A to E, F to M, N to Z

About a million times better than I thought it would be considering it's poster and tagline, this Robert Rodriguez modern adaption of Invasion Of The Body Snatchers is amazing. I was probably most surprised by its acknowledgeing and embracing of its source material, and it's ability to keep me guessing right up until the end, especially since I thought I had it all figured out at that point. There were quite a few stars, among the faculty, that I was totally unaware would be in the film. I think I had only been exposed to "liquid metal" guy being in the film. Surprise actors such as Bebe Neuwirth, Famke Janssen and Jon Stewart not only threw me, but delighted me in their performances. The younger set doing their best impression of a possibly alien infested Breakfast Club, including drug scene, left something to be desired though the plot does deflect you from their talent enough for it not to be too bothersome.
Overall, this one is not too frightening or gross, as you might think. However, it is a great homage to classic horror without being a disappointment to modern audiences.

Johnny Depp and Bencio Del Toro are Hunter S. Thompson and his attorney in Las Vegas as Thompson blows off a story and goes on a drug filled adventure in the most surreal city in America. Unfamiliar to Thompson's writing, it is difficult for me to separate the elements of his style and those brought in by one of the only true filmmakers of our time, Terry Gilliam. Unified by Depp's terse narration, sometimes thought, sometimes spoken, always a tad confused as even Depp asks early on if perhaps he spoke out loud wondering if his compatriots heard him, this film carries a constant tension even at its most mundane. This is a humorous and thoughtful look at America's changes from the 60's to the early 70's wrapped up in one big bizarre bow. While Depp and Gilliam fans must see this one, anyone with a socio-political mind really should do so. Oh, and if all that sounds too deep and involved for you, there are lots of drugs, and bit parts played by Christina Ricci, Gary Busey, Tobey Maguire and should keep you placated. As with any Gilliam film I've seen, this one is excellent.

Even watching Stephen Dorff for over an hour and a half didn't raise my opinion of this piece of studio crap, trying to cash in on the popularity of The Ring. Though it doesn't explain the problems of this film, I feel it will help you understand the inherent flaws of it by letting you know that the website that's leaving people dead is "www.feardotcom.com". Hehehe, yeah, there's a dotcom before the .com, I don't get it either folks. It also doesn't help that the title of the film blatantly tells you that the computer's the cause of the deaths your seeing, but it takes the cops here a good half hour to jump on board with that. Alright, I'm just bitching incoherently here, let's see if I can't streamline this review.
Okay, people are dying bizarre deaths, while bleeding from their eyes. Meanwhile Det. Mike Reilly (Dorff) is busy going over an old case, involving a serial killer, The Doctor, who is still at large. Dorff and the bizarre deaths come together, and enters Health Department worker, Terry Houston (Natascha McElhone) who is investigating the possibility of an ebola-like outbreak, because of the bleeding. Somehow, the bizarre deaths are related to people who have subscribed to a website run by The Doctor, who tortures and kills hot women, live on the web. If you're following the logic here, you may be wondering how killing those who have subscribed to The Doctor's website is lucrative at all for him, but fear not, all will be explained far after you've stopped caring. About halfway through, what appears to be another straight serial killer story turns into a sort of Sixth Sense thingy, though they won't really explain that very well either. Meanwhile, the camerawork and lighting, in yet another film, seems way too influenced by The Cell, while some of the imagery and design work is straight out of DOOM or Quake. In fact, it's interesting that on every computer you see, long before the user reaches the creepy website, there's this Trent Reznor/ Quake desktop interface going on, which I have never, ever seen on any computer I've ever used, PC or Mac. And while The Doctor can't "feel", which is his half-assed excuse for torturing women to death, he's deeply in touch with his love of bondage, securing his victim with many leather straps, a nice bondage gag, completed with a huge leather belt across her enormous breasts. I have to say, that while in theory, that may sound titillating, or repugnant, depending on how you view that sort of thing, it was really dull and boring, a big "meh."
What else didn't I get in this one? Oh yeah, Dorff and McElhone share some tamest of the tame flirting, and I'm not sure, they may have slept together once, and all of the sudden it's fucking Casablanca at the end. Did their tepid relationship really demand the wailing that ensues when Dorff dies at the end? Or more importantly to the overall plot of the film, did the vengeance of a dead woman justify the four or five deaths that got us there, and what of her attempt to kill the only people who might help her achieve that vengeance? The film also fails to play out slight foreshadowing that Dorff's cop buddy, Sykes, is actually working with The Doctor. Did I mention that the film had deeply inherent flaws? My head hurts, like when I tried to analyze The Matrix Revolutions, so I'm going to end it here, warning you off from this one. It's really not very good. In fact, I have no idea who would be in the target demographic of this film.

