Rango (2011)

Movies I thought of while watching Rango: High Noon, The Man with No Name Trilogy, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Cat Ballou, Chinatown, Apocalypse Now, Yojimbo, Unforgiven, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Movies I did not think of while watching Rango: Rango.

At what point does a movie stop being its own film, and start becoming a clip show of Hollywood's greatest hits? When John Logan was writing Rango, perhaps he should have put a little less effort into paying homage to so many great films. His basic story is a very interesting one: a lizard that has been kept as a pet suddenly finds himself in an old west town called Dirt, where he has reinvented himself as a gunslinger. That lizard (voiced admirable by Johnny Depp) is the titular Rango, who enjoyed putting on theatrical performances in his terrarium before he suffered an environment change. Shortly after establishing himself as an expert marksmen (accidentally), Rango is promoted to town Sheriff by the Mayor of Dirt (Ned Beatty), a character obviously derived from John Huston's character in Chinatown. But as Rango delves deeper into an investigation about the town's water supply, he finds that the old west may not be the best place for a thespian lizard.

The main problem with Rango is lack of identity. The lead lizard himself is sufferring an identity crisis throughout the film, constantly asking through gloomy voiceover "who am I?" While watching Rango, I sometimes felt as though the movie were asking me "what am I?" The only thing I can say for sure is that Rango is a western, through and through. But where Logan and director Gore Verbinski go wrong is they constantly remind us of past great films, but fail to make Rango anywhere near as good as them. It reaches a point where you ask, "well, why don't I just see those movies?" The highlight of the film comes in the very beginning when Rango is running away from a hawk with another desert creature. This scene is both funny and exciting, and one of the few times that Rango is it's own film. After the scene ends however, the clip show begins.

The animation of Rango is really the saving grace of the film. Every character, though ugly, is beautifully rendered. The most interesting character to look at is bad guy Rattlesnake Jake, voiced by Bill Nighy. His winding, scaly body leads to a tail topped with a Gatling gun instead of a rattle. Every scene with him is thrilling to watch, and in fact were the only times during Rango when my heart actually felt involved in the film. Unfortunately, his scenes don't show up until much later in the film, and they are very scarce even then.

One more important thing that must be stressed is that Rango is NOT a children's movie. Despite being produced by Nickelodeon, this film is riddled with adult humor that children will not understand. On top of that, the humor is not even that funny. You may smirk at an inappropriate comment, but there is very little to laugh at here. Even though the MPAA chose to leave the word "violence" out of it's rating, Rango is littered with it, from claims to cutting off other characters "giblets" to a supporting character who constantly walks around with an arrow through his eye.

Rango is an hour and 47 minutes, but feels a lot longer. It has terrific animation, well crafted action scenes, but an overall slow pace and a very annoying lead character in Rango. Many will find the references to other films endearing and fun, but I found them to be distracting. You are probably better off just watching any of the films I listed earlier. My rating (3/10)

Kick-Ass (2010)

Being a superhero is as close as a fictional character can get to becoming a celebrity. Many people forget the names of actors and actresses, but nobody is going to dig through their mind trying to remember who the guy in the bat suit is. This easy notoriety is the reason so many of us fantasize about having superpowers (and don't pretend that you don't). So, how come nobody has tried to be a superhero? This is the exact question Kick-Ass' protagonist Dave Lizewski asks his two nerdy friends as they hang out in their local comic book store. If you ask me, it's to prevent movies like Kick-Ass from being made.

Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) is a textbook nerd. He has big glasses, a cracking voice, and is utterly invisible to the popular crowd at school. His favorite hang out spot is a comic book store with his two friends that do nothing to improve his image. Fed up with being useless in a world run by crime, Dave decides that what we really need is a superhero. Equipped with absolutely no combat skills, a green wet suit, and some clubs, Dave assumes his alter-ego as Kick-Ass. Little does Dave know that he is not the only superhero on the block. After narrowly being killed by thugs, Dave is saved by Big Daddy and Hit-Girl (Nicolas Cage and Chloe Moretz), a father-daughter team set on seeking vengeance for a past atrocity by crime lord Frank D'Amico (Mark Strong). Soon after, Dave discovers that being a superhero may not always be worth the fame.

Kick-Ass is based on the graphic novel of the same name by Mark Millar. I have not read the graphic novel, but I have no doubt that it was much better than this film. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding Kick-Ass because of Chloe Moretz's role as Hit Girl. There is apparently something about a 13 year old sporting a trucker's foul mouth and a tendency towards bloody violence that just did not sit right with most parents. Well, I'm no parent. Hit Girl was one of the only good things about this movie. As a source of several of the few laughs to be had, Chloe Moretz does an apt job of keeping this otherwise lackluster film afloat. But the real treat was seeing her interact with her character's father, Big Daddy, played brilliantly by Nicolas Cage. Cage and Moretz bring undeniable chemistry to the screen, and are an absolute delight to watch. The best scene in the entire film comes when we first meet Big Daddy and Hit Girl as their plain clothes selves, Damon and Mindy Macready. Former cop Damon is teaching his daughter how to deal with pain...by shooting her in the chest while she wears a bullet proof vest. This scene gave me hope that this movie would have many more brilliant scenes to come. Unfortunately, this movie was not called Big Daddy and Hit Girl. It's Kick-Ass. So let's discuss the titular hero.

Do you know how fun it is to watch somebody who cannot fight, try to beat up a group of criminals? You may think it's kind of funny for a few minutes, but after a while it just becomes kind of sad. Well that is how I felt watching Kick-Ass. First of all, the character of Dave Lizewski was one that I had no feelings towards. Aaraon Johnson was not doing enough to create a main character that was worthy of my sympathy. I did not care about him. Because of this, my interest in the character was void. There may have been some hope when he became Kick-Ass, but I soon discovered another problem. It is just no fun to watch somebody flail their arms around in a green wet suit. I understand that his inability to fight was the point, but that doesn't make it a good point. Every film has two basic sides: the point (message, theme, etc) and the entertainment (emotional responses). You can have effective entertainment without having an effective point, but you can NEVER have an effective point without effective entertainment. You can make a film about the most important subject ever, but if I don't like the way you tell the story, than why should I care? Sadly, Kick-Ass does not gain fighting skills throughout the course of the film, so any scene with him is just as monotonous as Johnson's voice over.

Well maybe Kick-Ass shouldn't be graded on its performances. After all, it has been advertised as a high-octane violence fest. Surely, the action sequences are top notch and worth the films downfalls. Well, don't be so sure. There are actually relatively few fight scenes in Kick-Ass, and there are even fewer that are actually fun to watch. The best fight in the film belongs to Big Daddy. It was well choreographed and excellently filmed. Unfortunately, it lasts only about 20 seconds. The majority of the fighting in the film is done by Hit Girl, and though her moves are eye-poppingly exciting the first few times around, they became rather stale near the end. I felt like I was watching the same scene over and over again.

Kick-Ass is a movie that should have remained a graphic novel. It's protagonist did not transfer well to the screen, and neither did it's style. Perhaps if the film focused more on Big Daddy and Hit Girl it would have been a lot better, but that probably would have upset the fanboys of the graphic novel. I cannot recommend this film to anybody over the age of 30 or under the age of 17. This film is perfect for the college crowd but will not sit well with anyone else. And I have a feeling that in a couple of years, not many people will even remember it. My rating (4/10)

Bruno (2009)

In 2006, a wave of the most frightening and dangerous disease known to man swept the United States from coast to coast. It affected nearly everyone in some way, and three years later, it still has not fully died out. I am talking of course, about Borat-itis. From the mind of Sacha Baron Cohen, a character came forth that was so naive and lovable that audiences and critics alike embraced him with open arms. As I walked through the halls of my high school, I could not go more than 15 seconds without hearing a poor impersonation being spouted by a student. Claims of "great success" and an epidemic of "high fives" nearly decimated the hallways, and I was unsure if they could ever recover. Now in 2009, Cohen has unleashed a new character that will not be as loved, not be as sympathetic, and (most importantly), not be as quoted as Borat. I speak of Austrian fashionista Bruno, an extremely openly gay television host who is played shamelessly by Cohen. After making a fool of himself at a fashion show, Bruno becomes blacklisted from working in Austria and decides to move to America to become "uber famous". Shot mockumentary style just like Borat, we follow Bruno in his quest through such "get famous quick" schemes like pitching a show to a TV network, adopting an African baby, or making a sex tape with Presidential candidate Ron Paul. Whether he is as quotable as Borat or not, Bruno is a hilarious character, and the film by the same name is equally as funny.

Bruno is a film that is certainly not for everybody. It contains an excessive amount of graphic homosexual intercourse, it is shocking and eye-opening (I'll explain this later), and it includes at least 30 consecutive seconds of close up male genatalia. But for those of you, like me, that just find the comedy in these things, you'll see that Bruno is one of the funniest movies of the year. Any film that can get Paula Abdul to willingly sit down on a "Mexican chair person" and casually carry on an interview is worthy of praise. Bruno's outrageous premise is held together by it's fearless lead, Sacha Baron Cohen. Cohen pulls absolutely no punches as he totally immerses himself in his role. Not wavering to homophobic hunters or terrorists, Cohen shows an impressive ability to withstand a dangerous situation just to drag the absolute most comedy out of it. In one scene, Bruno finds himself at a swingers party and becomes locked in a room with a rather domineering swinger. As she whips him repeatedly with a belt, Cohen does not stop the shoot or drop character, but instead jumps out of a window and runs off into the night. Dedication such as that is nothing short of brilliant.

