Times Herald Movies

Harry Potter 7b

2011-08-19T13:19:00.000-07:00

Since being introduced to the books several years ago, I definitely had a fondness for the Potter-universe that I didn't expect before having cracked open book one.

Not being one to constantly compare movies with the source material, I've enjoyed the book series and the movie series as separate entities since the films began. No movie will ever be able to fully capture the book it was based on. The sooner we all accept that fact, the sooner we can all enjoy going to the movies.

Splitting the last Harry Potter book into two films was a great idea. They were able to get more of the source material in and all of us who read the books were grateful for that.

The movie itself was an enjoyable conclusion to the series, as was the book. Yeah, some deaths and sadness, but also a solid finale for the saga.

One of my favorite parts of both the book and film series was the character Neville Longbottom. He may have been author J.K. Rowling's finest accomplishment. Developing from a minor character that was just a sad, pathetic, nerdy little kid, Neville became an integral part of the story at several points and really was one of the most well-written characters from the whole series.

Overall, the last installment took some of the best elements of the previous films and brought a satisfying close to one of the most beloved children's stories of the modern age.

Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 gets an A-
--John Berry, online editor--

Paul

2011-03-17T19:19:00.000-07:00

Nick Frost and Simon Pegg have teamed up again.
This time they brought their goofy buddy comedies to American soil.
Paul is a story about two nerds road-tripping in the American southwest to see the legendary Area 51.
They happen upon a real alien, voiced by Seth Rogen.

A long string of odd bit parts by big names in the comedy world added to the usual goofiness of Pegg and Frost make for an enjoyable film that isn't as good overall as the duo's Hot Fuzz or Shaun of the Dead, but they made the concept far better than it should have been.

When you think about two nerds in an RV and an animated alien romping through New Mexico, it doesn't sound like it could ever be good.

The script (written by Pegg and Frost) surprisingly brings a story that is more than just dick and fart jokes, which is what I kind of would have expected from the story idea and the director of Superbad.

It's a thoroughly enjoyable comedy that delivers far more than it should have, but falls short of the brilliant films in Pegg's past.

Paul gets a B-.

True Grit (2010)

2010-12-22T08:30:00.000-08:00

It's rare that a remake is all that respectful to the original, and even rarer that it is a true update that keeps the feel of the original without making it an entirely different movie.
The Coen brothers managed to take a film from 1969 that they clearly loved and make it into an updated film that was reverential to the classic John Wayne movie.
The new True Grit was an update more than a remake. They added some details and moved some things around, but there was a lot of dialogue and action that were directly from the original.
Acting was not one of the strengths of the 1969 version, but the 2010 film is full of great performances to complement the strong story that was what made the original worth watching.
Joel and Ethan Coen maintained the feel as well, keeping the somewhat goofy tone popping up through a serious tale of a child's revenge.
True Grit is nowhere near as dark and heavy as No Country For Old Men, but that is the one of the Coen films that people will probably compare it to.
What impressed me the most is that they managed to make the new one stand on it's own as a brilliant piece of cinema while maintaining the familiarity with, and clear respect for, the source material.
True Grit (2010) gets an A-
--John Berry, online editor--

True Grit (1969)

2010-12-21T12:06:00.000-08:00

In preparation for the upcoming release of the Coen brothers' remake, I figured it would be good to check out the original True Grit with John Wayne.
With the realization that film-making was not as sophisticated in the 1960s as it is now, it was still kind of shocked at the lack of real acting in this movie. The young girl who is the lead is just kind of annoying and not terribly convincing. Wayne himself goes from sober to drunk in no time flat with a couple of swigs of whiskey. I wasn't aware that a man of his size would get drunk that quickly.
Other than that, it was a interesting story with some strangely light moments.
I'm not a great fan of classic westerns, but this one was watchable even if it wasn't the greatest film overall.
I'm interested to see how the main elements of the original are handled in the remake. Just a guess, but the goofy drunken John Wayne scenes will probably be told as a serious drinking problem for Rooster, and not the comic levity. And hopefully the little girl in the new one can actually act.

127 Hours

2010-12-20T18:44:00.000-08:00

Leave it to Danny Boyle to make gold out of something that seems less than thrilling.
We've all heard the story of the dude who got trapped while climbing and had to cut his hand off to escape with his life.
When I heard there was a movie being made of this true life tale, I really thought that there was little to be done with the story that could make it a whole movie. One guy, alone trapped for days until he realized nothing would save him and he makes the gut-wrenching move to remove his own hand. A logical decision since it was crushed and probably gangrenous by that point. Losing it meant he would be able to get out of there and actually live.
The summary probably more interesting than the real story could have been.
Then Danny Boyle gets on board. Anyone who has ever read my reviews before (and I thank both of you) knows of my man-crush on the British director.
He delivers on this one as well.
Aron Ralston (played by James Franco) is the real outdoor enthusiast who made one mistake and ended up trapped for days alone.
In the beginning of the movie, he seems like a typical narcissistic jackass as he bikes through the wilderness with his video camera mounted on his handlebars positioned to film his own face rather than the terrain he's on. I kind of hated him at the start of the movie.
Through an interesting character study and some decent acting, you actually end up happy for this guy by the end of the movie when he finally escapes.
Beautiful imagery and creative telling of a man's flirting with madness make this a film that will certainly get some talk come Oscar season again.
127 Hours gets an A.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Due Date

2010-11-04T08:42:00.000-07:00

Once upon a time, a filmmaker set out to make a comedy about a group of kids on an ill-fated road trip that sends them through crazy circumstances and hijinx to find themselves closer than ever after the experience.
This was Todd Phillips' Road Trip back in 2000 with Breckin Meyer, that Stiffler kid from American Pie and Tom Green as he was still riding his improbable and inexplicable rise to fame.
Todd Phillips is back with a new road trip comedy called Due Date that is oddly reminiscent of this and every other road comedy with crashed cars and brushes with the law and an implausible pairing that turns into a warm, fuzzy friendship after all of these wild and crazy experiences create a bond that only a second-rate road trip could create.
In spite of being a terribly trite concept, Due Date actually made me laugh pretty hard at a few points and kept me at least amused throughout.
This is probably mostly due to the comedic skills of Zach Galifianakis and the prickish straight man delivered well by Robert Downey Jr. and the actual entertaining chemistry the two have.
Given the choice, I'd rather watch Galifianakis do his stand-up and watch Downey play Tony Stark, but they both do well carrying this film through some rough patches that would probably have fallen flat with most other actors.
There are a lot of wildly unrealistic scenarios that go so outlandish that it's hard to maintain that willful suspension of disbelief, but still provides amusing scenes.
Due Date gets a C+ mostly for the two lead actors, without them, it probably would have scored much lower for me.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

The Town

2010-09-22T13:46:00.001-07:00

So who remembers Good Will Hunting?
It might be the last time that Ben Affleck was watchable in a film that wasn't helmed by Kevin Smith. (Okay, I kind of liked Forces of Nature, too.)
It was also his big writing debut, with his buddy Matt Damon.
Seeing as how well that one worked out, you'd think Affleck would try it again.
He finally got back on that writing/acting bit with his new film, The Town which he also directs.
The comparisons to Clint Eastwood are a little drastic, but Affleck does a solid job with all three tasks.
The story is enjoyable, if a little clumsy with some dialogue. As a director, Affleck might be on to something. The Town is a big budget thriller that might be the impetus to get his career back toward directing after 2007's Gone Baby Gone didn't really make waves.
Being backed up by a cast like this couldn't hurt any director though. Jon Hamm, Rebecca Hall, Jeremy Renner and Blake Lively all produce excellent performances as the most important people in Doug MacRay's (Affleck) life.
Renner is MacRay's best friend Coughlin and delivers the best performance of the film going all over the spectrum of lovable-misfit bad guy to just-plain-bad bad guy.
Blake Lively was also surprisingly good as Coughlin's sister and MacRay's former flame, Krista.
Some great minor roles filled by Chris Cooper and Pete Postlethwaite add some depth to the film.
Overall, this won't go down as one of the all-time great caper films like Heat, but it was a solid film that hopefully will lead to more Affleck at the helm, since he seems to be developing a knack for it.
The Town gets a B-
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Inception

2010-07-15T11:22:00.001-07:00

Inception is the latest installment in the relatively short, but extremely impressive resume of Batman director Christopher Nolan.
While the scope and grandeur of this latest movie are almost along the lines of the Batman films, Nolan is heading back toward his Memento roots with a more cerebral film that has interesting effects and good action sequences but relies more on story and characters than on big budget spectacle.
His Batman endeavors were smart for the superhero genre, but Nolan's Memento, Insomnia and now Inception are much more cerebral films that really push viewers to think about the movie rather than just get enveloped by the flashiness and explosions.
Nolan knows how to walk the line between intelligent story and too smart for audiences though.
Inception is smart enough to build intrigue, but not so intellectual that it goes over the viewers' heads.
The cast is pretty recognizable, even the smaller roles are populated by the likes of Michael Caine, Cillian Murphy, Pete Postlethwaite, Tom Berenger, Lucas Haas and Marrion Cotillard.
The lead roles are well acted by Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page. but all of the performances are kind of overshadowed by the story, which is the true star of the film.
There are enough plot twists to keep the audience interested for the full two and a half hours without going too far and getting confusing.
Nolan does fall short of delving into some of the more interesting aspects of the dream sharing and information theft, which could definitely use some more exploration, but the length is already enough to remind you of how uncomfortable theater seats can be, so it makes sense to not have jumped all the way into those ideas.
Overall, it's a thoroughly enjoyable movie that gives you plenty to think about and will probably warrant a few more viewings in the future.
Inception gets an A-.
--John Berry, online editor--
Watch the trailer here.

Just Wright

2010-05-13T16:24:00.000-07:00

I'd love to hear a song from Common and Queen Latifah.
But a movie, I had my doubts.
I expected a disaster from the director of Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 but Just Wright was still a let down.
First off, Common is not an NBA star and it rang false from the first shot of him with a basketball. And a big time star? They couldn't have tried something more believable, like he's a good player, they really went for the best player around. Two-time league MVP, Nets' franchise player. And even more unrealistic, the Nets are a contender??!?
With that in mind, I could have moved on if the story was good, but it's the same tired story we've all seen before: "unattractive" girl surprises everyone and gets the awesome, hot guy.
Are we really teaching a lesson with that or are we just showing that women can be shallow too?
Latifah's character is supposed to be some homely woman who is every guy's buddy and it's so unlikely a ball player would fall for her.
After all those Covergirl and Revlon ads have told us how pretty she is, now we're supposed to buy her as the ugly ducking?
Really?
She might not be the conventional beauty, but she is certainly no one's ugly.
But the biggest problem might just be the directing though.
Sanaa Hamri clearly knows how to build a shot and work with the camera, but she has talented actors giving lackluster performances throughout the entire film.
That kind of consistently poor acting can only be attributed to the director.
Every NBA cameo in the world couldn't save this wreck.
I'm reluctant to really hate this movie because I like so many of the people in it and am a big fan of Common's music, so I'm giving Just Wright a D+.
--John Berry, online editor--

Iron Man 2

2010-05-06T17:34:00.000-07:00

Fan boys (and girls) can rest easy.
Jon Favreau delivers on the promise that he made with the open end of his first Iron Man movie. Again, it seems like the fact that he is clearly a fan of the subject matter is shown in his reverence and respect for the story he is telling.
Iron Man 2 is every bit as fun to watch and tech-nerdy as the 2008 film.
The basics: if you liked the last one, you're probably going to like this one.
It mixes the humor, action, drama and epic scope that made the last one such a surprisingly great film.
Robert Downey Jr. is actually even more perfect as Tony Stark in this one, with the same mix of narcissism and joviality that made him dead on for the role to begin with, but improves on the last performance with a role that delves a little deeper into the demons deep inside Stark that made the comic book character perpetually compelling.
The rest of the cast bring the typical Marvel references to secondary characters that are mostly enjoyed by nerds who grew up with comic books and superhero cartoons: Black Widow, Nick Fury, War Machine, Whiplash, Jarvis, Justin Hammer and even a very brief (and not-so-subtle) reference to the son of Odin.
Tony Stark has a wonderful dilemma of which super-hot redhead he wants to be enamored with in Gwyneth Paltrow's Pepper Potts and Scarlet Johansson's Natasha Romanoff/Natalie Rushman/Natalia Romanova.
The replacement of Terrence Howard still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, but Don Cheadle is a great actor so he does a fine job with James Rhodes, though I still argue that Howard's portrayal was smoother and cooler, even if Cheadle's Rhodey gets to actually wear the suit.
Mickey Rourke's Whiplash is seriously menacing, even if he's a bit washed out by being one of the enemies instead of the only enemy that Iron Man faces.
Like many superhero movies, they try to put a little too much story in not enough space, so elements that could be better get a bit marginalized, like Rourke's evil genius which could have been spotlighted a bit better.
This film is clearly going to be not just one of the best action movies of the summer film season, but it lays a lot of groundwork for the Avengers movie that is scheduled for release in 2012.
In spite of trying hard to include a bit too much awesomeness, Favreau and crew manage to present us nerds with the right mix of story and action to make his second Marvel foray just as good as his first, which really took audiences by surprise that "Gutter" had that much genius in him. As much fun as it is to watch Favreau act, I really hope he keeps directing if we're going to get quality like these, and Made, out of him rather than Zathura.
Now I'm looking forward to Cowboys and Aliens in 2011.
Iron Man 2 gets an A-
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Happy Birthday Ron Perlman

2010-04-13T10:50:00.000-07:00

One of the best character actors of our time, I've been a huge fan since I saw The City of Lost Children when I was in high school.
Even though I don't speak a word of French, that movie was one of my all time favorites then and still ranks high on my list.
Then he was the brilliant Norman in Last Supper, which also blew my mind as a young movie lover.
And who could forget him as Johner in Alien:Resurrection. (Yes, the least awesome of the Alien series, but still awesome none the less)
The past few years he's gained more notoriety as Hellboy and in a show called Sons of Anarchy.
Also doing a TON of voice work in cartoons and video games, including the Fallout series.

Happy 60th Mr. Perlman.

Sherlock Holmes

2010-04-13T10:16:00.000-07:00

I know it's mostly new movies here on this blog, but I just got to see the Sherlock Holmes movie on demand and it was good.
By no means is it great or true to the source material, but it was an enjoyable action movie.
That's all I really wanted out of it, so getting enjoyable action, I felt like it gave me all that it could have.
Great style, and a passable story made it worth the time spent watching it.
Both Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. were entertaining with the borderline-romantic relationship they had between Watson and Holmes.
Rachel McAdams was cute, but the character lacked much depth, so that was a bit disappointing.
It was nice to see Guy Ritchie take on the challenge of doing a period piece. It was really just the same tried and true Ritchie action sequences set against a more stylized backdrop, but it worked well enough.
Sherlock Holmes gets a B-

Clash of the Titans

2010-04-01T18:53:00.000-07:00

Remaking old movies is pretty much all Hollywood wants to do anymore.
Usually it is stuff that should just be left alone and was fine as it was.
Anymore, if you make something from an original script, you get lots of Oscar attention for it, no matter what.
Clash of the Titans was not on that list of classics that were fine as they stood. A campy, cult classic from my early childhood that had a lot of strengths and even more weaknesses, sure. But it didn't stand terribly tall as it was.
Nearly 30 years later, the special effects are up to where the story they were trying to tell in 1981 really needed them to be.
The new one is a worthy update.
It tells the same story of Perseus battling Medusa and the Kraken that the original told, but with better special effects and lesser acting.
Louis Leterrier helms the new one and treats it with reverence that comes from having been a fan of the original when he was young. The French director has a short but impressive directing resume that consists of three other fun action flicks, two of which were written by the great Luc Besson. The other was the better of the two recent Hulk movies.
Avatar's Sam Worthington is the star of this 3-D spectacle as well. He rocks the same haircut in this one, but doesn't have any blue counterpart this time around.
As Perseus, he has to figure out a way to save Argos from Hades and his mighty Kraken.
The story is classic.
The effects are well done.
The action is constant.
There isn't a whole lot I didn't like about this movie.
Except the woman who plays the legendary beauty Andromeda is actually less attractive than the actress portraying Io, the creepy lady who stalks Perseus his whole life and basically plays Watson and explains the parts that Perseus doesn't have time to figure out himself.
Much like the original, there are few people who will call this great cinema, but most people who watch it will have a good time doing so.
2010's Clash of the Titans gets a B+

The Hurt Locker takes the bigs!!

2010-03-09T13:22:00.000-08:00

This year's Oscar ceremony was proof that sometimes content matters more than marketability in Hollywood.
Sometimes.
Ms. Bigelow walked off with the directing trophy for The Hurt Locker, which truly was one of the best films to come out in 2009 and for several years prior as well.
I loved her remarks when asked about how it felt to be the first woman to win that award, she basically said that she longs for the day when saying the first woman to do something will no longer be necessary.
Then they get the best picture as well, it couldn't have been better that night unless Star Trek had won for best special effects. But the movie biz couldn't live without kissing James Cameron's ass for something or he'll pack up his toys and go home with his billion dollar box office draws and all.

