the lights come back on. The only linger because they were introduced to us with such color and voice. The violence is there but as always with Tarantino it furthers the story. This film feels at times like a western set in the East. The vast majority of these characters are simple men with moral or immoral agendas. That's all. The soundtrack is great as well. Not overbearing but certainly mood setting. The acting is great to and once again proves you don't need the big names to make a movie work just the great ones. I can't say enough about Brad Pitt so I won't. If he isn't the biggest and perhaps best actor working I can only think of one other. He is effortless here as he was as Benjamin Button. In some places he is intense and you can see the wheels working (see: Fight Club). In a place like this you forget he is who he is and you just see the character. That is the beauty of this film and perhaps Tarantino's films in general. You can take it for what it is no matter what you just saw the outcome is simple by film's end. Simple but it sticks with you. The dialogue and plot maybe the most unique thing you've ever seen but it resonates as a simple outcome lead by glorious characters. This is not the year's best film but it is in fact one of the best films to grace the cinema in 2009. Congratulations Quentin Tarantino, you are this movie's star…and thank you for the last line of dialogue. He is speaking right to us.

Orphan (2009)

Better than it has any right to be

[8/10 · 30 July 2009]

Orphan is one of the most confounding movies of the year. Not the movie itself mind you, but the process behind which it was made. Ya know how films are cut and trimmed after the filming process is complete. Orphan seems to buck that trend. Everything concept, plot device, cliché, and genre rule within the story's grasp is gobbled up and spit out on screen. I laughed, was shocked, jumped, was legitimately terrified, appalled, and just leveled by how shameless a production this is.

The acting is good. Vera Farmiga could be a Oscar-contender yearly if she so chooses. Peter Sarsgaard seemed to have so much fun deploying his role as unsympathetic, wrong in the head husband. The children nail the suspense give their characters a vulnerable feel. Esther is just...great! Orphan is a film not for a critic or just or you or me. It's for the whole auditorium to experiences all the reactions this film supplies. This kind of film seems to understand that we aren't here for but one thing, TO HAVE FUN. Well done go enjoy and be-forewarned, this puppy will leave its mark on you

The Island (2005)

Better than it has any right to be

[8/10 · 16 July 2009]

I will not lie. I enjoyed pretty much all of this film because of its' gorgeous look, thrilling action, endearing characters and involving plot. That being said, its not Citizen Kane. It is just a very good film. The tale to me seemed sort of unique. The whole business of cloning being a means of self-preservation has be touched on just not in a mainstream movie.

The cast makes this film run. McGregor and Johannsson are both endearing and innocent as two clones out in a world far grander than they had been told. Hounson is one the best actors working and here he plays a thoughtful man good at what he does but not removed from his past or its' lessons. Sean Bean's character is one I could only imagine being played by him. He is cold, intelligent, and motivated perhaps by a moral few others see. His dialogue with Hounson leaves one to wonder if he has an inflated self-image or a legitimate cause(Hounson's answer is one of my favorite lines from 2005).

The action does get a bit ludicrous but as with Bay when doesn't it. Still the when stuff goes boom in his movies my jaw drops a little. This get a bit repetitive after awhile, especially when considered the movies first act seemed a tad devoid of Bay-ness. That's OK because while buildings explode and trucks are smashed we are following our two leads (who's token love story is tolerable). We care about them and their buddies back at the cloning mecca because (as the film illustrates soundly) they are REAL. The action is means to discover their fate and like so many good actions film we are only wowed because we have been made to care. Well done Michael Bay. You are now forgiven for Pearl Harbor.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

The least of the series

[5/10 · 16 July 2009]

I haven't read much of this series. I have seen all the films and they have made me a casual fan. Upon glimpsing the PG rating for entry #6, I approached with caution. Isn't the series supposed to dive headlong into more perilous territory with Voldemort's return? This film refuses, and what we get in a stellar looking film with very little in the way of direction.

We hop from serious goings-on in the muggle world and the wizarding world, right into teenage hormones and hesitantance, then back again to ending that seems only to be executed because the hour was getting late. The problem with the Ron/Hermoine and Harry/Ginny love stories isn't that they are in the film but rather they aren't genuine. When Harry and Ginny finally do act on it its far to short and cheesy, mildly laughable, very predictable then farmed for a crappy joke a few seconds later. Ron and Hermoine's interest seem to only be in the film because they are in the novel. Neither really elaborates on their attraction and I can't anticipate it blossoming given the way it's presented in this title. There is far more attempted humor in this pic than its' predecessors. Some of it is funny but that isn't the true reason anyone in the audience is here (see: Transformers II).