But behind the heavy layer of lubricant, Bruno does have a point to it. This film is the ultimate satire of celebrities, doing whatever it takes to get into or stay in the limelight. Bruno goes as far as interviewing a known terrorist in hopes of getting kidnapped, to become famous. Sure nobody in real life would ever do such a thing, but this obvious metaphor is something that holds a lot of truth. Bruno also takes aim at parents who essentially "sell" their children for a chance at spotlight. As he interviews parents who are willing to let their children participate in a photoshoot, the questions he asks get to be outright insane. "Is your baby comfortable with working heavy machinery?" "Does your baby like the scent of phosphorous?" "Would your baby be comfortable with undergoing liposuction to lose an extra 10 pounds?" Yet all of these questions were met with a "yes" from the parents. Seeing these parents agree to these horrible things is an eye-opening experience. And if those questions weren't enough to convince you that these parents are insane, maybe this will do it. "We have chosen your baby to be dressed as a Nazi Officer, pushing a wheelbarrow, with a Jewish baby, into an oven. Is that OK with you?" "Sure".

Though Bruno is hysterical and creatively satirical, I cannot recommend it to most people. Some of the things seen in this film cannot be unseen, and that may disturb people. Sometimes parents look the other way at R ratings and allow their children to see a film anyway. In this case, parents need to be warned that this film is NOT FOR CHILDREN!!!!! AT ALL!!!!!! UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!!!!!! If you have issues with homosexuality or graphic male nudity, you'll probably want to steer clear of this film as well. However, if you are fine with all of these things and accept the fact that this is just a movie, you'll probably enjoy it. My rating (7.5/10)

Adventureland (2009)

In 2007, director Greg Mottola made a huge dent in the world of comedy with the hit Superbad. With the assistance of writers Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, he delivered one of the funniest films of the year and still kept it sincere underneath the loads of vulgar language. In 2009, Mottola went out on his own and wrote and directed the film Adventureland, a project probably very close to his heart because he worked at the real Adventureland long ago. For his sake, I hope this was not an account of his actual experiences there. Not only was this film about as funny as stubbing your toe on the refridgerator, it was overrun with whiny characters that pulled no sympathy from me.

It's 1987 and James Brennan (Jesse Eisenberg) just graduated from college. Before attending Graduate school at Columbia, James wants to spend some time in Europe in hopes of losing his virginity to an easy foreign girl. But when the cost of his trip increases unexpectedly, James is forced to find himself a summer job to pay for the difference. Enter Adventureland, the local amusement park where James' friend Frigo (Matt Bush, the kid from the AT&T commercials, and the only funny part of this film) works. After a brief interview with park manager Bobby (Bill Hader) and his wife Paulette (Kristen Wiig), James begins his thrilling career as a game shack attendant. Life looks bleak for James until he is spotted by Em (Kristen Stewart), another game attendant. The two spark up a friendship that soon turns into romantic feelings for James. But Em's chaotic home life and an attractive musician mechanic named Connell (Ryan Reynolds) jeopardize James' chance of making this summer one he will remember forever, in a good way at least. Falsely advertised as a comedy, Adventureland is a drama chronicling the life of a post-graduate loser in Reagan era Long Island.

Adventureland did have one aspect going for it in it's favor. It was a realistic film in how people, specifically younger generations, interacted with each other in their awful job environment. The awkward and somewhat gloomy nature of these poor souls was a truthful account, so in that respect Mottola did a great job at writing. However, this brings up a serious problem in the film. Real life is not all that funny. In Superbad, the friendship between the two main characters was real, but events in the film were heavily exaggerated to accommodate the comedy of the film. In Adventureland, everything that happened was practical and thus much less funny. Mottola left little room for comedy and instead put heavy effort into developing his characters. In a dramatic film, character development is key. There needs to be a significant amount of it in order to draw an audience in. However, a comedy does not need nearly as much attention put in to the characters. In a good comedy, such as Superbad, the very beginning of the film introduces us to exactly who our main protagonists are. As the film progresses, subtle actions inside the comedy reveal more and more about the characters, but we are never force fed the material. Mottola takes this short 5 minutes of character introduction and stretches it into a full hour. Because of this, there is no light-hearted interlude between the moments we meet our friend James and the main issue of the film. It is drama through and through, and I was looking for a comedy.

Perhaps the biggest disease that Adventureland suffered from was the fact that it was a character driven film with boring characters and lackadaisical actors. Jesse Eisenberg plays the soft spoken intellectual James in a static way that is reminiscent of Michael Cera. Both emit an air of pathetic awkwardness, and neither ever really raise their voice beyond a certain level. The only difference is that Michael Cera is actually funny. Line after line Eisenberg delivers with the same "enthusiasm", and never once did he bring a smile to my face. Much like Paul Rudd's character in I Love You, Man was embarrassing to watch, Eisenberg overplays the quirkiness of his role and never shows the maturity that his character supposedly gained. The lone bright spot as far as performances go belongs to Kristen Stewart, who may have actually been too good for her role. The confusion and mayhem that was Em's life is brought forth with stunning strength though Stewart's performance. I say she may have been too good for this role because since everybody else was so awful and she was so spot on, the gap between was uncomfortably recognizable. However good of a job Stewart did though can be overlooked by the fact that she too, has not a single comedic line in Adventureland. So far, we have a comedy with two main characters. One is pathetically unfunny despite his best efforts, and the other is straight-laced and meant to amp up the drama. Forget good performances, somebody say something funny! It was here that the supporting cast contributed hugely to the film. Matt Bush as James' pestering friend was by far the funniest aspect of Adventureland, but was unfairly underutilized. I have seen Bush in a few TV commercials and I was glad to see that he transferred well onto a big screen. His future in the film industry will hopefully long, despite his upcoming project, Halloween 2. And of course, Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig deliver as always but are, like Bush, rarely on screen. Martin Starr, as James' game shack mentor Joel, provides little to nothing to film, and may as well have been dropped from the script entirely.

It can be argued that Adventureland was not meant to be a comedy in the vein of Superbad but rather a touching coming of age story. This statement I can live with, but respectfully disagree. This film has been marketed vigorously as a hilarious follow-up to Superbad so that is exactly what I expected. Marketing this film as a comedy makes about as much sense as marketing Schindler's List as a great date movie. But judging Adventureland as a coming of age tale does not help it much. Because of the dismal acting and irritating characters, the journey into manhood didn't interest me in the slightest. The final resolution to the film is predictable and conjured not a single emotion from me. The characters themselves showed little emotion to any situation presented to them. They simply looked bored, and that made me bored with them.

Adventureland is a very long 107 minutes that is only good for a few chuckles and one solitary worth while performance. Greg Mottola has fallen victim to the sophomore slump, falling well short of the expectations brought about by Superbad. To those of you who may complain that I am being unfair by comparing this film to Superbad, let me say this. Adventureland as a lone film was boring, not funny, and a waste of $8. My rating (2/10)

Crank (2006)

Do you ever feel like you just need a break from the world? Do you ever just want to leave and go to a place where things don't make sense, and nobody questions it? Do you want to see a man inject himself with an overdose of Epinephren and then go on an adrenaline fueled rampage through an entire city? If you answered yes to all of those questions, I have the perfect remedy to feed your need for senseless violence. Crank is a film so out of the realm of realism that your brain may freeze from all of the impossibilities. Jason Statham, a name synonymous with "awesome", stars as Chev Chelios, a professional hit man who has run into a problem. A rival killer has injected him with a mysterious poison that will kill him if he lets his adrenaline drop too low. Set on getting revenge before he dies, Chelios does whatever he can - driving through a mall, Epinephren shots, sex in public, the usual - to keep his heart racing. But don't worry about the plot. The plot is completely irrelevant. Crank is chock full of amateur camerawork, horrific writing, dismal acting, and overall inconceivabilities...but damn is it a good time.

It is pointless to discuss the technical aspects of a film such as Crank. It would be like trying to find a new perfume fragrance at a farm. You can try all you want, but you won't be happy with what you find. What Crank offers you is an exhilerating thrill that never ceases to be ridiculous. Rookie writers/directors Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor be sure to never lead us on to thinking this movie was meant to be taken seriously, and that is why it is such a success. Although their directing repertoire consists of only shaking cameras, poor CGI, and countless jump cuts, they keep the action going and actually make Crank watchable. Plus, it always helps to have the number one tough guy in Hollywood today headlining your film. It could be said that Neveldine and Taylor have created the perfect men's movie: violence, sex, violence, loud noises, Jason Statham, and violence. Deep down, I think even the most refined man secretly wants to see a guy cut off another mans hand that was holding a gun, and then pick up the hand with the gun still gripped in it, and shoot the man with the gun with his own finger on the trigger. Not in real life, of course. That would be disturbing if it was real.

