Push

**1/2 – This movie had a dark quality that I wasn’t expecting. The guy who played the Human Torch in the Fantastic Four films was the star, and everyone else in it was either a young (13-16 years old, I would say) girl or someone I had never seen before. The basic premise was a bit of a stretch, but if one buys into that, there is some enjoyment to be had here. The ending seemed to set up a very unlikely sequel, though, which was somewhat unsatisfying.

The Hangover

***1/2 - A very amusing film overall, with a great performance from “Daily Show” alum Ed Helms and a surprisingly funny turn by Zach Galifiniakis, whose standup routines I am not at all fond of. Even in the parts in which the jokes didn’t necessarily work perfectly, the writers of the film managed to keep it interesting by throwing in a pretty neat little mystery-lite storyline. The only things in this that I didn’t really care for were the little gay Chinese fella, who I found extremely irritating, and a far too-frequent usage of shots of naked male asses. Also, whether it is tongue-in-cheek or not, the use of that stupid “Who Let the Dogs Out” song in a film is never acceptable.

The Men Who Stare at Goats

***1/2 – A star-studded cast including George Clooney, Ewan MacGregor, Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges feature in this comedy based on the US military’s factual pursuit of ‘psychic warfare’ technology. The film was nicely shot and acted for the most part, with a minor exception in Ewan MacGregor’s less-than-convincing American accent. This one didn’t receive a whole lot of positive reviews, but it certainly had some funny parts, and I liked it despite the fact that the meandering story was kind of goofy and the comedy had some overly broad moments. The frequent Jedi references must have been pretty annoying for Ewan “Obi-Wan” MacGregor to put up with.

Cloverfield

** - For whatever reason, most modern monster-based horror movies have seemed to feel the need to try to lull the viewer into a false sense of security by forcing them to watch a bunch of unappealing characters party with each other for the first hour or so of run time. That’s how this film starts out. While the monster (finally) attacking and picking off the unrealistic champagne-swilling yuppie jackasses in this film is marginally satisfying, the movie as a whole is rather daft. And the end is pure crap.

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

*1/2 - Yet another film in which there is some sort of tenuous connection made between Vampires and Werewolves. I will confess that I am not the greatest monster scholar on the planet, but I can’t recall ever hearing about any sort of Vampire-Werewolf relationship until the last decade or so. Now, every vampire-based movie that comes out has werewolves tossed in as well. What’s next? Frankenstein and a mummy in a three-way with the Creature from the Black Lagoon? Anyway, this sequel to 2008’s “Twilight” is every bit as dumb as the first movie. It manages to advance all the dopey subplots of the original in small increments, while simultaneously introducing new subplots AND bringing the main storyline to a grinding halt. I gave this an extra ½ star because there is one splendidly ridiculous scene in which a Rasta vampire gets eaten by a pack of unconvincing CG werewolves

Twilight

* - One could very fairly wonder why on Earth I would have any interest in this kind of movie. And I’ll freely admit that the main reason I put “Twilight” and its sequel on my Netflix queue is that I really enjoy skewering the occasional piece of rubbish. This seemed like it would give me that opportunity, and it didn’t let me down there at all. To sum “Twilight” up in two words, I would call it this: cash grab. The book series that this is based on apparently has a rather rabid fan-base of young girls and gays, and it is easy to see why, as the superficiality present in the thought processes of all the characters is mind-boggling. This movie features horrendous dialogue, a stupid plot and stupider subplots, and loads of well-groomed young people in tight pants lusting after each other in vaguely menacing ways. It’s kind of a young vampire slut soap opera.

Food, Inc.

**** - This is one of those rare successful documentaries that make one want to immediately change their lifestyle. While it didn’t really work on me (as I was chomping on pepperoni and Doritos while watching, and as I write this review as well), it still has the potential to introduce a clueless demographic to issues that it is unfamiliar with. Parts of this film have an unfortunate schlocky quality, but for the most part it works well toward achieving its apparent goal of people demanding what they need and not what they are trained to want.

G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra

*1/2 – Being a huge fan of the G.I. Joe mythos, I find that the unnecessary changes made to the characters and themes of the series/comics are only small parts of why this adaptation blows. The movie is very visual-heavy, but the special effects are pretty poor and unconvincing. The physics behind the action sequences is unrealistic to say the least. The serious dialogue is laughable, and the lines that are supposed to be funny are painful. Whether one is a fan of G.I. Joe or not this movie is nearly unwatchable.