The acting is stellar however. Rupert Grint seems to have a true future in any genre he wants. He embraces every line he has here. The addition of Jim Broadbent as Horace Slughorn is ingenious. He portrays need, cleverness, curiosity, and most of all shame in such a way that few can. Series regulars Alan Rickman (Snape), Michael Gambon (Dumbledore), and Maggie Smith (McCongall), all have upped the ante giving us more desperate and struggling characters. Kudos as well to Draco Malfoy who's performance is as heartbreaking as it is sinister. The whole cast tries to tailor to the script but there's only so much can be done with so little.

So as a non-die-hard but certainly a follower I was disappointed. This isn't a bad film mind you but a sadly misguided one. I can understand the need to lighten the mood after the tragic and sometimes to solemn 5th film but you can't deny what is on the horizon for the Potter gang. Sadly this film tries to.

Quarantine (2008)

Solid, Looks good, and in your face...Creepy twist at the end

[7/10 · 4 March 2009]

Horror movies have two main goals. The first is make sleep with lights on in fear that whatever was in the film you just ACTUALLY happening to you (See: The Exorcist). The second goal is make you jump out of your seat. Quarantine excels at this. This unique horror film maximizes its setting, premise, and queasy-cam style to give its audience a hair-raising ride.

The premise may seem like a simple zombie film, but in all honesty it isn't. Not only do the "zombies" NEVER actually die its unclear until the film's end just what caused the incident. When we do find out just what (or who??) probably was responsible it leads to by far the film's most chilling moment. The feeling of paranoia and claustrophobia is thrilling when you consider that the entire film takes place inside a apartment complex. The film has no standout performances but it is well-acted considering it sort of a difficult acting element with the camera.

There is way to much down time in the first half of the film . There are one to many moments were we wait for the scare but never get it. It sorta feels like a waste of time. In all honesty it isn't that big of a deficit. The violence and gore in the film is frequent but not necessarily inventive. The films best moment of violence actually isn't seen, involves a dog, sprinting into an elevator. You'll have to watch. Id rather no ruin it.

All in all Quarantine is a very good film that's pretty fun and quite scary. It certainly has its' unique aspects, and it stands alone as different, unflinching horror film.

Troy (2004)

Simply put this is VERY good

[8/10 · 11 February 2009]

While perhaps not the epic some envisioned upon its' release, director Wolfgang Petersen's adaption of Homer's The Iliad is faithful enough, more than thrilling enough, and its lead actors dominate the screen. Brad Pitt's performance as Achilles brings the famous warrior to larger-than-life status. He is defiant, determined, and unstoppable. His Trojan nemesis Hector is played by Eric Bana who can embody an action hero with a conscience as well as any actor in Hollywood. His battle with Achilles truly goes down as one of the best the screen has seen. The rest of the cast features the seasoned Brian Cox as the disgruntled Agamemnon. His frustration with Achilles seems well placed despite Agamemnon's unsavory intentions. The legendary Peter O'Toole is cast as King Priam. Also notable is Orlando Bloom's performance as Paris. He comes across as rather unlikeable, but I think that is the intention. Paris is seen as a man truly in love with Helen (played with a believable uncertainty by young Diane Kruger) but struggling even more with the fact that he has brought war on his family and Troy, and that he is not the man his brother is or that Achilles. The fight scenes in this film are second to none, as they feature much more intimate combat between groups of men instead of masses of CGI created armies. When CGI does appear in the film it serves the purpose of illustrating just how massive the conflict was, and it is impressive eye candy as well.

The one grudge with the film I share is that Petersen failed to include the massive role the three Goddesses and Zeus play in setting up the action. Perhaps audiences would shy away from such a story but there is no denying that the absence of this element makes story not quite as rich as The Iliad. All in all though, I found the film to be a truly epic piece of cinema with thrilling battles and a very great cast. Troy is certainly worth any movie-goer's time.

Gladiator (2000)

R.Scott is the most underrated director EVER

[10/10 · 11 February 2009]