Much like Jean Claude Van Damme and Sylvestor Stallone before him, Jason Statham has made a name for himself in the world of over the top action flicks. This olympic diver turned archetypical Hollywood bad-ass first made his mark on the action world back in 2002 with The Transporter, and he has yet to lose his touch. In Crank, Statham simply does what he does best, and that is beat people senseless all while talking in that guttural, rough voice. Like his movies before this one, we are basically treated to The Jason Statham Show, because it is his mere presence that keeps us wanting to watch more. Crank is essentially just the next movie in a long series of films that I call Jason Statham Beats The Crap Out of People. Since this movie came out in 2006, he has starred in four more action films, and has five in development credits, one of which is a sequel to Crank. Statham is a man in high demand, and why not? Men want to be him, and according to my girlfriend, women definitely want to be with him. There are a few co-stars in this film, but they really don't matter. Amy Smart seemed like she was wandering around some movie sets, seeing if anybody needed a part filled, and they just grabbed her and tacked her in here. She only had about 12 lines in the entire film, and I probably could have delivered them better.

Chances are that if you want to watch Crank, you do not care about who is in it, how well they did, how the story is, or who directed it. You just want to know if this film is going to excite you and make you feel the rush you crave. The answer is a resounding "YES!". At a quick 87 minutes, you have just enough time to enjoy your energy high without crashing from an overdrawn story. Crank does not take itself seriously, and offers quite a few laughs that should keep you happy too. Who ever said that a movie has to be good, to be good? My rating (7/10)

Tropic Thunder: A Second Look

If you have not read my first review of Tropic Thunder please go to August 2008 in my archive.

The summer of 2008 was a great season for comic book films. Not only did every single superhero flick flourish at the box office, but most of them received critical praise as well (with the exception of Hancock). With all that success revolving around action films, the summer really needed a comedy to round itself off and make it a truly memorable one. Late in August, I reported that Tropic Thunder was the film that fulfilled that need. I mentioned how the performances of Robert Downey Jr, Tom Cruise, and Brandon T. Jackson saved the film from it's somewhat flimsy story. The Academy went as far as to nominate Downey Jr for Best Actor in a Supporting Role as the 81st Oscar ceremony. Even now, I feel this nomination was well deserved as Downey Jr really nailed that role down to a T. Tom Cruise also received a Golden Globe nomination with Downey Jr for Supporting Actor in a Comedy, which was a bit much, but after all, it's just the Golden Globes. Either way, it was not just me that felt some of the performances in Tropic Thunder were praiseworthy.

Last month, I finally bought Tropic Thunder hoping it would be just as funny the next few times around, and I was a little disappointed. Not a significant amount, but there was a definite letdown. All of the performances I once praised were still great and I feel like I will always give them high marks. Downey Jr was just as brilliant to watch the second time as he was the first. Cruise's foul mouthed movie executive Les Grossman was still an outrageous character that provided lots of laughs and that little extra bit of satire. However, all of the negative aspects of the film that I pointed out in my first review became much more evident and harder to avoid this second time around. The problem with comedies is that there are very few of them that have the ability to last. A joke that could have you rolling in stitches the first time you hear it may not even coerce a chuckle out of you the second time. In Tropic Thunder, I remembered most of the jokes of the film, and Downey Jr's performance, although still terrific, was less surprising as the first time. So sadly, there wasn't much opportunity for me to laugh out loud during my second viewing of this film. Instead, I kept noticing how Ben Stiller and Jack Black were uncharacteristically bland and one dimensional. I really noticed how it took the film a very long time to get rolling out of the starting gate. When I saw it in theaters I noticed this as well, but not to this extent.

Tropic Thunder was no one hit wonder though, and I don't mean to imply that. Even on second viewing there were numerous laugh out loud moments and once again, great performances. The biting satire commenting on why actors make some decisions in their career is scarily accurate and still a potent theme. And since the direction can't change from one viewing to the next (only the way you view the direction can differ), the action sequences were still well put together with the perfect blend of violence and comedy. So although it may not be the ideal comedy that will live on forever, and it will probably do nothing else but diminish even more over time, Tropic Thunder is still a good experience, although less of one than I originally thought. My new rating: (6.5/10)

RocknRolla (2008)

So what is a Rock-n-Rolla? The marketing campaign for this film circulated this question through every possible medium, causing a terrible case of "annoying fake British accents" amongst our friends and family (a condition similar to "Borat-itis"). Before RocknRolla was even released, people were buzzing with fake British enthusiasm to find the answer to this question. However, when the film was finally released, we discovered people didn't so much care about finding the true meaning of a "Rock-n-Rolla" as much as they did masquerading as a British person. This is evidenced by the fact that RocknRolla only made about $6 million and never broke into the top 10 at the box office. Even I, who was a fan of Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, didn't bother seeing this film. It's a good thing I didn't waste my money. RocknRolla tries to be as fun and charismatic as its predecessors, but falls into a veritable mine field of movie faux pas.

RocknRolla is not a sequel as I may have led on, but simply a film in the same vein as Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. After deviating from the "multiple storyline" gimmick since 2000, writer/director Guy Ritchie returns to the form that made him famous for his latest film. Sadly, the eight year break seems to have gotten to Ritchie and he was unable to bring himself back to his heyday. RocknRolla loosely revolves around Lenny Cole (Tom Wilkinson), the self-proclaimed King of the Old School who runs most of London. Lenny is currently trying to make a deal with some local Russians, and as a token of affection Russian head Uri Omovich (Karal Roden) allows him to hold on to his lucky painting. To Lenny's dismay, the painting is stolen from his home by his estranged son, rock star Johnny Quid (Toby Kebbell). While he searches for his junkie offspring, Lenny and his confidant Archie (Mark Strong) must also keep relations with the Russians running smoothly, keeping it a secret that he lost Uri's beloved painting. Unfortunately, tensions rise as the shipment of money between the two parties continually gets stolen by One-Two and Mumbles (Gerard Butler and Idris Elba), two crooks who were tipped off by shifty accountant Stella (Thandie Newton). As the story progresses, everyone's world begins to fold into everyone else's, meeting at an end that was more of a whimper than a bang. Much less cohesive and interesting than his previous efforts, Ritchie wastes his opportunity at a comeback on this scrap heap.

To some degree, RocknRolla is a pretty film. Not in terms of the events sprawled out on the screen, but rather in how Ritchie and cinematographer David Higgs show what is being done. The use of somewhat dirty coloring conveys the grimy feel of the world these no good characters are living in. Ritchie also sometimes redeems himself with a clever filming style, specifically in one scene as One-Two and his partner Mumbles are being chased down by some unstoppable Russians. The rest of the film however, is a total loss and an incomprehensible mess. The smash-bang execution that Ritchie perfected in Snatch was obviously short-lived, as was his ability to spin an engaging story from his mental yarn. The mostly central story following the whereabouts of a missing painting is hardly enough to keep the viewers eyes forward. Even a ten year old who just drank seven Red Bulls would start to get bored. Ritchie fails to create a single memorable character from his basic, bland script. Even as I'm writing this, I frequently have to visit the IMDb page of this film to remind myself of the character's names. I can't even remember if Stella, the accountant, worked for Lenny, Uri, both, or neither. You could say that this is no more than the fault of my own memory, but I argue that Ritchie didn't do a good enough job to plant these faces in my head as he did in Snatch.

In both of Ritchie's previous multi-story films, the plot is driven by a maniacal kingpin who has "commoners" groveling for mercy. In RocknRolla, this role is stepped into by two time Oscar nominee Tom Wilkinson, a consistently impressive actor that most recently knocked me out with his portrayal of Benjamin Franklin in the HBO mini-series "John Adams". To my chagrin, Wilkinson brings the biggest disappointment of the film in the form of his surprisingly weak performance. An intimidating kingpin Tom Wilkinson does not make, so much as a man who is just a jerk. The characters in RocknRolla may have feared Lenny Cole, but that is just because the script told them to. As a viewer, I was as daunted by Cole as I would be of a Pomeranian with a mean streak. In Snatch, Ritchie created a villain that truly induced fear and with the perfect performance of Alan Ford, the character Brick Top was one to remember. Lenny Cole is a boring scoundrel with no lasting power. Even Cole's growing opponent Uri was portrayed in a rather tame manner. With the exception of one scene that shows his power, Karal Roden never gets the opportunity to show how devilish his character is. The supporting performances from the entire cast, including Thandie Newton, Gerard Butler, Jeremy Piven, Mark Strong, and Ludacris, are all nothing but exercises in mediocrity. The only showing anywhere close to being worthy of celebration is Toby Kebbell's drugged out, hyper-violent, comically apathetic Johnny Quid. His character's farcical behavior gives RocknRolla a slight ray of sunshine in an otherwise dank cave. However, his talents are grossly under-utilized and for most of the movie we are subject to the flat stories of the other characters.

RocknRolla could have had a place on my DVD shelf for years to come right next to Ritchie's other accomplishment's, but instead I will never have it enter my home again. It's unnecessary length is the final straw, closing in on two hours. Snatch was by no means short and was only ten minutes shorter than RocknRolla, but it was at least filled with things to appreciate. If you want to watch a caper flick that's fast paced and highly satisfying, watch Snatch. If you want to watched a caper flick that tries to be quick but instead gets bogged down by it's stale story, watch RocknRolla. My rating (3/10)

In Bruges (2008)

Bruges - (pronounced Broozh) city in Belgium


Have you ever been to Bruges? Well I haven't. When looking up a place to vacation, my family isn't looking at the brochure that says "Visit beautiful Belgium!" The city of Bruges is a medieval town with beautiful buildings and canals, but if you aren't held over by sightseeing, you probably won't want to go there. They don't even have a bowling alley. Being so obscure and unknown to most, it turns out to be the perfect place to, I don't know, hide out a couple of hit men who messed up their last job? That's exactly what Harry Waters (Ralph Fiennes) decided to do. After an unnecessary victim was claimed on their latest hit, Ray and Ken (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson) are ordered by Harry to hole up in the little known city of Bruges in Belgium. While Ken has no trouble enjoying the gorgeous scenery, Ray hates everything about the city as he frequently expresses in rather vulgar terms. It could be that Ray is just upset because it was he who made the mistake on the job, and the guilt is destroying him on the inside. Not even a date with beautiful Belgian girl Chloe (Clemence Poesy) or a comically racist dwarf (Jordan Prentice) could cheer him up. After a few days in Bruges, Ken receives a phone call from Harry, and we discover that the reason the two men were stationed in the secret city is not as simple as it seemed.