It's kind of like Sliding Doors only with thieves and people getting naked. I'll try and break it down for you. Rebecca Romijn-Stamos is a thief who screws over her fellow robbers, in a bizarre diamond heist. While running from them, and attempting to flee the country, she is mistakenly taken in by people who think she is their daughter, who has recently lost her husband and daughter. This should make the first half hour of the film make a lot more sense to you, as De Palma takes his good natured time revealing things to the audience. While at her "parents" house, the real daughter returns and kills herself. Stamos takes the girl's passport and plane tickets, only to find herself returning as the wife of a diplomat at the same time her wronged partners in crime are released from jail. Enter a photographer, Antonio Bandaras, who is hired by a tabloid to get a shot of the diplomat's wife setting the ex-partners on her trail, while she must figure a way out of her predicament.
Great drama has an element of tragedy to it. Too bad Brian DePalma couldn't remember that all important concept. I don't mean every film has to be Das Boot depressing, but this film would have only been aided by some darkness or mystery at the end. What's truly tragic is just how interesting the shots are, how well framed things are, how the talent superceded my expectations of them (truly, there's no sarcasm on that one,) but DePalma's need to twist the film and one too many endings ruined what could have been a fairly good film. Let me take that back, the twist didn't bother me, until we hit the final ending sequence which just made everything, kind of stupid. I was perfectly happy with not having every little detail wrapped up in a bow for me. Alas, that was not to be, and my opinion of the film soured because of it.

In the spirit of Randy of Scream's Rules of a Horror Movie, and inspired by Final Destination, I will list some Rules of How to Make a Horror Movie:

1) Hire musicians to produce your score. Merely playing your Best of Hitchcock CD is not sufficient, and yes, while Hitchcock is often referred to as the master of suspense, you are not Hitchcock.
2) Stick to the basics. Psycho killers are easy for your audience to understand and require almost no explanation. If you must go the mystical killer route, please refer to earlier works such as Hellraiser or The First Power which make clear the need of a physical embodiment of your supernatural nemesis.
3) Don't outthink yourself. Perhaps zooming in on the words "final destination" and "terminal" in an airport isn't as clever as you seem to think it is. Also, a simple killing can be a hundred times more powerful to your audience than the Rube Goldbergian deaths you have planned.

For those of you unable to put in the time for an epic feature, but who still want to see quality cinema, I might suggest Christopher Nolan's first film, Following. Filmed in black and white, it rings in at a brief 70 minute run time. An aspiring writer tells his tale in flashback form of how he began following people. It is a bizarre chain of events that lead him into the lives of a psychology obsessed house thief, a former model and a gangster/pornographer. Exposure to the dark sides of these individual's lives, and what motivations remain concealed even as they welcome this stranger into their worlds are the crux of this brilliant film. Nolan's capabilities behind the camera are more than apparent in this film, and you're doing yourself a disservice not seeing this one if you've enjoyed his later work.

If the box office numbers were any indication, not many horror buffs could resist seeing this one. I don't know if I'd have paid $9 to see it (I got lucky and borrowed an illegal DVD) but if you have a free rental coming at Blockbuster or something once it comes out, it would be worth it. The basic premise is Freddy resurrects Jason to make the people of Elm Street remember him, which will allow his own return from beyond. But when Jason refuses to stop doing what he does best, and starts stealing Freddy's glory, Freddy gets all pissed off leading to the inevitable title match. Freddy and Jason are adequate. However, Freddy, who is one of slasherdom's most creative killers, for the most part, is reduced to pretty straight forward slice and dice action. Jason tends to be the stand out star of the show though, returning directly from where he left off in Jason Goes To Hell, worked within his pre-existing backstory and some of the best scenes such as him aflame trudging through a cornfield. The film does tend to stick with horror flick conventions over all, but the director seemed to be a novice, afraid to fully immerse himself in the genre. There were things in scenes that I expected that never materialized, but should have. Also, there was this strange need to reference, such as a Jay Mewes-like character that they only bothered to script correctly in one line, and all the recent Freddy backstory that was just one big nod to Scream without doing anything with it. And while the killing and fights were all well and good, my favorite scene was where our heroine meets one of Freddy's early victims that warn her that he likes "little girls." And since our heroine was obviously, at least 25, I knew she'd be safe, well, unless Jason killed her. Also, the film educates. I learned not to pass out drunk at a rave, or else some guy who looks like Billy Idol will attempt to rape me. Never try to start a fist fight with a man, who is not only on fire, but weilding a machete. And while you may like the drugs, if a horribly burned caterpillar comes out and offers you a hookah, do not partake. My biggest disappointment with the film was that if they were going to hire someone who looked so much like him, they should have shelled out the cash to get Danny Bonaduce as the institutionalized guy's brother. I mean, as long as we're in the theater of the absurd, make it pop guys. Ah, maybe he was too busy filming Dickie Roberts, huh?
So summations, it's odd, goofy, disappointing at times, but worth it. A kajillion times better than Jason X, but honestly, what isn't? If you're even a closet horror fan, you need to see this one. However, I suggest you lose as little money in the process as possible. It's a perfect "wait 'til it's on cable" type of show.