Gran Torino

*** – Despite the fact that he is now like a hundred years old, I’m still pretty sure that Clint Eastwood could beat the crap out of me if he wanted to. Or, at the very least, he could grab me by the throat and growl an obscenity-laced threat at me in that raspy voice of his, and make me poop my pants and run away (with knees pressed together in a vain attempt to keep feces from running into my shoes). Anyway, Clint stars in this film as a racist old Korean War vet who is simultaneously despised and worshipped by a large Vietnamese family that lives next door to him. One kid gets shot, another gets raped and beaten, but Clint gets his revenge in the end... sort of.

Star Trek

*** - I must say that I am at least a little puzzled by the extreme critical praise of this film. Sure, it is fairly entertaining, and manages to cleverly skirt around the Trekker-worshipped canon of the original series, but I didn’t find it to be all that fantastic. The acting was decent but unspectacular, the unnecessary modernized sexualization of the characters was irritating, and the villains were goofy and unconvincing. Oh well, I guess average Trek is better than no Trek.

Astro Boy

***1/2 – One of the least original stories possible and derivative, stereotypical characters are easily outweighed by the absolutely stunning animation and design work in this film based on an apparently old and revered Japanese ‘Manga’ series. With all the hype that movies like “Avatar” get, I think this flick far surpassed it visually, and had a story that was no less stellar (and much shorter, thankfully). It certainly makes one realize that marketing muscle is probably the reason that certain films make billions of dollars while others are relative flops at the box office.

The Fourth Kind

** - Along with “Blair Witch Project”, this is one of the bigger fake-outs in the history of cinema. The filmmakers go well out of their way to try to make one feel as though this movie is based on true events of alien abductions and missing persons and such in Nome, Alaska. However, it doesn’t take any research to make one realize that this story is about as real as an elderly Asian woman who is a competent motorist. Be that as it may, parts of this flick are watchable, and the acting is decent. The story is ok for the first hour or so, until it devolves into goofy lightweight horror.

Che

*** - This movie is four and a half hours long, chopped into two 2+ hour chunks. How anyone could sit in the theatre that long and watch this is beyond me. I had some difficulty watching it in my underpants from the comfort of my bed in short one hour bursts. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad movie or anything. It’s just really, really long. It’s a story that covers Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara’s life as a revolutionary in Cuba and Bolivia. He is a rather polarizing figure, so if you think he was great, you’ll love this. If you think he was a cowardly terd, you probably won’t. Personally, I don’t give shit one way or the other, ergo the 3-star rating.

A Perfect Getaway

***1/2 – When a character in a movie specifically uses the term ‘red herring’ early on, that should be taken as an indicator of what to expect. That exact thing happens in this movie, and despite that, writer/director David Twohy (most famous for the surprisingly good Vin Diesel vehicle “Pitch Black”) managed to concoct an ending that was still not entirely predictable. Some odd directing/cinematographic techniques are used toward the end (black and white stuff, split screens, etc.), which don’t entirely work, but the story and acting are good enough to make this worth watching.

Planet Hulk

**1/2 – An 81-minute animated adaptation of a recent ‘Incredible Hulk’ comic book storyline, “Planet Hulk” seemed to be geared a little bit more towards kids than I expected. There wasn’t much in the way of dialogue, and the story is fairly lame. Roughly 75% of the film consists of fight scenes, which become a bit tiresome eventually. The animation is decent, but everything seems to occur in a weird slow motion sort of effect, which is rather annoying.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

*1/2 - For the record: I hate car chases. This film has a 30-minute car chase at the very beginning of it. Therefore, I hate the first 30 minutes of this movie. Although I don’t entirely dislike the doom-and-gloom story that is hinted at between incomprehensible action scenes, I also found myself extraordinarily irritated by the incomprehensible action scenes that overwhelmed the brief bits of doom-and-gloom story. Also, the gradual real-life transformation of ‘Ahnold’ into some sort of lumpy deflated balloon is more than a little disturbing.

Where The Wild Things Are

**1/2 - After murdering a dog, ransacking his sister’s room, telling a rambling James Joyce-ian style stream of consciousness story, and gnawing on his mother’s shoulder, a clearly sociopathic kid runs away from home and enters a bizarre fantasy world full of nightmarish beings. While there, he weaves an intricate web of lies and manages to destroy the civilization built by the enormous beasts. Apparently, though, everything is ok in the end. While the story and most of the dialogue is squarely aimed at kids, the visuals do not seem to be, as the creatures in this are some of the creepiest I’ve ever encountered

National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets

***1/2 – The “National Treasure” series is certainly not the sort that will appeal to everyone. First off, it heavily features Nicolas Cage (and occasionally, Nicolas Cage kissing some poor woman!). Strike one. Secondly, the action and plotting is more fitting for a video game (a la ‘Tomb Raider’ and things like that) than for a movie. Strike two. However, I can’t think of a 3rd strike here. And that fact in and of itself is more than I can say for most movies. I like ‘em and hope they make a third one, so piss off.

