Movie of the Day - June

June 1st, 2012 - People often say that this is the absolute definitive Batman movie, and for the most part, I agree. "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" captures everything that a Batman movie should have: the dark, gothic atmosphere of Gotham City. The moody, no-nonsense, yet bad ass as hell mentality of Batman himself. The A-plus (voice) acting talents of the likes of Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, and Dana Delany. Sure, it most certainly stands as the best animated Batman film of all time...but I can't help but give into human nature and say, simply put...I wanted more. Granted, the film takes an interesting look at the DCAU's Batman in his origins, lost love, place in Gotham both in and out of costume, as well as putting him into a rarely seen no-win scenerio and still seeing him come out of it, but the one thing I think about everytime I see this movie is 'is Batman REALLY being pushed to his limits?' Around the time this film was released, DC Comics was having Batman go through a storyline called 'Knightfall' in which Batman was beaten by Bane, replaced, and forced to win back his honor as being Batman. It not only showed Batman being pushed to his limits, falling, and raising, but it also featured practically every single member of his rogues gallery in one form or another. To me, that should have been the tale we should have received in this movie. To me, the problem with "Mask of the Phantasm" is that it is a phenominal Bruce Wayne story (I still get chills when it shows the first time he dons the cape and cowl, its like he becomes a whole new person) and a so-so Batman story, focusing on the new character known as the Phantasm. Sure, the reveal of the Phantasm's identity is kinda a cool twist, but to me, the reveal sorta raises a few too many questions then answers. Now, don't get me wrong: its still a really good movie with fantastic animation, and showing just how serious, focused, and all-around artistic the Batman Animated Series was, but I can't help but simply have asked for me. I give "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 2nd, 2012 - In 1994, filmmaker Kevin Smith released a film called "Clerks" which began his career, standing as the lynchpin for not only his franchised films, but also setting off a spark that is still felt through independent film today. As most fans know, Smith's original ending to "Clerks" featured lead character, Dante, being shot and killed in a store robbery. Smith later said that he changed the film's ending to a more up-lifting one due to negative feedback, and that, quote, "the audience shouldn't suffer just because" he "doesn't know how to end the movie". It was a lesson Smith would never forget. However, in 2011, with the film "Red State", Kevin Smith would forget that very lesson. Being a huge Kevin Smith fan, I wanted to like Red State, but the fact is, the movie is a jumbled mess with a piss poor ending that I haven't been so annoyed with since "The Devil Inside". First and foremost, the movie features WAY too many characters, most of whom are either ignored, dropped, or killed off just to all focus on another character. With deaths, I can at least udnerstand, but the killcount of the movie is so high and random (the lead woman featured in the film's poster randomly appears, stays on screen for about 15 minutes, then is killed off in the most random, piss-poor fashion) that it simply becomes bad taste. The ending is, without a doubt, the worst part of the movie. It's so bad that it actually features a roughly 10 minute speech explaining what the ending actually was that I almost expected the Architech from "The Matrix Reloaded" to walk by and simply say "Screw this!" Granted, Smith has stated that the ending was the ending he wanted due to budget reasons, but still, I can't help but think something (ANYTHING!) could have been better then what we got. Now, I DO like the premise of the film about a hate preaching church crossing the line to a point where government agents are forced to get involved to shut them down once and for all, but the execution is horrible, making this one of the worst horror (and I use the term EXTREMELY loosely) films I have seen in years. Kevin Smith is a good director, and a fantastic writer. It's one of the reasons why this film upset me so much because I know he can do MUCH better then this crap. I give "Red Stare" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 3rd, 2012 - Described as a cross between "The Goonies" and "Gremlins" (with a touch of "Shaun of the Dead" thrown in for good measure), "Attack the Block" is the tale of a street gang from a down-and-out apartment complex standing together to fight off an alien invasion. If that sounds like the greatest concept to a movie of all time, that's probabily because it is. What could have easily been a cheap, B-movie, asylum style film became a story about redemption, standing for your friends, and being a hero. This movie is all heart, giving a rather realistic and adult outlook on what would happen if the most unlikely of heroes are tossed into this impossible situation, yet never loses its sense of humor along the way (British comedic actor Nick Frost stands as the films supporting-vetran actor). However, the absolute best thing about this movie can be summed up in two words: John Boyega. In his debut role, Boyega plays the main title role of "Moses", a street wise (and just as street tough) leader of his gang who steps up to take charge when the alien menace arrives, staying strong and showing no fear when his friends need him the most. All you have to do is look into Boyega's eyes and you can see a battle hardened young man who is willing to do anything to save his block, and his performance in this movie is simply stunning. Now, my only real complaint about this movie is a big one: the sci-fi element. The thought of an alien invasion on a low-income London apartment complex is interesting, but I would have rather the aliens of been flushed out a little more. One minute, its about skinny, classic gray aliens, and the next minute, they are jet black alien dogs with glow in the dark teeth. Yu-wha? Still, the animation and puppet work on the aliens are gorgeous, so if you don't question the whys and focus more on the whats, they are still entertaining. "Attack the Block" could very well be this generations "Goonies" (though I don't recall Mouth, Chunk, or Data being slaughtered in the movie), and if it was, I wouldn't have a single problem with it. I hope this movie does end up becoming a cult classic, for the simple reason because its that good. I give "Attack the Block" 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 4th, 2012 - As I have stated in my previous reviews, I absolutely loved "Men in Black" and absolutely hated "Men in Black II". Now, its 3-D sequel "Men in Black 3" is something of a mixed bag. There are things about it Im not a big fan of, but overall, I have to say that I really enjoyed it. First, it needs to be said: I LOVE time travel stories. Something about the concept of someone commanding time itself and being able to go anywhere (or anywhen) they want always speaks to me and, frankly, it makes perfect sense for a time travel story to be incorperated into the MiB franchise, considering that so much of the story involves history. As far as plot goes, I like the idea of J being sent back in time to save K from being killed by an old foe, an act that would change the timeline as a whole, but this does also lead to probabily my biggest complaint about the entire movie: since most of the movie features K from 1969 (played brilliantly by Josh Brolin), Tommy Lee Jones takes a SERIOUS backseat in this movie, having perhaps 20 minutes of combined screen time in the movie...and don't give me any crap about how "Tommy Lee Jones is too old to keep up in an action movie" because as "Captain America" proved to us, he's most certainly still got it. Also, while we are on the subject on underusing talent...THEY KILLED OFF ZEDD!? WHAT THE HELL, MAN!? Zedd (played by Rip Torn) is one of MiB's lynch pin characters, as noteable as either J or K. To have him simply killed off screen as a means to introduce to 'Hall of Retired Letters' is lazy, and the character deserved better. Finally, I have to say it....