Some films know not to take themselves too seriously. Gladiator is one of the few films that know it must take itself seriously. It sweeping story, epic action, unflinching villain, determined ensemble, involving story, and larger than life hero make this a classic film by more than one standard. Director Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Alien, American Gangster, Black Hawk Down, Thelma & Louise) has made many a great film but his ability to let his incredible visual technique tell his stories is by far an aspect that has made him a legend. The narrative itself is not lacking in anyway. In fact it might be the best one Scott has presided over. Maximus's rise from noble general, to broken man, to finally a valiant, defiant, righteous hero is beautiful, triumphant and heart-braking. Russell Crowe can embody any hero and here he take on a true superhero like persona. Senators, queen, and Roman citizens rally around him to bring down a suspicious emperor. To us though Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix) is much more than suspicious we see him as disturbed, perhaps perverted, certainly sadistic, evil, murdering, disillusioned son of Marcus Aurelius (whom he murdered when he found that Maximus was to be emperor). The battle scene at the beginning when Maximus's troops rout the Germanic tribes is hauntingly beautiful and glorious. Also worth noting is the solid display of the supporting performances. Connie Nielsen is stellar as Lucilla, a woman who is caught between trying to best her diabolical brother (whom she still loves because he is family) and trying to keep her son safe. The implied past relationship between her and Maximus adds to the stakes of the story. Derek Jacobi is well cast as a seasoned determined senator on the side of Maximus. Djimon Hounson and the later Oliver Reed are likable and identifiable as Maximus's gladiator allies. On the whole Gladiator is unforgettable, involving story whose characters move us.

The action is thrilling, the stakes are many, and our hero personifies righteousness and strength. This film won the Academy Award for 2000's Best Picture. I highly doubt it that close of a vote.

Defiance (I) (2008)

Straightforward excellence

[8/10 · 22 January 2009]

I have to say that when the 007, the future Victor Creed and the director of Glory, Last Samurai AND Blood Diamond appear on the credits for an upcoming movie you can pencil in two hours of my weekend. Defiance is exactly what you expect it is a harsh, exact, and honest look at how the three Beluski brothers saved over 1200 Jews in the black forest during the World War II. That is the ENTIRE war mind you. The performances are all stellar notably Jamie Bell, Liev Schriber and Alexa Davalos. Bell and Davalos come of age without you even noticing it as they fall in line behind their leader Daniel Craig (playing the oldest brother) who channels his inner Bond by detaching himself from the situation when need by in order to accomplish the greater good. Schriber deserves Best Supporting Actor consideration (for the nomination only because HEATH has it wrapped up). Here he plays a man haunted by violence and murder and cares not about his morality but choose instead to dominate his NAZI nemesis by killing as many as possible. On top of playing a complex character hes a bad ass and a half here. The conditions are harsh and depicted as so. Some may say it is hard to connect with the story because there is not any emotional depth at hand. They are right. It is not complex stuff, we follow around men and women who are simply trying to survive extraordinary times. The fact that they succeed and fail (not to mention THIS REALLY HAPPENED) is connection enough.

The Crucible (1996)

Good Acting but overall boring

[4/10 · 28 July 2008]

Okay my opinion may be much different because I played the role John Proctor in theater-form just a few months ago. I find the story to be one-tracked and boring. D-Day Lewis dominates and Joan Allen is top notch. I know the story has very solid metaphors for fearful discrimination but after awhile it's like we get it enough. It's almost to easy to pick up on character motivations in the film, play, or novel adaptations. You know where the story is pretty much headed. It's always thoughtful and mildly interesting but as a film form it's boring and tedious. I also had a problem with Ryder because she was convincing but I saw my four teenage friends play her much scarier, and portraying her for the crazy-messed, kooky, demented bitch she was not just someone like Ryder who showed she was mildly disturbed and only motivated to get Proctor in trouble not because she actually thought she was doing the right thing in her own world. I cant overlook that they seriously all out-performed a "star" like Ryder (in my opinion she is so over-rated and now people realize it) Like I said I had a different experience. Aside from Lewis(I learned so much watching him) and Allen I was bored to sleep.

Hellboy (2004)

A good, solid start

[8/10 · 26 July 2008]

I found Hellboy to be a worthy first entry in its' ever-growing series. The commercial success of this film led director Guillermo Del Toro to make Pan's Labyrinth so it also serves as kind of coming out party for such a stellar film-maker. The film runs kind of like a moody, dark, and disarming tale of MIB only were dealing with monsters as opposed to aliens. The real reason this film works is because of its' cast. Ron Perlman is utterly awesome as Hellboy as a someone is truly angered and dealing with a never-ending identity crisis. Selma Blair is kind of simple, but shows her character as one who knows she's vulnerable and scarred and confused as to how she can help the team and Hellboy the man...yes he ACTS like a man...she cares so much for. The action is solid and you can clearly see Del Toro's visuals in almost every scene. I found the scenes in Russia to be breathtaking. The storytelling is thin but the fact that the villains are Nazi's helps because no matter what you always hate them. The plot also seems a predictable bore at times but you don't really notice which is a testament to the cast and Del Toro. All in all this a good movie and a stellar comic-book movie with fantastic driven performances, stunning visuals, solid action and a disarming sense of humor. This mildly-flawed but superbly entertaining picture means a lot to its' genre it's director and it's own ever-improving series. Like I said a good start.