National Treasure

***1/2 – When you get right down to it, I guess this movie is little more than a feature length video game without the interactivity. Be that as it may, I enjoyed watching it. It may have had the unfortunate presence of an aging Nicolas Cage, but he didn’t detract enough from the nifty screenplay and original plot to make it unwatchable. The direction and production were more workmanlike than artistic, but there was enough going on to keep me interested even after a few drinks.

Doomsday

** - This movie is basically an odd amalgamation of “Mad Max”, “28 Days Later”, “Braveheart” and “Gladiator”. There is a huge amount of gore, car chases and fight scenes, and a story that requires little or no real attention from the audience. It seems to have had a pretty large budget, as the production was nice and the Scottish scenery was rather pretty. I gave this film an extra half star due to the presence of the gruff Cockney wombat Bob Hoskins and the guy who played Dr. Bashir in “Star Trek: Deep Space 9”.

2012

*1/2 – When I saw “The Day After Tomorrow” I thought that no movie would ever top it in the realm of silly scripts, scientifically specious ideas, and borderline laughable writing and plot. Well folks, we now have a new champion, and it is called “2012”! This movie is almost completely devoid of any sort of merit, and is also extremely long. If one could cut out the hackneyed subplots and scientific misrepresentations and just show a sort of technological demo of stuff blowing up, it could have easily clocked in at under an hour instead of over two and a half. This movie would be perfect to show film students in order to inform them of what not to waste potential investors’ money on when they graduate.

Angels & Demons

***1/2 - This prequel to “Da Vinci Code” is mainly a rehash of the first film, but there are enough interesting strands of plot to be found to keep this one feeling pretty fresh and enjoyable. While the absence of someone as charismatic as the original’s Sir Ian “Gandalf” McKellen is unfortunate, the storyline (that is probably actually a little better than the first) is solid enough to maintain interest for the entire run time.

The Da Vinci Code

**** - Dan Brown is at least a step or seven below Michael Crichton as an author of action-oriented larks, but this film based on his surprisingly best-selling work is both enjoyable and thought-provoking. I love the anti-organized Christianity philosophy that is pounded out through the film’s 2+ hours, and the mysterious plot is pretty engrossing even through the occasional lapse. I can’t entirely agree with the final message, but that doesn’t necessarily detract from the film experience.

Inglourious Basterds

****1/2 - This film shows that when one is making a movie set during the events of a historical period, the plot can still be entertaining while not necessarily following the real-life events with any accuracy. In that respect, this movie can be considered somewhat of a fantasy or alternate history. It was enjoyable throughout, with great characters and acting (the guy who played Landa was especially good) and an interesting story. The only reasons this one doesn’t get a five star rating are the fact that Tarantino still doesn’t seem able to recapture the outstanding dialogue of his first three films, and that there is a bit of a gore-factor that didn’t appeal to me (e.g. gratuitous scalpings, etc.).

Religulous

*** – Bill Maher is certainly not the type of chap that everyone (myself included) enjoys listening to. While this movie features him at his smug, self-serving ‘best’, it also features him in unfamiliar terrain; as a populist philosopher. This documentary of him making the foolish look even more bewildered than they are is entertaining, but it also seems too easy to accomplish, and too colored by Maher’s own viewpoints. Agreeing with someone on one topic does not always mean one must enjoy their biased antics.

State Of Play

***1/2 - Is Russell Crowe as a tubby CCR-loving hippy, Ben Affleck as a straight-laced legislator, and Jason Bateman as a bisexual coke-head lout a perfect combination? Well, if this film is any indication, I would say that is a fair statement. A mysterious plot weaves its way through this well scripted and acted film that keeps the viewer guessing without annoying them. The ending isn’t entirely satisfying, but is good enough to raise this flick above the pack by a bit.

Surrogates

** - One more in a long string of movies that pound into our heads that machines are evil and humans are great. While I don’t necessarily disagree with the “over-reliance on technology is bad” message that is espoused in this film, I would have to say that it is pretty unsuccessful in making that point appealing, as all the characters – human and robot alike – are equally despicable. When you think about it, though, the idea of ‘surrogates’ as a potential future technology is pretty dumb, as anything these human controlled robots do could easily (and much more affordably) be simulated in a computer with the same results.