[SPOILER WARNING] The ending is simply...weird. Yes, we learn what happened to J's father (not sure anyone asked about it to begin with, but okay...), but with K being present at his death and taking J under his care asks alot more questions then answers, leaving the movie on a tripping, frustrating conclusion...but, enough of the bad. Let's focus on the good. My favorite thing about this movie is that it did away with all the kid-friendly crap we got in the second movie, leaving us with a more adult oriented story. The worms are underused (which makes them all the funnier) and Frank the Pug is missing as a whole (aside from a brief photo of him in J's apartment, which was met with an immediate "awwwwww" from the audience), which I think is actually good, allowing me to take the plot alot more serious. The casting is from beginning to end solid, with Emma Thompson, Mike Colter, Will Arnett, Alice Eve, Bill Hader, and Jemaine Clement as 'Boris the Animal' (who, in my opinion, is the best villain of the three movies by a mile) along for the ride, but I gotta say, Michael Stuhlbarg's role as Griffin is my favorite in the entire movie. As I said, I love time travel, and the idea of an alien who can actually live in between time and space itself, going as far as to know how different parallel universes of time start and end, is a genius idea. Moreson, Stuhlbarg's character himself is simply so damn likeable, having a calming and all around cuddly aura to himself the audience can't help but love. Im not sure in "Men in Black 3" is meant to be the finale of the franchise, but if it is, it ends on a very high note. Its a good movie, and a much better follow up to the original movie then its direct sequel. I give "Men in Black 3" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 5th, 2012 - You really can't talk about "The Box" without talking about Richard Kelly, and you can't talk about Richard Kelly without talking about a film called "Donnie Darko". "Donnie Darko" is a film that will never be on Movie of the Day because I absolute hate it. To me, its a film that insists upon itself, creating a world of douche bag, stereotypical characters, sticking them into a world that had to be forged from some type of acid, and gave it a supernatural/time traveling resolution that not only seemed pulled out of Kelly's ass, but actually has the gull to be ambiguous....that's just great. LOST does it and it sucks; Donnie Darko does it and its art....nice. But, why am I reviewing "Donnie Darko" here? Isn't this a review of "The Box"? Well, yes, but the thing about Richard Kelly is that he is something of a one trick pony. As the writer and director of "Donnie Darko", "Southland Tales", and of course "The Box", Kelly tended to have all three films (which actually should have NOTHING to do with eachother) incorperate the same three themes: manipulation of time, personal self-sacrifice for the greater good, and ambiguous interpritations of what's real and what's not. The only difference between "The Box" and the other two films is that that type of story telling device has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OVERALL FILM!!! "The Box" was originally inspired by the short story 'Button,Button' (later turned into a Twilight Zone episode) with the simple, yet brilliant, concept: a stranger approaches a man and his wife and gives them a simple box with a button on it and says that if they push the button, they will be rewarded with one-million dollars; however, if they do push it, someone in the world will die. Now, if that was the movie alone, it would have been brilliant. A simple movie where two people spend two hours trying to make a tough, life altering decision...but nooooooooo! The wife (Cameron Diaz) pushes the button less then an hour into the movie, we see that the death effects someone that causes a weird-ass Rube Goldberg effect that kills someone else, leading to the couple stumbling across a strange cult that worships rebirth that leads to their son going blind and deaf, and the only way he could be saved is with Diaz being killed...WHICH MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO FRIGGIN' SENSE! And this is what angers me about Kelly's writing: you can't create plot devices and use abiguity as a means to not have to explain how basic biology works! The "Button, Button" concept is all that was needed for this movie, and all the paranormal/supernatural elements simply kill it. The cast is fine, but relatively boring. Cameron Diaz, James Marsden, and and Frank Langella are all fine actors, but under Kelly's directing, they are wooden as wooden can get, so really, there is no real opinion of them, good or bad. They simply...are. If it sounds like I hate this movie, it's because I DO! Richard Kelly, Im sure, is a good writer if he simply gave his work a little more focus on the details and a little less on 'weird for the sake of weird'. In alot of ways, I link Richard Kelly to M. Night Shayamalan in the concept of 'writey/not directy' because Im sure he could shine alot more in a collaberation with a visionary director. "The Box" is the sad story of a good story being mowed down with filler, filler, and more filler. If I could describe this movie in one word, it would be 'avoid'. I give "The Box" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 6th, 2012 - Before I get into the actual review, it needs to be said: I friggin' LOVE Tenacious D. Jack Black and Kyle Gass struck gold with the creation of a sudo-mega brilliant that's entire gimmick is based upon the ideals of 'hype'. From their short lived HBO show to their videos, I always enjoyed beng along for the ride that is D, so naturally, if Tenacious D is designed to be episodic, it only makes sense for there to be an origin story. However, when it comes to "Tenacious D in The Pick of Destiny", my main problem with the movie can be found in the same means as my problems with SNL based movies (which actually makes sense, considering that Tenacious D itself was originally designed to be sketch for Mr. Show): the joke begins to wear a little thin at a long runtime. Overall, the idea of a rock-musical telling the story is good, going from KG and JB meeting, the band forming, the quest for the Pick of Destiny, and even the D's immortal showdown with Satan (and actually hearing the greatest song in the world featured in the song "Tribute"), but aside from that, this movie is heavily padded. We get a college party that goes nowhere, a car chase (epic as it was, as this film clearly was inspired by "The Blues Brothers") that sorta goes no where, and even cameos from Tim Robbins, John C. Reilly, Amy Adams, Amy Poehler, and Colin Hanks....each one going absolutely no where. Understandable, when you're going with Tenacious D, you're clearly going to go with fart jokes, pot humor, and various portions of the film dedicated to "the c**k", but my problem is that the film didn't need it. Jack Black and Kyle Gass are talented and funny on their own, not needing to depend on bathroom humor....still, its not all bad. The songs are catchy, and the more dedicated Tenacious D fans (or simply Jack Black fans) will still be entertained, so all in all, its not a horrible film, but it could be alot better. I give "Tenacious D in The Pick of Destiny" 2 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 7th, 2012 - To those who say that I take movies too seriously, and that its impossible for me to enjoy a good ol' fashioned stoner comedy, let it be known: I friggin LOVE "Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle". But why? Why is it that I like this movie over the 8 billion other stoner, road trip movies? One word: effort. "Harold and Kumar" is more then the traditional 'stoned douches go on an adventure' because, ironically enough, pot takes quite a backseat in this movie. Is it featured? Sure, but it isn't the end all/be all storyline of the movie. Instead, we are treated to something of a 'coming of age' story about friendship, growing up, stereotyping (even being forced to stereotype your own ethnicity), reaction to bigotry, and the overall arch of the film, being able to experience that one moment in life of complete satisfaction. Truth be told, for a 'brainless, stoner comedy', it has alot of heart, and is actually quite deep. At the time, both John Cho and Kal Penn were known for being side characters in straight to DVD comedies, so to have these two in the starring role was quite a challenge. A challenge that they both lived up to perfectly. Harold (Cho) and Kumar (Penn) have the perfect "Odd Couple" vibe, with Harold as the straight man, and Kumar as the more free spirit. They work off eachother well, making their friendship all the more belivable. And yes, it needs to be said....Neil Patrick Harris is freakin' EPIC in this movie. Long before "How I Met Your Mother", NPH resparked his career by playing this stereotypical version of himself, a drugged up sexoholic who brings the laughs everytime he is on screen. See, the main reason I made sure that this movie was a Movie of the Day was to prove a point. Just because studios make comedies of this genre doesn't mean they have to be bad. Actually, with the right script, cast, and care, any movie (no matter how silly the overall plot may be) can be a work of art. I happily give "Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle" 4 out of 5 stars.