Even after reading the plot synopsis, I'm going to venture to say you still don't quite know what to expect from In Bruges. I wasn't too keen on seeing it after hearing what it was about, but good word of mouth brought it to my DVD player. I've never been happier to give a movie a chance. I could talk about In Bruges for an hour and never would a negative word cross my lips. Beautifully written, the film is endlessly witty, darkly hilarious, and sincerely devilish. Writer-Director Martin McDonagh won an Academy Award in 2005 for his short film Six Shooter and he could be on the fast track to earning his second win for In Bruges' original screenplay. McDonagh's script has the ticklish punch you'd come to expect from a Coen brothers black comedy. Every line in In Bruges is relevant and comes back to say "hello" later on in the film. Don't let your ears drop for a second because you're likely to miss something that could make you laugh afterward. If his writing wasn't enough, McDonagh's direction is spectacular. The city of Bruges is laid out before you with stunning beauty and succeeds as not just a setting, but as a character in the film as well. The city serves as a prison to central character Ray, or even an eternal hell. No matter what he tries to do, his sins continually bring him back to Bruges.

But a script is just a bunch of pieces of paper if it doesn't have the actors to give it life. Colin Farrell gives the best performance of his career as morally affected hit man Ray. Before In Bruges, I had never seen Farrell in anything I had enjoyed (besides one episode of "Scrubs"). But in this role, he shows terrific ability that I've never seen from him before. Farrell does not simply have to play some tough guy executioner, but portray one that has a revelation about the true meaning behind his crimes. At times Farrell is drop dead funny, and then at the drop of a hat becomes the face of anguish and the epitome of guilt. Farrell received a Golden Globe for his performance and it was an accomplishment well-earned. Co-star Brendan Gleeson deserves equal praise for his turn as Ray's pal Ken. Ken has to make sure he keeps Ray's head above water and prevent him from doing something he may regret. Gleeson does an exceptional job of showing us how difficult it is for his character to make the decisions he is forced to make. Dealing with both the depressed Farrell and angry Fiennes, Gleeson's character is the middle piece that provides a balance between all the players. Rounding out the terrific ensemble is two-time Oscar nominee Ralph Fiennes as the temperamental boss of the duo that have caused him much grief. If Farrell and Gleeson weren't enough, Fiennes arrives halfway through the movie to add an entirely new aspect to the film. The moment his character arrives in person, the pace of the film kicks into another gear. So if you were getting bored of the sentimental displays of affection between Ray and Ken (even though they are not boring, very short, and are not maudlin in the slightest), you immediately became engaged again. Fiennes gives a fine performance that helps drive In Bruges to it's wonderful conclusion.

Behind the dark comedy of In Bruges there are some powerful underlying questions. What is Heaven? What is Hell? What exactly decides whether or not we make it into these places? While in a museum Ray and Ken come across a painting of The Last Judgement by Hieronymous Bosch. Throughout the film Ray openly despises everything he sees in Bruges, but when he sees this painting, even he is taken aback by it. Ray and Ken then begin to discuss the matter of the after-life, and how they feel they will be judged. Ken says he does not believe in places to go after death, but Ray has a line about ending up in purgatory, that "in betweeny one", that really stood out and had major relevance to his character. "You weren't really s*** but you weren't that great either". It's vulgar, it's short, but the truth behind it is unyielding. Disregarding Ray for a second, think of yourself. Would you consider yourself to be a great person? Do you feel you have done enough deeds in your life to warrant the status of a "great" person? Or, have you been, well, in a nicer way of saying it than Ray, crap? Would you say your existence has had no benefit on the human race whatsoever and if anything you've only made things worse? I'd certainly hope not. Yet I would say most of the human race falls in the middle of those two standards, including myself. So what are we to expect? Stuck in purgatory forever, dealing with absolute nothingness? And where exactly are all these places? Is Hell an actual set location or is just one place we really dislike, like Bruges for Ray? Or maybe I'm making a big deal out of a simple line. Your decision.

I was afraid of saying it before, but after viewing this film again I feel it is something I must say. In Bruges is one of my favorite films of all time and if it didn't fly so far under the radar back in February of 2008, it would be considered great by all. There are plenty of digs at Americans, but they aren't too bad and they are actually pretty true. There's even a moment when Harry insults our culture by saying even in killing people we are less civilized than the rest of the world. In Bruges is not long at all and you may even want it to go on longer once it is over. With so much to love, I can hardly think of anybody disliking this film. And if you are like me, you may put Bruges on your vacation list one day. After seeing how pretty it looks on film, I want to know what it's like in person. Maybe I'll find Ray there. My rating (10/10)

He's Just Not That Into You (2009)

February is probably my least favorite month of the year. It is the time when movie studios are caught in the middle of their release schedules. Their Oscar nominees have all hit theaters back in December, and they have to wait a few more months until they could release their blockbusters. So February is the time where movie studios dump off their below average work and hope that their garbage smells better than everyone else's. This means we get movies like The Pink Panther 2, another Friday the 13th, and a whole mess of lousy romantic comedies. Every now and then you do see a genuinely good film in February, such as last year's surprisingly good romantic comedy Definitely, Maybe. I should have known it would be too much to ask for consecutive February's with smart, original films with actual entertainment value to boot. He's Just Not That Into You, based on the popular self-help book by Greg Behrendt, is original but noticably ostentatious and desperately lacking the ability to keep my attention for more than four minutes at a time.

The diabolically intricate plot mostly revolves around Gigi (Ginnifer Goodwin), a certified loser in love who can't seem to read the signals that men give her. She looks to her co-worker friends for help but all they can offer are the same meaningless pieces of advice that have become commonplace in our society. But irony lies in the fact that Gigi doesn't know that these friends are the worst possible candidates for help, because they are all having relationship issues themselves. Beth (Jennifer Aniston) has been dating Neil (Ben Affleck) for seven years and still doesn't have a ring on her finger. Janine (Jennifer Connelly) thinks she is in a pleasant marriage but is unaware that her husband Ben (Bradley Cooper) is cheating on her with Anna (Scarlett Johansson), a yoga instructor that he met at a convenience store. But oh no, the plot doesn't stop there. Anna is also teasing Conor (Kevin Connolly), who is trying desperately to convince her that he is the man for her. Meanwhile, Conor is trying to build a a reputation as a good real estate agent by working with Mary (Drew Barrymore) (who I imagine is an advertising agent, although the movie never specifies), who looks for love on internet dating sites and ultimately comes up with nothing. So in this mess (and that really is the only word to describe it), Gigi does manage to find one person that she can talk to and gain helpful advice from. Conor's friend Alex (Justin Long), a certified player that doesn't make it a habit to become attached to any one girl. He's Just Not That Into You tries desperately to be intelligent, but instead is nothing more than a jumbled Rubick's Cube with missing colors.

With such a diverse ensemble and a story that covers all ends of the relationship spectrum, the real charm in He's Just Not That Into You probably should have been bred from the fact that it is highly relatable. The events that take place in the film are, for once, actual every day occurrences! How many romantic comedies have you seen with a ridiculous storyline that makes you bury your head in your hand because it is trying way too hard. It's never just two people who may or may not like each other and so the game of cat and mouse begins. It's always stupid things like Made Of Honor or 27 Dresses or some Hugh Grant movie. But the Gigi character in He's Just Not That Into You is one that I've seen so many times. Not in movies, but in reality! Dating is a tough game to play, and some people just don't get the hang of it. Ginnifer Goodwin as Gigi is but one of the few performances I found to be genuine and enjoyable. Her adorable naivety speaks so much to the main core of the film, which is that nobody really knows what the hell is going to happen. She also exudes an unmistakable energy with co-star Justin Long, the bartender that doubles as her relationship counselor. Long is charming and shows a great deal of maturity in his role. Since he's most known for his roles in Accepted and Dodgeball, it is still in the mind of a movie-goer that he is a young, lovable goofball. Long overcomes this stereotype with ease. And women take notice, everything that Long says in this movie is the absolute truth. Trust me.

Despite some very good performances, He's Just Not That Into You falls into every trap set by a romantic comedy, even with it's unique idea. I have not read the book, but if it progresses the same way the movie does, I'm glad I didn't read it. Screenwriters Marc Silverstein and Abby Kohn show no aptitude in their field and fail to capitalize on the rare opportunity of having an original plot. No wonder this is their first movie they've written since Never Been Kissed back in 1999. With so many different things happening in a script, you would imagine something could happen that would really surprise a viewer. This is never the case, as I was able to decide what was going to happen five minutes before the characters in the movie did. Director Ken Kwapis does not help the matter. He was unable to keep the convoluted plot together and made He's Just Not That Into You verily unwatchable. He should have called Christopher Nolan for help, he's a master at keeping a movie in order. Kwapis has directed multiple episodes of many television shows like "The Office", and has been in charge of disastrous movies like License To Wed and Dunston Checks In (although I must say the latter is a tiny bit of a guilty pleasure of mine. I know it's awful, but cmon, its an orangutan). Given that record, he should stay with his television career and leave directing movies to someone else.