Inside Man

****1/2 – Despite its self-proclaimed status as a “Spike Lee joint”, this movie is an absolute delight to watch. An outstanding plot and script keep the viewer guessing as to what is going on without feeling foist upon or overly confusing. Many plot threads that seem unrelated at the beginning weave themselves into a rich tapestry by the end, and solid acting from Clive Warren and crew adds to the enjoyment of the overall package. I highly recommend this film.

Babylon A.D.

*1/2 - The ever befuddled-looking slab of flank steak known as Vin Diesel stars in this dystopian future world-on-the-verge-of-Apocalypse type of film. He is apparently supposed to be some sort of mercenary who is hired to transport some girl from Russia to America, but the girl might be infected with some virus or something… I don’t know. Oh, and also, the virus causes people to explode. However goofy the plot is, the action is decent and the scenery’s not half bad.

Whiteout

** – A small cast, unoriginal scripting, and lack of directing subtlety make the ‘twist’ ending of this film unbelievably easy to guess almost from the outset. While nothing about this movie other than the obvious finale was particularly bad, there wasn’t anything here that was terribly interesting or engrossing either. The Antarctic scenery (which isn’t something that one has the opportunity to see very often) was strikingly beautiful, though.

Wanted

**1/2 - If your ideal film involves Angelina Jolie and some wormy guy performing strange, law-of-physics-violating gunplay maneuvers, than this is the film for you! The plot is trite and hackneyed, but it’s gussied up with tons of stylish yet probably unnecessary murder… but who doesn’t like that stuff? I can’t say I disliked this film, but it probably could have been better, and the fact that the writer(s) tried to make my sort of nerdy bloke identify with the main character was more annoying than anything else.

The Happening

** - M. Night Shyamalan has moved on from telling interesting mystery stories (i.e. “The Sixth Sense” and “Unbreakable”) and apparently decided to write and direct movies that are silly & obvious parables decrying urbanization. Mark Walhberg is perfect in is role here, assuming Shyamalan instructed him to act like an emotionless strip of pressboard paneling. Zooey Deschanel (Zooey? Please, darlin’ …) is just as poor in the role of his semi-estranged wife, and John Leguizamo solidifies his reputation as the complete waste of space he established himself as in “Spawn”. I’d recommend avoiding this one.

LOST: The Complete 4th Season

**** – This is the first season of the acclaimed series ‘LOST’ that I didn’t see any of on TV (mainly because I started to go to bed way before its airtime). While certain aspects of this writer’s strike shortened 13-episode season are outstanding (such as the introduced freighter team), the fact that it expanded on some of the worst parts of season 3 (e.g. goofy love triangle subplots) was somewhat disappointing. The character that had been the show’s most enigmatic, John Locke, makes odd and seemingly unfounded choices that may have come off better in a fully fleshed out season. Hopefully it will all make sense in the end.

Hellboy II: The Golden Army

***1/2 – I have to say that the production design in this movie is some of the best that I have seen in any movie. While the story is a bit silly, I’d certainly recommend watching this just to see the outstanding character design and production, if for no other reason. Like the first “Hellboy” movie the dialogue in this outing is really quite poor, unfortunately. I like the walking fish guy, though. Kind of like a blue C3-PO who isn’t a homoqueer.

The Day The Earth Stood Still

** - In this remake of the “classic” (by which I mean old, boring and overrated) 1951 sci-fi film, Keanu Reeves breaks open a big ball of glowing ice in the mountains of India, falls asleep, then wakes up 80 years later covered in whale blubber after falling out of a spaceship in Central Park only to realize he is still a chunkhead who can’t act. This film seems to posit that if ever there is a national emergency - such as a meteor strike or Keanu Reeves attack – a large herd of nerdy professor-types from varying acadmeic fields will be rounded up and put on the front lines ahead of military personnel.

Public Enemies

**1/2 - This picture about a portion of gangster John Dillinger’s life (the length of which is not made entirely clear) looks nice and is mildly entertaining, but doesn’t hold up for its entire two and a half hour run time. The dialogue is goofy, full of corny one-liners spouted out by Dillinger, his associates and FBI agents (most of which are gunned down at one point or another in the film). It also tries to portray every character – gangster, FBI agents, and whores- with a sort of grandiose esteem that is usually reserved for heroes and such. It strikes me as odd to do so about a bunch of people who killed indiscriminately.