Legion

2010-01-22T16:27:00.000-08:00

There are certainly a lot of bad movies about angel mythology out there.
Some of them are pretty enjoyable, like The Prophecy and Dogma, and there are tons of crappy ones too, like John Travolta's Michael and It's A Wonderful Life.
Paul Bettany plays a much better archangel than Travolta did, but Legion certainly falls in the lesser category of films.
Despite a storyline that is actually somewhat intriguing, decent acting from the lead angel by Bettany and the promise of much angel-fighting, Legion drowns in poor dialogue and sappy, melodramatic performances from most of the human cast.
The plot has promise, at least for anyone with a passing interest in angel mythos and old-timey biblical vengeance.
God has grown tired of the many ways in which mankind has squandered the many gifts it was given. There is a child in the gestation process that has a possibility to bring light and goodness back to the humans. God says eff it and sends an archangel to Earth to kill the unborn child and his mother.
Michael decides that instead, he will show God the goodness that humanity has save the child from an untimely demise and allow him to grow up and lead us all into the light.
So all of the armies of heaven are now trying to end humanity, which is a fun concept.
So many reasons why this movie could have been enjoyable:
-Angels possessing weak humans to do the dirty work.
-Gabriel coming down from heaven to pick up where Michael's disobedience left off.
-Lots of guns.
-Lots of ammo.
-Lots of explosions.
One main reason that a deity should want to destroy us all:
-The script.
We have two hours of sappy monologues delivered by cliched characters. We have lots of down time for those cliches to blather on and say nothing of importance.
We have very little of the angels fighting each other. The only good part of the whole movie is the promise of biblical vengeance and winged combatants trying to destroy each other. And that is reduced to a few short minutes of screen time that we are forced to wait for while we watch a painful performances of characters that you can't care about if you try.
Legion gets a D if I'm approaching it logically, but an F if I add in my extreme disappointment in the lack of angel fights.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Brothers

2009-12-09T17:22:00.000-08:00

Jim Sheridan made his directorial debut a long time ago with My Left Foot and helped get Daniel Day Lewis on his road to being one of the most well-respected actors of all time (Lewis' first Oscar performance).
He has made a career of intense story telling and serious topics garnering some of his actors' best performances.
His latest offering, Brothers, (based on a Danish film called Brodre) hits another tricky topic, war in Afghanistan and the effects on the families of the soldiers.
Again, Sheridan coaches out some great performances from his actors and makes it look easy.
The best performance in this film is from Jake Gyllenhaal as younger, troubled brother Tommy Cahill. His older brother, Tobey Maguire's Sam Cahill, is a captain in the USMC and makes another trip to Afghanistan.
Tommy's wife, Grace, is played by the lovely and talented Natalie Portman. It's important to note how pretty she is because it is a fact repeated by several of the characters throughout the movie.
Some of the dialogue is clunky and cliched, parts of Maguire's performance are overacted (he overdoes the crazy eyes a few times), and there is a line delivered by the oldest daughter that is just preposterous, but overall the movie is a satisfying character study that provides an interesting look at the effects of war on the soldier and on the family they leave behind to cope with their absence.
The movie is thoroughly entertaining the whole way through, but has some major holes in spots but manages to get past that and deliver one of the better movies of 2009. Not that 2009 has brought too much competition, but it is actually the second best Iraq/Afghanistan war movie to see wide release this year, following The Hurt Locker which might be the best movie so far about the current war.
Brothers could have used a little more of the experiences Sam has in Afghanistan, and a little refining of the dialogue, but the whole film is solid and thought-provoking, so it gets a B+.
--John Berry, online editor--

2012

2009-12-01T18:07:00.000-08:00

Oh, Roland Emmerich, what do you have against the White House?
Emmerich loves destroying stuff in bizarre end-of-the-world scenarios. From Moon 44, Godzilla, Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow and now 2012. Emmerich is now the modern day king of the disaster epic. This new piece or the apocalyptic puzzle portrays the ancient Mayan prediction of planetary alignment bringing about the catastrophic disasters across the globe. This prediction never really existed, though, so all of this fear of the year 2012 is going to be oddly reminiscent of the y2k debacle a few years back. But the idea is that the solar wind is creating different charged particles because of the alignment that are heating up the Earth's core, causing free-floating plates on the surface.
The nonsensical premise aside, Emmerich and company deliver exactly what his fans want: over-the-top special effects not bogged down by complicated story or character exposition.
With a large ensemble of characters that never get a chance to fully develop and a convoluted connections between random disaster victims there is very little reason to care about anything in the entire movie. Which is fine, since half of them are dead by the end.
One of the leads is John Cusack as Jackson Curtis (not 50-Cent, that's Curtis Jackson) is bland and his family is annoying. The president of the USA is played by whispering Danny Glover and no one is sure why he can't talk. His daughter is Thandie Newton who is a doctor of picking art to save. Oliver Platt is the White House chief of staff who is kind of a prick. The only interesting character is the geologist who discovers that the end is coming played by Chiwetel Ejiofor, who seems to be constantly great in supporting roles, so it's nice to see him with a larger part, even if it's in a mediocre movie.
The main flaws in 2012 are the dialogue and the back story.
Nobody seems to get that disaster films don't need to be populated by the employees of Hallmark. There are no fans coming to see a touching goodbye between a father and son, or a valiant effort by the President to whisper a touching speech to the American public, or see a budding romance in the midst of the tragedy. People see movies like this to watch stuff get absolutely wrecked.
Emmerich should stick to what he does well. Special effects and epic destruction are the only draw for a movie like this. Stop pretending that you know how to make an emotional side of the end of the world.
If you're looking to see crap go boom, see 2012, but I'm giving it a C- overall.
--John Berry, online editor--

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

2009-11-19T11:47:00.000-08:00

Not being a fan of the Twilight books, New Moon was not a terribly exciting film for me to watch. Of course, I'm also not a 14-year-old girl, so I have yet to even pick up one of the Stephenie Meyer penned junior romance novels.
There are a lot of very slow points in the movie and an excessive amount of poorly written dialogue. All three lead actors were clearly chosen for their aesthetic appeal, and not for their acting abilities. Pretty vampire-boy Edward, broodingly pretty werewolf-boy Jacob and the lead actress Bella, whose name means pretty.
The special effects are patchy throughout the movie, with some scenes done well and other scenes feature the wolves. Not more than a handful of shots of the (were)wolves looked like the animation was from this decade.
Hearing cringe-worthy lines pepper the entire story made it almost unbearable at points. Robert Pattinson's Edward delivering lines like, "You're my only reason to stay... alive. If that's what I am," with all of the passion of cold white toast with store-brand margarine makes me wonder how these movies are even making money. But then I realize how unsophisticated teenage audiences are, and it starts to make sense.
With that in mind, the whole movie is not without merit.
The story, when it is actually moving, is enjoyable enough for an escape from reality. Action scenes are well done for the most part, with the exception of the poorly animated wolves. Even some of those fights are fast moving enough to ignore that problem.
My friends who did read the book tell me this movie adaptation sticks closer to the source material than the first Twilight film did, so that is bound to please the fans in their Team Edward or Team Jacob t-shirts. I was looking for my Team Victoria shirt, but probably only because Victoria is the villainous vampire that wants to kill Bella.
Or possibly because she is played by Rachelle Lefevre, the only actress in the movie old enough for me to find attractive without having to register with the county.
I'm going to give New Moon a C- for anyone over 17, but it'll probably be adored by all of the teenage fans.
--John Berry, Online Editor

Pirate Radio

2009-11-16T14:38:00.000-08:00

Though it's being eclipsed by the latest disaster flick, there is a great new movie that just hit the theaters this weekend.
Lacking the explosions and carnage might create less furor at the box office, Pirate Radio is bound to have much more value to viewers and will outlive the end of John Cusack's world.
Once upon a time when rock and roll was young and Britain was even more stuffy and oppressive than it is now, sex, drugs and rock were quarantined off shore as pirate stations who defied the government's restriction of the Stones, Beatles, Dead, etc., tunes and gave the kids what they want.
With a goofy premise, abstractly based on real stations that existed in the 60s, it was bound to be a fun movie, if done right.
Early promos had it called "The Boat That Rocked" which led me to believe they were not doing it right.
The story centers on a young kid named Carl (Tom Sturridge) who goes to live amongst the DJs and crazy folk of Radio Rock, anchored in the North Sea.
He arrives and finds an eccentric group of rock-and-rollers who border on cliche, but manage to stop short of going over-the-top.
The ensemble cast includes the ever-impressive Philip Seymour Hoffman and a veritable who's who of the U.K. actors who you know even if you can't always remember their names.
Writer-director Richard Curtis led the production with the same surprising grace that weaved the stories in his previous directorial effort, Love Actually.
One of the best parts of the whole film is the soundtrack, which takes on a larger role than average, which is apt since it is a film about a radio station.
Lots of classic rock binds together the story of the struggling radio station, the government suits trying to shut them down, and the general populace loving the music and the changing times in the world.

Pirate Radio gets an A-

Capitalism: A Love Story

2009-10-27T18:59:00.000-07:00

Michael Moore's latest offering is an indictment of the death of the American middle class thanks to an increasingly greedy upper class.
He continues to mostly preach to the choir, not entirely by fault of his own. His fans are fervent. His critics even more so.
Sadly, the points of this movie that are not speaking with a liberal bias are read as that by anyone who doesn't actually see the world from Moore's point of view.
Many of the people who trash Moore's politics haven't actually watched his movies, and they are certainly missing out.
Capitalism: A Love Story is following a long tradition of well made documentary films from a champion of the working class. Moore's own liberal slant comes through often in this film, but also questions the democrats who are now at the reins. The politics are secondary in this film though. The heart of his story is told showing the growing disparity between the rich and the poor.
His message is less about the right or the left causing or solving the problems and more about the problem itself. He even points out that politicians did less to cause the problem than they did to ignore the problem and just allow it to happen with the deregulation and looking the other way while the American public was robbed blind.
Drawing a direct line from the golden days of the 40s and 50s to the recession we see now, the main difference shown by Moore is a disastrous imbalance of power. The system worked with the principles of capitalism walking hand-in-hand with the principles of democracy. Once unfettered greed was allowed to run rampant on our financial systems, democracy took a back seat to the politics of the almighty dollar.
He goes as far as arguing that capitalism is a sin that is synonymous with that same unfettered greed. This point seems to be what is resonating with all of the usual Moore detractors.
Nowhere in the movie does Moore actually call for a socialist take over in America, but this is exactly what the anti-Moore folks seem to think he is saying.
He touts the ideals of democracy and illustrates how the people have no power in a country where the banks and CEOs have more influence in the government than the voters do.
Moore makes a lot of valid points and touches on some rather emotional territory to balance the goofy antics like putting up crime scene tape around the stock exchange and some humorous archival footage.
The overall movie is a good balance of humor and gloom. Moore clearly has a point to make, but that is typical for him and for most documentary filmmakers.
Capitalism: A Love Story gets a B+.

Where The Wild Things Are

2009-10-15T18:01:00.000-07:00

How do you make a children's book of a few hundred words and a couple dozen drawings into a feature length movie?
You add your own wild interpretation to the source material and turn a children's book into a movie no one should take their child to.
In spite of robbing the youth of another potential kids' classic, Spike Jonze has created a visually compelling film that is clearly aimed at the grown kids who read the book when they were young, and not at kids who have recently enjoyed the book.
Where The Wild Things Are is probably the best looking film of the year. Art direction, special effects, cinematography, costumes and every other visual aspect of the movie are nearly perfect. Jonze and company have created a look to the film that somehow both captures the aesthetic appeal of the book and expands it to a much larger and darker adventure.
This interpretation is much more grown-up and desolate than I was expecting going in to the theater, but that is apparently what Jonze was aiming for. He hit his mark.
Following Max (Max Records) through his family troubles and his inability to fit in, the story adds more background to why Max needs to create this world of his imagination. Max's world seems to become filled with joy as he enters and becomes the king of the land, but soon crumbles around him as the menagerie of dysfunction unfolds before him and the friends he has made are revealed to be neurotic and insecure, just like the people in Max's real world and Max himself.
The beauty on the screen can still not make up for the lack of interesting story. There are a lot of slow points and an inconsistent pace to the movie overall. There is little in the story that is even near as compelling as the visuals on the screen.
In spite of his age, Records delivers on the lead performance like a seasoned actor and shows the complexity of childhood through the surreal lens of a Spike Jonze film.
The supporting cast, mostly voice work, all complement this with solid ensemble performances that you would expect from names like James Gandolfini, Forrest Whitaker, Chris Cooper and Lauren Ambrose. The real stand out supporting role is Katherine Keener as Max's real-world mother. She balances a compassion for Max's eccentricities and quirks with a clear inability to truly know how to deal with the same.
Where The Wild Things Are is enjoyable to watch, even while it holds more melancholy than anyone could imagine in the original book, just getting lost in the dreams of a child that still lives in the back of Jonze's mind is well worth the price of admission.
I'm giving it a B+.

Zombieland!

2009-10-12T15:10:00.000-07:00

There are a certain type of movie that you don't expect a lot from except that you will have a good time.
Zombieland is certainly that type of movie, and it delivers just that.
From the opening credits, there are crazy images of zombie attacks and victims frightened and running. These are so over-the-top and outlandish that they work from the first one because of how completely goofy it is.
With a clear intent to spoof the horror genre, the film honestly fits the amusement park imagery used in most of the publicity materials. Especially the finale in an amusement park where the quartet of heroes try to lay waste to scores of the undead.
The story follows four unlikely survivors of some type of disease that turns them to the zombies you've seen in so many horror movies. I actually liked that they didn't spend much time trying to explain what caused the zombies because that takes so much time in other zombie movies.
There is a familiar feel to the more serious parts of this movie (yes they are there, even if they are few) if you've ever read The Walking Dead comic books. That is about as big a compliment that could be given to any zombie movie since that series is one of the best zombie tales ever woven.
The lead characters are known to each other only by the cities they each claim to be heading for and are all played well by an oddly eclectic group of Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg, Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin.
Let's be honest here, who doesn't love the idea of the little girl from Little Miss Sunshine demolishing undead monsters? It was lots of fun.
All of the lead actors made the film though because of the chemistry that developed through the movie. Stone and Breslin are sisters trying to make their way to a location rumored to be untouched by the infestation. They are using any type of chicanery that will work in order to get there.
Eisenberg and Harrelson are an unlikely pair of neurotic mess and crazy tough guy, respectively, that would make it in to any buddy-cop movie that you watched in the 80s.
These two duos meet up along the way and the good times roll. Eventually.
The story is pretty predictable, but that's what should be expected from a zombie comedy. It delivers on the brutality and clearly doesn't take itself to seriously, so it is a fun time for the entire duration.
I'll give Zombieland a B+.

Whip It

2009-10-02T15:45:00.000-07:00

Drew Barrymore's directorial debut is good.
I can honestly tell you that I didn't expect to be saying that at all before I saw Whip It.
A coming-of-age tale within a movie about an extreme sport set in Podunk, Texas, directed by an actor who hasn't ever directed before.
It doesn't seem like a winning proposition, but it makes it through with a defiant grace befitting its subject, women's roller derby.
Revolving around Ellen Page as a 17-year-old kid from a tiny town outside of Austin, this story takes a look at a roller derby league in Austin and does a nice job of explaining the sport and showing some of the allure it holds.
While it has the familiar trappings of a first-time director, Barrymore is clearly an adept storyteller. She hits some of the typical melodramatic tones that you would associate with a newcomer, but overall avoids letting the whole movie fall to cliche.
That seems to be hard for many directors to do with sports-themed movies in general, so it is impressive to see Whip It teeter on the brink and come back successfully.
Bliss Cavander (Ellen Page) is a high school student who becomes enamored with the roller derby vixens that she meets and decides to get involved when one of the women suggests that she come to try-outs.
Not surprisingly to the audience, but much to Bliss's own shock, she's pretty good at it. Fast and agile, but inexperienced, she earns herself a spot on the worst team in the league.
She also meets a cute boy who sings in a band at one of the derby after-parties.
There is the obvious spark between them and it barrels down that road toward cliche.
While there is a visually pleasant love scene underwater (which is one of the most well shot sequences in the film), the love story part of the movie makes Bliss seem weak and childish while the rest of the fiery independence and the roller derby make her seem tough and spunky, and a complete person.
Without divulging too much of the plot, I was happy to see Bliss come out strong in the end.
There is a lot of good acting throughout, and some mediocre acting mixed in, but Page and SNL's Kristen Wiig (yeah, I was shocked that she was a good actress, too) are definitely the best performances. Alia Shawkat and Daniel Stern needed some more screen time because both of them did well, but their characters seemed kind of flat.
I hope to see more from Barrymore as a director because she gave an impressive first effort that was enjoyable from beginning to end.
Whip It gets a B+

The Informant!

2009-10-01T17:02:00.000-07:00

Steven Soderbergh's latest is a true-story based film starring Matt Damon as a corporate big-shot who teams with the FBI to expose corruption in an agricultural giant, ADM.
It's an enjoyable ride as Mark Whitacre (Damon) starts to "accidentally" spill the secrets of some shady activity within the food production industry to FBI agents.
The story is set in the early 90s but looks like the 70s for some reason. Initially, I just thought that was because the Midwest is kind of behind the times, but it seems to be just a strange stylistic choice by Soderbergh.
Damon's performance is solid as a scientist who seems to lack common sense and gets in over his head with the FBI when they come to his work to investigate an extortion attempt that Whitacre reported to his bosses. I don't want to say too much more about the plot, so as not to spoil it for anyone.
Joel McHale's intense portrayal as 7 minutes of an FBI agent make it worth the admission price. Okay, maybe that's just my man-crush providing a bias.
The fatal flaw in The Informant! is that there is no real value in the tale that is told.
It is a tale told well with good actors and moderately pleasing visuals, but the story of Mark Whitacre isn't that interesting.
There is little drama inherent in white-collar criminals pushing up the cost of corn syrup by manipulating the market from behind the scenes. Argi-business is just not that interesting.
Many scenes of Whitacre's inept spying provide a bit of amusement and the story is good enough to hold the audience's interest for nearly two hours. But what is lacking is a reason to really give a crap about any of it.
The Informant! gets a C+.

The Invention of Lying

2009-10-01T14:40:00.000-07:00

Ricky Gervais heads up an all-star cameo-fest in The Invention of Lying.
He co-wrote and co-directed this one with Matthew Robinson and is the lead actor in a tale about a parallel world where no one has ever told a lie. Not even an exaggeration of the truth.
Gervais' Mark Bellison decides to just make something up that isn't true.
The concept is golden and offers many moments that are quite funny. The unfortunate part is that the idea of brutal honestly isn't as funny in this as it could be. They make it kind of cartoony and childish at points, so that it makes less raw humor and more just mild amusement. What could be hilarious ends up getting a few chuckles scattered around.
As with much or Gervais' work, there are points where it drags to an almost intolerable pace and picks back up again. This is annoying, but doesn't kill the whole movie.
Some of the jokes get beaten over and over again, which is also annoying, but again doesn't kill the movie. We get it, Gervais and Robinson think religion is a lie, so they make that the butt of all of the jokes for the second half of the movie. We get it, the girl thinks Mark is fat and ugly.
What kills the movie is that they take a good, original concept and stretch it out over cliched storyline where a boy likes a girl that is too good for him and ends up winning her over in the end. The ugly duckling story all over again, don't judge a book blahblahblah...
It feels like the audience gets robbed of what could have been a much funnier movie if it didn't take it self so seriously.
The curse of Ricky Gervais.
I'm giving The Invention of Lying a C.

Best bad movies

2009-09-15T09:35:00.000-07:00

In memory of Patrick Swayze and his role in the greatest bad movie of all time, I've got to talk about the greatest terrible movies of all time. This is the opposite of the well made movies that are just no fun to watch, thanks Benjamin Button, but you're terrible in spite of your high production values.

Coming in at number 5:

Bruce Willis could populate this list all by himself, what with all of the awful action movies and utter cheese on his resume, but his biggest ratio of poor quality to enjoyability has to be Hudson Hawk. Lame story, bad acting, outlandish premise, but somehow a really good time. Danny Aiello plays his sidekick in a buddy-criminal comedy that gets a mastermind burglar back into the game after he serves time in prison at the behest of the Vatican. Yeah.