My feelings on He's Just Not That Into You are clearly split down the middle. On one hand, it has some very entertaining performances that aren't what you would typically see in a romantic comedy. The casting director did a magnificent job finding the people that would bring these roles to life. It makes sense that Kevin Connolly, the boyish looking man from "Entourage" would be the guy taken for a ride by an unfaithful girlfriend, reasonably played by Scarlett Johansson. The ending, however cliche and obvious, succeeds in being heart-felt and tender, even making me crack a smile. Briefly. Don't let my girlfriend tell you anything otherwise. But then on the other hand, the pace is unbearable and the writing is clumsy and hackneyed. Not to mention it is half an hour too long. If you are a woman, you will find lots to love about He's Just Not That Into You. If you are a man, you'll just have to take comfort in knowing that you are doing something nice for your girlfriend. If you are a man, and you are seeing this movie just for yourself, I am going to have to deduct 3 man cards from you. My rating (5/10)

Be Kind Rewind: What the Hell Was I Thinking?

Back in July of 2008, I wrote a review of the Michel Gondry film Be Kind Rewind. In it, I had written about how it was a predominantly nice film that wasn't so much funny as it was sweet and fun. It reminded me of how my friends and I made our own movies and I liked that I could relate to it. I only gave it a 5.5 out of 10, but that is still a mild recommendation. Recently on a free preview of Cinemax, I got the chance to watch Be Kind Rewind again. I recalled all the nice things I had written about it and thought I'd give it a second watch. After an hour, I had to shut off the television because I couldn't take it anymore. I had made a mistake.

I never said Be Kind Rewind was a very good film. Whenever somebody asked me "Hey, what did you think of this movie?" I never said it was a good movie. My answer was always the same: "It was nice. Very pleasant." I am deeply sorry for misleading you. There is nothing nice or pleasant about this movie. In my first review I made a point of saying how the script was awful, the direction was trite, and the acting was subpar. Those statements stand where they are. But I did say that I enjoyed Jack Black's performance as the eccentric conspiracy theorist Jerry. Holy hell I must have been slipped acid before watching this movie the first time. The second time around, it was Black who I hated THE MOST. He was nothing more than an annoying pestilence. Also at second viewing, the lazy direction and camerawork proved to be not just trite but unyieldingly soporific. It was seriously as though my friends and I through this movie together in a week. And do you know how I said I liked this movie because it reminded me of my friends and the fun we had making our own movies? Well I'm over it.

Sure I didn't watch Be Kind Rewind all the way through the second time, but I wasn't going to subject myself to the rest of it again. After shutting it off, I just thought back to what the ending was, and realized how unfulfilling and inconclusive it was. Forget all the stuff I said before, because I retract it all. My new rating (1/10)

Gran Torino (2008)

I am not a racist. I believe that every race has their benefits and shortcomings, including my own. But who among us can say we haven't laughed at some racial humor in our lives? I like to think that it's healthy to poke fun at everybody once in a while, just as long as it is in good fun and not meant to be offensive. Comedians everywhere do impersonations of different races that we are not ashamed to laugh at. Racism in movies and television can be somewhat different depending on how it is used. American History X was a fantastic film that focused on how racism can destroy lives, and it was absolutely nothing to laugh about. However, racism in a movie like Borat is meant to inspire laughter and not to be taken seriously in any sense of the word (although I guess you could say Borat was more anti-Semitic than racist. Same point though). But with all the professional comics out their, who would have thought that the best racial and insult comedian to ever live was Clint Eastwood?

The content of Gran Torino is in no way a comedy. It is the story of bitter Korean War veteran Walt Kowalski (Clint Eastwood), who after losing his wife now lives alone with his dog Daisy. Walt spends his time fixing things around the house, drinking beer, and caring for his beloved 1972 Gran Torino. At the wishes of his late wife, local priest Father Janovich (Christopher Carley) checks up on him every now and then, but Walt, who has trouble connecting with own children, wants nothing to do with him. But if you asked Walt what annoyed him the most about his life, it would be his neighbors. We've all had neighbors we didn't care for. Maybe they didn't clean up after their dog in front of your house. Maybe they borrowed your lawn shears and never returned them. Walt's reason? They are Asian. An entire neighborhood of Hmong people surround Walt, and he is not happy about it. When his next door neighbor's teenage son Tao (Bee Vang) tries to steal his Gran Torino as a sort of gang initiation, the family forces their son to work for Walt as penance. As Walt gets to know Tao and his family, his old ideals begin to fade, and he even takes Tao under his wing, teaching him life lessons and protecting him from the gang that is after him. Gran Torino is a film that defines character growth and is richly entertaining, albeit not always for the right reasons.

The single driving force behind Gran Torino is its director and star Clint Eastwood. Without his presence, this film would have suffered vastly. Although Eastwood's age prevents him from bringing physical charisma to the screen, his verbal deliverance of insults and lessons make his performance unique and interesting. The septuagenarian actor claims Gran Torino will be his final film in front of the camera so he can stay behind the camera, and I feel this performance is one Eastwood can go out on happily. Whether he wanted to or not, he brought forth a deadpan comedy that would make Vince Vaughn proud. A single scene where he would walk through the house of a Hmong family and throw around racial slurs as though nobody was there provided for more laughs than all of Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer's movies put together. (Although it can't be hard to top two laughs). Eastwood's performance was thoroughly entertaining, but because it was for the wrong reason, I can't really say it was great. When Eastwood wasn't rolling me in the aisles, he spent his time growling at people and just looking genuinely angry at everything. Even when his character shows kindness he still ends up looking like he wants to hurt me. The accomplishment in Eastwood's performance lies solely in how he convincingly made his character turn from a miserable grouch to a kind-hearted hero. He also taught me about four new insults I plan on dispensing to my friends.

Without the professionalism of Eastwood, Gran Torino falls short on every mark. The entire Hmong supporting cast was comprised of rookie actors who have never been in a movie before, with the exception of Doua Moua, who played the gang leader. Perhaps by surrounding himself with the talentless hoi polloi, Eastwood thought his guttural mumblings would make him seem like the mumblings of a Best Actor candidate. Nice try, Mr. Eastwood. Gran Torino also becomes unsure of itself as it plays on. At first you feel the movie will primarily be about Walt protecting Tao from the gang, while at the same time learning the lesson of tolerance. But the film ends up abandoning the gang aspect and just focuses on Walt and Tao's relationship for most of the movie. Then at the end, the gang, after lying dormant for about 45 minutes, re-enters and steals the ending of the movie. I acknowledge that this could be argued as making the movie "dynamic", but I choose to think it makes writer Nick Schenk indecisive. However, Schenk's screenplay is not at all bad. There were several scenes that were written very well and kept the movie entertaining. Specifically, keep an eye out for the scene when Walt teaches Tao to interact "like a man" with his barber Martin (John Carroll Lynch).

Gran Torino is a tolerable 116 minutes that is mostly held up by star Eastwood. I have to reiterate that although I am recommending this movie, it is not because it was the deep, searing drama it looks like. I actually suggest cutting off the final 20 minutes and changing the title to Clint Eastwood Insults People. If they did that, they could've won the Golden Globe for Best Picture Comedy or Musical. Actually, if they made it a musical, this could go down in history as the greatest movie ever made. But it isn't. The only dramatic aspect where Gran Torino succeeds is in spectacular character development. Everything else is overshadowed by comedy. My rating (7/10), for all the wrong reasons.

NOTE: I'm aware of the fact that this movie is not really a comedy. I just found the content of this movie to be extremely comical when it was supposed to be very serious. That was my point. So if you noticed that I tagged it as a comedy, please don't think I'm an idiot.

Burn After Reading (2008)

In 1998, Joel and Ethan Coen introduced us to a man in a used up brown robe that liked to be called "The Dude" (or El Duderino, if you please). A simple man who wanted nothing more than to go bowling and drink white Russians. But instead this poor man was thrust into a world of nihilism, kidnapping, and ferrets just so he can receive some compensation for his defiled rug. After all, that rug really tied the room together. This, of course, is The Big Lebowski, the film that incorporated the Coen Brothers into mainstream America for the first time. Anybody who has seen it cannot go to a bowling alley without laughing at least a little bit. Ten years later, the Coen Brothers are returning to the world of comedy-crime-capers with the star studded Burn After Reading. Looking at the billing alone, one knows what they should expect from this film. Main actors John Malkovich, George Clooney, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, and Brad Pitt have all either won or been nominated for an Academy Award. Cap it off with the reliable Joel and Ethan Coen, and you have a Best Picture award waiting to happen. Sadly, Burn After Reading does not warrant this praise, nor is it anywhere near as good as the iconic Big Lebowski. But like I said, if you put enough delicious ingredients into a single bowl, you are bound to find something to like. Burn After Reading is a terrific ensemble piece that takes effort from everyone involved to create something wonderful.