I normally will not make a statement like this, but if you have not seen this film, make a point to do so. When Jim Caviezel finds his father's old ham radio during the Northern Lights, he finds himself able to speak to his father (Dennis Quaid) thirty years in the past. Their conversations alter the past, affecting the present leading to an attempt to stop a killer in both times eras. Well done heartwarming cinema with plenty of action, this film will leave you with the word "cool" on your lips more than once. Though I entered thinking I might enjoy this one, it still completely knocked me on my ass with an appeal I believe to be universal. This film was originally reviewed by most as "a guy movie," but a good movie is a good movie, and that's what you get here. See this one.
You'll be glad you did.

It's rare I'll use comparisons like this in reviews, but this film was nowhere near as bad as Terminator 3. I have other people backing me up on this too. Not that it was good by any means. Let's see if I can walk you through it. Gigli (Ben Affleck) is an inept mob enforcer in L.A. who grew up in L.A. which does not stop him from having a really bad New York accent. For some odd reason, he is given the task by his boss, who thinks Gigli's a total fuck up, to kidnap a prosecutor's retarded brother to take the heat off a higher up in New York. Even so, this boss also sends a second contractor, Ricki (Jennifer Lopez) to stay with Gigli and make sure he doesn't fuck up the job. And while she yogas away on Gigli's floor, gives flowery speeches concerning war, psychology and vaginas, and is constantly reading, she not once proves herself to be any less of a fuck up than Gigli himself. While it does contain some moments of humor (intentional and unintentional) and few more subdued emotional moments, the film also contains a plethora of speeches that have little to no real connection to the narrative and a constant sense that the filmmakers, each and every one of them, weren't sure where the hell they wanted to go next in the film. Most notably apparent in a cameo by Christopher Walken as an eccentric cop who stops by Gigli's once.
It could have been a storyline, but they let it drop after the one visit. There is also a great cameo scene with Al Pacino that is really good, and is logical in the overall sense of the film, but again shows just how flawed and meandering the rest of the film is. And don't get me started on the Hollywood ending that was tacked on because test audiences didn't like the original (to those of you interested, the original ending is not included on the DVD, in fact, it's a big no-frills DVD.) It doesn't help that neither Gigli nor Ricki ever does anything more badass or horrific than intimidate some high schoolers, in fact, Gigli, the hard ass contractor, seems downright squeamish cutting the thumb off of a corpse, with a plastic butter knife, yes, plastic. It also didn't help that the one sex scene, with zero nudity, which was about as sexy as a girdle ad was extended rather than being treated as an implied act that we could just trust happened. So again, it's not good, but it was nowhere near as bad as critics had claimed it was. In fact, I've seen a lot worse in my lifetime, and I'm sure to see worse in the future. I don't feel I wasted my time watching this, as I am now an informed critic of the film, but I did waste about $12 in late fees. Bad Stu, bad bad Stu.

Opening with an impressive, tad gory battle scene, the tone for Gladiator is set. While violent and brutal, this film uses ancient plot and story giving it heart beneath the testosterone surface. Of course, when I say uses, I mean uses, including an ending stright out of Oedipus at Colonus. The main villian is a whiny little bitch/prat (you decide, both words are so fitting here) resulting in him being more annoying than truly evil. Despite all this, the film was thoroughly enjoyable, and my ass almost didn't notice how long I was sitting on it. Russell Crowe showed, once again, that he is perhaps the most versatile actor around these days. I also enjoyed the performance of Djimon Hounsou, who played an African slave that befriends Crowe as they both enter the world of the gladiator (then again, I just might have liked the character.)

The same director and a poster that looked way too much like Swingers II initially scared me off from this vastly superior film. Three bizarre tales related tangentially unravel before the viewer in a Jackie Brown style of time displacement. While funny more from the absurdity and truth of situations, rather than methodical comedy, it seems each viewer will get something different from it. Actually, this one views like a Gregg Araki film, minus the extremely weird aspects, making it much more palatable to a mainstream audience. Casting also is very frightening on the surface, carrying a large stable of television actors. However, with the exception of Katie Holmes who really has a small role, they surprised me in a pleasant way. Jay Mohr (Action) and Scott Wolf (Party of Five) were excellent in their tale, which not only shocked me that they took the roles but how well they did in them. While targeted toward college students or younger, I'd say this one has appeal for anyone under 30.

I have to imagine that doing physical comedy/adventure films must be a lot of fun, because every once in a while Brendan Fraser does a wonderful job in a great film like this one that proves he is an extremely talented actor, not just Dudley Do-Right. Playing a yard boy turned confidante opposite Ian McKellan (who plays James Whale, the director of Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein,) in this story of discovery, despair, and on a certain level, love, Fraser makes the last days of Whale one of the most human tales I've ever seen. McKellan, in the past few years, has continued to expand his body of work, giving filmgoers something new each time, while never failing to impress. This film is no exception, and is perhaps his best role that I have seen. I would also like to mention that Lynn Redgrave does a delightful turn as Whale's maid/caretaker, because it is worth mentioning. Do yourself the favor of seeing this one.