4:

Face/Off is John Travolta's contribution to this world of fun movies that are just terrible. Sure, he's got some great movies like Pulp Fiction and Get Shorty, balanced with a lot of terrible movies like Look Who's Talking and Battlefield Earth. But Travolta and company manage that perfect balance of good and bad with a story of cops and robbers trading rolls through surgery.

3:

Star-studded often spells bad news since the budget goes to salaries and blowing stuff up and rarely to good writers. S.W.A.T. manages to take a bad script and turn it into the second most-enjoyable Colin Farrell movie. A crimelord offers a huge reward for anyone who can spring him from prison. A classic older cop (Samuel Jackson) has organized a SWAT team made up of officers who don't fit in to the normal cop mold and they are charged with guarding this particular inmate. You can see how this would be utter cheese, but is somehow a decent ride in spite of the terrible idea and some mediocre acting.

2:

Mr. Jackson is actually in many movies that are enjoyably bad, and in two of my favorite awful films. His other appearance on this list is a little shoot-em-up with Vin Diesel called xXx. It's the story of an extreme athlete who gets recruited by the government for a covert espionage mission in Eastern Europe. How could this possibly be any good? They manage to make the pacing work and the elaborately strange story a lot of fun.

1: The greatest bad movie ever has to be:

Patrick Swayze and Keanu Reeves team up with some inspired insanity from Gary Busey for Point Break. Maybe it is partly due to the fact that I was 14 when it came out, but I love watching this FBI caper of an undercover agent trying to infiltrate a surfer community to find bank robbers... and ends up finding himself along the way.
That has got to be one of the cheesiest premises that anyone could ever conceive, yet it works without hesitation from beginning to end. Fast paced, action packed and lacking any discernible reason to have ever been made, Point Break is one of the most enjoyable movies ever. Even with the surreal skydive from somewhere in outer space judging by the amount of time in freefall, it is great fun.

I know there are a lot of enjoyable bad movies out there, so hit the comments with your own favorites.

District 9

2009-08-18T17:26:00.000-07:00

There is a surprise as we near the end of a summer movie season filled with disappointing crap.
A whole lot of Hollywood outsiders team up with producer with clout to make a movie that is clearly the best action movie of the summer action season.
District 9 is directed by Neil Blomkamp, a special effects artist and filmmaker from South Africa who managed to get Peter Jackson involved in the process as a producer. Possibly because of Jackson's weighty name on board, but hopefully because the audiences spoke out for well made movies, they managed to unseat GI Joe on it's second weekend as the top box office spot.
Unknown actors, documentary style shooting and low budget looking sets (how much could it have cost to build shacks in Johannesburg?) are offset by amazing special effects and high-caliber story telling.
Blomkamp builds a world that is simultaneously surreal and believable. Surely part of that is his background in special effects and 3D animation. His previous, much less known endeavors seem to have similar traits of seamless integration of special effects on top of the live actors and scenes.
The story is a straightforward commentary on race relations and apartheid in Blomkamp's home country.
Even though the metaphor is so obvious, it still works extremely well. That is a strong testament to the quality of the script, acting and especially the directing.
There is already a lot of talk surrounding the idea of a sequel, which Blomkamp seems to be in favor of, so audiences will probably be seeing more of him, if this story is continued or not, the solid numbers in the box office mean Blomkamp has found his place in the Hollywood scene.
District 9 gets an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

G. I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

2009-08-05T23:48:00.000-07:00

It's bad when a movie isn't being screened for critics prior to the public seeing it.
There has never been a case where it was just that good that they didn't want the movie ruined by critics spoiling the plot.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is bad.
Not Transformers 2 bad, but still pretty bad.
The saving grace of G. I. Joe is that the story is actually fun and mildly engaging. Interesting for an action movie based on a cartoon from the 80's and a toy line that's even older.
The major flaws center around horrendous acting and even worse dialogue. Poor casting did not help matter much either.
Channing Tatum is supposed to be Duke, a super-soldier with a brilliant mind and the ability to lead. Instead, Duke seems like a punch drunk buffoon who at times seems like he's lucky to form full sentences without serious coaching. But we're supposed to believe he can operate sophisticated machinery and weapons as soon as he picks them up with no training?
There really isn't enough to be said about how Marlon Wayans single-handedly murdered my childhood with how bad his portrayal of Ripcord was. Maybe it was the script, maybe it was the delivery, maybe it was a perfect storm of lack of talent and hatred of quality filmmaking that rolled into Wayans' performance, but whatever the case, damn was he bad.
The only passable performances really came from Destro, played by Christopher Eccleston, and the underutilized Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje as Heavy Duty.
Even the high-end special effects were inconsistent enough to be laughable in some scenes. One moment, a high tech armor suit seems plausible, the next minute it's running through the streets of Paris so poorly integrated into the footage that it looked like it was a scene from Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Possibly the worst crime in this debacle was the foisting of not one, but two half-assed love stories upon an audience that clearly needs none of that nonsense. The biggest part of this audience is men 35 and under who played with the toys as kids and watched the cartoons religiously as a boy (myself included). This is not an audience looking for depth and passion. This is an audience looking for a fun story with good action and some half decent acting. Lots of stuff blowing up and great special effects would be good too. There is not a need to uncomfortably force romance into every movie released in the world. Some movies can work without any hokey sentimentality jammed in for no clear purpose other than to show that women have no place in cinema unless they are victims, mothers, love interests or a bizarre combination of any or all of these. Why does the fact that an attractive, intelligent female character is on the screen mean that one of the male characters must possess her and make her his at some point in the movie? This movie would have worked just fine if Scarlet was just a strong soldier, but I guess the viewing public would be uncomfortable thinking that a woman could be happy on her own.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra gets a D+.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

2009-07-14T13:07:00.000-07:00

The latest installment of the Harry Potter series of movies brings one of the fan favorite books to life.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is the sixth installment with one more book that is currently being filmed to be released as two movies in 2010 and 2011.
Half-Blood Prince is directed by David Yates who also directed part five and is at the helm for the remaining two films as well.
The book version is epic in scope and would have to be split into two movies as well to have any chance of encompassing all of the content, which is why they decided to split the final book in two (also the obvious money to be made that way). Being only one film, it comes with the inherent shortfalls of missing critical points from the book.
For a fan of the films who hasn't read the books, there is a good chance they will enjoy this film without the nitpicking of details while pushing up your glasses and throwing your Hufflepuff scarf on the ground in disgust. We all know there should have been more of Greyback and Lupin, but tough cuts had to be made.
Visually, the whole movie is stylish and beautiful. They clearly spent a lot of time and money in post production creating a look to tie the whole film together. The special effects were a focal centerpiece in this one, just like the previous films.
The story is enjoyable and they did manage to keep the majority of the critical plot points in tact from the book.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince feels like it will have the same enjoyment of multiple viewings as the first five had, so that would seem like they accomplished what they set out to do in making a film that the fans will enjoy and buy tickets for.
Art direction is the strongest point in this film, but it is also the most solid overall film in the series. This bodes well with the grand finale coming in two parts in the near future.
I'm giving Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince an A-.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

2009-07-09T20:59:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I should have listened to all of the reviewers who said that Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was bad. Especially this one from Pajiba.com.
I've always been the type of person that needs to learn lessons the hard way.
So who thought you could make a movie less compelling and less interesting than the 2007 Transformers movie? It would seem that Michael Bay heard everyone complain about the last one and listened to the complaints that there was too much Shia Lebeouf and that there wasn't enough of the robot aliens. He gave us more robots, but then still gave us too much Shia.
He still thinks we'd believe that a woman that looks like Megan Fox would even talk to a dorky kid called Sam Witwicky.
He also apparently thinks that if we see enough of Megan Fox's barely covered ass that we'll ignore the fact that the story is sloppy at it's best moments and barely ties together the explosions and special effects.
Does Bay think that the American public is stupid? He might be right since the movie has made nearly $300 million and counting.
Maybe Michael Bay is the reason the movie-going public has been ruined by bad movies. They expect less story and more spectacle with every big budget action movie and the progression of Bay's movies have followed that exact standard. Bad Boys and The Rock were a balance of spectacle and story and there has been less discernible plot in each of his movies since then.
Never have I seen a movie with so much action that left me so bored.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen gets a D.

Away We Go

2009-06-29T15:34:00.000-07:00

Hooray for the return of the good Sam Mendes.
His last two efforts were lackluster at best (yeah, I disliked Revolutionary Road and Jarhead what? ), before that were two masterpieces of modern cinema.
So with Away We Go, hopefully this means Mendes is back to form.
This little love story follows an odd, quirky couple (John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph) who have very little in the world and find that they are pregnant and about to have even less.
They search for a new place to live and a fresh start to life with the prospect of raising a child closing in on the horizon.
Rudolph's Verona and Krasinski's Burt are likeable and interesting, and it's interesting to see Rudolph try to do some serious acting and pull it off surprisingly well since her SNL years were unfunny and her other movie work has been minor roles with no real substance.
At times hilarious and at other times deeply sad and moving, the stars and supporting cast (especially a brief part by Chris Messina and Melanie Lynskey as the friends in Canada) create one of the best romantic comedies that has been produced in recent years.
Away We Go feels like an indie production, even with the big names attached and the fact that it really fits the modern formula for dramedy perfectly.
The real faults in Away We Go are when the characters blur the line between acting and caricature. Maggie Gyllenhaal's new-age hippie mom and Jim Gaffigan's drunken dope hover right around that line and feel a little contrived at times.
Overall though, the movie is fun to watch and well acted, even through some weak spots, and is well worth the time and ticket price.
Away We Go gets a B+.

Year One

2009-06-23T13:13:00.000-07:00

Why do they keep letting Jack Black star in movies?
Doesn't he have enough money yet? Can't he just go away?
Year One looked like it had potential to have some funny parts, there were even a few chuckles in the preview.
Somehow, the handful of funny parts in the preview were not funny in context of the overall film.
Even with Michael Cera playing the same character he's usually funny as (awkward kid with no way with women, you're all familiar) can't seem to save this debacle.
A seemingly endless parade of cameos from the likes of director Harold Ramis himself, Vinnie Jones, David Cross, Paul Rudd, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Hank Azaria and many others can't even make this funny.
Tired jokes and Jack Black doing the same unfunny physical humor that he's done a thousand times just drags the whole movie down to a non-stop bore.
Year One gets an F.

Coming attractions...

2009-06-11T08:27:00.000-07:00

Food Inc.: This is being heralded as the next documentary to hit the scale of Michael Moore as far as mass appeal and marketability.
http://www.foodincmovie.com/

Moon: Sci-fi from David Bowie's son an Sam Rockwell.
http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi843186969/

Tetro: Francis Ford Coppola is back with a new original screenplay. First since The Conversation (one of my all time favorites).
http://www.tetro.com/

Dead Snow: nazi zombies? Cheesy horror movie that doesn't seem to take it self seriously? Decent special effects? Beautiful scenery?
Yes, please.
http://www.deadsnow.com/

Year One: Ah, stupid comedy. Cameos by David Cross and Paul Rudd had me laughing hard in the previews.
http://www.yearone-movie.com/

--jb--

The Hangover

2009-06-09T13:33:00.000-07:00

Not a bad idea teaming up Ed Helms, Zack Galafianakis and Bradley Cooper for an update to the bachelor party genre of comedy.
They lose the groom during the festivities and wake up in a complete state of disarray and confusion.
The story is passable and at some times even interesting, but the real strength of The Hangover is the odd humor of Galafianakis and Helms together playing off of the mostly straight-man role that Cooper is in.
Cooper delivers some funny stuff too, but Galafianakis and Helms are down right ludicrous. The characters are as mismatched as any Hollywood comedy would do these days, so it's pretty typical humor in many ways, but it works to deliver laughs.
As far as originality goes, it has a lot of the same type of story and humor as many of the million drunken exploit movies out there. This is nothing groundbreaking in any way.
The discomfort caused by Galafianakis' awkwardness is worth watching though. From his bare backside near the beginning to his NC-17 rated exploits during the end credits, and all of his insanity while clothed as well, he is probably the funniest part of the film.
The Hangover gets a B-.

Big weekend for Mr. Stiller

2009-05-26T13:43:00.000-07:00

The AP has reported that Terminator Salvation failed to beat out the latest installment of Night at the Museum.
Kind of a surprise since the first Night at the Museum barely broke 30 million in it's opening weekend. Ben Stiller and Jonah Hill have some amusing banter in the preview, but it looks like more of the same from the first one.
The long awaited Terminator sequel has failed to live up to the hype to many viewers, reviewers and now at the box office.
I'm wondering if that will have any effect on the now rumored T5 (whatever the title might end up) and if this less than hoped for opening weekend will make them rethink going with the same writers for T5 as they had on 3 and 4. We can only hope.

Terminator Salvation

2009-05-20T19:25:00.001-07:00

McG sure loves to blow stuff up.
That really could sum up the latest installment in the cultural phenomenon that is Terminator. But that makes for a pretty dull review, so I'll expand a bit.
The most important fact is that Terminator Salvation is way better than T3 was. The special effects are the best of the series. The action sequences in this were about equal with Terminator 2, which is probably my personal favorite.
Decent performances from everyone in the cast, especially Christian Bale, Anton Yelchin and the little silent girl, Star, played by Jadagrace Berry, an apparent newcomer to the Hollywood scene.
The dialogue and story are the weak points. An overabundance of foreshadowing and explanation makes it seem like the writers (who also penned T3) think their audience is stupid.
Really stupid.
Which we very well might be for buying into the idea that this kind of apocalyptic darkness is less than 9 years from now.
As far as characters go, John Connor (Bale) is passable, but not terribly well developed. The savior complex aside, it seems like he's not got a whole lot going on. There is ample opportunity to expand and see some more depth to him, with his pregnant wife (Bryce Dallas Howard in a performance that deserved more screen time) and his teenage dad (Yelchin) and his immediate affection for Star (although who could possibly not love an adorable little mute girl). McG and his writers seem more intent on blowing stuff up to bother with that kind of storytelling.
Terminator Salvation gets a C+.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Star Trek

2009-05-07T08:22:00.000-07:00

It is appropriate that since a reboot is the cure-all for most modern technology, that the new Star Trek reboot is a perfect remake of the classic series that set the bar for much of sci-fi to come after it.
J.J. Abrams directed a script by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (the writing team behind Fringe, both Transformers movies 2007 and 2009, The Island and tons more). The new cast keeps what was good about the original series and gives it a modern update with fantastic special effects and modern storytelling.
Abrams and crew re-imagined the Trek universe with some time travel and actual scientific theory about black holes. The modern Trek tv shows have been known to integrate science into the storylines and embrace the smarter viewers without alienating viewers who were not up to snuff with the heavier theories behind it.
The new movie throws in the same intelligence and has enough action and a fast pace to draw the wide audience as well.
Right away, this movie grabs its audience and slams them hard with some pretty brutal action and raw emotional events that set the stage for a pretty complex story.
Fans of the classic series are up in arms about the retelling of the origins of these characters because they see the Roddenberry original as sacred and don't want it messed with. They are speculating about the new story and coming just short of crying blasphemy.
These people are crazy.
This reboot serves as an homage to the classic but manages to improve on all of the parts that were limited by the times and technology of the 1960s. The modern cast breath new life to dated characters and concepts that were so groundbreaking in their day that their fans are more loyal and dedicated now than they were in the original series run in 1966. Hopefully once these fans actually see the new Star Trek, they will realize the reverence that Abrams and crew hold for the original and embrace the new gang as much as the old gang.
The new Star Trek gets an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Comic book nerds watch out

2009-05-06T18:55:00.000-07:00

Swirling about the interwebs right now are whispers mixed with substantiated rumors about what effect the success of X-Men Origins: Wolverine is having on the future of the X-Men franchise.
The big news for nerds everywhere is the Deadpool solo flick. The official announcement is up on Marvel.com (HERE ). A high profile actor like Ryan Reynolds taking a small part like that in the Wolverine back-story film is more than likely just setting the stage for something more (like Samuel Jackson's Nick Fury in the easter egg scene following Iron Man which is foreshadowing a Nick Fury solo film and an Avengers movie). The story is that the success of Wolverine's opening has put the Deadpool movie on a front burner for Marvel.

Thor's Marvel movie is also the subject of a lot of speculation right now. Marvel is allegedly going to announce some casting decisions in the near future, with Kenneth Branagh signed on at the helm. EmpireOnline.com has that story.

A full slate of Avengers related stuff is also in the works, as listed on Imdb.com: Nick Fury, Iron Man 2 (and 3), Ant Man, Thor, Captain America and of course the complete Avengers movie.