The story of Burn After Reading is very difficult to explain given the numerous characters and their respective plot lines. If it gets to be confusing... try reading it again. Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand) is a physical trainer at Hardbodies Gym. She is a very unhappy woman who surfs internet dating sites for Mr. Right. She is also intent on undergoing numerous reconstructive surgeries to help boost her self esteem. However, her dreams are dashed when she finds she does not have the money to pay for all these procedures. Her luck seemed ready to change when her co-worker Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt) discovered a disc in the women's locker room which held secret CIA information. Linda convinces Chad to help her find where the disc came from so they could blackmail the person, which could help her pay for her surgeries. They find that the information came from Osborne Cox (John Malkovich), a CIA analyst who recently quit his job after they tried demoting him for his drinking problem. Unhappy with her husbands decision, Osborne's wife Katie (Tilda Swinton) files for divorce, kicking him out of the house so she can be with her man on the side Harry Pfaffer (George Clooney). Katie knows that Pfarrer is cheating on his wife with her, but little does she know he is also cheating on her with anybody he can find. After a chance meeting on the internet, Pfarrer ends up hooking up with Linda, who is still in the process of trying to blackmail Osborne. As every one's lives begin folding over into the others, the result is a very funny (and confusing) film.

To the Coen Brothers, it is not simple enough to just make a comedy. They cannot just write a film that is riotously funny, because it seems to be somewhat beneath them. Much like The Big Lebowski, Burn After Reading is not a one dimensional story that relies deeply on hilarity. The humor in Burn After Reading is found more in subtle plot elements and the traits of the characters than in actual jokes. It is the clever writing and perfect execution by the actors that makes the movie funny. There are few directors that could use this technique effectively, and the Coen's fall into that category. Joel and Ethan are unstoppable forces in the world of film making, able to mold a film exactly to their liking, whether it be a taught thriller or a goofball comedy. This is proved by the 1-2 punch they executed with No Country For Old Men and Burn After Reading. The brothers make sure they are involved in every element of the film making process. Acting as writers, directors, and producers of every single one of their films ensures that no outside force affects their work. Unswayed by the uneducated criticism that "the Coen's make boring movies", they repeatedly come out and deliver exactly what they want to, and the result is usually terrific. Burn After Reading is not their best effort, but in the hands of any other directors, it would have failed miserably.

But I'm sure if you were to ask the Coen Brothers, they would tell you that their success rests heavily on the shoulders of the actors. In Burn After Reading, spot on performances by every single actor involved helps keep the movie afloat. Given the confusing plot, it was imperative that the performers delivered exceptionally well to keep the audience interested. With not a single wet match in the pack, the movie exceeded typical standards that are expected even of a Coen Brothers film. Frances McDormand, whose character Linda can be considered the main protagonist, is often hilarious as she becomes wrapped up in the world of blackmail. Her real moments of recognition came as she interacted with Pitt and Clooney. Pitt acted as the real comic relief in Burn After Reading, due to his character's dimwitted nature and humorous dancing while listening to his iPod. He also served as a significant character foil in the film, especially when sharing screen time with Malkovich's smart Osborne Cox. George Clooney delivers the most engaging performance in the film as the womanizing hobbyist Harry Pfarrer. He brought a real sense of charisma to the screen and proved to be very enjoyable. But the two actors who deserve outstanding praise are John Malkovich and Tilda Swinton. Both are absolutely unforgettable in their roles. Malkovich's scathing and deeply irritated portrayal of the jaded Osborne Cox was not only intensely dramatic and entertaining, but also served as the jumping off point for some jokes. That is the textbook definition of getting the best of both worlds. Swinton too deals out a performance worthy of the Oscar winning actress. Balancing a divorce and an affair, her character was devoid of comedy but still managed to be fascinating.

Although Burn After Reading was blessed with brilliant writing, directing, and acting, it still manages to fall short of what you would hope it to be. The main reason for this is the constantly developing story that takes quite some time to fully reveal itself. Pacing usually is not a problem for the masterful Coen's, who can make a lengthy sequence of desert shots with no dialogue interesting like in No Country, but they seemed a tiny bit off their game here. In this one single aspect they suffered, and it managed to bring the film down a noticeable amount. Their script was full of cunning wit and clever components, but it was still confusing as hell. Even George Clooney in an interview stated he had no idea what the movie was about because it was so damn puzzling. I'm sure he was exaggerating a little, but it gives you an idea of what we are dealing with here.

Burn After Reading is a pleasant 96 minutes long, which is something I thank the Coen's for. Even The Big Lebowski, as terrific as it was, was verging on obscenity with it's length. Even if you are not a fan of the Coen's, Burn After Reading is a different movie for them, and I think they will be able to make a fan out of you. My rating (8/10)

Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium (2007)

Once in a full moon, a movie comes around that leaves you scratching your head in utter and absolute confusion. Some of these films are deep and riddled with hidden meanings and subliminal messaging (2001: A Space Odyssey). The rest of those films are simply incomprehensible due to the over-active imagination of everybody involved. Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium is the latter. A film so whacked out and terrifyingly zany, Wonder Emporium left me deeply disturbed...and mildly entertained. 7 time Oscar nominee and 2 time winner Dustin Hoffman sports a painfully cutesy lisp as the magical Mr. Magorium, a 243 year old toy inventor. For as long as he has been alive, Magorium has brought joy to countless children through his mystical Wonder Emporium. There, kids enjoy toys that defy gravity, rooms with computer generated bouncy balls, and Kermit the Frog. Molly Mahoney (Natalie Portman) is a worker at the emporium and shares the same goofy and lighthearted attitude as the store's proprietor. For everyone in the neighborhood, especially one young boy named Eric (Zach Mills), Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium is the happiest place on earth. But things start to go sour at the emporium when Magorium announces he will be leaving this world...because he has run out of shoes. (Seriously). With Molly in charge, the store begins to become very angry and starts losing its magic. Now Molly has to use the help of Eric and new hum-drum employee Henry (Jason Bateman) to restore the mystical place to its former self. With over 100 moments that made me say "What the crap?", Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium is a ridiculous attempt at over the top film-making...and it amused me.

With a plot like Swiss cheese, Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium left me dumbfounded time and again with it's ambiguity. First of all, if I were a parent, I'm not so sure I'd let my children spend their entire day at a toy store run by a creepy man with a lisp who claims to be over 240 years old. I feel like that should be a warning sign for parents. It is also all the more bewildering at how everybody in the neighborhood seems to accept the fact that this store is completely out of lines with reality. I'd be terrified if an octopus jumped out of a book and landed on my head! It is also never explained how Magorium gained his magic originally and then how he gave it to Molly. Was he an alien? Was he a wizard? Was he pumping noxious gas through the store to make people hallucinate causing them to believe what they were seeing was true? We don't know. I'm 95% sure if you were to ask writer and director Zach Helm that question, he wouldn't even know. But I think I might be giving Wonder Emporium too much credit by asking these analytical questions. It is after all just a children's movie. It is sort of like asking the writers of Spongebob Squarepants why Spongebob often takes baths, even though he's underwater. Or why when he speaks, bubbles don't come out of his mouth. You are just supposed to look at it at face value and be entertained by it. Regardless of how many times I was left stupefied by Wonder Emporium, I was slightly and surprisingly entertained.

The man behind Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium is Zach Helm, who previously penned the acclaimed Stranger Than Fiction. Helm is obviously a man with a vivid imagination, but somebody might want to check his drink for traces of alcohol, because what he created here was a demented work of delirium. He did everything in his power to make this film as wacky and zany as possible. Those really are the only words to describe it. Even the characters in the film use adjectives that are synonyms of wacky and zany. The final credits read all of the characters names as something silly like "Mr. Edward Magorium - Avid Shoe Wearer" and "Eric Applebaum - The Hat Collector". It are the little aspects like this that made Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium almost unbearable for me. Almost.

The performances in Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium weren't making matters an easier to take. Dustin Hoffman's campy, kooky, wacky, and nutty Mr. Magorium was enough to make me suspicious that somebody dropped a hit of acid in my soda. Complete with mad scientist hair and the aforementioned dreadful lisp, Magorium seemed like a character that should be in an early Saturday morning cartoon. Instead of being lovable and amicable, he flustered and perturbed me. His ceaseless corny jokes became tiresome and sometimes moronic. He seemed to have a strange obsession of trying to figure out why their are always more hot dogs than hot dog buns. It was amusing once, but when he brought it up again it was just unnecessary. Natalie Portman had to do her best to seem as childish and immature as possible in order to fit the bill in this movie. Perhaps that is why she was sporting the 12 year old boy haircut. Realistically speaking though, Portman is a good actress but she does not have the sparkle that is needed to be entertaining in a children's film. You could see in her face that she was hoping for the chance to do some real acting, but this movie was about fun, so she just held it inside and sleepwalked her way through it. Jason Bateman, who apparently felt this movie was more important than working on something better, say, a movie based on his hilarious hit TV series Arrested Development, shows up in this film to provide pretty much nothing. Maybe the only somewhat genuine performance in this schlock-o-rama was that of 12 year old Zach Mills, who played the outcast little boy that finds refuge inside the walls of the Emporium. He showed a real attachment to all the characters and was really the only sympathetic one of the bunch. It wasn't great, but it was very impressive.