June 8th, 2012 - Sometimes, it really sucks to do these reviews. Sometimes, a movie comes along that I really REALLY want to write a positive review about, but simply can't. That type of movie is "Austin Powers in Goldmember". You see, kids, the thing that others me about this movie is the same exact thing that bothered me about "The Spy Who Shagged Me": this trilogy is nothing more then the same movie over and over again! I get it: he's a British spy for the 60s in the modern day. It was absolutely hilarious the first time around, but the third film in, we're still "Do I make you horny, baby"? Gaaaaah! Dr. Evil, however, was still a good idea, so it was right around this movie that his character finally began to grow stale. Perhaps that's why the film began to focus more on Scott being the truly evil one in the family, and the eventual reveal of Austin and Evil as brothers (Dougie Powers? Really?). The cast of the film is sorta hit and miss. Folks, Im just gonna say it: Beyonce CAN NOT ACT! Its clear that she was hired for this movie as nothing more then eye candy and to sing on the soundtrack. However, Michael Caine playing Austin's father was BRILLIANT CASTING! In a world of "Dark Knights", "Cider House Rules", and "Inceptions", its almost shocking to see Caine actually being funny. He was a welcome breath of fresh air in this movie. Also, the cameos of Tom Cruise, Gwenyth Paltrow, Steven Speilberg, Kevin Spacey, Danny DeVito, and John Travolta were fantastic (the Osbournes...not so much), making the design of what an actual Austin Powers movie would look like a stroke of genius. Overall, the problem with Austin Powers is that it was a tale that could have simply been told in a single movie. Yes, the character (and the franchise) was a play on the excessive James Bond movies, but the joke only goes so far, and its third film in was simply overkill. I give "Austin Powers in Goldmember" 2 out of 5 stars.

June 9th, 2012 - Roland Emmerich is the type of creator I loath. He's a man who, basically, writes the same movie over and over again. The formula is always the same: broken family + disaster - any actual science % cheap shots at anything that seems to piss him off = hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office. From "Independence Day" to "Godzilla" to "2012", Emmerich's are nothing more then popcorn flick designed to do nothing more then 'entertain the masses', which could be taken as both a good thing and a bad thing. With films of this calibur, creators have the ability to spread whatever message they want. So what does Emmerich say is this movie? The Presidency of George w. Bush was a disaster, global warming is real, and we are all shmucks for our harsh immigration rules....yes, EXACTLY what you want from a disaster movie. "The Day After Tomorrow" is a movie about a 'global storm' (yu wha?) causing most of the united states to be swallowed up in a massive hurricane (wait...what?) and, days later, turning into a second ice age (okay, NOW you're not even trying!), all the while focusing on a young son (Jake Gyllenhal) trying to reunite with his father (Dennis Quaid). As I said earlier, from there on in, its the same plot: father and son are strained, disaster comes, they both stay alive to see eachother one day, yadda yadda yadda, credits. Honestly, I really wouldn't be as irritated with this movie if it wasn't simply the same thing over and over again. This movie is pretty much "Independence Day" minus the cheesy fun factor and likeability. I know it made half a billion dollars, but frankly, that doesn't make it any good. Sure, the visuals are great, but you can only watch them for so long without the right story to back it up. When it comes to movies that I stand against, "The Day After Tomorrow" is the shining example of what bothers me, and its through these reviews that I can only hope that, one day, these types of movies can be thought out a little longer before they are simply slapped on with a disaster and called a movie. I give "The Day After Tomorrow" 1 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 10th, 2012 - "Candyman" is one of those rare movies where I'm really not a fan of the flick, but that's nobody's fault but my own. The movie is well written, beautifully acted, and for its time, the effects are actually quite good...but the biggest problem you could ever have in a horror movie is not scaring your audience, and this film, simply put, doesn't scare me. Sure, there are jump scares, gorey moments, and scenes that are straight up creepy (Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen kissing with a mouth full of bees comes to mind), but scary? Eh. I guess the one thing that sorta gets to me is that the plot doesn't make too much sense to me. So, Candyman (Tony Todd) is destined to make Virginia Madsen's character 'his', so he continues to twist and torment her life until her can take her, making her out to be a kidnapper, and a multiple murderer...but why? Scene after scene after scene, Candyman has her exactly where he wants her, and yet still, he allows her to get away, essentially allowing his prey a chance to escape. Eventually, it comes off more as 'playing with her' then actually being a legit threat. "Candyman" is far from my favorite horror movie, but again, that doesn't make the movie bad...simply not my style. For those who like the more gothic, jump scare, thinking type horror movie, they would most likely rate it higher, but as for me, I can only give it 2 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 11th, 2012 - George Reeves could very well be one of the saddest stories in Hollywood. A man who wanted fame, fortune, and love, but once he had all three, he found nothing but pain and misery. On June 16th, 1959, Reeves was found dead in his bedroom, apparently an act of suicide via a self-inflicted gunshot. However, due to the lack of Reeves' fingerprints on the gun, amongst other findings at the scene of the incident, many believe Reeves' death may have actually been murder. Today, it still remains a mystery as to what happened that night, but one thing is