None of these will probably live up to Batman's last two outings, but if Iron Man is any indication, Marvel will be working hard and delivering some good stuff.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

2009-05-04T12:30:00.001-07:00

Comic book movies are always a sure fire way to get an audience. That audience is bound to simultaneously love and hate whatever is put on the screen. Thus is the curse of playing to the fanboys, a built in fan base that will be hypercritical of the movie, but still flock to see it.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine is going to face the wrath of these fans this weekend.
The origin story of Logan, aka James Howlett, aka, Wolverine, aka Weapon X, is as convoluted at this point as it could possibly be. There are different tellings from different comic series that contradict certain points from one to the other, but this new retelling has the heart of it pretty straight. There are some missing characters and details, but director Gavin Hood took better care with the story and the characters than many directors would have.
Hood was at the helm for weightier pieces like Rendition and Tsotsi so a comicbook movie is an odd departure, and a wise choice for Marvel to start the Origins series with a character-centric telling rather than the action-centric one like the other X-Men movies.
Writing the Wolverine script was Skip Woods, who has a shorter resume including Hitman and Swordfish, and David Benioff, who penned the novel 25th Hour and screenplays for Troy and The Kite Runner. So right away, one can see where this movie was not destined to be a shoot-em-up explosion fest that people expect from many comic related movies.
This is actually where the movie's strengths lie, in the unexpected crew behind the wheel. It was a slightly different approach to the superhero genre with more attention paid to the characters than to the the special effects and battle scenes.
But that brings us to the weak points of the movie. There were some scenes that were seriously lacking in the special effects department to the point where obvious flaws were evident.
Other weak spots were the tertiary characters and their glossing over. Several of them were touched on and very quickly explained, but not well enough to warrant attention. This might have been for time constraints, or budget issues, but if they wanted to include more obscure characters like Deadpool, the Blob, Bolt or Emma Frost, there needs to be more explanation, or less explanation. Instead, they tell just enough about these characters to interest the audience, but not fully explain them.
Characters that would be looked at as secondary characters, like Gambit, Wraith and Col. Stryker were handled very well. Gambit played a big enough role in this to leave the possibility open for a larger examination in future X-Men movies, including the rumored Gambit movie that has been whispered about for years.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine gets a B-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

The Soloist

2009-04-29T18:44:00.000-07:00

Jamie Foxx has come a long way from his days of playing Crazy George on Roc. The last several years for him have been nothing short of epic in scope.
The Soloist continues that stretch of top notch performances in prime roles (with the possible exception of Tubbs in Miami Vice from 2006, but everyone needs a big shallow paycheck once in a while) that have run the full gamut from hard-nosed staff sergeant to Motown legend.
Foxx is a musical genius named Nathaniel Anthony Ayers who has had "a few setbacks" and is living on the streets of L.A.
He is stumbled upon by Steve Lopez, staff writer for the Los Angeles Times. Lopez is played by Robert Downey Jr., who is on a similar hot streak to Foxx's, but with less serious, but equally outstanding performances.
There is a dynamic chemistry between Foxx and Downey that fuels the whole film from the moment that Mr. Lopez starts to question Mr. Ayers near a Beethoven statue where Ayers is playing a violin with two strings. This mildly bizarre beginning takes Lopez into a world he hadn't imagined before this chance encounter.
Apparently, the film is a loose retelling of the real-life Lopez's experience writing a series of columns about Ayers, homelessness and mental illness.
The ending is not exactly a typical Hollywood wrap-up and may leave some audiences feeling incomplete, but this lack of neat-and-tidy is exactly what makes the ending so strong.
The strength of The Soloist is really in the performances, but the story itself should not be overlooked: a writer's fascination with his subject and an interesting study in what makes each of them tick.
Supporting roles by Catherine Keener, Nelsan Ellis, Stephen Root and an assortment of actual homeless citizens of L.A. round out the experience to make a solid movie into an outstanding movie.
In spite of some slow patches and a strange string of coyote urine references, this film is living up to the hype, and hopefully will not be forgotten by awards season.
The Soloist gets an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Observe and Report

2009-04-09T13:00:00.000-07:00

Seth Rogen is back. For some that is not the best news ever, but I happen to have a soft spot in my heart for the lovable stoner. This time out he is a mall security guard in Observe and Report.
The first time seeing the preview, all that came to mind was the recent Kevin James debacle and I immediately cringed to see Rogen going down that road.
This one is definitely not a family friendly romp like Paul Blart was. Extremely not family friendly.
Eastbound and Down creator Jody Hill was at the helm of Observe and Report, which shows through in the awkward cockiness of the main character in each project.
Observe and Report serves to creep out the audience as much as it amuses. The bizarre lead character is surrounded by equally bizarre family and co-workers. Possibly it feels so creepy because it's disturbingly accurate how out of touch with reality Rogen's Ronnie Bernhardt is. Having worked in malls, I know how some (definitely not all, to be fair) security guards really have that over-inflated sense of self-importance. Many want to be cops but fell short for a variety of reasons and now see their "wet floor" cones and their walkie-talkies as substitutes for a badge and gun.
This movie is not as amusing as the usual Seth Rogen fare, but has it's own shining moments. The dynamic of Ronnie and his perpetually drunk mother is kind of charming and serves up more than a few laughs.
Overall, the creepy side of the movie outweighs the fun and leaves you feeling a little uncomfortable when leaving the theater.
Let's hope Rogen's upcoming Funny People will be better (and it really seems to have more going for it) and allow him to put Ronnie behind him.
Observe and Report gets a C.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Training Rules

2009-04-04T20:47:00.000-07:00

The Philadelphia Cinefest is rolling to a conclusion, but this weekend is full of good stuff for movie lovers. A choice event was tonight's world premiere of a documentary about prejudice in the world of women's basketball.
Training Rules focuses on specific practices at Penn State but touches on the the broader topic in general as well. The core of this story is a young woman, Jen Harris, who was dismissed from the basketball team for being perceived to be a lesbian. From there, the filmmakers looked into other cases that showed a history of homophobia in the women's basketball program at Penn State revolving around coach Rene Portland's stated policies of not allowing lesbians on her team.
It's hard to take a story like this and not make a compelling film. Where many filmmakers would allow the intense story carry the documentary, Dee Mosbacher and Fawn Yacker decide not to take the lazy route. Weaving together the tails of several different student athletes that faced hardship in the PSU basketball program is done with finesse and compassion. Compelling subjects are complemented by adept storytelling by the director.
Harris's story is enough to keep an audience's interest. A stellar athlete who is also an outstanding student and seems to have all the promise and potential that any kid coming out of high school could have. Her dreams of playing in the WNBA seemed not just realistic, but certain. After being forced out of the team by Portland's policies, Harris and her family decided to stand up and, as is said in the movie, make sure this doesn't happen to another player.
That story alone is enough to draw an audience in and keep them in, but Mosbacher and Yacker found several other former players and coaches who faced similar treatment in the PSU basketball program.
Sadly, many of the former players did not live in a society that saw the injustice of these policies and were not afforded the opportunity to stand up for themselves at the time. Many of them, and probably countless others there and at other schools, were forced to just accept the injustice and walk away hurt and defeated.
The only real downside of Training Rules is the decidedly narrow scope of its potential audience and therefore its budget constraints, sadly the fate of far too many excellent documentaries.
Training Rules gets an A-
--John Berry, Online Editor--

I Love You, Man

2009-04-02T13:59:00.000-07:00

Ridiculous.

In a very good way.

I Love You, Man is from director John Hamburg, who was one of the writers of Zoolander, Meet the Parents and Along Came Polly (it's surprising that Ben Stiller didn't show up in this one). This one is along similar lines to these uncomfortable comedic romps, but has some more of the off-color humor that would be expected from Paul Rudd and Jason Segel.

The preposterous storyline of a guy searching desperately for a best friend to make his best man at his upcoming wedding seems like it might be destined for failure. But the half-baked story idea is brought to life by amusing, well-written dialogue and a palpable chemistry of the two leading men.

While straddling the line between rom-com and a genre that can really only be described as Apatow-edy, I Love You, Man finds it's own voice through Paul Rudd's always amusing performance.

Some points of the movie hearken back to the awkwardness of Meet the Fockers at times, but those moments are counter-balanced with actual comedy.

There are plenty of weak points in the story, but overall it is steady amusement with periods of raucous laughter.

I Love You, Man gets a B-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Watchmen

2009-03-08T21:16:00.001-07:00

So it is finally here and fanboys around the world can find out for themselves if Zack Snyder has butchered a classic graphic novel.
Watchmen has been rumored to be in the works for a film adaptation pretty much since the book was released in the 80s. After several directors and producers were attached and dropped, 300's Snyder brought the project to theaters.
What he delivers is as faithful an adaptation as is possible in one movie, which may be credited to screenwriters David Hayter (X-Men and X2) and Alex Tse (Sucker Free City). It may have served the story better to have split it in half or possibly a trilogy to fit everything from the book into the movie.
The actors in the major roles bring the characters to life in ways rarely seen in comic book adaptations. Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach is astoundingly accurate and delivers a performance that will hopefully give a talented character actor more high-profile roles. Even though Rorschach is a highlight of the cast, the rest of the major players are pretty spot on as well, with the exception of Carla Gugino as an elderly Silk Spectre. Her younger performance in the flashbacks is good, but loses something under the bad make-up of the modern day version of the character.
There is a major change in the ending of the movie from the original ending, but there is really only one big detail that is changed. Without giving away too much, the same act is done, but through different methods.
This change has raised the ire of many a fanboy, as well as the author Alan Moore who as publicly stated that he has not seen any film adaptations of his comic books and refuses to. He has not been credited in the film versions of Watchmen or V for Vendetta and has publicly decried League of Extrordinary Gentlemen and the others. His co-creater and artist for Watchmen, Dave Gibbons, has been unerringly positive for his praise in the film adaptation.
There are parts of the book that get glossed over because it is an epic story that could never fully fit into one movie (even this three hour one), but even with those bits and pieces missing or sped through, it is the most accurate adaptation this fanboy could have hoped for.
The movie is enjoyable for people who have never seen the source material, but even more enjoyable for folks familiar with the graphic novel.
Overall, Watchmen gets an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

The Reader

2009-02-16T19:00:00.000-08:00

How can a movie based in post-Holocaust Germany possibly be enjoyable?
Well, The Reader is not a lot of fun to watch, but it is thought-provoking and moderately touching at points.
The crux of the story is a love affair between a teenage boy and a grown woman. Michael (David Kross as the younger, Ralph Fiennes when he is grown up) meets Hanna (Kate Winslet in her multiple-award winning role) when she helps him as he falls ill in front of her apartment.
This chance meeting is followed by a couple of awkward encounters brought by him trying to thank her for her kindness. Hanna is a domineering woman who gruffly accepts his thanks and then aggressively seduces the boy. Not that seducing a 15-year-old boy is all that tough.
The affair lasts a summer as he neglects his friends and family for a woman who is mistaken by a stranger to be his mother. Hanna makes Michael read to her each time they meet up as a part of the intimacy that grows to seem more important to her than the physical side.
She abruptly disappears from his life and he begrudgingly returns to the life of a teenager.
A few years later he is a law student who happens to be witnessing a trial of five women being accused of atrocities that occurred during WWII. One of the women is his former flame, Hanna.
While the subject matter of anything surrounding the Holocaust is always treated with a certain gravitas, The Reader takes itself even more seriously than it probably should.
This story framed by any other crime would probably not get the attention from critics that this film is getting.
That is the tough part of making a movie from a subject matter that holds this harsh of a place in human history, finding a story within the epic framework that can hold the dramatic weight it needs to not be overshadowed completely by the historical facts.
The dramatic climax is a bit of a letdown as the buildup feels like it is heading towards something more intense.
The performances are all solid, but again, probably would not be getting the attention if not for the framework of the Holocaust behind it.
The Reader delivers enough to maintain the audience's interest, but falls short of being the epic Holocaust drama that it's makers clearly envisioned it to be. They get a B- for the effort.
--John Berry, online editor--

Revolutionary Road

2009-02-10T07:10:00.000-08:00

Melodramatic and over-the-top performances override the solid storyline of Revolutionary Road.
A couple drifting through a suburban existence in the 1950s struggle to find a reason to be happy.
Kate Winslet's April Wheeler is a failed actress and housewife who is ultimately unhappy with what her life has become. Her husband, Leonardo DiCaprio's Frank Wheeler, is mostly resigned to his role as father and breadwinner until he becomes convinced that he has not found his true calling in life.
An interesting character study becomes secondary to actors actively trying to one-up each other with emotional outpourings. It seems like director Sam Mendes decided to let his actors go unrestrained, begging for attention from the awards community. The final product is watchable, but nothing spectacular.
Both DiCaprio and Winslet have given audiences better performances in other movies, so it is no surprise that they were overlooked by the Academy.
The over-acting was not limited to the top two roles though. The supporting cast had their share of cringe-worthy moments. It makes me believe we have director Sam Mendes to blame.
It seems more disappointing when you have a good cast, interesting concept and decent dialogue and it gets ruined by mediocre execution.
Revolutionary Road gets a C+.
--John Berry, online editor--

Gran Torino

2009-02-04T14:23:00.000-08:00

The best movie that the Oscars ignored this past year has got to be Gran Torino.
Rumored to be Clint Eastwood's final movie (he himself stated it will be his last acting), it will stand as a fantastic swan song.
Watching an old man lost in a world where he feels alone and ostracized is more interesting than many of the other films that are up for big awards.
Throughout the movie, Eastwood's performance as Walt Kowalski, a recent widower and veteran of the Korean War, is as touching as it is amusing. He goes from crotchety old racist to father figure for a young Hmong neighbor struggling to fit in to his own community.
Not giving away too much, the ending is as powerful an ending as I've seen in a long, long time. A profoundly touching final scene for the character and one of the most iconic actors of all time.
It really seems like a crime that Gran Torino got ignored by the Oscars, but awards don't always go to the best performers or movies.
The only drawbacks in the movie are a few weak scenes involving an old man punching stuff and some less-than-stellar performances from the supporting cast.
Gran Torino gets a B+.
--John Berry, online editor--

The Wrestler

2009-01-27T20:58:00.000-08:00

Mickey Rourke's comeback performance isn't really a comeback.
The guy has been working consistently since 1980. He has had big roles and small roles, but he has been working.
He is back in the lead role spot, but it's been only a few years since he was there. 2005 had him in major roles in Domino and Sin City with fantastic results.
The Wrestler is being heralded as his big splash back on the scene. Apparently only films that beg for award season attention are big enough to be called a comeback.
Randy 'The Ram' is a washed up pro-wrestler who reached the pinnacle of his fame in the 1980's with his high profile bouts against the likes of The Iron Sheik.
Now he is trying to scrape by on matches in high school gyms and run-down clubs. The years have certainly taken their toll.
Rourke's performance is certainly solid, as is the storyline of the movie. Award-worthy is another matter entirely.
This glimpse into the soul of a broken man is intriguing enough to keep you entertained, but not an epic masterpiece as so many critics seem to think.
Comparing this to director Darren Aronofsky's prior films takes away a bit of the luster. With more cerebral fare like Pi, Requiem for a Dream and The Fountain under his belt, Aronofsky's portrait of a broken wrestler on a downward spiral seems almost pedestrian.
The Wrestler breaks no new ground in film making, but does serve the audience better than most of the films out in recent months.
The character stops just short of heading down a messianic path as he seems to be building to redemption, but falls short. An ending that leaves the audience with less than what most people expect, but which I felt separates it from most other sports movies.
The supporting cast are also solid, but nothing spectacular.
I'll give The Wrestler a B-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Oscar nominations

2009-01-22T06:30:00.000-08:00

Hooray for Slumdog and Milk. Richard Jenkins is a pleasant surprise. Looks like i have to go see The Wrestler and Benjamin Button as soon as i can. I'm pretty shocked to see Gran Torino get so little attention, especially since there is talk that it might be Clint Eastwood's last movie.

Complete list of 81st annual Academy Award nominations announced Thursday

1. Best Picture: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''Frost/Nixon," ''Milk," ''The Reader," ''Slumdog Millionaire."

2. Actor: Richard Jenkins, "The Visitor"; Frank Langella, "Frost/Nixon"; Sean Penn, "Milk"; Brad Pitt, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"; Mickey Rourke, "The Wrestler."

3. Actress: Anne Hathaway, "Rachel Getting Married"; Angelina Jolie, "Changeling"; Melissa Leo, "Frozen River"; Meryl Streep, "Doubt"; Kate Winslet, "The Reader."

4. Supporting Actor: Josh Brolin, "Milk"; Robert Downey Jr., "Tropic Thunder"; Philip Seymour Hoffman, "Doubt"; Heath Ledger, "The Dark Knight"; Michael Shannon, "Revolutionary Road."

5. Supporting Actress: Amy Adams, "Doubt"; Penelope Cruz, "Vicky Cristina Barcelona"; Viola Davis, "Doubt"; Taraji P. Henson, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"; Marisa Tomei, "The Wrestler."

6. Director: David Fincher, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"; Ron Howard, "Frost/Nixon"; Gus Van Sant, "Milk"; Stephen Daldry, "The Reader"; Danny Boyle, "Slumdog Millionaire."

7. Foreign Film: "The Baader Meinhof Complex," Germany; "The Class," France; "Departures," Japan; "Revanche," Austria; "Waltz With Bashir," Israel.

8. Adapted Screenplay: Eric Roth and Robin Swicord, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"; John Patrick Shanley, "Doubt"; Peter Morgan, "Frost/Nixon"; David Hare, "The Reader"; Simon Beaufoy, "Slumdog Millionaire."

9. Original Screenplay: Courtney Hunt, "Frozen River"; Mike Leigh, "Happy-Go-Lucky"; Martin McDonagh, "In Bruges"; Dustin Lance Black, "Milk"; Andrew Stanton, Jim Reardon and Pete Docter, "WALL-E."

10. Animated Feature Film: "Bolt"; "Kung Fu Panda"; "WALL-E."

11. Art Direction: "Changeling," ''The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''The Duchess," ''Revolutionary Road."

12. Cinematography: "Changeling," ''The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''The Reader," ''Slumdog Millionaire."

13. Sound Mixing: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''Slumdog Millionaire," ''WALL-E," ''Wanted."

14. Sound Editing: "The Dark Knight," ''Iron Man," ''Slumdog Millionaire," ''WALL-E," ''Wanted."

15. Original Score: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," Alexandre Desplat; "Defiance," James Newton Howard; "Milk," Danny Elfman; "Slumdog Millionaire," A.R. Rahman; "WALL-E," Thomas Newman.

16. Original Song: "Down to Earth" from "WALL-E," Peter Gabriel and Thomas Newman; "Jai Ho" from "Slumdog Millionaire," A.R. Rahman and Gulzar; "O Saya" from "Slumdog Millionaire," A.R. Rahman and Maya Arulpragasam.

17. Costume: "Australia," ''The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Duchess," ''Milk," ''Revolutionary Road."

18. Documentary Feature: "The Betrayal (Nerakhoon)," ''Encounters at the End of the World," ''The Garden," ''Man on Wire," ''Trouble the Water."

19. Documentary (short subject): "The Conscience of Nhem En," ''The Final Inch," ''Smile Pinki," ''The Witness — From the Balcony of Room 306."

20. Film Editing: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''Frost/Nixon," ''Milk," ''Slumdog Millionaire."

21. Makeup: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''Hellboy II: The Golden Army."

22. Animated Short Film: "La Maison en Petits Cubes," ''Lavatory — Lovestory," ''Oktapodi," ''Presto," ''This Way Up."

23. Live Action Short Film: "Auf der Strecke (On the Line)," ''Manon on the Asphalt," ''New Boy," ''The Pig," ''Spielzeugland (Toyland)."

24. Visual Effects: "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," ''The Dark Knight," ''Iron Man."

___

Academy Award winner previously announced this year:

Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award (Oscar statuette): Jerry Lewis

Golden Globe Ramblings

2009-01-11T21:19:00.000-08:00

Those dames and fellas over at the Hollywood Foreign Press Association did it mostly right this year.
Slumdog Millionaire took home best drama and best director for Mr. Danny Boyle. As well as trophies for score and script. It truly was the best movie out this year, and deserving of these accolades.
Somehow Kate Winslet walked away with both best lead and supporting actress awards. Good for her, she's come a long way since that horrendous pile of garbage known as Titanic.
Heath Ledger walked away with what is likely not his last award for the role that will go down in history to define him, and possibly help redefine the movie villain.
In a surprising dark horse victory, Colin Farrell grabbed best actor in a comedy for In Bruges, which may have been a shock to many just because it was far better than it should have been. Farrell finally proved that he can actually act. Who'd have thunk?
On the TV side, 30 Rock took every award they could qualify for and I can't think of any reason why they wouldn't.
The only vast disappointment of the evening was best comedy movie going to Vicky Christina Barcelona. What a dreadful waste of time that movie was.