Okay, let's get past the scary stuff first. Dom Deluise and Rodney Dangerfield play feuding mob bosses in this parody of the gangster genre. The good news is they really don't have large roles. The film truly revolves around Kevin McDonald (The Kids In The Hall) playing Dom Deluise's youngest son, who inherits the family business after the murder of his brother,..sort of. The meek McDonald must learn to dress, act and think like a mob boss, which is pretty damn funny in and of itself. Enter Don Na, Dangerfield's daughter, played by Fabiana Udenio (Austin Powers,) who McDonald falls in love with, and a bad premise begins to pan out as a funny movie. McDonald and Udenio prove themselves both great comic actors and able to save even weak scenes in the film. Also, Lou Ferrigno is great as the family bodyguard who insists on being called Alice. Overall, the film is 85% funny, whenever McDonald, Udenio or Ferrigno are involved, and while not Zucker-Abrams-Zucker funny, it's nice to see one of The Kids In The Hall do a job they can be proud of, unlike Bruce directing Superstar.

Well, there's this guy named Josh who starts working in a law office as a secretary, and there are 17 important letters that must go out right away but aren't managing to go out in such an immediate manner. His world is full of colorful individuals from the strung out IT guy to the secretarial pool to the lawyer he works for, Bob Shelby. Honestly, if I had read that as a plot summary, I probably would have dismissed this film and never have watched it. Luckily, I hadn't, and ended up enjoying 90 minutes of the funniest movie I've ever seen. I do not make that statement lightly. There's no use of the words "perhaps," or "in the top 10," this was the funniest film I've ever seen. Even more strange, it's humor seems the most universal I've seen in a while. I laughed more watching this than I did watching The Princess Bride. Josh is just a funny guy, the way he does things, the way he delivers dialogue, and the rest of the cast doesn't drop the ball either. Go rent this one, RIGHT NOW!

Two escaped convicts, in an attempt to avoid roadblocks and the like, make a stop in Happy, Texas posing as a couple of gay child pageant producers. As they become more involved with the town, will their criminal sides prevail? And more importantly, what obstacles from within and without may ruin their Happy existance? To be honest, this independent film is one of the funniest, heartfelt, and wonderful flicks I've caught lately. I know the box looks stupid, but the film is good...really. It's not big budget action, psychological thriller, nor murder mystery. It's just one of those "good movies" I run into every once in a while, so please, if you are so inclined, give it a looksee. You'll be glad you did.

I would normally not endorse seeing this over the holidays, but it's been out for a while and with The Two Towers opening this past week, I would expect smaller audiences at this one. Harry, Hermione, and Ron are back, a little taller, slightly different voices (especially Ron) and facing a more sinister and direct evil, as students at Hogwart's begin to be found paralyzed. Everything that can go wrong does, including Harry being fingered as the prime suspect. Will the kids survive, or will Hogwart's be shut down for good? Well, a third film is coming, so make a guess.
The performances really make this film. Harry is much more confident. Ron's facial animation really works for his role. Kenneth Branagh is excellent as the braggart professor, Gilderoy Lockheart. Even, the completely CGI house elf, Dobby, had me laughing and I read the books.
It's definitely worth a view. Tycho at Penny Arcade said these films are visual aides to the book series, and I agree, but that's how I've approached the films. I also know people who enjoy the films just fine, having never touched the books, and that hasn't held them or their enjoyment back one bit. So, if you're itching for a trip to the big screen for family fun, reader or not, I'd have to recommend Mr. Potter and friends.

You know, every once in a while someone bases their film on a Stephen King story and it doesn't suck. This would be one of those films. After horrible adaptions of The Stand and The Langoliers, not to mention straight out shit like Apt Pupil, I've found myself leary of King films, so I was utterly delighted with Hearts In Atlantis which delves into the era and feel of Stand By Me. It is the story of one summer in a young boy's life when mysterious man moves upstairs, changing his life forever. The story does at times drag out some bits we've all seen before, but the actors, particularly the child actors, do a great job. It's rare I'll look passed cliched scenes rather than just saying, " Seen it, taped it" but this film was good enough to do just that. I even managed to get passed my post-"Hannibal hype" reservations about Anthony Hopkins, and really enjoyed him here.
If you know me at all, you know all of this is high praise. My problem in this review is that I don't want to give too much of the story away, but I also want to make it clear this was a good film. It's not I feel the need to own, but it's one that I'm very glad that I saw.