for sure: On June 16th, 1959, the world lost Superman. "Hollywoodland" is half biographical/half fictional account of Reeves' life (played relatively well by Ben Affleck) as well as the investigation into his death my petty detective Louis Simo (Adrien Brody). The film flashes back and forth between the story of George Reeves life from up and coming actor, to TV's Superman, to the multiple possibilities of his death, and Simo's investigation, interviewing those close to him, such as Reeves' lover (Diane Lane), studio exec boss (Bob Hoskins), and eventual mistress (Robin Tunney), discovering that he and Reeves weren't so different, and how Simo needs to change his own life, or else it could very well end in misery too. This film almost seemed like it needed a touch of fiction in it. George Reeve's life was a difficult one, filled with being forced to not be himself at times, as well as being typecasted once Superman ended its run. Its hard to have an uplifting ending with no hope whatsoever when the Man of Steel himself dies, so with Simo, we can at least get a full story in the movie, and honestly, his saga is almost as interesting as Reeves. While I've never been a big Adrian Brody fan (is it just me, or does he mumble in every single role he ever gets?), he works well as the films eyes and ears, allowing for an interesting lead character to follow. Ben Affleck plays the role of George Reeves up to par, but at times, I can't help but think that he delved into the 1950s character a little too hard, eating up the scenery once or twice. Diane Lane and Bob Hoskins are legends of the screen as usual, and Robin Tunney once again channels that tightrope walk between cute and loveable and about to snap at the same time that only she can do. All in all, while it may not be the ideal biography of George Reeve's life that the purists would want, it still makes for a interesting and gripping film. I give "Hollywoodland" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 12th, 2012- Seriously...WHO THE HELL WAS THIS MOVIE MADE FOR!? It can't be for adults because it's far too stupid! It can't be for kids, considering that this is probabily one of the most sexist 'action films' I have ever seen in my life...AND I'VE SEEN "THE CONDEMNED"! Personally, Im surprised that it took an entire decade after making "The Tuxedo" for Jackie Chan to retire from action movies, because after this train wreck, there is NO going back. The fact is, the plot of this movie could be decent: a suit that grants the wearer the ability to do pretty much any physical activity. Hell, the science of basing the suit on controlling the wearer via nurve endings is quite brilliant. The problem, however, is that the suit itself is the ONLY brilliant thing about this picture. The action scenes are par (at best), the gags are stupid (Jackie Chan knocking out James Brown, then singing in his place......funny), and when I say this movie is sexist, its something of an understatement. Practically every single time Jennifer Love Hewitt (who, Im sorry, seems like a sweet, kind person, absolutely beautiful, but CAN-NOT-ACT!) appears on screen, she does nothing more then appear as 'the sexy decoy'. Hewitt, you're hot, but come on! What are you? Jessica freakin' Rabbit? Another thing that annoys me is the editing, which seems to have an usual dedication to random close ups of characters faces which, sometimes, leads me to have ill feelings towards the man who invented HD. It's not "Catwoman" bad editing, but it's close. If I had to describe "The Tuxedo" in one word, it would simply be....'why?' There is no artistic integrity. There is no charming interaction between characters. Hell, the characters are either stereotypes or a block of wood. All in all, this movie simply has no reason for existing...buuuuuuuuut, if you're a hardcore Jackie Chan fan (or simply a fan of Hewitt's breasts because, trust me, this film reminds you that she has them. Constantly), you might enjoy it. To say that I did not, however, is an understatement. I give "The Tuxedo" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 13th, 2012 - Rule number one about making a black comedy: you can make it as dark as you want, but please, for the love of god, MAKE IT A COMEDY! One of Ben Stiller's earlier directing roles, "The Cable Guy" was interesting for, at the time, taking Jim Carrey out of his 'goofy, nice guy' roles and, instead, makes him an unpredictable stalker. In a strange sorta way, Carrey does bring his traditional wacky personality to the table, but in a different way...which is actually something of a bad thing. Let's face it: without the nostalgia glasses, most of Carrey's 90s characters were actually quite annoying (man talking out of his ass, bank teller willing to make an ass of himself for a hot blonde, pretty much all of "Dumb and Dumber, etc), but the thing about Carrey is that as the protagonists of these movies, he's still so loveable that we can't help but enjoy him. In "The Cable Guy", Chip is the villain of the story, leading to his demented mannerisms coming off as either annoying or simply creepy. Take for instance the bathroom scene with Carrey and Owen Wilson. Sure, Chip is saying one liners with the classic, black-comedy style set up, but I don't personally find beating the crap out of Owen Wilson all that humorous. Go figure. Other cast members feature Matthew "Looking back on it, even Ferris Bueller was a tad bit bland" Broderick, Jack Black, and Leslie Mann (who, along with "Big Daddy" and "George of the Jungle", makes her third appearance on Movie of the Day playing essentially the SAME EXACT CHARACTER), none of whom bring too much to the table. The basic thing about this movie is that, simply put, its not funny. Not bad, and ertainly entertaining in certain parts (the "Star Trek" style fight at Medevil Times IS sorta comical), but for the most part, there are few laugh out loud moments. If Stiller were to sway even further from his comic roots and made this a solid horror flick, it would be fantastic, but as it is now, its simply....there. I give "The Cable Guy" 2 out of 5 stars.