But the night was an overall winner with most of the trophies going to people that actually deserve them.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Doubt

2009-01-11T20:57:00.000-08:00

Have you ever seen a movie with boundless potential only to have it squandered and leave you wanting more?
I have.
Tonight I watched Doubt.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman in an emotional role pitted against a cold-hearted Meryl Streep. The always lovely and charming Amy Adams playing the innocent bystander. A surprisingly fantastic performance from Viola Davis in a role that was far too small. Based on a critically acclaimed play.
All of these would lead me to believe I was in for a solid evening at the cinema.
But mix that solid base of vibrancy with some ugly greys of sub-par cinematography, heavy-handed imagery and metaphors, clumsy directing and pacing problems and you get a muddled mess that does not come close to living up to what it could have been.
Doubt has some terrific performances from all of the leads and most of the secondary actors, but can't get past its own fundamental problems.
I'll give it a C.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Slumdog Millionaire

2008-12-31T21:26:00.000-08:00

Danny Boyle ventures in to yet another genre to show everyone how it's done. Slumdog Millionaire is his shot at a Bollywood love story. The same masterful film making that he showed in his prior modern classics like Trainspotting, Sunshine and 28 Days Later shows up again as Boyle proves he can produce unique and compelling stories in any genre.

The story of a young man from the slums of Mumbai, India and his struggle to prove he is not a cheat at the country's favorite game show (Who Wants to be a Millionaire) while he explains his back story of love and loss and coming from nothing and less.

Boyle unfurls the story slowly enough that it's not immediately obvious where he's going, so it keeps the audience involved so well that you stay wrapped up in it through some mildly slow spots in the the movie. The pace moves quickly enough through the rest of the film that those slow spots are evened out.

Visually explosive sequences and frenetic pacing balances with vast landscapes of Mumbai and serene moments of introspection as the characters grow up in some chaotic conditions but somehow manage to pull through.

The balancing act continues with perfect highs and wretched lows within each of the flashbacks and modern stories.

Hopefully the next Boyle film will live up.

Slumdog Millionaire gets an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Milk

2008-12-22T18:20:00.000-08:00

Many people out there remember the murder of Harvey Milk. I do not remember it, but I know a little bit about it through reading and being culturally aware. The first openly gay major politician combined with the famed Twinkies defense of Dan White make it one of the most interesting assassinations of our time.

The story of his rise to office and his struggles along the way are one of the most interesting sagas of our time as well.

Since the ending was no mystery, the film telling Harvey Milk's story, Milk, discusses the more personal side of his life and briefly examines the figures around him in these formative years in the movement to find equal rights for Gay Americans.

Milk is a compelling look at both the movement and the man as they both came in to focus in the early days of the Castro in San Francisco.

Gus Van Sant has been working for years to get this project out there, with rumors of a variety of leading men, and this latest attempt led by Sean Penn. Harvey Milk is a complex character to say the least, and Penn seems like an obvious choice to play him. Penn's ability to immerse himself in his roles provides the character with the depth that the real Milk deserves.

The film was intriguing and informative enough for a wide audience, even though the subject will probably not give it the audience it deserves.

Some discussion of timing came when the release was announced. Obvious parallels to the modern-day gay marriage issues and Prop 8 specifically make the story even more poignant and relevant than if it were released in the 90's when it was originally proposed. Some thought that it would have helped convince voters to vote against Prop 8, but there is little chance the viewers of this movie are really going to be anyone who isn't already a supporter of gay rights.

Plot-wise, Milk seems to gloss over much of the personal life of the subject and concentrate on his professional life. The backdrop of the early days of the gay rights movement gets a bit of glossing over as well, with some pretty significant supporting cast playing people who were also major players in the movement just seeing fleeting moments on the screen.

Milk gets an A- and only falls short by leaving the audience wanting more.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Role Models

2008-11-19T17:56:00.000-08:00

So a formulaic comedy about two guys who are opposite personality types working a job together and forced to spend time together getting in to trouble and somehow being paired up with cartoonish children as a punishment sounds like fun to you?

Go see Role Models.

In spite of being the most predictable storyline you can ever imagine, it actually is an extremely enjoyable hour and a half.

The characters start off as caricatures and end up becoming moderately endearing and way deeper and multifaceted than one could have ever expected at the beginning of the movie.
While the plot is nothing special, the dialogue and the jokes carry the viewer through what ends up being riotously funny at points and solidly amusing throughout. The creative team (and much of the secondary acting team) behind this have roots with the classic sketch comedy show The State (if you don't know The State, you probably were not a teenager or twentysomething in the early 90's). Subtle sarcasm and overt gags mix together well throughout the movie as the humor and dialogue rescue a film that wanted to fail from the cliched beginning.

The actors are the other strong point that makes you glad you spent your 10.25 (plus soda and pretzel-bite money). Paul Rudd is always amusing. Seann William Scott is still playing Stiffler, but somehow I'm not tired of it in this role. Both of the lead child actors nail the roles so well that you really believe they are real kids and start to empathize with them as they hit the obvious rough times in the beginning and near the end of the movie.

Overall, Role Models gets a B for rescuing this film from itself.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

Miracle at St. Anna

2008-10-08T21:08:00.000-07:00

Spike Lee is back in business. Two in a row that are solid movies. He's back.

No more good one, bad one, good one, bad one.

Inside Man was a solid bank heist movie. Miracle at St. Anna proves Lee's technical and storytelling prowess by delving into his first war drama with the same panache as his classics like Clockers, Crooklyn and Malcolm X.

For the vast majority of the film, Miracle is a compelling piece of (loosely) historically based drama that keeps the audience drawn in and offers characters that are complex and fascinating. These kind of characters are rather common in war movies, but it is usually just a couple that are interesting. Miracle has a full contingent of multi-faceted characters backed up by 99% solid performances.

The only failing of this movie is the ending. Now, I will admit that I am often picky about endings for movies, and it's rare that a movie sneaks up on me and I don't see the ending coming. But Miracle at St. Anna has no need to take the ending that it does. The final scene of the movie does not even fit the overall tone of the entire film. It feels forced and contrived.

If Spike Lee had just called it quits before the final sequence, the movie would have closed with a less-than-happy ending and would have been outside the Hollywood norm, but it would have fit the pacing and the tone of the movie.

Other than that, it apparently had some historical inaccuracies, but a: I'm not a history scholar, so I really don't know about those claims, and b: it is a work of fiction based on true events. Are there any movies that are 100% historically accurate?

The best directors in the business are the only ones able to jump from genre to genre with even success and put out consistently good movies. Spike Lee proves once again that he deserves to be in those ranks.

Miracle of St. Anna earns a B+ overall, but would have been an A if it had a better ending.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

2008-10-02T13:20:00.000-07:00

When your big Hollywood star power is coming from Kat Dennings and Michael Cera, you probably are not setting out to make a whole lot of money at the box office.

When your talent is centering around the same duo, you probably are setting out to make a good movie with plenty of hipster credibility.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist is setting just this stage as it opens Friday the third. Dennings and Cera are both talented young actors who should get lots of prime roles in the months and years to come because they both set the groundwork of smaller roles in which they deliver infallible performances and land bigger and better roles along the way.

This is the first time we see Cera as a romantic lead in his career and he actually starts off the movie by showing why he hasn't landed such roles. He hearkens back to his old George Michael role from Arrested Development by delivering a whimpering, mildly pathetic kid who seems afraid of life. He does that role well, but we've seen it before.

As the story progresses, Cera steps outside of his typecasting and shows his talent with a complex character who is at times awkward and funny while turning to self-assured and serious at other parts.

Dennings hits the ground running as a funny, smart, tough girl who seems to be just gliding through her quiet private school existence. Like Cera's character, Norah proves to be equally complex as she weighs following in her father's footsteps to a sure-thing job versus going to college to make a life of her own.

The romantic part of the romantic comedy shows its face early and often, but starts with Nick pining for a love lost and Norah pining for a love nonexistent. Both characters are in love with an idealized notion. Nick with a girl that his ex never really was. Norah with a guy she's never met but is certainly not the guys she has known so far.

Supported by a lovable mix of miscreants and good-guys, the lead characters gallivant around Manhattan in search of a live show by an illusive band. Nick and Norah are clearly meant for each other, if only Nick could get over his ex and realize it.

Yeah, it sounds like a bit of a cliched idea for a story line, but endearing performances from the two leads, interesting secondary characters and dialogue that plays more natural and intelligent than most teen movies makes this film a lot more watchable than most of its peers.

Most teen movies play to a dumber crowd, but Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist seems to be presenting them as I remember kids being when I was young. The characters are not mature or experienced, but are clearly intelligent and have bigger goals than just getting high, drunk, laid or all three.

While the movie overall is a little more saccharin sweet than I usually prefer, the script is a very strong first offering from Lorene Scafaria (based on a novel that I didn't read, so I'm not sure about the source material). Peter Sollett, an indie director who is treading for his first time on less serious fare, also sets his mainstream Hollywood catalogue up right with a great job out of the gate.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist gets a B+ and would make a great date movie since it's got a fair amount of both romance and comedy.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Vicky Christina Barcelona

2008-09-30T16:23:00.000-07:00

The latest offering from Woody Allen is a prime example of lazy film making. (And my selection to review it is lazy as well since it was a request from all of my reader, she really demanded more than requested).

Vicky Christina Barcelona takes some of the more talented actors in the business today and a solid, unique storyline but somehow manages to make the whole thing boring and a chore to watch.

The movie begins with a narrator whose voice is just mildly annoying. As it carries on, listening to the narrator becomes arduous and starts to really grate. It seems that Allen decides that instead of giving us information through developed dialogue and plot, he just has the narrator do it for him.

Dialogue is consistently the strong point of any Woody Allen film, and this one should be no exception, but the character dialogue becomes secondary to the narrator beating the audience over the head with inane details as if the viewer were unable to understand what is happening on the screen.

The plot is interesting enough to keep you there through all of this. Christina (Scarlett Johanssen) runs off and falls in love with an artist (Javier Bardem) who has a sordid history with a wild ex-wife (Penelope Cruz) who just happens to pop back in to his life again. After this cliched plot line emerges, Allen actually takes it to a less predictable place (which will not be spoilered here) and rescues the story.

The performances are exactly what should be expected from Javier Bardem, Scarlett Johanssen, Rebecca Hall and Penelope Cruz. All good actors. All delivering excellent performances. The supporting cast also pull through to round out the film with overall near perfect acting. This might be attributed to Allen's directing or to the casting director, but each actor seems perfect for the character they are playing. One of the most effective is Chris Messina as Doug, Vicky (Hall)'s fiancee who is the most dull, annoying person ever, which gives a fantastic look at Vicky's complex situation as she yearns for stability but also wonders about her best friend Christina's vivacious love life.

The story is intriguing and would have made a solid movie if the narrator had just shut up ten minutes into the movie. Clocking in at just over 90 minutes, Allen could have spent a good amount more screen time on telling his narrative without the obnoxious voiceover.

Overall Vicky Christina Barcelona gets a C, but if they had put in the effort to show off those fantastic actors and decent dialogue it would have scored higher.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Choke

2008-09-29T16:41:00.000-07:00

Chuck Palahniuk's modern classic is brought to life on the silver screen in the Fox Searchlight indie production of Choke.

For the most part, director and screenplay writer Clark Gregg stays true to the original text. A few little strays here and there throughout the first two thirds of the film get you by in this low-budget offering. The casting is strong on the majors, but a little weak on the minors. Sam Rockwell is fantastic as the charming-but-flawed Victor Mancini who trolls sex addiction support groups for willing partners in his own addictive behaviors. Anjelica Huston is his career troublemaker mother, Ida, who is dying in a hospital. Brad Henke is surprisingly well cast as Victor's always-losing best friend Denny who is carrying his own share of sexual deviance.

Knowing it's not fair to compare a movie to the book that it is based on, it has to be said that there was a LOT of material that was glossed over in the movie that should probably been expounded upon or left out entirely because they feel like they are just kind of thrown in for fun. Denny's rock collection, Victor's Jesus comparisons, Ida's social experiments in the flashbacks to Victor's childhood and even the mundane existence at Colonial Dunsboro are all major parts of the book that felt rushed in the movie.

Gregg clearly has a reverance for the book that shows through, but he seems to assume a familiarity with these side themes in the story that a viewer who has not read the book will probably not understand. Even the choking in resaurants part of the story gets less attention than it deserves, especially since the story is called Choke.

If you have not read the book, the movie will be enjoyable. If you are able to separate the source material from the end product (like watching the new Star Wars movies without thinking of the original Holy Trilogy), the movie will be enjoyable. If you cannot separate movies from the books they were based on, you will probably be disappointed, especially in the ending. Similarly, if you watch this trying to compare it to Fight Club (also a Palahniuk novel of sheer genius), you will also be let down.

This movie has a less serious tone than either Fight Club or the writings of Palahniuk in general, but seems to hit its mark as a twisted, dark comedy that tries to showcase acting and characters more than dialogue and story. In that regard, it holds the feel of the book because the insane and insanely interesting characters are the strongest part of the novel, where the story is just kind of the background of the book.

The book version is an A+, but the Choke film really only deserves a B+ for glossing over too much of the book when the film would have been served better to leave out parts of the book entirely to give more attention to others.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Burn After Reading

2008-09-14T10:34:00.000-07:00

The Coens drop their latest this weekend with a star-studded display called Burn After Reading.

It's the story of infidelity and stupidity in the the D.C. intelligence community. While in the scale of genius that is the history of the Coen brothers, this movie is not on the same level as some of their usual fare, it is a fun ride and and a witty satire of the spy movie genre.

Cinematic geniuses tend to aim higher and higher with each successive offering, but following up No Country For Old Men with something better would have been next to impossible. So the Coen brothers did the smart thing and made no attempt to top it and went in an entirely different direction.

A weak movie from Joel and Ethan Coen is still better than usual Hollywood standards. Burn has moments of sheer genius that are hallmarks of the Coens. Unfortunately, this one has fewer than most of the duo's previous endeavors.

Many of the jokes fall a little flat, but that is offset by the brilliant storyline and the always stellar performances of Clooney, McDormand, Pitt, Swinton, Jenkins and the great and mighty Malkovich. There are even a couple of grand minor roles including David Rasche (yes, Sledge Hammer is still around) and J.K. Simmons (one of the most underrated actors of modern cinema).

The real strong point is the story. Unique is the key to every Coen movie so far, and this plotline is no exception. It's hard to describe the story without giving too many details away, so just know that there are interesting twists and turns all along the way that make for an enjoyable ride that doesn't fail to disappoint in the end.

Burn After Reading might be on the lower end of the Coen movie scale, but it still gets a B+ in the real world.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

Reaching into the DVD collection.

2008-09-03T17:27:00.000-07:00

Just decided to watch something this afternoon that I have loved for a while. Partly because I am a creature of habit and watch lots of movies multiple times. Partly because I have watched some mediocre science fiction movies lately and wanted to watch a really good one again.

The director is the great Danny Boyle and the movie is his sci-fi offering to the world: Sunshine.

With the sun dying out, a crew of scientists are on their way to our source of light and heat in this part of the universe in order to jump-start it with a massive nuclear explosion.

Sounds like a typical sci-fi plot, but with Danny Boyle at the helm, it is anything but typical. He is known for experimenting with various genres and coming out with fantastic results. Sunshine fits his m.o. perfectly. A seemingly normal plot that he takes to a whole new level of filmmaking, as he did with 28 Days Later, Trainspotting, Shallow Grave and pretty much everything else he's had his hands on.

With a solid cast including Cillian Murphy and Rose Byrne, the drama is gripping the whole way through the film. The story is truly an original take on the sci-fi genre as well. Penned by Alex Garland, with whom Boyle has worked several times, it is a story that is simultaneously an homage to psychological sci-fi and a departure from it.

This modern classic gets an A (as if there was any doubt from my glowing praise).
--John Berry, online editor--

Babyon A.D.

2008-08-27T23:59:00.000-07:00

The first thing I ever watched by Mathieu Kassovitz was a French film in 1995 called La Haine, known by English audiences as Hate. This was a great example of how Kassovitz was talented at telling a story in unique ways with an obvious skill behind the camera and behind the pen because he wrote, directed and starred in La Haine.
His latest offering is a big budget Hollywood extravaganza called Babylon A.D., which from the first scene proves that he is still skilled, but somehow changed. Not sure if working in the industry for several years has warped him or if it is just growing older and more hardened. Starting with an explosion and blending right into a gun-drenched, angry display by Vin Deisel, the opening sequence looked like classic Kassovitz with a serious case of 'roid rage.
So much macho posturing from the go, it looked like the whole film would be tortuously filled with overt displays of manliness.
Luckily, the story got better.
The story actually got really good. There were still moments of too-much-testosterone, but it was an intriguing storyline that demonstrated Kassovitz's abilities of yesteryear.
Okay, now the spoilers:
The solid storytelling devolves with a rush to finish the movie as if they ran out of money, time or desire to put forth effort. The final quarter of the film really does not fit with the rest of the story, especially not the final scene.
Vin Deisel's closing line of the film is delivered with all the acting skill of a ninth grader who got cut from the drama club. And the close of the story is not much better.
The first three-quarters of the film are a solid B, but the ending is so bad it drags it all down to a C-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Pineapple Express

2008-08-25T16:26:00.000-07:00

It would appear that Seth Rogen can do no wrong. Makes me think that maybe I should see Horton Hears a Who and The Spiderwick Chronicles. Aside from those, everything Mr. Rogen has touched lately has turned to comedic gold.
Pineapple Express is no exception.
From the onset, this film's concept is amusing and seems like it should end there. Just amusing enough to be worth watching once, but nothing notable.
Somehow Rogen and his long-time collaborator Evan Goldberg crafted a near-masterpiece with a comedy that becomes more than a simple stoner flick soon after it starts. Truly a stoner-comedy-action-crime-drama-romance. Every scene delivers its fair share of each of those aspects. Every scene also keeps you drawn in and genuinely concerned for the two lead characters.
The truly impressive part of Pineapple Express is how they manage to keep it funny and keep the whole audience laughing while also giving serious drama and action sequences that can be taken seriously while you laugh.
It is a delicate balance that is maintained through the whole film as a compelling storyline unfolds.
The plot is unique. The performances are impeccably delivered. The writing is top of their form. Pineapple Express may indeed be the Rogen/Goldberg team's finest work. Their previous endeavors have delivered the same comedic punch, but this one teams the laughter up with an action movie that is equally viable on it's own.
Some moments go a little over-the-top and get too silly, but those are very few.
Pineapple Express gets an A- and will be a lot of fun to watch repeatedly.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Clone Wars.