It's rare I can say a film fulfilled a dream of mine, but this one did. Danny Devito is taken out like a dog with a shotgun..."Thank you, movie." But you did come here to hear about my fantasies. This one, if you haven't heard or guessed is about the old thief stuck doing one last job, which is cliche enough most times to tell you to stay away, but David Mamet on the script and the story manages to keep things interesting throughout. Gene Hackman and Delroy Lindo dominate the screen whenever they appear, and you almost are forced to ask "Who the fuck is this guy?" when Sam Rockwell arrives on the scene playing the young, stupid thief. Oddly enough, beyond playing the butt monkey to the old pros, both in character and acting, Rockwell manages to hold his own. The greatest flaw however in this film was that everyone was constantly playing everyone else in the films layering deception over deception that left me as the credits rolled feeling that maybe the ending I had just seen was not the end of the story. That is a much more annoying feeling than I've ever gotten from a film, cause I just couldn't up and decide if it sucked. Although the ambiguity of it, had me leaning that way. If you're a Mamet freak and must see it, I'd say give it a try though it's a bit over-constructed, even for him. Otherwise, the use of gangster slang and the complicated nature of the film will either anger or bore you, so don't bother.

He's big. He's red. He's definitely different. During WWII, crazy Nazis, along with the Russian mystic, Rasputin, attempt to conjure an old god, but due to Allied interference, what comes through the portal is a small red, horned boy who is taken in by a young paranormalist, the Professor. Fast forward sixty years, and enter the Bureau of Paranormal Research and Defense with young FBI agent, John Myers. John's new duty, to watch Hellboy, who beyond being an B.P.R.D. agent, along with merman pal, Abe Sapien, is also taking trips to visit his love, firestarter Liz Sherman, who has left the Bureau. John's going to have his hands full, especially as Rasputin and the crazy Nazis return to destroy the world by using Hellboy.
Oh my, did I have to see this one, and I was really pleased, despite it not being geekily accurate. It didn't matter. Hellboy is as much comedy as it is action as it is a love story of some very broken people, and that's why it works so well. Hellboy, beyond his gruff exterior, is lovesick, a cat person, and has real, solid unspoken relationships with the people around him. But Hellboy is not alone. The Professor has taken on the role of father to Hellboy. Abe takes verbal abuse and risks his life simply because it's the right thing to do, and as he says, "we freaks only have each other." Liz is looking for a way to be normal, while she can't get out from under the guilt she carries for the damage she's caused when her powers flare beyond her control. In fact, the most normal character is Agent Myers, who doesn't seem to truly find his place in the world until he meets the B.P.R.D. The flaws, the sense of family, the friction that results all make this beyond belief tale very immediate and true, and one very fun film.

Okay, I've warned you before on these so I'll do it again. It's a reader, it's subtitled, just letting you know. Let's move on. Jet Li is Nameless, a returning hero in a war to unite China, coming home to meet with the Qu warlord. As he is received, he spends the first half hour of the film telling his version of events that led to him defeating three of the most dangerous assassins in China. I don't think I'll be giving too much away by saying all of this is a lie, and honestly, it might help you watch the film as these tales are a bit over the top melodramatic, a little daytime soap operay kinda thing, yeah. I almost wanted to do some strips making fun of these tales they were so bad. These tales are followed up by the warlord telling his version of what he believes really happened. Nameless then corrects the warlord's version of events, which leads to both characters being forced to make some serious decisions. The fighting and swordplay was nice, and it was unbelievably pretty with lots of really rich colors and great filming. On the downside, it really seems like a lot of the swords were made of tin which was bothersome to me, the bending, the excessive wobble that a lot of the weapons had, that bugged me. Also, while some of the wire work was alright, there were way too many times that the film was just screaming wire work and this film was supposed to be historical, not really delving into the mystical aspects like Crouching Tiger, and thus the wire work that was noticable was out of place in my mind. Overall, it was a good film, not too long, a little goofy on the front end which I've noted redeems itself. I'd say it's okay. If I had to compare, I liked Crouching Tiger better. But if all you're looking for some nice fight scenes and some beautiful cinematography, this film's got plenty of that. It does reinforce the fact that Zhang Ziyi is a very beautiful woman, and despite appearing on the cover (in the red) is unfortunately in one of the smaller roles in the film, she gets some fight time in, but isn't around that much. So, Ziyi fans, don't let yourselves be fooled. Other than that, it's a good flick, an epic without the 3 hour epic run-time.

Though deeply steeped in why a lot of folks didn't like Kuffs, i.e. talking to the screen, this film was made for us 80's kids, and as was pointed out to me just last week, this is a staple of the 80's teen genre. Unfortunately, the musical montage of the 80's is missing in this one, and I was waiting for it. Anyway, John Cusack (can you get more 80's?) plays a record store owner going over his romantic failures after breaking up with his current girlfriend, Laura (some actress from Denmark who looks a lot like Patricia Arquette.) Add in his love/hate relationship with his employee/friends, the soft-spoken weirdo Dick and the over-the-top Barry played wonderfully by Jack Black ("we are Sonic Fucking Death Monkey!") and Cusack's life couldn't be more normal (or screwed up depending on your viewpoint.) Two great smaller roles went to Joan Cusack, who plays the intermediate friend of Laura and John, and a surprise appearance of Tim Robbins as Laura's new man. In fact, the appearance of Robbins and "the beating scene" would have made this film worth the buck I spent all on their own. Despite this film being a romantic comedy, it left me constantly guessing as to where it was going, making the trip there all the more worth it. This exploration of one man's life, past, present and future, injected humor throughout while still being a genuinely worthwhile film, especially for any 80's film buff.