June 14th, 2012 - If I didn't make it clear in my "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" review, let me state it once again: I friggin' LOVE David Fincher. One of my favorite directors of all time. His directing has a style and substance all his own that somehow is capable of making gritting and dirty into a world of beauty. However, before Fincher brought us a girl with a dragon tattoo, the story of the zodiac killer, or even Tyler Durden's Project Mayhem, Fincher brought us a film with the single greatest ending in cinema history with "Se7en". Now, this review will have to be spoiler free simply because I wouldn't dare ruin the ending for those who haven't seen it, but in a word, its phenominal. Its dark, its deep, and it will piss you off while satisfied at the same exact time. The story is something that "Law and Order" would give anything to have as an episode: two detectives try and find a killer whose murders resemble the seven deadly sins (for those of you playing at home, gluttony, sloth, greed, pride, lust, and perhaps the films most important two, envy and wrath). However, even when the killer is caught (I won't even reveal the actor who plays the killer, but its a brilliant casting), the story is far from over. Morgan Freeman and Brad Pitt are at their best, playing respectfully a vetran and rookie cop who are forced together in an opposites attract theme. Gwenyth Paltrow is good as Pitt's wife, but I can't help but feel like she was a tad bit underused, and at the same time, a scene with Paltrow and Freeman was included that, filmwise, makes the ending have a bigger impact, but at the same time, seems a little out of place with grand scheme of the movie. Still, "Se7en" is a cinema masterpiece, and I can guarantee you, you will NEVER look at cardboard boxes the same way again. I give "Se7en" 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 15th, 2012 - Everyone, from comic book to cinema fans, tend to harp on this movie, and honestly...I can't seem to figure out why. Is it the best comic book movie ever made? No. Is it the worst comic book movie ever made? Not by a longshot. Truth be told, considering that this film was directed by Mark Steven Johnson, the man who gave us such films as "Ghost Rider", "Jack Frost", and "When in Rome", its actually a deep, exceptional movie. To me, there are two main strikes against it which I keep seeing come up when people rant about this flick. First, the casting. Yes, Ben Affleck plays Daredevil, and Jennifer Garner plays Elektra, but let's be realistic about this for a second: Affleck was seriously up to par with the movie, capturing the moody vigilantism of Daredevil, as well as the no-nonsense, humbled side of Matt Murdock. Remember kids: just because an actor is well known doesn't mean he can't still be a superhero. As for Garner, I know: she is nothing like Elektra, but remember: in 2003, the one thing Garner was most known for was "Alias", a series about a kick-ass spy, which isn't THAT much of an offshoot for Elektra. She may not have been the ideal choice for Elektra (and her throw down with Bullseye is...sad. She didn't even have a chance), but it could have been much much worse. Now, the other problem is one that isn't the film's fault. This movie came out in 2003, less then a year after "Spider-Man" came out. Everyone expected "Daredevil" to be another happy-go-lucky superhero flick, not expecting the depressing, gritty feel for the film. As any comic book fan would tell you, the story of Daredevil is a depressing one, filled with pain, death, and rare moments of redemption. I think alot of people expected it to be something else, so they view what they got as "bad" which is unfortunate, considering how much good there is in this movie. Colin Ferrell steals the show as Bullseye, standing as perfect casting for the character, as well as making the character his own. Michael Clarke Duncan as The Kingpin is perfect, as he's finally given the role as a main event villain in a blockbuster movie I was always hoping he would get. Jon Favreau and Joe Pantoliano even out the cast as Foggy Nelson and Ben Urich, respectfully, bringing the usually one dimensional characters to life in means their comic book counterparts can only dream of. Lastly, I need to say it: I LOVE Daredevil's costume. The red leather makes sense for a character, and I wouldn't have minded if this became his comic book costume due to the movie (Im looking at YOU, Hawkeye...). Overall, I think the Man Without Fear had a fantastic debut movie (with a fantastic soundtrack to boot), but I guess this is one flick that everyone has to have their own opinion about. I give "Daredevil" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 16th, 2012 - "Perfect Blue" is a really hard movie to review simply because the best thing about it is also the worst thing. It's a beautifully, tragically written story that actually makes it hard to watch in some parts. Mima Kirigoe is a sweet singer turned actress who simply wanted nothing more then to extend her career and become a legit actress, but as the lines between fandom and obsession quickly fade, Mima life becomes a living hell, making everything she not only knew, but could also depend on, become turned upside down. As I said, Mima is an adoreable, realistic character, so seeing what she goes through is heartbreaking. There is a sequence in which she is acting in a production in which she is a stripper who finds herself caught in a gang rape that is EXTREMELY hard to watch (I'll be honest, folks...this movie almost didn't get watched due to this scene. It stays with you, and its damned uncomfortable). However, deep in its core, "Perfect Blue" is a well written mystery with a twist at the end that I didn't see coming, but if you watch the movie closely, it all makes perfect sense. Dubbed by Roger Corman as "what would happen if Alfred Hitchcock teamed up with Walt Disney", this movie will be loved by anyone who is a hardcore fan of anime, as well as anyone who is a fan of a good, honest suspense movie. However, let it be warned: not only is this a deep, emotional movie (If you had a hard time with flicks like "Inception" or "The Sixth Sense", you're gonna have a bad time), but this is also a VERY mature film, filled with violence and sexual situations that will, as I said, make you feel mildly uncomfortable. Still, while relatively vulgar, its still a beautiful work of art, and a must for anime completists. I give "Perfect Blue" 4 out of 5 stars.

June 17th, 2012 - There is no movie that I actually pity more then "Wild Hogs". I pity every single aspect of this movie. I pity the road trip franchise genre. I pity the Harley Davidson corporation for their name being attached to it. I pity some of the best rock tracks of all time for being involved with the movie's soundtrack. However, above all, I pity the actors. Tim Allen, John Travolta, Martin Lawrence, and most of all, William H. Macy deserve better then this. See, it's a simple concept: four comedic actors going on a cross-country motor cycle trip. This could actually be pretty fun, allowing lots opportunity for comedic situations to arrise. Hell, essentially, this is the popcorn comedy flick that should be able to write itself....however, what we end up getting are unfunny slapstick moments, grossout humor that practically becomes homophobic, the movie suddenly transforming into a groan-inducing action flick (not as bad a "Paul Blart: Mall Cop", but close), and of course, the perception that something was in a reality TV show (Dr. Drew, Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, etc), its suddenly supposed to be seen as funny. Really, the problem with this road trip comedy is that, ironically enough, it does the exact opposite of what I hate about the franchise: it tries TOO hard. There are so many ways for this movie to be funny, but instead of simply allowing their A-list talent to be funny on their own, they put them into goofy, slap stick comedy situations (William H. Macy being written the worse, as a man who can't even seem to drink a cup of coffee without starting a fire), that annoys more then it entertains. Also, the direction seems a little off as well. Ray Liotta is a great actor, but for being in a comedy, he comes off as WAY too harsh. Yes, he's supposed to be the leader of a biker gang, but at one point, in this seemingly light-hearted comedy, he comes off as more of a serial killer then a simple antagonist. This makes the character even more conflicted during the credits scene. "Wild Hogs" is a movie that stands as nothing more then wasted opportunity. This could have been a fantastic movie, but too much conflict and not enough heart (I'll admit. The scene at the end in which the four Hogs stand up to the 20 something biker gang, knowing they were going to get their asses kicked, but STILL stand together is actually quite epic) makes this a less then stellar movie. I give "Wild Hogs" 1 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 18th, 2012 - There is the classic saying that there is not such thing as a good movie based on a video game, and for the most part, I agree with that. However, I will also say that "Silent Hill" possibly comes the closest to being good, but the film lacks one major factor: common sense. Every single thing that happens in the last 100 minutes of this movie could have easily been avoided in the storyline if only the film's main hero didn't make a single completely uncharacteristic action. See, the film's protaganist Rose (played by Radha Mitchell) is looking to cure her adopted daughter Sharon (Jodelle Ferland) of her sleep walking. While she sleepwalks, Sharon calls out the town name of "Silent Hill", leading Rose to take Sharon to the town for some answers. Along the way, Rose acts oddly suspicious in front of police officer Cybil Bennette (Laurie Holden), which leads to the random, uncharacteristic moment. For god only knows why, Rose immediatly floors the gas padel of her car, looking to avoid being pulled over by Cybil, an action that eventually leads her and her daughter to get into the car accident that leads them to Silent Hill....why!? Why would Rose try to run from the police? If Officer Cybil is questioning why Rose and Sharon are acting strange, Rose could have easily said "My daughter suffers from sleep walking. We are trying to help her." Unless Rose was an off-screen noteable felon, her escape from the police is completely uncalled for. Furthermore, this point is proven even further, as Rose spends a large percentage of the movie in handcuffs due to Cybil attempting to arrest her (cause nothing screams innocence like fleeing the police). And I know, I am putting alot of focus into something that was simply put into the movie as a means to get them to Silent Hill, but really, after already realizing that common sense will no longer be a factor in this flick, its really hard to take the rest of the movie seriously. Visually, its well done, as the foggy mist and generally creepiness of the city itself is captured directly from the video game, but this is quickly deminished by 2nd rate CGI from the films monsters, and fair amount of hamminess from the movie's actors (especially when you get to the ending to which, frankly, I've watched this movie three times now, and I STILL don't understand it). Frankly, the problem with "Silent Hill" is that its pretty much all bark and no bite. The film does an excellent job building up atmosphere, but once it makes the transition from build up to confrontation, the threat itself is simply isn't as big as it needed to be, nor is it worthy of the build up. "Silent Hill"video game fans will probabily enjoy the film, but as far as being a legit horror/suspense movie, it's a little less then par. I give "Silent Hill" 2 out of 5 stars.