2008-08-18T19:13:00.000-07:00

The Star Wars universe expanded a little more recently. Star Wars: The Clone Wars is an animated feature-length movie that fills part of the gap between chapters two and three in the endless saga of the Skywalker clan.

As a child, Star Wars took up a good portion of my time and thoughts and toy collection. So watching another expansion is always good. Even when it's as abysmal as The Phantom Menace.

The latest installment is not anywhere near as bad as Chapter I, but it is also no instant classic.

Clearly geared toward a younger audience, and allegedly a precursor to a primetime TV series, it does the job it sets out to do. An enjoyable storyline that steers clear of any major developments in the overall epic series, it sets up a little of the story of the clone wars. More a character study than an in depth story, it covers a period of time that was alluded to in the actual Star Wars movies several times.

The Clone Wars is an enjoyable 90 minutes for fans, but will probably not engage too many people who did not enjoy the movies. The promising aspect of it is that it may draw in a younger generation of fans that will then go back and watch the original holy trilogy.

I'll give Star Wars: The Clone Wars a B.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Hitting theaters this weekend.

2008-08-15T19:10:00.000-07:00

Apparently Woody Allen is back at it. He has done nothing worth seeing in several years, but he's got Vicky Christina Barcelona coming out this weekend. I can't see Scarlett Johansson and Javier Bardem doing a bad movie together, so it gives me hope.

Mark Pellington (Arlington Road, U2 3D) drops Henry Poole is Here which is getting pretty luke-warm reviews. Not sure why, but something makes me like the idea of Luke Wilson and George Lopez together. Lopez, fresh off his minor role on one of the most underrated shows on TV, Reno 911, is hit-or-miss for me. But Wilson rarely steers me wrong. Yeah, he did the Legally Blonde movies, but he usually does alright.

Another possible horror debacle is out with Keifer Sutherland and Amy Smart on board. Mirrors might be alright with those two leading it, but recent horror offerings have been fairly disappointing. With Alexandre Aja of Hills Have Eyes (2006) directing, it has a shot at being good, so I'll probably see it at some point.

The big buzz is around Tropic Thunder right now. Ben Stiller directs and stars in an action movie comedy about bad actors in a bad movie. Sounds bad, but then I thought Zoolander would suck. Some genuinely funny clips in the previews (especially the red band trailer with Stiller getting stabbed by a toddler) and the fact that Downey Jr is doing black face without international protests are enough to pique some morbid curiosity, despite all of the "retarded" protests.

My first choice this weekend will have to go to my childhood favorite: Star Wars. The Clone Wars is a cartoon entry into the Lucas universe with the man himself in the producer role. It is apparently the first entry in what will be an animated TV series, so all the Star Wars nerds are going to be interested in what is going to become of this. The upcoming video game, The Force Unleashed, and this movie are bridging gaps in the story lines between movies (the game between chapters 4 and 5, the movie between chapters 2 and 3) so it just leads to speculation of where Lucas might be going with the expansion of his universe. Rumors of chapters seven, eight and nine have been swirling for years, but there may be no real reputable source behind them.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

This weekend looks like fun.

2008-08-08T18:16:00.000-07:00

Pineapple Express is out. I'm looking forward to seeing it and laughing a lot. Seth Rogen cracks me up. Watching him in the interviews promoting the movie has been fun as well. He's a genuinely funny guy.

I also like the idea of this one. Stoner comedies are funny, but not usually great. This one looks like a step up from the typical pothead fare. Maybe because the people behind it are funnier. Maybe because they infused it with much of the magic of their previous endeavors that were not stoner movies. Maybe because it's the first stoner action flick.

Probably all of those things.

I know what I'll be doing at some point this weekend.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Step Brothers

2008-08-07T18:44:00.000-07:00

Kind of a let down.

Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly in tandem should be way funnier than they are. Talladega Nights was not as funny as it could have been and Step Brothers follows suit. Lots of good jokes. Two funny lead actors. A ridiculous story idea that allows for many chances for comedy.

The plethora of hysterical jokes are peppered throughout the movie with a lot of slow points that make the viewer just wish the jokes were back.

Co-writer and director Adam McKay seems like he's hearkening back to his SNL days of settling for occasional funniness.

Ferrell and Reilly are grown men who still live with their single parents. The parents, played by Mary Steenburgen and Richard Jenkins (Six Feet Under's Nathaniel), meet and fall in love and the two guys are forced upon each other.

The new step siblings are too much alike and thus hilarity ensues. Or rather should be ensuing. Instead we get the funny jokes from the previews, but expanded upon and left to drown in a sea of less funny jokes.

Ferrell and McKay were clearly at their best in Anchorman and on www.FunnyOrDie.com.

Wait for video or cable for this one. But if you do go see it, wait for the clip during the credits. worth sticking around and probably should have been the actual end of the movie and not the bonus clip.

Step Brothers gets a C+.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

X-Files and pseudo-siblings

2008-07-25T17:37:00.000-07:00

Rolling in to theaters this week is a second viewing of The Dark Knight.

I guess there are some limited release things coming around. A period piece from the director of Becoming Jane, Julian Jarrold, brings out Brideshead Revisited with a veritable who's who of hey-it's-that-guy castings. Can't say too much because I don't really care.
Boy A is a British film about a dude coming out of juvie trying to build a new life. The reviews I've read are basically saying that the story is an obvious string of cliches beating viewers with a sense of loneliness. That sounds like no fun to me.
A couple of documentaries that present topics that nobody cares about. Indiana teenagers in American Teen, and a tight-rope walker in Man On Wire.

I really feel that the X-Files have passed its time of interest, but X-Files: I Want To Believe is here for some reason. Maybe somewhere some mother's basement is emptying out for the evening for a second week straight, it seems that even the nerds have given up on Mulder and Scully because the interwebs are not abuzz with talk of them kissing like before the first disappointing X-Files movie a decade ago.

For my 10.50, I'll be checking out one of my guilty pleasures, dumb comedy. Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly are back together for Step Brothers in a completely ridiculous plot that promises to make me embarrassed for liking it. Adam McKay at the helm makes me hopeful that they can reignite the magic that was The Landlord, but I'm sure it will be more along the lines of Talledega Nights. If they can live up to that, it'll be worth watching, but not worth repetitive viewing like Anchorman.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Dark Knight is not just hype

2008-07-18T06:13:00.000-07:00

For all the talk surrounding Dark Knight and especially Heath Ledger's performance, I went in to it expecting to be let down, at least a little.
I really thought that Ledger's performance was going to be good, but that there was a lot of hype around the role because of it being his last and the critics were being kind because they don't wish to speak ill of the dead.
Was I ever wrong.
There was no distortion in what the critics were saying, this movie is the real deal. Ledger's performance will go down in history as one of the best movie villains EVER.
His acting abilities have never been questioned by me. I have always thought he was good verging on great. As the Joker, he pushed way past that line of becoming a great actor. For the first time I am actually sad about his death. Rarely do I feel real live emotion about people I don't know personally, but after seeing this, it would have been truly amazing to see where he went next. There really is no telling how far this actor would have gone. Joker would have pushed him into the upper echelons of Hollywood talent.
That said, there is also a whole movie around that performance that defies everything I've ever thought about modern film making.
This is the first movie where I can find NOTHING to complain about. Yeah, I know, I complain about everything.
The story was top notch. Kept the audience involved for the full 2.5 hours and really could have kept them enthralled for longer.
The acting from everyone was incredible. Christian Bale is my favorite Bruce Wayne ever (although Michael Keaton might still be my favorite Batman). Michael Caine as Alfred delivered some of the most poignant speeches in a film filled with great dialogue. Morgan Freeman was great as always. Aaron Eckhart gave Harvey Dent a grace and empathy that no actor (live or cartoon) has ever been able to do with that character. Maggie Gyllenhaal was a huge step up from Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes.
The action sequences were beyond amazing. This was as close to perfection as a movie might ever come.
Christopher Nolan took what was a really good Batman Begins and tweaked every detail in his process of crafting that film and gave us what will undoubtedly be his masterpiece in his life's body of work. He improved on every aspect in his previous Batman endeavor, including things that didn't seem to need improvement.
Dark Knight is an instant classic. Since I can't find anything to not like about it, I have to give it an A+.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Hellboy lives up to expectations

2008-07-14T05:07:00.000-07:00

Hellboy II: The Golden Army was able to hold up to my lofty aspirations for it. Guillermo del Toro brought to life a whole new world of other-worldly creatures and even spruced up the ones he had before.
The first Hellboy movie was a comic-book nerd's dream come true. The second fits right along side of it as Hellboy (aka Red), his love interest, Liz, and their associate Abe (aka Blue).
The story was hindered a bit by the incessant love story b.s., but overall the plot was intriguing and better than the first film. Red gets pulled in to the middle of a war that existed ages ago and was brought to an end by a truce between the king of the invisible world below the surface of ours and an ancient king of men. The king of the non-human creatures is still in power and his son decides its time to start that war back up again.
Red and Blue head into the seedy underworld of mythical creatures to try to maintain the truce. One of the more interesting subplots that was extremely underexplored was the idea that HB was not a part of the world of man, but belonged with the other world and the rebelious prince was trying to convince Hellboy that he should not stop, but rather help the mythical world take over. If they has spent less time with the love-story drama and delved into the inner turmoil drama, the movie could have been drastically better.
The only other problem was in the lack of backstory with many of the creatures and with the other world in general. Mr del Toro will have to learn to explain more when he gets behind the helm for the Hobbit because Tolkien's world is the best mapped mythology of any literary work in history.
Even with these flaws, the film was as enjoyable a movie as anything that has been released in recent memory. It will have trouble finding an audience this coming weekend as Dark Knight takes on all comers and will likely sit atop the box office reciepts for weeks to come. But for anyone who can't get tickets for Batman next weekend, go see Hellboy instead.
I'm giving Hellboy II an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

In theaters this weekend.

2008-07-10T17:56:00.000-07:00

For me, nothing is gonna top Hellboy II this weekend, but the competition looks pretty weak anyway.
A whole bunch of limited release stuff that might have some sort of interest on another weekend. Spencer Breslin as a balding teenager, with a supporting role from Cuba Gooding Jr., yeah, he's still alive. Looking at Cuba's latest string of crap though, it might be wise to steer clear. Who even watched Daddy Day Camp? So Harold looks like a no.
Death Defying Acts is The Illusionist a couple years too late, so that's a no as well.
Ellen Burstyn is on a venture of memories and self-discovery in The Stone Angel. Not sure if i'm feeling writer director Kari Skogland's prior resume with a weak Crow tv show and something called Children of the Corn 666. But working with Burstyn and an upcoming project with Ben Kingsley means she might be better than her history would imply. Sounds like a wait for dvd.
The we move on to the wide release stuff.
Does anyone remember when Eddie Murphy made good comedies? No? Me neither. With the exception of the Shrek movies, i think we have to go all the way back to 1999 for the passable Bowfinger and 1998 for his first Nutty Professor which was better than i thought it should have been. The latest debacle with multiple Eddies is Dave. If Hollywood hasn't learned that multiple Eddies in a film hasn't worked in a decade, then maybe this one will teach them. Yeah, it was awesome in Coming To America. It was still amusing in 1998's Professor. That was the point where the concept should have died. Maybe his paychecks are bigger for the more roles he plays? Ah, who cares.
Brendan Fraser as been busy. Mummy 3 (or 4 if you count Scorpion King) is on its way. But before that we're getting Journey to the Center of the Earth. In all three dimensions. That might just be too much excitement. Maybe they could give us the full 4D experience and jab you in the back and spray water at us too. My prediction here is too much flash, not enough substance. A classic Jules Verne book given the family friendly treatment by Hollywood? Maybe if i had kids, which i don't, so no thanks.
-John Berry, Online Editor--

Hancock.

2008-07-02T20:00:00.000-07:00

Finally, Will Smith is in a movie that is good without qualifications.
I Am Legend was good at parts, but had lots of flaws. Pursuit of Happyness was done well, and Smith's acting was great, but it was kind of over the top on the emotional manipulation. Hitch was just crap. I, Robot had great source material, but lacked in comparison because the robots were a little too cartoony. Bad Boys 2, Men In Black, Ali, Wild Wild West, etc., all passable movies with major flaws that had to be overlooked in order to enjoy them.
Hancock's only flaws are in the brevity of it. If there was more movie, there would have been deeper explanation of many parts. Mostly questions on the back story. But to me, that's good because the film leaves me wanting more.
It's a hard movie to discuss because much of my enjoyment was based around the fact that the movie was not what was expected going in to it. It delivered on the promise given by the previews of a funny, outlandish and definitely out of the ordinary superhero movie. But after establishing that, they take on explaining why Hancock is who he is. His journey to become a better man, or better superhero.
Smith shows his off acting chops as he manages to ditch his usual charm and leave behind the guy that everybody loves to be a social pariah with a habit pissing off everyone around him, even the people he saves.
Honestly, the movie was better than the premise should have been. Partly because of Will Smith's ability to make movies that are better than they should be. Partly because of an extremely solid supporting cast. And majorly because of the director, Peter Berg.
Berg has a history of making movies that are okay ideas that turn out being better than the mediocre premise they are based on. He took Very Bad Things from what could have been just another comedy to one of the better movies from the late 90's glut of formulaic-pushing-the-envelope-but-only-just-a-little dark comedies. He made The Rock's first good movie. The Kingdom was a solid war movie in an era of crap movies about the middle east. So I'm clearly psyched that Berg has been tapped for the Dune remake.
So with the combination of Berg, Smith and one of my favorite actors, Jason Bateman, it turns out to be Will Smith's best movie in a long long time. Maybe ever. And his most unique movie since Men in Black. And his most enjoyable movie since the first Bad Boys.
I'll give Hancock an A-.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

This might be the right week to grab a new DVD.

2008-06-17T16:15:00.000-07:00

With The Love Guru and Get Smart rolling out this week, it might be the best weekend for an outdoor activity that we could ever hope for.
For cinephiles everywhere, it's time to catch up on what's been out for a while that you forgot to see or didn't have time because you've seen Iron Man too many times. Okay, maybe that's just me.

Besides good casting, the Get Smart remake looks like a terrible idea with a big budget managed to get good actors. This one is directed by the guy who made the only bad Naked Gun installment, the three weakest Adam Sandler comedies and a bunch of collaborations with Tom Arnold. Written by the guys who wrote Failure To Launch. How could this go right?

Mike Myers is trying too hard. That might sum up The Love Guru completely. A tinge of racism and a lot of stupid puns cushioned by some of the lamer jokes from the Austin Powers movies. That is about what I'm expecting after seeing the glut of previews and commercials that have been overloading the TV and previews at the theaters.

You'll have to wait for Tuesday, so it won't help for this weekend, but In Bruges comes out on DVD next week. That is the most entertaining bet in the near future.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

Mixed bag of a weekend

2008-06-16T13:12:00.000-07:00

The Happening was a let-down and The Incredible Hulk was surprisingly good.

After the 2003 Ang Lee Hulk failed to impress audiences nationwide, most people thought that not much could really expected from another Hulk movie a mere five years later.

This new installment, which Marvel Studios is quick to point out is NOT a sequel, harkens back to the television classic with Lou Ferrigno and Bill Bixby. There are several homages to the classic series with the "Lonely Man" theme song making a scene in the new film, as well as a cameo and vocal work from the still massive and clearly working out Ferrigno. And Stan Lee's obligatory cameo actually had him do a little acting this time instead of just appearing.

Edward Norton's performance was way better than Eric Bana, and moderately better than Bill Bixby.

The story also is a throwback to the old tv series. Dr. Bruce Banner is in hiding as he tries to figure out ways to reverse his condition. The update is clearly in the special effects and, unlike the 2003 film, culls more from the comic books that originally told Hulk's story.

Hulk's nemesis in this installment is a character named Emil Blonsky, as well as the classic story of General Ross chasing Banner with the U.S. military.

With a lot more action and a lot less introspection compared to Ang Lee's Hulk, it is a faster-paced, more compelling story that will thrill fans of the old show and of the comic series.

Not quite as good overall as Iron Man, but containing a nice little appearance from Tony Stark, it does help set the table for the next step towards the Avengers movie that is in the works.

M. Night Shyamalan's latest outing shows us why it's good to let go of the past and try new things. Shyamalan's attempt to get back to scary movies with bizarre twist endings leaves us wishing for the good old days of Lady in the Water.
The Happening feels like an old-school disaster movie, but with a modern environmental twist. The idea isn't bad, but the acting surely is. I always thought Mark Wahlberg was better than this airy, weak performance, but he sure doesn't show us the same caliber of performance we saw in The Italian Job, or The Departed, or Four Brothers, or even Shooter. Zooey Daschenel is a better singer and a better model than she is an actress.
The bad acting was enough to kill any suspense and intrigue that a solid story idea could have created. And the severe telegraphing of his typical twist ending ruin and chance for shock value that M. Night could have had in store.

So, The Incredible Hulk gets a B and The Happening gets a D+
--John Berry, Online Editor--

This week is BIG!