Kevin Bacon plays a smug, arrogant asshole scientist and part time peeping tom. After minimal success making primates invisible and visible again, Kevin decides he should be the first human to undergo the process. When, surprise surprise, his team can't make him visible again, Kevin becomes an even bigger asshole, and even though he is noted as being the smartest person on the research team, he does nothing to help in finding a cure for himself. He just becomes the basest of evils (okay, so he rates above the guy who writes a check in the express lane of the grocery store, but not by much.)
Wow, it's rare a movie losses all credibility within ten minutes. After a bunch of shit credits and a scene of Kevin being slimey, we get to see a member of the research team attempt to tranquilize an invisible gorilla. To do this, he enters the cage of the gorilla, who could easily tear his arms off, holding a syringe, rather than a safe dart or fast injection gun, which is an item that appears like all of two scenes later. Not so amazingly, we later find out that this yo-yo isn't even the person on the team in charge of the animals, not that any connection between this fact and the tranquilizer scene is mentioned. This is just the first, blatant example of inconsistancies that will be dropped on your head by the dump truck that is Hollow Man. I was going to go on about all the flaws I found, but when doing a search on IMDB I found the Hollow Man goofs page. Give it a look, pay special attention to ones marked - Continuity. Beyond all it's inconsistancies, action scenes often end with decisions that make you ask, "And you didn't think of that earlier why?" This is quite possibly the most aggressively bad film I've seen since Battlefield Earth.

>Rob Zombie writes and directs, This Boy's...Piece Of Shit. Wow, this is the type of film that makes the guy's at Troma Studios look like fucking geniuses, because they don't waste a lot of money trying to make things look good, and are willing to make jokes and fun of themselves. House Of 1,000 Corpses, not only takes itself way too seriously, it quite frankly fails to deliver the 1,000 corpses promised in the title. Okay, stop me when you've heard this one before, there's this gas station in 1977 that's also a chicken joint that sends a group of kids into the middle of nowhere, where they pick up a hitchhiker who takes them home to her weird ass family, and when they're having dinner, the mother orders the mutilated son to "Go get Grandpa." Yes, Mr. Zombie has no fucking shame when it comes to blatantly ripping off other films, such as when a radio playing "Brick House" is turned on before a victim is brutalized with a straight razor about his head and face. And don't give me that homage shit. When the guys went to their cars in Swingers, it was homage. This is horrible stealing. What really bothered me was the very end, when we're transported to the inside of a game of DOOM where everyone looks like an escapee from Marilyn Manson's entourage or a Giger painting, I'm not sure which yet. It was horrible though. Though not as horrible, as the brief scene at Hot Wet Pussy Liquors, which not only showed that members of the freak ass family could deal normally within society, but seems to have been included strictly so they could make the joke about the name of the establishment. Also, there must have been a focus group that was confused that Oct. 31st is Halloween, which would explain why there was a completely separate subtitle to enlighten me to that fact. Not one of the killer's was impressively scary, nor were any of the killings, and the concept of using cut scenes that normally have nothing to do with the scene we're watching consistently throughout the film, yeah, what was up with that? At first I thought it was going to be some sort of time displacement thing, but then the scenes never really came to pass later on. The only interesting part were the B/W fetishist strippers that appeared in the cut scenes at times, I kept trying to make a new movie that featured them, cause maybe it'd be better. If nothing else, they probably solidified Zombie's 12 year old demographic for the sequel. Yes, he's making a fucking sequel. The freak ass family will hit the road in the sequel, leaving us only to wonder if it will be more of a Natural Born Killers rip-off, or more of a Kill Bill rip-off. Hell, it'll probably be both.

Oh yeah kids, I watched the other one at last, and I am sorry to report that this haunted house film really wasn't that bad. Geoffrey Rush stars as an amusement park genius who loves to give people a good scare. Famke Janssen plays his wife who decides to hold her birthday party in a former mental institution with a horrifying history. Guests who were apparently invited by neither Rush or Janssen arrive, featuring the likes of Peter Gallagher, Taye Diggs, and Bridgette Wilson (Sonya Blade in Mortal Kombat.) As things get creepy, the audience must wonder who's behind it; Rush, Janssen, one of the mystery guests or perhaps something more sinister. Shot for the bizarre scenes much like a music video, this movie hits the mark of what it is, entertainment, not an Oscar contender. Also, by leaving the audience with a more ambiguous, mysterious Blair Witch type horror, the film is much more eerie and intriguing than the belabored The Haunting. This film also uses its jiggle factor effectively making both Janssen and Wilson slinky and sexy helping block any plot holes, at least to the male viewer. Rrrrrr! So as far as things go, House On Haunted Hill is nothing to bust your ass to go and see, but it is definitely a worthwhile, "I'm bored and it's on cable" flick to check out.