June 19th, 2012 - Mooncrabs. There, I just saved you two hours of your life without having to see this flick. "Apollo 18" is a found footage movie focusing on the supposed 'cancelled Apollo 18 moon landing', stating that the mission actually did happen, and the footage shown is what actually happened on that fateful mission. The problem with this movie is that 80% of the 'found footage' is...pretty boring, focusing on mission procedure that makes the moon scenes from "Superman II" look state-of-the-art. Like "Silent Hill", the build up for the extraterrestrial threat is more hyped then it needs to be as the alien threat is nothing more then 'space crabs' that hatch and suddenly attack the three astronauts for the sake of plot convienence. Also, like "The Devil Inside", the movie ends with....a website. Clearly, there seems to be a new fad in the world of found footage movies where producers understand how universally hated their movies will be, so they throw together cheap websites to explain their movies to the theater going audience, most likelly in the same means as someone who apologizes just before they know they are about to be punched in the face in a final attempt at mercy. "Apollo 18" is bad. Simply, flat out, bad. One of the worst found footage movies in a long time. I give "Apollo 18" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 20th, 2012 - Considered to be one of the greatest comedies ever made, "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" is sorta a mixed bag for me. Considering the dozens (yes, I said DOZENS) of comedic talent that is crammed into this flick, when this movie brings the funny, IT BRINGS THE FUNNY! With Milton Berle, Phil Silvers, Buster Keaton, Mickey Rooney, Jonathen Winters, and many MANY more, the film has more then enough talent to be able to steal the show on their own. Also, the plot of all these colorful characters essentially go on a mad-cap race for a fortune is the perfect story for so much talent to show their range. Personally, my favorite scene is with loveable truck driver Lennie Pike (Jonathen Winters) getting into an all-out brawl with a couple of service station owners over a minor mis-understanding, a fight that leads to the entire gas station being torn down to nothing. However, like I said, this movie also has quite alot to cringe at as well. First of all, this movie is LONG, clocking in at well over 2 1/2 hours. Usually, that wouldn't be an issue, but at least three seperate times, that time is dedicated to the individuals argueing over how they are going to equally share the money. All three times lead to them saying that there is no way they can split it evenly, so in the end, it all leads to wasted time. Also, purists who love this movie will no doubt disagree with me til the end, but...I HATE the ending. It simply ends on such a depressing downer that you can't help but raise an eyebrow and feel less then satisfied. Still, it may be a mad world, but this movie left me feeling anything but mad. If you're a fan of classic comedy, or simply want to play who's who with the countless number of cameos this movie offers (I purposely left them out because I didn't want to ruin the flick for you), I say check it out. I give "Its a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 21st, 2012 - God only knows what compels a person to make a movie like "Captivity". However, even though I doubt the 'torture porn' genre of horror movies isn't going to go anywhere for a while, is it really too much to ask for to want the same care and consideration to go into movies of this calibur that went into the likes of "Saw" and "Hostel"? No, "Captivity" isn't a good movie. In fact, you could very well say that "Captivity" is a horrible movie. The idea of a model/actress being stalked, kidnapped, and tortured due to the very means she reveals herself to the public via interviews could have been the basis for an interesting take on the way society views the very idea of celebrity, but instead, the psychological interest is quickly pushed aside to allow pointless, gory moments to arrive, such as the victim (forgetably played by Elisha Cuthbert) being force-fed human remains, being forced to kill her own dog, and being caught in a massive sand trap that would make Jigsaw himself roll his eyes in embaressment. Further into the movie, Cuthbert is joined by a male captive (Daniel Gillies) who she forges a tender friendship with that leads to a twist ending that....well....have you ever seen a movie where you can guess the ending, but then think to yourself "No, wait. That's stupid! They would never do something THAT stupid! It makes no sense! They have got to be smarter then that!", then find yourself even more pissed off once that ending you guessed arrives? Yeah, that's this movie in a nut shell. Basically, when it comes to "Captivity", don't be fooled by the film's banners and posters, declaring this to a troubled, twisted thriller that will make you cringe with fear, seeing what happens to this poor, helpless girl. The movie isn't scary, isn't well written, and the characters are so one-dimensional, its hard to have any sympathy for the events they are going through. I give "Captivity" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 22nd, 2012 - I am not a fan of the James Bond films. At all. My issues with the franchise can be explained in one single word: repetition. Let's be honest: pretty much every Bond film follows the same exact scheme: terrorist plans to destroy the world, Bond is called in, someone close to Bond dies to 'make this matter personal', Bond is assigned to a specific region to gather intel, meets the girl of the picture who, at first, seems like a cold hearted shrew, Bond saves the life of the cold hearted shrew, the terrorist somehow has a girlfriend to eventually lead to a catfight, Bond and the shrew bed, Bond gets captured, Bond uses gadgets to escape, Bond faces off with the terrorist, Bond saves the world, Bond and the shrew bed again, credits. "The World is Not Enough" is the PERFECT example of how repeative and, overall, pointless the franchise had become, from the over-the-top opening credits to the 'James Bond will Return' ending title. Granted, it is sad to see this as the final performance of Desmond Llewelyn as Q (Llewelyn was tragically killed in a car accident after the film's premiere), Judi Dench is always enjoyable as M, and we are trated to John Cleese taking up the Q duties as the entitled character R, Im just going to say it: Pierce Brosnan's version of 007 is one of the most smug characters ever to be put on screeen. I know, Bond is supposed to be smug, but it comes to a point where its offputting how smug he is. Toss in Denise Richards in the role of Dr. Christmas Jones (Jesus, I don't know what annoys me more: the stupid name, or being forced to take Denise Richards seriously as a nuclear physicist), and you have a movie that isn't just repeatitive, but its pretty damn off putting too. If you are a Bond film (or simply wear the same old, same old movie theme as a security blanket), you'll most likely enjoy this movie. I, however, simply couldn't enjoy it. I give "The World is Not Enough" 2 out of 5 stars.