2008-06-11T15:17:00.000-07:00

Nerd overload.
The Incredible Hulk is hitting theaters this weekend. As is the new M. Night piece The Happening. And not being released this week, but coming to my favorite local theater (The Ambler Theater) this week is The Fall, a foreign film being billed as the best visuals since Pan's Labyrinth.
Being a child of the 80s, I grew up watching the old Hulk tv show with Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno, as well as all of the Marvel Comics related cartoon shows that flooded the airwaves in the 80s. All of these cartoons ushered me right into the world of comic books. So the glut of Marvel Comics movies that have come out recently and will in the next few years have me very excited. (The little tease of the Avengers movie that is in the works is worth sitting through the Iron Man credits for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.) The new Hulk movie looks to make up for the lackluster Eric Bana outing from 2003. I believe in Ed Norton. He rarely steers us wrong (we can forgive Everyone Says I Love You). With Louis Leterrier at the helm, it should have some solid action as well as a good story. His Transporter movies were nothing short of action movie perfection.
The Happening is a return to the roots of what somehow made Shyamalan a household name. After disenchanted audiences griped and moaned about Lady In The Water and The Village, M. Night goes back after the audiences he won over with The Sixth Sense and Signs. Although, people seem to forget that his first major studio film was about a ten-year-old kid's hard time in Catholic school. All of these movies were great films in their own right when compared to the genres of film they belong in and not expecting Lady to be like Signs just because it's the same director. You have to respect a director's desire to dabble in different genres because they want to and not to appease fickle audiences. Shyamalan and Danny Boyle are perfect examples of how a good director can make good movies no matter what the genre.
Ambler getting The Fall is just giving me a chance to be lazy and not drive to Philly. All I really know about this one is that the visuals are stunning and the main premise is a little kid hearing a fantastical story from some dude in a hospital. That, and my friend Shannon LOVED it. Not that it would mean anything to anyone else, but she never steers me wrong either. Maybe I should hook her up with Edward Norton.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

The Strangers

2008-06-04T18:16:00.000-07:00

This past weekend I checked out The Strangers because it looked like it was going to be something a little different than the recent glut of crap that Hollywood tries to pass as horror movies.
It was a little different. Just a little.
That little bit was enough to make it better than a lot of recent horror movies, but it's no masterpiece. When your standard is The Ring and Scream though, it's not hard to look good in comparison.
Our protagonists begin their adventure with a moody car ride to a nice little house in the middle of the woods that turns out to be the male lead's parents' vacation home. He and his love interest clearly have had a fight. James, played by Scott Speedman from Felicity and not Scott Speedman from Underworld:Evolution since James is a giant baby, decides to leave Liv Tyler's Kristen alone at the house so they can have some time apart.
Enter scary people in masks.
The good part is that they make the villains much scarier by making them just human with no allusions toward extraordinary talents or strength. The realism pushes the story along by not calling for the audience to reach too far to believe in the situation. Some genuine suspenseful moments and some real tension are created by mood and not by gore, which is a lot more than can be said for most of the poor excuses for scary movies that have come to theaters recently.
The better part is actually Liv Tyler. She's pretty good in a role that seems like it could have been disastrous in another actress' hands.
The bad part is watching them telegraph the standard suspension building tactics, like Kristen running outside, falling in a ditch and hurting her leg. Who didn't see that coming? And James' buddy showing up and getting shot in the face. Wow, creative.
The worse part is the continual shaky, hand-held camera use trying to create mood. Yeah, lots of movies have used it to try to look cool and creative, but it comes off just looking cheap and contrived. Good use of hand-held camera work is based around moderation. Making the vast majority of your movie hand-held just looks like you didn't want to try to compose your shots or put effort into cinematography.
Overall, I give The Strangers a C- because it is watchable, but not good.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

No time for love Dr. Jones.

2008-05-21T08:31:00.000-07:00

It's here. The latest installment in the summer movie nerdfest. Harrison Ford dons the fedora once again for a throwback to classic cinema at it's biggest and most kitchy and over-the-top.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull rolls out with the big summer movie blockbusters. In typical Lucas/Spielberg fashion, it's BIG. Huge action sequences. Lots of plot twists and turns. Global travel. Nuclear explosions. Area 51.
Okay, that's probably not what you were expecting, well, neither was I. It seems that Lucas and Spielberg decided there was a need to update the Dr. Jones storyline with some more modern plot devices.
It has the feel of classic cinema with some contrived but interesting elements that have the epic feel of the old Indiana Jones movies. It is more fun than a lot of the movies that have come out in recent memory, even if it isn't as good as a Temple of Doom.
Soviet conspiracy in the middle of the red scare in America sets the stage as Indy gets pulled out of the cushy academic life and back in to the adventuring business. A good friend of his has gotten a hold of a legendary artifact which has "powers" that are unexplained.
The story goes from olden conspiracy to newer conspiracy as it gets flavored with tinges of an X-Files episode. But not to worry, there is plenty of swinging from the rafters and old-fashioned whip fighting to go around.
I'll give it a solid B for the effort.
-John Berry, Online Editor--

Hitting the theaters this weekend.

2008-05-15T06:00:00.000-07:00

Reaching back to the good old days of 2005, a small independent film starring Ugly Betty's America Ferrara called How the Garcia Girls Spent Their Summer is being re-released. It is described as similar to her debut, Real Women Have Curves, and is getting a limited release as many smaller films tend toward. This might be my pick for the week's new releases as nothing else is really exciting me.
Narnia's exploration continues with Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian storms into theaters to knock Iron Man out of the top box office slot. The first installment was a solid film and was as good as i remember the book being. Granted, i don't remember much of the book being that i read it around the age of six. But i never read the other books in the series, so the sequel film doesn't have the nostalgia factor for me. It does seem to boast more action and less fantasy than Wardrobe, so it might have promise. If i were six again. Which i'm not.
The only other movie i know of hitting the big screen this week is another limited-release, indie flick called Reprise. European arthouse fare about two friends who want to be writers. From the descriptions, does not sound that thrilling. However, some of the reviews are lauding it's ability to push and pull it's audience emotionally from one extreme to another. So the positive reviews are making me interested, even though i rarely agree with real film critics.
Maybe it's a week to go see something that's been out for a while. Forgetting Sarah Marshall, here i come...
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Sicko

2008-05-13T18:29:00.001-07:00

This weekend i finally got a chance to check out Michael Moore's film about the medical and insurance industries, Sicko.
Moore starts out with a brief discussion of people who cannot get insurance, but covers more about people who have insurance but still cannot get proper medical care.
Contrasting America's system with several around the world, he also delves into the socialized aspects of other countries' health care systems.
While many people criticize Moore for making one sided documentaries, i can't fault him for it. Even when i disagree with his views on subjects, i appreciate his right to tell the story as he sees it. I have never seen a documentary that does not try to purport a specific viewpoint. No filmmaker i know of keeps their own views out of the products they create.
Back to the movie, not the man...
Sicko offers an interesting look at how government funded health care has worked around the world and the severe lack of regulation in our own country. In a time when health care is garnering headlines in all of the political discussions, this movie is an informative piece that serves to pull on the heartstrings a bit more than many of Moore's previous films, but ultimately is informative and thought provoking.
No one can really look at the current state of health care and honestly say there is nothing wrong with it. If nothing else, Moore offers up talking points to carry the discussion along.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

This week in theaters

2008-05-08T09:10:00.000-07:00

Okay, so there was a big week last week for the movie industry. Iron Man heralded the start of the summer blockbuster season with a hundred million dollar debut. A big moneymaker that is also getting good reviews means a sequel is already in the works.
But to follow that up this week, we get what could be a lackluster weekend.
Speed Racer is going to be the clear winner as far as American dollars are concerned. It looks a little too flashy and colorful for my taste. It is a live-action cartoon though, so it is no surprise that it looks like a cartoon. The style of the movie looks nothing like the old cartoon though. That might be a draw for some people, but it seems like they took out every aspect of the classic show except the names.
On the romantic comedy side there is What Happens in Vegas with Cameron Diaz and Asthon Kutcher. This looks like another the-funniest-part-are-in-the-trailer movie. With a promising supporting cast (Rob Corddry and Zack Galifianakis for starters) it should probably be better, but it looks like it'll be another formulaic typically cheesy boy-meets-girl crap fest with a formulaic twist.
No more major releases leave us with Frontier(s) from French filmmaker Xavier Gens. A horror movie meets a criminal/action movie set at a rural inn in the French countryside. Sounds like From Dusk Til Dawn in France to me. Might be worth watching for horror movie fans like me, but it might be yet another disappointment in a long line of disappointing European horror flicks.
The one movie this week that has me really interested is an international movie called The Fall. In limited release, we might not even get to see it here, but it should be visually thrilling and a wild fantasy film in the vein of Pan's Labyrinth.
Next week should be back to the blockbusters with the next Narnia installment.
--John Berry,
Online Editor

Yes, I'm a nerd.

2008-05-03T20:00:00.000-07:00

It's true. I had glasses growing up. Was in the smart kid classes. Playing sports and I were not friends. Most of the cool kids and I were not either.
I read a LOT of comic books. Still have some around. So the glut of superhero movies around has given me much joy and nerd-heartache.
Bad comic book movies are a crime. See: Punisher (both Tom Jane and Dolph Lundgren), Daredevil, Ghost Rider, etc.
For me, good comic book movies however are a guilty pleasure like no other.
Iron Man is just that. Made by nerds. Jon Favreau is clearly one of us at heart. Yeah, he's cool now that he's a Hollywood big-shot, but you can tell he was a nerd once.
Thoroughly enjoyable. Fast paced. Solid action. Stupid jokes. And more nerdy tech-heavy sequences than you can shake a plastic lightsaber at.
Robert Downey Jr. was a questionable call in my mind before I saw this movie. He really surprised me though and made the lovable jerk billionaire come to life. It's a good thing too because we'll probably see at least a couple of sequels.
The supporting cast was perfect too. Gwyneth Paltrow is super-hot as a redhead. Oh, and she plays Pepper with a depth and complexity that I never saw in a comic book, since most comic books write female characters that are one-dimensional props. And Gwyneth looks hot as a redhead. Terrence Howard is always great, so there is nothing new there. Jeff Bridges makes a pretty tough bad guy. Who would have thunk Tucker could be so b.a. Not to mention a minor but awesome role played by Clark Gregg who directed the upcoming film rendition of Chuck Palahniuk's masterpiece of modern fiction.
A perfect balance of fever-pitched action and exploration of the origins of the Iron Man makes this an ideal distraction from real life.
Iron Man gets a B+.
--John Berry, online editor--

Hollywood has broad summer range behind the blockbusters

2008-04-25T22:10:00.000-07:00

(From The Associated Press)

LOS ANGELES (AP) _ Along with the major blockbusters, Hollywood offers loads of other films this summer. A look at the highlights:

May:

"The Fall" — A bedridden man in early Hollywood spins wild fantasies to encourage a young girl at the same hospital.

"How the Garcia Girls Spent Their Summer" — America Ferrera and Elizabeth Pena star in a comedy about three generations of Mexican-American women.

"Made of Honor" — Patrick Dempsey covertly romances his best pal (Michelle Monaghan) after she asks him to be "maid of honor" at her wedding.

"Meet Bill" — A lingerie saleswoman (Jessica Alba) helps turn life around for a loser (Aaron Eckhart).

"Noise" — Tim Robbins stars as a man who turns vigilante to combat the constant racket of Manhattan.

"Redbelt" — David Mamet directs Chiwetel Ejiofor as a man of honor in a corrupt world of mixed martial arts fighting.

"Son of Rambow" — A British charmer follows two wildly different boys who team up to make their own "Rambo" action flick.

"The Strangers" — A couple (Liv Tyler and Scott Speedman) face terror as masked intruders invade their home.

"War, Inc." — A hit man (John Cusack) poses as a corporate flunky to pull off an assassination in a war-torn country. The dark satire co-stars Hilary Duff.

"What Happens in Vegas" — Cameron Diaz and Ashton Kutcher are scheming strangers who wed on a whim then battle over a Vegas fortune they've won.

June:

"The Happening" — M. Night Shyamalan's latest features Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel in a tale of a couple running from an apocalyptic terror.

"Kit Kittredge: An American Girl" — Abigail Breslin stars as a plucky Depression-era girl in an adaptation from the American Girl book series.

"The Love Guru" — Mike Myers is a self-help weirdo trying to patch things up between a hockey star and his wife. With Jessica Alba and Justin Timberlake.

"The Promotion" — John C. Reilly and Seann William Scott are supermarket workers duking it out for a management job.

"Wanted" — Angelina Jolie's an operative for a secret agency who helps train a dormant prodigy (James McAvoy) to use his super abilities. With Morgan Freeman.

July:

"American Teen" — It's the "Breakfast Club" in real life with this teen documentary about a jock, a nerd, a stud, a popular girl and an artsy one.

"Brideshead Revisited" — Hayley Atwell, Ben Whishaw and Emma Thompson star in an update of Evelyn Waugh's 1930s-era classic.

"Gonzo" — Director Alex Gibney's documentary examines the outrageous life of boozing, drug-abusing writer Hunter S. Thompson.

"Hellboy II: The Golden Army" — Ron Perlman and director Guillermo del Toro reunite for another adventure about the superhero from way down under.

"The Longshots" — An ex-high school jock (Ice Cube) coaches his niece (Keke Palmer), the first girl to play Pop Warner football.

"Mamma Mia!" — Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan and the music of ABBA highlight this musical about a woman sorting out which of three old flames is the dad to walk her daughter down the aisle at her wedding.

"Religulous" — Bill Maher goes globe-trotting to talk with people about God and religion.

"Space Chimps" — Stanley Tucci and Cheryl Hines provide voices for an animated tale of lower primates in space.

"Step Brothers" — Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly are adult slackers who become family when one's mom marries the other's dad.

"The Wackness" — Ben Kingsley's a frustrated shrink who forms a bond with an equally frustrated teen. With Mary-Kate Olsen and Famke Janssen.

August:

"The Accidental Husband" — Uma Thurman's wedding plans are knocked for a loop when she learns a prank left her married to a man she's never met.

"Babylon A.D." — Vin Diesel's a courier in a post-apocalyptic world whose package turns out to be a mystery woman.

"Bangkok Dangerous" — Nicolas Cage is an assassin whose loner life is altered as he connects with a shop girl and a street punk in Thailand.

"Crossing Over" — An ensemble including Harrison Ford, Sean Penn and Ashley Judd are featured in a Los Angeles immigrant drama.

"Fly Me to the Moon" — A 3-D animated adventure centers on three young flies that tag along on the Apollo 11 moon landing.

"Hamlet 2" — Steve Coogan and Catherine Keener star in a comedy about a teacher staging an irreverent musical sequel to "Hamlet."

"Hell Ride" — A Western on two-wheels features bikers avenging a murder by a rival gang. With Michael Madsen and David Carradine.

"Henry Poole Is Here" — Luke Wilson's a shut-in whose nosy neighbors teach him he can't live in isolation.

"The House Bunny" — An exiled Playboy bunny (Anna Faris) offers lessons on living to the social misfits of a college sorority.

"The International" — Interpol agent Clive Owen and prosecutor Naomi Watts take on a global bank that finances terrorism.

"Mirrors" — Kiefer Sutherland's a night watchman at a department store whose mirrors hold a horrible secret.

"Pineapple Express" — A pothead (Seth Rogen) who witnesses a murder ends up on the run with his dealer (James Franco).

"The Rocker" — Rainn Wilson and Christina Applegate star in the tale of an '80s rock drummer who stages a comeback 20 years after he's booted from his band.

"Star Wars: The Clone Wars" — George Lucas presents an animated adventure featuring Jedis Anakin Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi as prelude to a TV cartoon series.

"Swing Vote" — A critical election comes down to the vote of one apathetic, beer-chugging nobody (Kevin Costner).

"Towelhead" — An Arab-American teen deals with her sexual awakening amid the Gulf War.

"Traitor" — Don Cheadle's an ex-American operative suspected in a terrorism conspiracy. With Guy Pearce.

"Vicky Cristina Barcelona" — Woody Allen's latest features Scarlett Johansson, Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem in a romantic drama in Spain.

"Wild Child" — A teen brat (Emma Roberts) is packed off to a strict British boarding school. With Aidan Quinn and Natasha Richardson.

New at the theaters

2008-04-24T17:07:00.000-07:00

This week's offerings seem kind of disappointing on the surface, but they might be worth looking in to.

Rogue is the sophomore effort from Greg McLean. If any of you remember the excessively disappointing Wolf Creek from 2005 then you'll know the only part of this that might be exciting is the comic value of cartoonish violence that follows long stretches of nothing.

While probably less funny than Rogue, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay looks like it will deliver a laugh or two. That might be about it though. Another one of those the-funniest-parts-are-already-in-the-trailer-so-why-bother-seeing-it romps is about all I expect out of this.

Ewan McGregor surfaces with Deception as he apparently tries to give Hugh Jackman some indie cred. Two high profile actors in a movie by a director fresh off of the advertisement circuit actually makes me interested. McGregor seems to pick roles well. He has yet to really let me down, and the previews for this one look like it will at least keep my attention, possibly even entertain me.

Burt Reynolds is apparently not dead. Who'd have thunk? Deal is, as one might expect from the title and cast, a movie about poker. Reynolds tries to teach a young upstart gambler how to play with the big boys. What makes me think this has been done before? Oh, because it has, over and over and over again. Let's take bets that the old timer gets into a wild predicament where he's forced to square off against his young pal.

Saturday Night Live alumni rarely make good movies when they team up. But with Tina Fey and Amy Poehler under the watchful eye of SNL writer Michael McCullers, who also penned an Austin Powers movie or two, could prove to be one of the exceptions to the rule as they bust out Baby Mama this weekend. Rumor has it that they are a little light on the Mean Girl's touch as Tina Fey had no part in writing this one. That might be a good thing for people like me who think Mean Girls was overrated and not that funny. 30 Rock, however, is comic genius. So if Tina Fey's past is any evidence, she's best when delivering her own material, but this has potential.

--john berry, online editor

The buzz around this week's releases.

2008-04-17T00:30:00.000-07:00

Hitting theaters on Friday, April 18:

Jackie Chan and Jet Li team up for the first time in The Forbidden Kingdom. In theory, every fan of kung-fu movies should be lining up for this one. Mixing Chan's more goofy and campy film history with Li's more straight-up action history seems like a good idea. A lot of buzz about it being family friendly makes me think it's leaning more towards the Chan end of the spectrum. Given director Rob Minkoff's history (Lion King and Stuart Little) this might be too kid-friendly for standard kung-fu audiences. My prediction: enjoyable but nothing great, although the first time teaming of Li and Chan should be epic.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall is a first time director who grabbed up the second string players from every comedy that's been out in the past few years. You'll recognize several supporting cast members from Knocked Up and various other Apatow productions. Jason Segel gets dumped and accidentally ends up at a vacation resort with his ex and her new dude. It'll probably be funnier than I'm expecting, but not full-fledged-Apatow-project funny.

Al Pacino is back with 88 Minutes and critics are calling it too long and slow among other not-so-friendly things. Not sure how you could go wrong with an action movie from the guy who produced all of the Mighty Ducks movies, oh, wait, there we go. I'm probably going to skip this one.

Morgan Spurlock's Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden? opens in limited release. He ventures to the middle east to talk with Muslims about America's "war on terror" and their views of it. His documentary past that makes no attempt to hide the fact that he has a point to be made with his social experiments foretells what this one will be. Spurlock clearly wants to make a point with this one too. One might think with the tone of the promotional materials that he is not agreeing with Bush. With that said, I'll probably go see it when it comes to Philly area theaters. He makes funny, thought provoking films and this one looks like more of the same.

The funniest thing in theaters this week is probably going to be Pathology. Another in a long line of horror/thriller movies that would only scare/thrill viewers with head injuries. A German director with a history of short films and music videos somehow got Milo Ventimiglia while he was bored on a break form Heroes, and Alyssa Milano who was apparently bored with doing nothing. As a fan of the horror genre, I think I'll have to skip this one.