What shocked me most about Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium was not it's wacky characters or outlandish plot, but the idea that I was somewhat entertained by it. After all the negatives I have thrown around about this film, I can't help but feel like I enjoyed it. It reintroduced me to the idea of magic and wonder that I had when I was a child. It took me away from dealing with horrible things such as applying to college, and brought me to a place that was nothing more than a place to have fun. For 93 minutes, I was in a place that I could enjoy, that I didn't have to worry about. Their was barely any viable conflict in the film because I knew how it would end, so I couldn't even be weighed down by that. Although still extremely flawed and altogether nonsensical, Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium creates a wholesome environment that your children will definetly enjoy...and you might even enjoy it too. This movie goes in my list of films that is so bad, it is good. My rating ( a very watchable 5/10)

Definitely, Maybe (2008)

Hey everybody, I've been on break for a while but I am back to review more films. Since school has started I do not have as much time to see new releases, so I will probably review older films for a while, starting now.

Perhaps my least favorite genre of films is the romantic comedy. Not simply because they are primarily "chick flicks", but because they are just so similar to each other. I recall watching 27 Dresses with my girlfriend and I was able to figure out the ending as the opening scene began. In all my years, I have never seen a romantic comedy that had an unexpected ending...until now. Definitely, Maybe is the freshest romantic comedy to hit cinemas in a long, long time. It is the touching and remarkably engaging story of Will Hayes (Ryan Reynolds), who is suffering a divorce while caring for his young daughter Maya (Abigail Breslin). As Will tries to put Maya to bed, she relentlessly inquires to hear the story of how he met her mother. Will reluctantly agrees, and the real movie begins. A young Will Hayes just arrived in New York in 1992 to support Presidential candidate Bill Clinton in the upcoming election. Momentarily leaving his college sweetheart Emily (Elizabeth Banks) in Wisconsin, Will is left susceptible to the dangerous possibility of falling for other women in his new surrounding. One of those women is the beautiful copy machine girl April (Isla Fisher), whom Will becomes very good friends. The two share many comical encounters that are very easy to watch. The other woman testing Will's strength is up and coming journalist Summer Hartley (Rachel Weisz), who is also currently dating world famous journalist Hampton Roth (Kevin Kline), a man of 60 that still likes 'em young. It is also very enticing to learn that Summer possibly shared a romantic encounter with Will's Emily during their college days. With all the characters in place, Maya and the rest of us are left wondering, "who does he end up with?". That, my friends, is why Definitely, Maybe is a terrific film.

Definitely, Maybe was directed and written by Adam Brooks, who also wrote the romantic sports comedy Wimbledon. Coincidentally, that was also one of the very few romantic comedies I actually enjoyed, despite it's predictability. What Brooks did with Definitely, Maybe was take a film genre and set a new standard for it. His writing neglected the cliche conventions of writing a romantic film, and instead twisted it with a mystery theme. With this unique and original plot, the viewer is left with only speculations as to how it will end. Much like I always do with these types of films, I guessed how it would end at the midway point. For the first time ever, I was wrong. Brooks did a superb job keeping me guessing. Whenever I thought I had it figured out, he would throw another curveball. The three woman that swirled through Will's life and time and again knocked him down actually managed to make me feel sorry for the main character. I was able to see his dejection and I was able to feel the love that he felt for all 3 of these women at one time or another. I was also very surprised to find myself willingly engaging in the story, eager to see what would happen next. My first viewing of Definitely, Maybe was with 2 friends, both of which are heterosexual males like myself. I had no problem watching this movie with them because I heard it was good and I wanted to see it, regardless of who I was with. But what shocked me was that one of my friends, who was very unhappy with the idea of watching this film without girls around, was actually bothered by the fact that we had to shut it off midway (we had to go somewhere). Even he was interested in how it ended. That just goes to show you that guys, you don't need to have a girl present to watch this film. It is genuinely good.

With a romantic comedy, who always have to be sure you have good actors to make everything feel authentic. If you go and watch a film like Good Luck Chuck, seeing Dane Cook flirt with Jessica Alba is almost as enjoyable as a trip to the dentist's office (no offense to any dentist's out there). In Definitely, Maybe, every actor did their part to make sure every moment was legitimate. Ryan Reynolds is known to be a very charismatic actor. Even in lesser efforts such as Blade: Trinity, Reynolds always brings charm to his characters. Will Hayes is no different. A delightful and relatable character, audiences will enjoy watching his life unfold and actually root for his happiness. Reynolds also consistently interacts with the films 4 leading ladies believably. Talking to his daughter, played by Breslin, you feel a warmhearted relationship between the two that you could find between a loving father and his child. His heartache is unforgettable as he repeatedly loses those closest to him. Reynolds is also blessed with a wonderful supporting cast, specifically Isla Fisher. I remember in my review of Wedding Crashers I said that Fisher had a very promising career ahead of her and my opinion has not changed. Consistently entertaining and thoroughly amusing, Fisher is a pleasure to watch in any film (except Hot Rod which sucked and horribly underutilized her ability). Elizabeth Banks and Rachel Weisz both put in strong performances, but the only other noteworthy performance from the female cast was the young Abigail Breslin. Although she was nominated for her role in the overrated Little Miss Sunshine, I actually thought she was better in this film. Still not worthy of a nomination, but she showed real talent in this film. (I still don't understand how she was nominated. She wasn't even that good. WHAT DID I MISS!?). Kevin Kline also contributes a very funny effort as the sexagenarian that has a taste for younger women.

When it all boils down, there is really one thing that I am looking for in a romantic comedy, and that is believability. I do not want to watch actors make googly eyes at each other. I want to see people convincing me that their is a such thing as true love. Definitely, Maybe is the only romantic comedy I have ever seen that was both realistic and genuinely entertaining. Not completely without the romance cliches, Definitely, Maybe is not perfect, but is certainly a breath of fresh air for a stupid movie genre. My rating (7/10)

Tropic Thunder (2008)

August is drawing to a close, which means schools are re-opening, pools are closing, and movie companies start releasing Oscar hopeful films rather than blockbusters. But before the summer of 2008 disappears forever, one more movie attempts to right something that has been wrong. In a summer movie season filled with superhero flicks and other random action films, we have yet to receive a comedy that will have us rolling in the aisles. Tropic Thunder, a passion project Ben Stiller has been working on for years, will not make you fall out of your chair, but is however the funniest film of the summer. On the set of the most expensive war movie ever made, rookie director Damien Cockburn (Steve Coogan) is having trouble keeping his narcissistic cast in check. Just 5 days into shooting, production is already 1 month behind. Action star Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) is having trouble recovering from his recent film Simple Jack, which was a box office flop and was bashed by critics. 5 time Academy Award winner Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.), an Australian actor, underwent a procedure to darken his skin so that he could play the African American platoon leader called for in the script. Fart joke comedian Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) is trying to break the mold of gross out comedy, but has trouble keeping his mind during filming because of his drug addiction. After being violently screamed at by movie executive Les Grossman (Tom Cruise like you've never seen him before), director Damien desperately takes advice from Four Leaf Tayback (Nick Nolte), the war veteran that wrote the book from which the movie is based. Tayback suggests that in order to get real emotion and an authentic feel, the cast should be dropped in the middle of the Vietnam forest where some controlled explosions and gunfire will challenge them. But no more than 5 minutes after they land, the cast is thrust into a real war zone with Vietnamese drug lords...they just don't realize it. When Tugg Speedman is kidnapped, Kirk, Jeff, rapper turned actor Alpa Chino (Brandon T. Jackson), and newcomer Kevin Sandusky (Jay Baruchel) must save their comrade from certain death. If you have seen commercials for Tropic Thunder, you probably don't think it looks very funny. Do not be fooled. Tropic Thunder is very funny and at some times hilarious, and has lots of fun action to satisfy your needs.

Just last week, Judd Apatow attempted to blur the genres of action and comedy together in Pineapple Express, but didn't succeed to the fullest extent. The trouble was his film had too many sagging points. Ben Stiller, who wrote and directed Tropic Thunder, made sure to add as many jokes as possible to keep things funny. This can be a very risky technique, as we've seen in You Don't Mess With the Zohan, where Adam Sandler crammed jokes into every orifice of that film but didn't land any hits making it unbearable to watch. Tropic Thunder has its share of misses, but not nearly enough to make the film droop. When jokes did hit in Tropic Thunder, much like Pineapple Express, it was hilarious. What makes Tropic Thunder better is the fact that is was continuously funny. There were less gaps in the comedy. Stiller did the correct thing in not letting the action overtake the film, and even during the action sequences the comedy never ceased. He also filmed everything very tastefully, not really glorifying the bloody part of fighting. Keeping in line with the rest of the film, Stiller kept things funny. Before the film even begins, we are treated to a series of hysterical fake advertisements and movie trailers starring the characters from the film. Once the film starts, show patience, as the first 15 minutes aren't particularly interesting. After you make it over that hump, Tropic Thunder becomes roaringly funny and endlessly entertaining.