June 23rd, 2012 - To those who have never seen this movie, it always makes me laugh when I hear the universal question "How can a movie about guys making some...fight club actually be that good?" Well, to answer that question: Brat Pitt, Edward Nortan, Meat Loaf, a woman named Marla Singer, soap being turned into explosives, some of the most quoteable dialogue in cinema history, perhaps the greatest twist ending in cinema histroy, and of course, that name that keeps coming up in Movie of the Day: director David Fincher. "Fight Club" is about so much more then an underground fight club. It's about a man's place in the world, and his immediate need to escape that place in the world, and see how far to the limit of insanity the human mind can take us to find that place. From casting, to writing, to moments that go from hilarious to street-rat scary and back again, "Fight Club" has everything you can want in a movie, with characters that you can't help but feel invested in. If I had to make any complaints about this movie, it would be the length of the film. There are so many subtle detailed moments to make the film epic that it takes a while to get going...but at the same time, if those moments were taken out, the film really wouldn't feel the same. "Fight Club" is recommended watching. If you haven't seen it, see it IMMEDIATLY. It's just that damn good. I give "Fight Club" 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 24th, 2012 - Like I said with my "Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle" review, I am actually capable of enjoying a good stoner movie if enough attention and detail is put into it. When it comes to "Pineapple Express", I do enjoy it due to the amount of detail put into it...but at the same time, I sorta feel like TOO MUCH detail was put into it. The cast is all star, from Seth Rogen, James Franco, Danny McBride, Rosie Perez, and many others, each and everyone of them pretty much knocking it out of the ballpark. The plot took the simple thematic device of "a stoner witnesses a murder" and launches it to the max, leading to scenes and incidents which are down right hilarious (my personal favorite scene is when Rogen's character, Dale, after witnessing the murder and fleeing for his life, arrives to his teenage girlfriend's house for dinner, simply due to how crazy and hilarious her father is. "If he doesn't get here soon, Im gonna eat myself some food, cause Im through with this!" classic). Though, like I said, later into the movie, the plot gets a hell of alot more serious and, frankly, unnecessarily dark. Characters are maimed and killed (most of which are in over the top, violent ways), and the film's climax leads to an all out brawl between Dale and the film's main villain, Ted Jones (played by Gary Cole) which pretty much does away with the laughs, and focuses on an all out, action film style brawl. I kept expecting Rowdy Roddy Piper to walk in and tell Dale to "put on the *beep* glasses!" Still, "Pineapple Express" is pretty much designed to be a giant middle finger aimed at PSA's over the top use of showing how marijuana is 'evil', countering it with its over over the top ramifications for it's characters actions. Everyone in this movie comes off as a cartoon character (especially Danny McBride's character, Red, who pretty much steals the show due to how quickly he switches sides in the film), but its obvious that that was what the writer was going for. It's a very funny comedy with alot of blood, but a brilliant payoff. I give "Pineapple Express" 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 25th, 2012 - About a decade ago, comic book writer Joe Kelly gave us an issue of Action Comics with a story called "What's so funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way", a story that focused on Superman's place in a world that is inevitably becoming more violent, vulgar, and demanding of instant gradification and results. Pitting Superman against an all-powerful team of "heroes" called the Elite who happily kill villains without blinking an eye, the story was a beautiful story that showed just how relevant Superman still is in the world today (boyscout and all) and still stands as one of the greatest stories ever written. Now made into an animated film (with Joe Kelly still as the writer), "Superman vs. The Elite" is good, but sadly, does't quite have the same impact on the screen as it did on print. The animation is crisp, the action and music is well done, and for the most part, the voice talent is excellent (though "NCIS" Pauley Pettette as the voice of Lois Lane simply doesn't do it for me), but really, the story itself comes off more as preachy then Superman actually making his point known. Don't get me wrong: seeing Superman cut loose and SEEMINGLY MURDER THE ELITE ONE BY ONE is friggin' epic, finally showing of what a pissed off, loose cannon Superman can be like, but again, the scene is quickly tarnished by the film's ending with Supes monologuing of why he can never cross the line, coming off as more of a man on a soapbox then a film's climax. Superman purists will love this film, and as much as I gripe on it, for what it is, its still a pretty decent movie. I could have used a bit more subtlety, but this movie is anything but bad. I give "Superman vs. The Elite" 3 out of 5 stars.

June 26th, 2012 - The first feature film about of the most popular, and well known superheroes of all time, and it is.....meh. "Spider-Man" is one of those movies that, when it first came out, I thought it was one of the greatest movies ever made. However, one of the bad things about this "Movie of the Day" project is that it has opened my eyes to other forms of story telling, filming, casting, editing, and other factors that go into a movie, giving me a much better eye on what's good and what's bad in a movie. "Spider-Man" is a film that I like, but I have issues (*rimshot!*) with. First, the story is good, establishing the basic origins of the character with one BIG exception: WE COMPLETELY MISS HIS FIRST YEAR AS SPIDER-MAN! He learns great power, great responsibility, then BOOM! Graduation, Aunt May taking a backseat in Peter's life, and Pete is now a full blown adult with perfect balance as Peter Parker and Spider-Man (trust me, when I get to "Spider-Man 2", I will be addressing this in length). It feels like for an origin story, he becomes Spider-Man way too easily and way too quickly. Also...I really hate to say it, but the main cast simply doesn't do it for me in this opening film. Tobey Maguire seems too stiff and serious to be Spider-Man, Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane speaks two languages: screaming and blathering that is supposed to come off as deep, and James Franco bounces between brooding and exposition. Willem Dafoe is an ideal Norman Osborn, but I have to agree with every other person in the world: the Goblin suit is horrible. One of the greatest character actors of all time, and he's hidden behind a tin can. Yabawha? The one truly good casting choice is JK Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson. Every SINGLE time he is on screen, he's fantastic, stealing the show and is on the same perfect casting par as Hugh Jackman as Wolverine and Ron Pearlman as Hellboy. Now, I know I've talked alot of crap about this movie, but what do I like about it? Well...it's Spider-Man! Just seeing the man on the screen in full costume, web spinning, swinging, and seeing one of my childhood idols come to life was an experience on its own. The action and stunt scenes also stand out as excellent, the sequence in which Spider-Man has to choose between saving Mary Jane and the tram full of kids most standing out in my mind. The direction of Sam Raimi is also really good, as the audience can tell that Raimi has a close connection with the character, wanting to get it as right as possible. All in all "Spider-Man" is a so-so superhero movie and a pretty good opening act for a three part saga, but its going to take 2 years and a few extra arms to make a good movie saga really great. I give "Spider-Man" 2 1/2 out of 5 stars.