--John Berry, Online Editor

The Counterfeiters

2008-04-16T10:31:00.000-07:00

Okay, so The Counterfeiters is yet another limited release, foreign film, based on a true story. All the fixins for a movie nerd like me. Subtitles, small independent theater, actors no one at the Regal Cinemas has ever heard of. Yes, I have an obsession with the Ambler Theater. Good movies, friendly staff, reasonable prices, why wouldn't I have this crush on the place?
So, the movie. . .
The protagonist, Sally (short for Salomon,) is a career criminal in nazi Germany. He mainly prints his own money, but touches on other illicit activities. After his arrest, for both the crimes and the being Jewish, he is sent to a concentration camp where he is labeled as both Jewish and criminal so that his fellow prisoners know what he is.
When the nazis find out exactly what Sally is capable of, they put him to work for them. With Sally at the helm of what has been called the largest counterfeiting operation in history, the nazis print enough foreign currencies to fund their war effort.
Sally just goes along to keep himself alive in desperate times, as do the other members of his crew. Once one of his fellow prisoners/coworkers in the printing plant voices his opposition to the effort, the movie takes a turn from historical study to fascinating character study of just how much a person is capable of in order to keep himself safe and alive. Sally has to keep up appearances, but help hide what his friend is doing to intentionally sabotage the operation, not only from the nazis, but from fellow inmates that fear for their own safety.
Balancing his own life, and those of the men he has bonded with in these horrid conditions, with the idea of helping the greater good becomes very complicated. If they openly defy the operation, they will all be killed and the nazis will find other prisoners to do the work.
The movie deftly weaves through these complicated issues of self-exploration while building a detailed picture of the historical facts behind the personal struggles.
The only failing of the movie would be in the lack of in-depth study of the supporting characters. So much attention is paid to Sally, that many of the fascinating minor players fall to the wayside.
Overall, the story is gripping, the drama is touching, the characters are captivating. With a run time of one hour, thirty-nine minutes, there is plenty of room for more probing of those minor characters.
I'll have to give it a B for the effort.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Count On Me

2008-04-14T20:40:00.001-07:00

We in the newspaper business like to see ourselves as civic-minded souls.

We almost play the role of Don Quixote as we use our place in the communities we serve to exhort our readers to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

It is a sacred right, one that has evolved from allowing only property-owning white males to cast a ballot.

Some black males, followed by women, received the right to vote in the 19th and 20th centuries. The National Voting Rights Act of 1965 sealed the deal.

If you are a citizen - of any gender, creed or color - you are guaranteed the right for which history books tell us Americans fought and died.

Evidence is mounting, however, that those who sacrificed their lives for our freedoms may be spinning in their graves.

This horrifying notion has been put forth with such aplomb by David Earnhardt in his documentary "Uncounted: The Math of American Elections" that you may never take the holy voting process seriously again.

And it makes one wonder if the real role of the mainstream media, one that has virtually turned away from these seemingly founded and well-researched accusations or egregious acts against the common citizen, should be to encourage a voter boycott.

What if they throw an election and nobody came?

It would be almost as compelling to watch at the 80-minute effort produced, directed and written by Earnhardt, who will be on hand April 16 for a Q & A session following a screening of his project at the Hiway Theatre in Jenkintown.

"Uncounted" is made in the spirit of Michael Moore's veracity to awaken the American public from its slumber on core issues. Although lacking some of the comic relief of Moore's narration ("Uncounted" has none, whatsoever, adding to its impact), this project could go down as the political documentary that Michael Moore should have made after it became clear that the irregularities - seemingly centering on the rich (whites from the right) winning national elections by disenfranchising the poor (minorities who lean left come Election Day) - of 2000 in Florida were not anomalies.

If this were a relay, Earnhardt picks up the baton and continues the race for justice by exposing almost laughable and obvious discrepancies and miscarriages of justice in the 2004 presidential elections and again in the 2006 elections.

Among these discrepancies are eye-opening exit poll numbers that don't add up, voter suppression that evokes the name "Jim Crow" without stretching it, the insidious evil of under voting (less votes reported than ballots cast in key districts in key states), electronic voting and the inability to confirm its accuracy, privatization of the election process that rivals that of the the privatization for profit of the war in Iraq and so on and so on.

There is so much here that more than one viewing is suggested. Even if you are unable to make it to Jenkintown for a one-time, mid-week viewing, I suggest you go to the Web site www.UncountedTheMovie.com and order a copy for yourself.

It could be the most patriotic act of your life.

--Gordon Glantz, Managing Editor

Run, Fatboy, Run

2008-04-08T19:14:00.000-07:00

It's probably time for me to see some mainstream films, but I see what I feel like seeing.
"Run, Fatboy, Run" is another British comedy that is not really getting a lot of attention and is not a box office smash. With Simon Pegg, star of "Shaun of the Dead" and "Hot Fuzz," at the front of a bizarre premise, it was bound to be amusing.
Pegg and Michael Ian Black (of "The State" fame, look it up kids) wrote it. David Schwimmer, yeah, the guy from "Friends," in his feature film directorial debut, manned the helm. A strange combination to say the least, but it turns out to work like magic. Disparate and seemingly incongruous comedic talents that don't seem to work on paper manage to pull it off without a hitch.
Pegg plays a coward who runs out on his gorgeous, pregnant fiancee on the day they were supposed to get hitched and essentially spends the next few years running from all responsibility. When the mother of his child decides to move on, he freaks out and wants her back. So he runs a marathon. Right, I know, it sounds like every cliche and lame joke in the book. But again, what seems like a bad idea on paper worked out really well in real film life.
Other than the improbable pairing of Thandie Newton and Simon Pegg, it actually seemed kind of feasible without stretching the imagination too much. Pegg's Dennis actually tells his ex at one point that he isn't trying to win her back with his desperate scheme, but that he'd settle for her respect. The more touching aspect of the film takes on its own life as Dennis becomes human and almost lovable instead of the caricature of a loser that he seems on the surface.
Somehow, the merging of these three seemingly inappropriately matched comedians brings out the best in each of them and the writing and directing team puts together a stirring little comedy.
I'll give it an A.
--John Berry, Online Editor

new on dvd...

2008-03-11T15:13:00.000-07:00

I don't often get excited for DVD releases, but this week had two winners. "Dan In Real Life" and "No Country for Old Men" both hit the local retail shelves. One store had them both for 30 bucks, not sure why they would package those two together, but I personally benefited, so yeah.

Everyone knows about the Oscar barrage that the Coen Brothers pulled in. Deservedly so. The movie was a masterpiece. No one could ever make the word "friendo" sound so ominous like Javier Bardem did.

But honestly, I was more excited for the release of Steve Carrell's brilliant tragic romantic comedy, "Dan In Real Life." Knowing Mr Carrell as we all do from his days at The Daily Show and then his most visible role as the endearingly hapless head of a paper company branch office. Of course you can't overlook his strange, comedic roles in various films ranging from a middle aged man with no romantic prospects, to a mentally deficient weatherman.

Perhaps his most interesting offering to date (even for a self-professed fan of the majority of his work) is this title role of the single dad who writes an advice column but can make no sense of his own life. Dan bumbles his relationships with his own kids, with his family, with every woman he meets, but maintains his level head when it comes to other people's problems.

Written and directed by Peter Hedges, who penned "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" and adapted Nick Hornby's inventive novel, "About a Boy," for the screen, the script fall just short of greatness, but is lifted back up by the cast. This ensemble looks at first glance to be a mish-mosh of hey-its-that-guys but melds together for a forceful dramatic performance.

Carrell's performance is the key to it all. As he often tends to go for the, um, less dramatic parts, I was doubtful about seeing him try his hand at strict drama with a touch of comedy, but I was pleasantly surprised by his ability to carry a cast full of heavywieghts like John Mahoney, Dianne Wiest and Juliette Binoche. With so many talented character actors around him, Carrell still manages to shine with wit and substance.

I'd give this one an A-
--John Berry--
TimesHerald.com

In Bruges:

2008-03-03T17:58:00.000-08:00

So the trailer led me to believe that "In Bruges" was going to be a funny action movie with a bland performance from the ever mediocre Colin Farrell. British action-comedies are usually fun and interesting.
Not a bad way to spend a couple of hours. I enjoy movies that are less than intellectual from time to time.
From the opening sequence it was clear that it was not going to be the movie that I had expected.
Instead, it was more of a dramatic look at a would-be hitman who makes a mistake. While it was still funny at points and and had some action sequences, it was way better than the goofy romp that I had expected.
Brendan Gleeson plays the role-model type hitman that Farrell has to tag along with as they lay low in a small town in Belgium and await further instructions from their boss. As a restless young man trying to wrap his brain around what he just did, laying low is not an option.
The story unfolds with a lot of twists and turns around the complex relationships between Farrell and Gleeson and then between Gleeson and their boss, a foul-mouthed Ralph Fiennes.
Without giving away too many of the critical plot points and ruin the movie, the mistake Farrell's Ray made proves too much for himself to handle. It is also a point of contention for their angry boss.
These bad-guy killers turn out to be intricate characters that go beyond the typical movie hitman. The multi-dimensional anti-hero of Farrell's might be his best performance to date. Brendan Gleeson is always a good actor so I was not shocked by his excellent job as the father-figure gangster.
I often see the twists coming in movies and it sometimes ruins my enjoyment of said plot twists, but even i didn't see some of these turns coming. The plot is complex and thought provoking as you are forced to examine what happens to a person who commits an unconscionable mistake and the repercussions such a mistake would entail. Farrell actually makes a murderer the sympathetic centerpiece of what might be one of the most original movies to come from the UK in quite a while. Of course, British movies are always more unique than the typical Hollywood fare that's been clogging up our theaters lately.

I'll give it an A.
--John Berry
Online Editor
TimesHerald.com

post oscars: some surprises and some not-so-much

2008-03-03T17:49:00.000-08:00

Oscar winners are in.

Javier Bardem got what he deserved.

So did Daniel Day-Lewis.

So did the Coen Brothers.

Jon Stewart was funny, but not as funny as on his own show.

Diablo Cody got an Oscar for writing "Juno." Not bad for a stripper who cleaned up her life but not her wardrobe. An engaging story with some good dialogue and some weak spots. I was a little shocked that it won, but i think it deserves recognition.

Tilda Swinton was a suprise to me because i thought she was overlooked by a lot of people in the entertainment industry when "Michael Clayton" came out. She did a great job in a role that was inherently challenging. She had to garner sympathy and be hated at the same time to pull that role off and she hit it dead-on.

The biggest surprise for me was that Hollywood actually recognized a lot of quality films and seemed to shy away from the blockbuster hits this year.

--john berry, online editor

Oscar picks:

2008-02-18T14:33:00.000-08:00

The Oscars are right around the corner, so i figured I would offer up my picks for all of the categories. These are not really the ones I think WILL win, but the ones I want to win. for your own full list of nominees got to: Oscar.com or for a printable list: Click here

Performance by an actor in a leading role:
Daniel Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood": His performance is beyond belief. A great actor that just gets better.

Performance by an actor in a supporting role
Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men": This movie was amazing and probably would have been half the film it was with anyone else in that role.

Performance by an actress in a leading role
Ellen Page in "Juno": She did a fantastic job as a relative newcomer in a difficult role with some iffy dialogue in the beginning.

Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton": A great movie that would deserve more awards any other year when the competition was not so tough.

Best animated feature film of the year
"Persepolis," Marjane Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaud: Honestly, didn't see any of the nominees, but I would love to see a film not made for kids win this category.

Achievement in art direction
"Atonement," Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer: Good movie with a weak, rushed ending, but it was beautiful to watch.

Achievement in cinematography
"No Country for Old Men," Roger Deakins: Always shoots beautiful pictures, and is competing with himself in this category, but No Country was just visually stunning.

Achievement in costume design
"Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street," Colleen Atwood: Stylish and slick are almost always words to describe Tim Burton movies, and this one is no exception with the costumes being one of the main visual elements tying the style together.

Achievement in directing
"No Country for Old Men," Joel Coen and Ethan Coen: Always great directors. That is all.

Best documentary feature
"Sicko," A Dog Eat Dog Films Production: Michael Moore and Meghan O'Hara: Mr. Moore can do no wrong as far as filmmaking. His politic views are a point of contention for many people, but too many people can't see past the politics and see what a terrific filmmaker he is.

Best documentary short subject
I saw none of these movies, so I can't even try to pick one.

Achievement in film editing
"The Bourne Ultimatum" (Universal): Christopher Rouse: Even though it strayed almost completely from the book, fast-paced, enjoyable films that are well made can be forgiven for some oversights.

Best foreign language film of the year
Again, saw none.

Achievement in makeup
"Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" (Walt Disney): Ve Neill and Martin Samuel: Norbit's makeup may be fantastic, but if Norbit wins an Oscar, there is no hope for the future of Hollywood.

Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score)
"The Kite Runner," Alberto Iglesias: Great movie that should have been up for more awards, but the score was great too.

Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original song)
I don't care.

Best motion picture of the year
"There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax) A JoAnne Sellar/Ghoulardi Film Company Production: JoAnne Sellar, Paul Thomas Anderson and Daniel Lupi, Producers: see a blog entry a couple spots down for mroe info on this one.

Best animated short film
Dunno about this one either.

Best live action short film
Yawn.

Achievement in sound editing
"Transformers" (DreamWorks and Paramount in association with Hasbro): Ethan Van der Ryn and Mike Hopkins: The kid in me wants this to get some kind of award. Even though it was too much talking not enough fighting robots.

Achievement in sound mixing
"No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage): Skip Lievsay, Craig Berkey, Greg Orloff and Peter Kurland: I don't really know enough about sound mixing to judge this one, so i'll just go with the one i like most.

Achievement in visual effects
"The Golden Compass" (New Line in association with Ingenious Film Partners): Michael Fink, Bill Westenhofer, Ben Morris and Trevor Wood: Not a great movie, but the special effects looked great, as did most of the visual design overall.

Adapted screenplay
"No Country for Old Men" Written for the screen by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen: Great story, great dialogue, great use of silence.

Original screenplay
"The Savages" Written by Tamara Jenkins: See my last review for more on this one, but the script was touching and funny and thought-provoking, peppered with some well crafted banter between the brother and sister leads.

The Savages

2008-02-15T14:56:00.000-08:00

Writer/Director Tamara Jenkins (apparently a Philly native) hits the target pretty well with an interesting tale of a family scattered around the country and forced to cope with a tragedy.
Jenkins' previous semi-hit, "Slums of Beverly Hills," has a similar feel as a comedic look at some less-than-funny circumstances unfolding as disfunctional families bear down and power through.
The similarities are striking, but "The Savages" gives a much more developed story through multifaceted characters that offer insight to how different people deal with the same situations.
Anyone who has dealt with loss and aging parents can tell you, this is never a cut and dry situation. "The Savages" does touch on that, but fails to really capture how complex these issues can be.
Instead Jenkins concentrates more on the relationships between an estranged father and two siblings who have drifted apart from each other. Philip Seymour Hoffman, who is always a fine actor, delivers another stellar performance as Jon Savage, the older brother who needs to be the responsible one as the Laura Linney's character, Wendy, falls apart. His emotional disconnect allows him to make the rational decisions to help their father who is slipping into dementia and has just lost his girlfriend of 20 years.
Jon goes through the motions and tries to keep Wendy above water as he himself is sinking and trying desperately to hide that from his kid sister. Hoffman's strongest parts of the movie are his portrayal of the emotional side of Jon Savage being forced back by the rational, college-professor side of Jon Savage.
Both siblings have to reconcile the fact that the father who was never really there for them is now in desperate need of their help. Watching an aging parent become less of what they once were and falling in to a role of dependent is hard whether that parent was the hero or the villain before. Mustering the courage to help the parent who gave their all is difficult, but even more difficult is finding the good within yourself to pick up a parent who abandoned you decades ago.
Jenkins' script weaves its way through that journey fairly well, but could use more screen time to explore that further.
Overall, the movie brings an enjoyable story that is thought provoking and sad with touches of humor, sometimes in the most inappropriate moments, that provides a unique perspective on loss and mourning.
B+
--John Berry
Times Herald Staff

JB's Oscar pick: best picture

2008-02-07T16:20:00.000-08:00

As a fairly serious movie nerd, I always enjoy the academy award season, if not only for the healthy discussions of all things movie-related.
Like most years, I've seen most of the movies in the major categories.
I went to see "Michael Clayton" to finish off the best picture candidates.
For once, I think all five of the best pic noms are actually all good movies.
Clayton was a solid story with a great cast. One of the weak points was Clooney's performance. While he was good in the lead role, I feel like I've seen him perform much better in other movies. He was better than a lot of actors out there, but it seemed like a sub-par performance from an actor who has proved he is capable of more.
"Juno" was a lot of fun. Funny, thought provoking script. Quality acting from some often underrated actors (including J.K. Simmons as Juno's father in a simultaneously amusing and touching performance and Jason Bateman whom I love from Arrested Development). There were a lot of minor flaws throughout the movie, like some awkward dialogue early on, that don't detract from the enjoyability of the film, but which I would consider serious enough to not deem it best-picture worthy.
"Atonement" had the makings of being a profound and intense epic love story. The cast all pulled though with some of the best performances I've seen each of them in. The story was compelling and kept me wrapped up in a movie that seemed a little slow at points, but kept rolling along. All the build up seemed rushed into a hasty final act that was forced and a let down.
"No Country For Old Men" was nearly perfect. A few minor flaws that involve anachronisms that are barely noticed as you watch didn't take away from anything. A unique story with some impressive performances, especially Javier Bardem, drive a long, involved plot with a sparse soundscape to a fevered plateau that makes it one of the best movies I've ever seen, let alone just in 2007.
"There Will Be Blood" brought another level to filmmaking. Daniel Day-Lewis is always strong, but this might be the finest performance of his already impressive career. This period piece takes you into the depths of the oil rush and gives a stunning portrayal of every aspect of life as both ends of society effected by the industry are pushed farther apart. While I'm not a fan of some of his work, Paul Thomas Anderson shows how good a talented filmmaker can be when he has a script that is perfect and a cast that cannot miss.
If I were voting for the best picture oscar, it would be hard to pick, but "There Will Be Blood" would just edge out "No Country For Old Men," even though my heart would be with the Coen brothers because of their perfect record for amazing films. "There Will Be Blood" was full on perfection. Nothing bad could be said about it. So I would call it the best picture because every aspect of the film was spot on. Personally though, I would happy to see it go to either Blood or No Country.

--John Berry, Online Editor

Times Herald Movies

2008-02-07T16:10:00.000-08:00

Times Herald staffers weigh in on all things movie related. Want to get involved too? Send an email to jberry@timesherald.com