Cemetery Junction

***1/2 – This big screen directorial debut from comic geniuses Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant was somewhat disappointing in that they didn’t also star in it, but it was still pretty entertaining, albeit somewhat formulaic. Ricky had a relatively small part – which was extremely funny – and Steve had a very brief cameo which was pretty good, but other than that the movie had to be carried by the weight of a mostly newbie cast (plus Ralph Fiennes and Emily Watson) and Ricky and Steve’s writing skills. Luckily, everyone pulls it off rather well, despite the fact that, in essence, this film is little more than a run-of-the-mill coming-of-age story set in Reading instead of somewhere in the States like they usually are. It is surprisingly well directed, though, by the pair whose only previous directing experience has been their two not exactly artful TV series. Additional marks go to this one for a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo from Karl Pilkington and also fairly major roles for two of “Extras” best guest stars (the dullard from season 1 and the guy at the pub who is obsessed with “When the Wind Blows” from season 2).

Fanboys

** - This mildly amusing send-up of sci-fi (specifically “Star Wars”) nerdism is hard to bash too badly since its subject is one for which I have a great deal of fondness. However, this isn’t really all that funny. Most of the parts that were actually humorous were the fairly frequent “Star Wars” quotes and references that were sprinkled in throughout. Besides that, the attempts at laughs were mostly broad sight gags, lowbrow dick and fart jokes, and/or unapologetic pandering to the audience. The numerous cameos by everyone from Kevin Smith and Jason Mewes to Carrie Fisher and Billie Dee Williams to Bill Shatner and at least three roles for the rarely funny Seth Rogen fell pretty flat. This movie portrays “Star Wars” and “Star Trek” fans as having a bitter and sometimes violent hatred of each other that burns brighter than a thousand suns. Does this form of geekworld infighting really exist? I sure hope not. I, for one, love both Wars and Trek (although I can’t say I’m too fond of the original Trek series) and find it somewhat sad that this type of caustic dislike may exist, or even be prevalent. I don’t think wise old Yoda or equally wise somewhat younger Guinan would approve of such behavior. I went all that way to end with a Whoopi Goldberg reference? It’s a shame.

Land of the Lost

*1/2 - While I seem to have made a number of wise decisions lately (such as braving the outside world by going to see “Inception” in the theatre, and purchasing the outstanding new Arcade Fire album), I unfortunately cannot include the adding of this 2009 Will Ferrell ‘comedy’ to my Netflix queue as one of my better ones. This modern tongue-in-cheek update of the kitschy 70s TV show that is a favorite amongst children and potheads is largely bereft of humor and has very little to offer the discerning viewer. As funny as Will Ferrell was when he was doing George Bush impressions or loudly playing a cowbell on SNL, it has not seemed to translate into full-length features, as I have yet to see one starring him that I’ve enjoyed more than fleetingly. Other than one scene near the beginning where Ferrell’s character is zinged by Matt Lauer in a faux “Today Show” interview, the laughs are few and far between. The plot (such as it is) makes no sense and just about every attempt at humor is a lame joke or even lamer sight gag. I guess this movie proves that you can only stomach so many dinosaur urine jokes before they start to get a little stale.

Inception

***** - One of the most conceptually ambitious films I’ve seen, Christopher Nolan’s “Inception” is as mentally engrossing as it is visually compelling. It is a rare treat to see a movie that is complex enough to challenge a viewer while simultaneously logical enough to remain coherent and free of storytelling gimmickry. While this had some of the old “Memento”-style brain gymnastics that made that movie intriguing (although, I’ve always felt it is somewhat overrated), “Inception” adds something that the former film never even seemed to attempt: visceral, joyride action. In that sense, I imagine just about any viewer with even a moderate amount of intelligence will be able to grasp the basic idea and follow it along the fast-paced adventure that fleshes it out. The dream sequences that the majority of the film takes place in allow for amazing scenery (such as the fantastic arctic fortress and endless urban wasteland) and superb visual trickery. Another thing working in the movie’s favor is the nearly perfect score by Hans Zimmer, which strikes all the right notes and gives this already intense film an even greater sense of urgency. All-in-all, “Inception” is easily the best film I have seen this year so far, and probably one of the best of the last decade or more.