What makes Tropic Thunder an above average comedy is some of the terrific performances displayed in it. One person who does not give one of those performances is Ben Stiller. His character Tugg Speedman is after all a slow witted tough guy, but he is actually the straight man in this film. Tugg is also a bit annoying because he took way too long to figure out that his kidnapping was not part of the film. Nobody can be that stupid. Providing few jokes (even fewer that are actually funny), one wonders why Stiller didn't write himself some better material. Another lackluster performance was that of Jack Black as Jeff Portnoy. Black is a rambunctious comedy actor, but his role is too small to allow him to show any type of range. His drug addiction is pretty much the only joke he delivers, and it isn't even that funny. The one exception being when he is tied to a tree and he says something that is just awful and hilarious. One of the better performances in Tropic Thunder is given by Brandon T. Jackson as the rapper who endorses a drink called Booty Sweat and a candy bar called Bust-a-Nut. Surprisingly, I found him very entertaining to watch and he had quite a few laugh out loud moments in the film, specifically in his interactions with Downey Jr. In a role that you would probably never have imagined him in, Tom Cruise has been earning praise as a show stealer as Les Grossman. I wouldn't call him a show stealer, but Cruise's over the top potty mouth performance was quite enjoyable and very uncharacteristic of him, which made it even funnier. Also a surprise, Matthew McConaughey randomly takes a supporting role as Tugg Speedman's agent Rick Peck. The role originally was meant for Owen Wilson, but he was forced to drop the film after his attempted suicide last year. McConaughey isn't exactly what I would call a "good" actor, but his concern for his client provided some extra laughs and probably McConaughey's best performance of his career. (That is not saying much). But the man who completely ran away with this movie is Robert Downey Jr. I'm sure when 2008 began, he had no idea how much of a household name he would become at years end. Playing an Australian actor that is playing a black man, Downey Jr steals every scene and delivers every line with consistent hilarity. The role of Kirk Lazarus was written to explore and make fun of how actors immerse themselves into roles, and Downey Jr perfectly exemplifies this...by immersing himself into the role. He created a character that was extremely hilarious without being racist or offensive. Every character in the film had a stale line or two (Stiller had a lot of those), but not Downey Jr. He hits the right note every time, taking comedy through a whole new frontier.

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the release of Tropic Thunder. Protests from groups supporting those with disabilities have plagued the film and no doubt had an effect on its weekend gross. (The film only took in about 26 million, it deserved much more). People are outraged over the use of the word "retard" in the film. They feel it is demeaning to all people with mental disabilities. Now that I have seen this movie, I can say without question that this film in no way offends mentally handicapped people. As somebody with a relative who has down syndrome, I did not feel angered by their use of the word retard. I laughed the entire scene. The word retard in the film is not used in a derogatory sense. Nobody says "You are a retard" or "That was retarded of you". That would be offensive because the line would be meant to be insulting to the person hearing it. Instead, Tugg Speedman and Kirk Lazarus discuss Tugg's role in his film Simple Jack, in which he did play a retard. (Notice how I have no problem using the word, because I am not using it to offend anybody). The whole purpose of the joke is to make fun of how actors will take on roles as handicapped people because they are hoping to get an award from it. The scene was actually extremely clever-minded and witty as Kirk explains to Tugg that there is a certain level of retardation you have to play to get an award, and that there is a certain point that can't be crossed. That joke is not aimed at retarded people, but at the actors who take advantage of the roles of retarded people. Honestly, I do not think you will be offended by this scene unless you are extremely overly sensitive. If Al Sharpton didn't freak out because a white actor was playing a black role, you probably won't freak out from the use of the word retard.

Tropic Thunder might not be every one's cup of tea, but it happened to be mine. Even with a slow first 15 minutes and the weak performance by Stiller, Tropic Thunder is the summer comedy we have been waiting for. At 107 minutes, time is not really a factor because you will spend most of it laughing. Ignore the bad press for this film caused by those disability groups and head to the movies for a good time. I have a feeling you will not be disappointed. I also feel that Robert Downey Jr. should be nominated for some type of award. Maybe not an Oscar, because that's a little extreme. Something less important, like a Golden Globe. It just doesn't seem right that his performance goes unrewarded. It was so perfect. My rating (7.5/10)

Pineapple Express (2008)

It seems that every few months another film written by the Judd Apatow gang surfaces and tries to breathe life into the comedy industry. In the past, any film with the Apatow Productions sticker attached to it has more often than not been a success. Whether taking on a middle aged virgin, two booze seeking best friends, or an accidental pregnancy after a drunken night, Judd Apatow has consistently proven to be a comedic genius that also has a lot of heart. Naturally, given this track record, I was very excited for the release of his most recent film, Pineapple Express. Trailers and commercials did even more to pique my interest. Entering the theater, I was all set to begin enjoying what should have been the funniest film I would see all year. Sadly, it was not. Pineapple Express chronicles the unfortunate tale of frequently stoned process server Dale Denton (Seth Rogen). After witnessing a murder committed by a policewoman (Rosie Perez) and the later identified drug lord Ted Jones (Gary Cole), Dale seeks refuge with the first person he can think of: his drug dealer Saul (James Franco). Ted, who mistakenly identifies Dale as a hitman from a rival Chinese gang, sends his best men to kill the two stoners forcing them to go on the run. With the help of Saul's friend Red (Danny McBride), the pair must fight fire with fire to save their lives, so they may smoke weed another day.

As somebody who does not smoke weed, drink alcohol, or do any kind of drug at all, maybe I missed something while watching Pineapple Express. Perhaps it would have helped to be stoned so that I could enjoy it more. But if a movie requires you to be stoned to fully appreciate it, then it's not that great of a movie. I could only speculate as to how marijuana makes you feel, but I imagine it is a lot like watching this film. When you are doing it (watching the film) you feel great and are having a good time, but once you come down from your high (exit the theater) you don't really remember much of what happened. Normally after watching a comedy with my friends, in the parking lot we will repeat jokes that we liked from the film so that we can renew the experience. Dead silent is the only term I can use to describe the walk out of the theater with my girlfriend. Neither of us could remember a single joke. I even had trouble remembering what the final scene in the movie was. I do recall that when Pineapple Express was funny, it was hysterical. But when it was not funny, it was dead, and there were a lot of points that were devoid of laughter. Judd Apatow's films usually do have a sagging point, but often bounce back by the end. Pineapple Express falls into a pit and spends the rest of the film trying desperately to climb back up from the depths of mediocrity. In the end it succeeded, but the line is very thin.

Aside from being a comedy, Pineapple Express is a heavily violent action film. Executed properly, Pineapple Express had potential to be a terrific summer flick. But the far from mainstream director David Gordon Green could not handle the new world of an absurd action comedy. Since the comedic portion of the film heavily relies on the actors abilities, I can only really comment on Green's ability to stage an over the top brawl. Put simply, he isn't particularly cut out for it. In some cases however, he did show professionalism and a good eye for comedy. In a scene where Saul and Dale steal a police car and are being chased by the corrupt policewoman, Green effectively mixes thrilling action with genuine humor. On the other hand, Green falters at creating an extravagant final showdown. The epic battle between rival drug factions and the stoners is poorly shot and beyond belief in some cases. In a different film like Wanted or Shoot 'Em Up, I forgive unbelievable and physically impossible events. But Pineapple Express was primarily a film grounded in reality for practically the entire duration. In the end, it was reduced to Wile E. Coyote running off the cliff but his feet are still moving. The only difference being those old Wile E. Coyote episodes were pretty funny. Green dropped the comedic ball completely and instead provided a third rate fight sequence with first rate special effects. For a first attempt at a wide release film, Green fell short.

Seth Rogen is a rising force in comedy, breaking through with the hits Knocked Up and Superbad and now has 5 in development credits on IMDb.com, including the leading role in a superhero film entitled The Green Hornet. Personally I am a fan of Rogen, and I hope he continues to be successful in Hollywood. But in Pineapple Express, Rogen is uncharacteristically weak in both his writing of the film and his performance. Sharing a pen with lifelong buddy Evan Goldberg (who he also wrote Superbad with), Rogen doesn't bring the sincerity that has made most of Apatow Productions in the past unique. He also doesn't create a character that is particularly likable. Although Dale is a very funny person, he has a girlfriend that is in high school. What is up with that? That's not funny, that's pedophilia. Actually they say she is 18, so I guess that is supposed to make it better. It still doesn't sit right with me. Aside from the fact that he is an irresponsible stoner and borderline pedophile, Dale is still pretty funny to watch thanks to Rogen. But the ray of light in Pineapple Express is without a doubt James Franco as the permanently stoned Saul Silver. Clad in a headband and pajama bottoms, Franco steals the movie right out from under the feet of the rest of the cast. I haven't been a fan of Franco's past work (especially his role as "the smiling idiot" in Spiderman 3), but Pineapple Express has changed my opinion of the kind of actor he is. He showed a terrific aptitude in creating laughter from every situation. Danny McBride provided intermittent comedy in his supporting role as Red. Once again though, much like Dale's character, Red is a bit of a jerk. By the end of the film he redeems himself by providing my personal favorite line from the film, "You just got killed by a Daewoo Lanos!" It's funnier in context. Gary Cole is a bit of a miscast as the sinister drug lord Ted Jones. I couldn't really get into his performance. He was about as intimidating as a Dachshund.

Pineapple Express isn't terribly long, but at some points you will begin checking your watch to see how much is left. The movie as a whole is a mixed bag that is full of funny performances but a lagging storyline and mostly poorly shot action sequences. If you plan on riding the express, be prepared to have a mild sense of disappointment and also the inability to remember anything you just saw. Although the experience won't stick with you, it gives you just enough fun while you are watching it to earn a mild recommendation from me. My rating (a disappointing 6/10)