Pearl Harbor (2001)

You can't deny how awful it mainly is

[3/10 · 15 July 2008]

Ya know for the longest time I could not understand why people despised Michael Bay. I mean Bad Boys 1 & 2, Transformers, The Island all fun entertainment. Then I saw this in my history class and realized what they all meant at once. This is the most clichéd, historically inaccurate turd of a war movie I have ever seen. It would be laughable were it not about one of the worst days in our history. Sure the battle scenes, top-notch but if we do not care at all about our characters, which is the cardinal sin of any movie were the characters are in constant peril, it's almost a meaningless exercise of lights and sound. I mean come on, does every line have to be from another film, and does every little plot twist (including the ending) have to be telegraphed to us. Here's my advice watch the 40-minute battle scene on you tube, then don't watch the rest. Not quite horrible but it's a bad movie by far and an incredible disappointment. Team America was so right

I Am Legend (2007)

A taut mesmerizing piece

[9/10 · 14 July 2008]

I Am Legend is not a perfect film but it exceeds as being three things: mesmerizing, exciting, and stunningly beautiful. It's mesmerizing because of Smith convincing, and realistic performance as Neville (not to mention Sam as a gorgeous lovable pup until...) we never feel the need to have someone standing next to him other than the dog. It's exciting because it simply works as an action pic with many jump-in-your seat moments. The flashback scenes are white-knuckle stuff. I also liked that the film subtly promotes Neville as a man of reason. But, three years deep into the apocalypse he is losing his sanity and sense what's real. This character study is interrupted by the third act however which has received unfair criticism because I loved how awesome and intense the end was. The true stars of this film are Smith and that unbelievable scenery. Manhattan has become vacant (save for wildlife) and vegetation has sprouted every which way. The posters claiming that there was still a fledging hope were an excellent touch. To Neville they have become commonplace, to us we will never see anything like them. The scenery is realistic, stark, and beautiful. This is an entertaining film that I loved. Sure it might have it's flaws but the "Prince" proved he can overcome any and all. He's the king of entertaining movies.

Spider-Man (2002)

An awesome picture, damn near perfect

[9/10 · 12 July 2008]

This is the film that will forever be credited with the revamping of the superhero industry, and definitely deserves that merit. It's a superhero movie at the finest level with motivated characters soaring action sequences and truly devious Nemesis. Let me just say that Tobey Maguire was the perfect casting choice for Peter Parker. For better or for worse he will probably always be remembered as Spider-Man and that because by the series second installment he had totally immersed himself in the role and you did realize it was him anymore you just saw Peter. Im not a Kristen Dunst fan at all but she did give a great performance in this. James Franco used this to establish himself as a very solid convincing actor. Then there's Willem Dafoe who truly is a great actor and is consistently underrated. He played such a great villain helpless, lost, and a borderline weak person as Norman Osborne. When he becomes the goblin he's a wise cracking, evil, motivated and powerful killer. Kudos also go to Cliff Robertson, Rosemary Harris, and J.K. Simmons for playing their roles true, entertaining and in Simmons case funny. The plot was great because it felt like you were watching a comic-book film which made it fun and involving. I never read the comics but they seemed to stay true to the source material. It's also never cheesy or under-developed which is essential to a superhero film. I loved this movie, it's timeless, fun and overall a fantastic achievement

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

A Truly Enjoyable action picture

[9/10 · 12 July 2008]

Wow this film was so improved over the last one. The action was stellar and top-notch. Also the acting was very convincing because Ed Norton seemed like a real character not someone who was abstract and hard to connect to. Liv Tyler and William Hurt were perfect casting choices and should be brought back for the next installment. Tim Roth wont go down as one of the best villains ever but he was a cut above. Roth never gets enough credit as a truly good character actor. What really did it for me was the awesome ending, it shows that the Avengers are truly coming and that the Iron Man and this new revamped Hulk will be here for awhile. This film was exhilarating, well-paced and convincingly acted. Great Stuff

Alone in the Dark (2005)

Brutal, Painful, Boll-ish

[1/10 · 15 February 2008]

This was pathetic and it illustrates just how far the careers of Dorff and Slater have fallen. Reid never had a career and she is rather laughable. Uwe Boll should be prosecuted for taking so many average/good video games and transforming them into enormous pieces of turd. If he ever makes a good movie, ill run a marathon or do something equally stupid. The effects were brutal, how hard is it to mess up the concept of monsters vs. soldiers?! And could someone please explain to me how this man has a consistent source of cash and some sort of tax shelter. I did the math from his films (this one, Bloodrayne, house of the dead, and in the name of the king) and he has lost at least 40 million dollars. In short he's costing everyone money. He should just go manage a McDonald's so the world can just recover from him.