The Island

** - This 2005 Michael Bay directed sci-fi thriller is basically a rip-off of a movie that was itself a rip-off of a number of earlier stories, with an enormous budgetary increase and Steve Buscemi tossed in as comic relief. The film that “The Island” blatantly rips off is one from the late seventies called “Parts: The Clonus Horror” and that was so bad that it ended up being riffed on in a season 9 episode of MST3K. So from the very outset “The Island” is at a disadvantage due to its lackluster heritage, even though that fact that it is a rip-off only detracts from its enjoyment in principle. That being said, the premise (i.e. people paying for clones to be raised for body part replacement) isn’t all that bad. Or, at least, it wasn’t bad 30 years ago when it was originated. It seems a little trite now, but I would definitely say that this is a substantial improvement over “Parts” due to the lush scenery, outstanding CG backgrounds and design, and better acting from the two leads (played by Obi-Wan Kenobi and the Black Widow). However, the last hour and a half of this two hour and fifteen minute movie is just a series of chase sequences involving cars, boats, helicopters, jet-bikes, mag-lev trains and footraces that are dull and mostly logic-free. This is a film that one shouldn’t think about too much, and if one follows that guideline, it might be worth sitting through.

Greenberg

**1/2 – I’m generally all for quirky characters in movies, but only if the quirkiness in the characters remains humorous and appealing enough to sustain them throughout the feature. In this latest offering from Noah Baumbach, the two lead characters are so unappealing that the brief bits of humor that they display are far overshadowed by their more irritating characteristics. Case in point: the lead female seems to be mildly retarded and have a Minnesota accent, but also frighteningly detached from reality and appallingly promiscuous. The male lead – played by Ben Stiller – is a clearly unstable sociopath who, while I can sympathize with some of his actions, is extremely cruel, belligerent and self-absorbed. In fact, all the characters in the movie seem very self-absorbed. I find people – whether movie characters or otherwise – who take themselves too seriously and think that everything they do is the most important thing in the world to be very annoying. Besides the character issues, the dialogue was a bit hit-and-miss, but it was well shot and looked fairly nice. The two graphic sex scenes in the film seemed oddly out of place and detracted from the overall package as well. This isn’t a bad movie at its core, but there was enough bad about it to cause me to have no interest in seeing it again.

Little Miss Sunshine

**** - If there is anything in this nation that more epitomizes its obsession with superficiality and vapidity than little girl beauty pageants I have yet to become aware of it. This low-key comedy pushes all the right buttons in its portrayal of the ludicrousness and horrifying glitz that is the beauty pageant, and throws in a nice skewering of self-help motivational speakers for good measure. The plot – a family’s journey to California for their daughter’s entry into the Little Miss Sunshine contest - sells the film short of what it is, as it is much more than it seems from its description. The variety of quirky, offbeat and funny characters are very well defined and played to a tee by all of the actors, with Alan Arkin as the foul-mouthed (“always with the fucking chicken!”) grandfather and Steve Carell as the depressed homosexual brother/uncle being especially good. The score by underrated band DeVotchka was outstanding and added a great deal to an already very enjoyable film, while also giving it a sort of Wes Anderson-esque feel. The beauty pageant at the end was funny and all in its satire and mockery, but it was still a beauty pageant at its core and, therefore, extremely difficult to watch. The second half lost a little steam, too, with the absence of the Alan Arkin character, but it’s still a great movie overall.

Clash Of The Titans

**1/2 – I guess I can’t really call this a bad movie, although for being a fantasy/action film it seemed awfully boring. It had lots of nifty effects and goofy looking creatures and battle scenes and lovingly filmed death sequences, but none of it seemed very cohesive. The plot was just all over the place and confusing as all get out, with crummy dialogue and not much going on between action sequences to keep one’s attention. It did, however, feature Sam “Avatar Guy” Worthington’s finest acting performance to date. That’s not really saying much since most of his “acting” in this movie consists of jumping around, grunting and yelling things like “Go!” and “Move faster!” along with the occasional nod or other head movement. It just burns my ass a little, I guess. All the critical praise this dope gets for his terrible acting skills is just incomprehensible to me. He must have naked pictures of everyone in Hollywood that he is using to blackmail his way into super-stardom. In any event, this movie isn’t anything that you’re not expecting it to be going in. So if you’re in the mood for some mindless and confusing action this is the movie for you. It’s better than the Harry Hamlin version, anyway.