I honestly, can't remember the last time I was this disappointed in a film. By this, I mean that I was actually excited to see the film, only to find it fall flat. It would be exceptionally nice and tidy to place all the blame at the feet of Jim Carrey, but the truth is, Carrey brought the animated Grinch to life from his posture and movements to his insanely cartoonish smile. There were very few times he broke into his own schtick, but the true horror was that most of his "jokes" were so poorly constructed, or so entrenched in an attempt at pop culture modernization, they are not even remotely funny. In fact, when Carrey is not involved, this pathetic attempt to update the story, rather than leaving it as a timeless one, is even more jarring to the ear. Due to these facts, I will lay the blame on Ron Howard. You suck, Opie!
The first half of the film, more likely the first two thirds, has nothing to do with the original Grinch special, setting up the Grinch's past, revealing him not to be just someone with a mad on for Christmas and the annoying Whos, but rather as a jilted child. Also, the Whos are painted not as creatures who party a little too hard and annoy their neighbors, but as egotistical, shallow fucks who can't get passed appearances. Unlike the rest of the Whos, there is little Cindy Lou Who, our doe eyed, Aryan posterchild, heroine who is questioning her own Christmas spirit (either that, or she just got her period) which, if you didn't understand it the first thirty times it's brought up, will be recited once more in the only original song in the entirity of the movie. The grand bonus was the hiring of the aggressively cute Taylor Momsen for the part, who I wanted to kill, especially when she started that damned out-of-place song. There are also a great number of smaller evils and bad lessons for children, like the Grinch breaking glass bottles and eating them, cooling a red hot bolt in his mouth, and uttering the word: bitchin'. Beyond all the romantic innuendo, cleavage shots of Christine Baranski, and the near orgasmic manner in which she recollects the Grinch, you will also get a not so subtle scene where the Grinch's dog, Max, takes a Who erection up his ass.
Grand costuming and make-up, Carrey's good performance, and amazingly Seussian set design are not enough to save this ::shaking my head:: soon to be holiday classic. Yes, despite what a catastrophe this flick is, we are a stupid America, driven by only the most base thoughts and products presented to us. This is a fair example of the type of shit that your parents like and you wonder just when the hell they lost all taste. So, there you go, the stupid American parents see it, force their children to watch it, and you get instant holiday classic.

I gotta say, I would not recommend this one for the kids. Then again, as an Ang Lee film, had it been strictly mindless kiddie action fare, I'd have been disappointed. There's a lot of talking, a lot of reading early on, and not a whole lot of Hulk considering the title. And oddly enough, I thought one sequence of the military hunting the Hulk across states should have been pared down. The hulkified dog fight seemed a little too intense for younger viewers, although there is something laughably ridiculous about Fifi The Terrible. It's biggest drawback is its length though. Shit, it was too long for me. Not that the film was bad. There were just some editorial decisions that could have easily reeled in its run time. Other than that, it was great. Eric Bana did a wonderful job as the tortured Bruce Banner, not only coming to terms with what he's become but who he is and his forgotten, tragic past. Jennifer Connelly's Betty Ross was thoughtful and endearing as Bruce's love who just doesn't know what she can do to help him. (Story-wise, I'm going to assume Betty's book smart, life dumb, and that's why she lives at 306 Rape And Kill Me Way.) The biggest surprise performance for me was Sam Elliott who managed to make gruff, career man, Gen. "Thunderbolt" Ross a sympathetic character. Nick Nolte, as Bruce's father, probably did the most acting I've ever see him do, and was not the acting and emotional black hole I was expecting, in view of his previous performances. The CGI was excellent. I didn't even think about the CGI in one scene where Nolte touches the Hulk's face until it was brought up to me later. And beyond interaction, the animators gave the Hulk a phenomenal emotional range. I was also glad to see that the filmmakers didn't decide to push the limits of the technology, unlike Lucas, who always ends up with at least one scene that looks like shit. Overall, I have to say The Hulk was an enjoyable film, and could have been just as good without the Hulk aspect. While I was saddened that I never got to hear "Hulk SMASH!" I was only truly disappointed by the second epilogue that felt like a Schumacher sequel to the entire film that had preceded it. My greatest surprise, however, was a guest appearance by a member of the band Du Jour, last seen in the film, Josie And The Pussycats. I love you, Du Jour!!!