June 27th, 2012 - They say that with sequels, it allows a movie franchise to improve, and make up for past mistakes brought on by the film's original movie. With "Spider-Man 2", that couldn't be anymore true. This movie makes up for, improves up, and generally created the bench mark for the original Spider-Man film, focusing more upon the man behind the mask as opposed to the hero itself. What bothered me so much about the original was how little we actually knew about Peter Parker, and how easy he seems to adjust to life as a hero. In this film, we finally get to see how chaotic it is for Peter to adjust beteen heroics, school, work, and relationships , standing out as more of the hero I expected to see from the comic books. Alfred Molina is also along for the ride, bring to life the character of Doctor Octopus, leading to a battle between he and Spider-Man on top of a moving train which helps create one of the greatest cinematic battles in comic book movie history. Now, it is to be noted that this movie is not without faults of its own. Sam Raimi, the director of the "Evil Dead Trilogy" seemed to have Evil Dead on the mind, as some scenes seem to try and balance slap stick and drama into the same exact scene (the Doc Ock hospital room scene immediatly comes to mind) as well as some relatively hammy scenes that practically come out of no-where (Harry Osborn's random turning on Peter at the party was pretty random, looking back at it). Still, "Spider-Man 2" put the hero into Spider-Man, and stood as one of the best turns in comic book movie history. Spider-Man finally became the true hero we could all look and root to, and I was much more impressed with this go-around. I give "Spider-Man 2" 4 out of 5 stars.

June 28th, 2012 - Everyone and their grandmother hate this movie...and frankly...I still, to this day, cannot see why. Is it the best movie ever made? No, but its not terrible. First and foremost, let's get the 800 pound elephant out of the way: the dance number. Yes: Peter Parker had a dance sequence (well, two technically), but let's be honest here. Those two dance numbers took, what, about 3 minutes combined? Three minutes out of a TWO HOUR MOVIE!? Bullcrap! You can't say that a movie is bad simply because there was a moment you didn't like....*sighs*...now that that's taken care of, there are OTHER moments of the movie I didn't disagree with. Mary Jane Watson (who, played by Kristen Dunst, I still never really was all that entertained with) comes off as overly whiny in this movie, always wanting to talk about her problems with Peter, but never actually saying anything, then finding herself befuddled when he doesn't get her point. Also, while the promise of Harry Osborn as 'The New Goblin' seemed interested, a amnesia storyline seems a tad bit too cliche, and in the end, final battle withstanding, his entire storyline came off as wasted potential. Now, what's good about the movie? Well, Thomas Haden Church brought the Sandman to life, Bryce Dallas Howard played a decent (yet underused) Gwen Stacy, and while his casting was controversial, I actually liked Topher Grace playing the part of Edward Brock Jr./Venom, as he seemed more of the twisted funhouse version of Peter rather then the jacked up, flexed powerlifted that he was paved as in the comic book. The concept of Spider-Man becoming darker was a neat concept for the movie, and it was actually quite unqiue and interesting to see a Not-So-Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man be willing to cross the line in the name of justice. It was taking the "Great Power and Great Responsibility" oath to its limits, and made for a quite compelling story.......so when people say this was "the worst movie of the year", its hard not to be a little irritated and frustrated. Like other movies of this calibur, I think "Spider-Man 3"s problem is that it couldn't live up to the hype "Spider-Man 2" set. People had a specific look for the movie in mind, and when they didn't get it, they turned on the flick. Still, i liked it, and actually found it rather good. I give "Spider-Man 3" 3 out of 5 stars.

June 29th, 2012 - Poor Eddie Murphy. He can't seem to catch a break, can he? Its almost as if every movie he had the featured starring role in simply gets worse and worse, and sadly, I think we have reached the bottom of the barrel in "A Thousand Words". Granted, even in the worst of Murphy flicks, we still can at least be entertained by his quick wit, comedic timing, and brilliant one liners, but in a movie where he's not allowed to talk, for with every word he speaks, a leaf falls off of his "tree of life", and once the tree runs out of leafs he dies, there really isn't much else to offer. The movie comes off more as a poor man's "Liar Liar" then a full-fledged, orginal comedy. Also, the film is supposed to be about 'finding and meaning the words you say before you speak them', but for whatever reason, the film comes out of left-field with life lessons in forgiveness, kindness to others, and treating everyday like its your last that is forced down our throats in ways that could make PSAs envious. Also, I am about to spoil the ending of the movie for you (as if you are going to watch it), but...the ending of the flick is a total sell out. Murphy speaks his final words on his father's grave, forgiving him for skipping out on him and his mother, and then...he survives. No explaination how, but he simply survives, meaning that the movie itself was practically pointless. All in all, "A Thousand Words" is simply a waste of time. I wasn't entertained, I wasn't provoked by thought, and above all, I wasn't laughing. This film is a surfire miss, and its quite disappointing to see much a comedy legend being reduced to...however you would classify this film. I give "A Thousand Words" 1 out of 5 stars.

June 30th, 2012 - Considering that this is a movie based on a Disneyland ride, if you were to tell me that this movie would be a.) part of a blockbuster, high grossing franchise, b.) be the beginning of a 4 movie saga, and c.) actually good, I would have probabily asked you just how much crystal meth you had recently enjoyed. The truth is "The Curse of the Black Pearl" is good. Damn good. Total package good. While the concept and storyline, at times, comes off as a ripoff of "The Princess Bride" (dread pirates, a master swordsman, an arranged marriage, 'a little dead and completely dead', etc), this theme was taken to its max, telling a gripping and, frankly, beautiful story about revenge, deception, and courage. The characters make this movie what it is, as practically every single one of them are flushed out and brought to their greatest potential. Not only is Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow as phenominal character, but I venture to say he is the greatest fictional character created in the last decade. Though it doesn't stop there: Orlando Bloom, Geoffrey Rush, and Keira Knightly are at their best in this movie, rounding out an all star cast. In what could have simply been a Disney cash-cow pirate movie, the writers and producers took their material very seriously, making a compelling and not-too kid friendly saga that would change the way the 'House of Mouse' does business, and caters to a whole new audience (an action that would end up leading to Disney's purchasing of Marvel Comics, and the deleopment of "Tron Legacy"). Still, the film itself is enchanting, entertaining, and simply damn good. I give "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" 4 1/2 out of 5 stars.