Hancock

*** - Will Smyth plays a Superman-type figure who drinks heavily and causes as much damage as possible while carrying out his rescue missions in this action-comedy that also features Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron. This film starts out very promisingly, with lots of humor and an interesting idea. However, as the movie progresses the humor seems to dissipate and the interesting idea morphs into a largely illogical and rather banal attempt to tie together plot strands that seemed like they might be neat at first. Even with the fairly weak storyline and dull (occasionally difficult to sit through) second half, this is still a good film that contains some high quality aspects and leaves open the possibility of a franchise that could have some lasting value. The ‘Fresh Prince’ is as good in this movie as he has been in any other movie he has been in, and I chalk that up to the fact that he’s not trying to go overboard with the comedy and charisma that most people seem to like so much, and are displayed in the vast majority of other successful films he’s been in. Bateman is always good for a few laughs, and his straight man routine in this is about as good as they get. It’s a quality film worth watching, but a little disappointing after such a strong start.

King Corn

**** - Unlike the similarly themed “Food, Inc.”, this documentary - which follows two Bostonians who decide to grow an acre of corn in Iowa and follow the process of what happens to it from start to finish - was less about getting people riled up over ‘the system’ and more about informing accurately. As a federal employee working for an agricultural agency, I found this movie pretty fascinating. I deal with farmers all the time, and speak with them at length about what they do and how they operate. However, New Jersey is a very small state with a very small sector of its population employed in agricultural fields. This documentary provides a new perspective about what a Midwestern farmer goes through in order to make a living. Whether or not one has a vested interest in agriculture, I think if you have at least some respect for how the world is supplied with sustenance you will discover a great deal about how things work and why things are the way they are from this film. On a personal level, they briefly show the Iowa version of the agency I work for in this. That was pretty neat, although I must say that it is not necessarily indicative of how things are in my particular office.

Kick-Ass

***1/2 – In this film’s rather lengthy opening narration, the title character ruminates on why no one has ever tried to emulate the many movies, comics and video games out there and become a masked superhero. This is a question I have often asked myself. My conclusion (that people are, by nature, selfish and unconcerned with what does not directly affect them) is not really touched on in this film, but that doesn’t make it any less enjoyable, seeing as this is largely an action flick. And action it does well. It takes a great deal of film-making chops to make it realistically seem as though a tiny 10-year old girl is pulling off killer ninja moves, and this movie succeeds in doing so. One aspect of the flick with which I do take issue is the fairly frequent occurrence of topical pop culture references. That is one my pet peeves in film. Including recent topical subjects like Myspace, Skype (whatever the hell that is), iPhones, first-person shooter video games and things like that ensures that a film will be dated within about 10 years and have no real lasting value. Besides that and the somewhat weak script, I found myself pretty immersed in the comic-like world that was created.

Michael Clayton

*** - In this critically-acclaimed drama (certainly not a thriller, as it is billed), George Clooney plays a lawyer who is not really a lawyer in that he doesn’t practice law per se, but he does work with lawyers in some capacity and travels a lot doing various things like talking to people and looking at horses. In any event, I don’t really know what he does, other than rack up large gambling debts. Between poker games he somehow manages to stumble upon a massive cover-up at a large agrichemical company (a la Monsanto) called U-North - which is a little confusing because for the first half of the movie I assumed it was a university not a large business – which was discovered by certifiably loony colleague Tom Wilkinson, who is subsequently killed via a needle to the foot. Lots of other equally uninteresting things occur, as well. The film is well-crafted and nicely shot with great performances from most involved, which keeps it somewhat enjoyable despite its dullness and predictability. I chalk up its critical acclaim to the presence of Sidney Pollack, who has been considered a sort of movie Midas ever since his string of dull and critically fawned over films from the 70s. Overrated.

Whip It

**** - How can you not like a movie that features Andrew “Future Man” Wilson – the most underrated of the Wilson Brothers – in probably his biggest role ever? The answer: you can’t! Why doesn’t that guy get more work? Maybe he doesn’t want it, I don’t know. Anyway, if I were a filmmaker, I’d cast him in everything, kind of like how Kevin Smith does with Affleck. Besides the unexpected pleasure of the esteemed Future Man’s presence, the rest of the film was pretty good, too. There was some decent dialogue and funny bits, competent direction from first-timer Drew Barrymore, and plenty of surprisingly enjoyable roller derby action. I certainly wouldn’t consider myself a roller derby fan after having watched this film, but if I was forced to sit through a sporting event of some sort, roller derby would probably now be near the top of the list choice-wise. I liked quite a few parts of this film, but I’d have to say my favorite was when the dumb jock guy at the diner eats some gigantic sandwich in under three minutes and then triumphantly exclaims, “It’s free, bitches! It’s free!” You can’t go wrong with filming an idiot yelling.