Alright, since the movie really takes a while to establish these things, which is probably my only complaint, let's do the rundown. Huckabees is a local chain store, like the Gap or Old Navy. Huckabees executive, Jude Law, has struck a deal with Jason Schwartzman and his eco-group to save a local marsh and woodland. As Schwartzman feels more and more pressured and unappreciated from all sides, he goes to a pair of Existential Detectives (Dustin Hoffman and Lily Tomlin) to find out about several coincidental meetings with an "African guy." It is from here that the film begins to explore "the blanket theory" and nihilism, through the lives of Law, Schartzman, a firefighter played by Mark Wahlberg, and Huckabees spokesmodel, Naomi Watts. And while philosophy is a part of the film, I chose not to focus on it too heavily, as the film is still highly entertaining, and goes back to one of it's own theories that you are inevitably drawn back into the everyday human drama of life, which to me, was exactly what this film was about. High points of the film include Scwartzman and Wahlberg fighting at the dinner table with a devout Christian family, any scene with Hoffman and Tomlin (seriously, these will be overlooked performances come Oscar time) and Shania Twain's momentary appearance.
So, should you go see this film? I loved it, but it is very dependant on your sense of humor. It had a very Royal Tenenbaums feel to it, to me. The film will make you think, and be fairly confusing at the beginning, which hopefully the start of this review will help you out with. If you didn't get Being John Malkovich, don't waste your time or money on this film. It's weird. It doesn't always make sense. But in the end, it's a really good movie, and, GASP, entertaining.

There were 2 things I knew going into this film. First, it featured Will Smith in a prominent role. And second, it would offer all the intellectual stimulation of a Bruckheimer film. And because of those 2 points, it really couldn't disappoint me too much. Let's try and nail down a little summary anyway. Will Smith is a robot-hating cop in the robot filled world of 2035 Chicago, which is also about to become more infested as the local robotic conglomerate is on the verge of releasing their new and improved model of robot. Toss in the bizarre suicide of Smith's friend, who also happens to be the creator of all the robots, with a possible robot suspect, and yeah, that's about as deep as it gets. Honestly, this one views, kind of, like Minority Report with more special effects and a little less interest factor. If you actually follow this one out, and look for motive, you can pretty much guess who's the evil mastermind. The only thing they didn't go through with is have Smith actually be a robot. I was a little disappointed on that level. The one positive in the film is a speech made about how humans must be protected from themselves, which maybe it's just me being a flaming liberal like I am, but had the familiar tone of any Bush administration policy since 9/11. However, to be honest, this film never presented itself to be anything but what it was, a big kick-ass blowout of Will Smith vs. Robots. So, if you like shit exploding and just want something mindless for a night, I'd actually say, go ahead and give this one a look. You could do much worse in the 'shit blowing up' genre.

Uh Oh, Kids! It's one of them book reader type films.
Okay, if you are still reading, I'll let you know that this production of Wilde's story is quite excellent. Rupert Everett plays a confirmed bachelor caught up in a web of political intrigue and personal crisis. Julianne Moore is his ex-lover and demoness bent on the destruction of anyone she happens to meet. Minnie Driver plays a possible new love interest who's as flippant toward Everett as he is toward her. I haven't even brought up the main plot of blackmail and enmity. Following the form similar to one of Shakespeare's comedies, only done in an intriguing way (I have never enjoyed a Shakespearean comedy.) If you enjoy this type of story, this is very much one to check out.

A young slacker finds his right hand is possessed by an ancient evil, and everyone that comes near him seems to end up dead. This straight slasher movie is still humorous and fun, you know, in an Evil Dead sort of way. The only problem I had with this flick is that it obviously propelled its slack jawed hero, Devon Sawa, into his current gig in, the piece of shit, Final Destination, which he probably deserves to be in. I did not really enjoy him at all in this film either. His two friends however, played by Seth Green and Elden Ratliff, were hilarious and helped tremendously in keeping the tempo of the movie up. Speaking of up, the love interest, played by Jessica Alba is a total hot ass. There is no nudity, but all young men, age 8 to 80, will enjoy...ahhhh.
huh? Oh yeah, so this film is not high art, of course not, but it is damn fun despite the violence and gore. Give it a rent, and don't forget the popcorn.

Hey, it's Christopher Nolan's latest release, a remake of (I believe it was) a Swedish film. Two L.A. cops are brought to a small Alaskan town to aid a murder investigation in the midst of an Internal Affairs scandal. When the murderer witnesses the questionable shooting of one of the investigators, he attempts to cut a deal with the other. It's only a matter of time before either his dealing with the killer or the Alaskan endless daylight overcome the inspector.
I approached this film much in the same way I approached Se7en. Having seen the trailer, I knew it was the type of film I've seen a million times before, but considering the cast, I thought it would either be great or bite ass. Lucky me, this one succeeds in much the same way, what they couldn't make new, they at least made interesting. This is not to give you the impression that this is another Se7en rip-off (which we're all sick of.) It's thematically closer to In The Line Of Fire, and it definitely has a lot less gore. Al Pacino puts on a wonderful performance here that had me wondering if perhaps he is just a tired, old actor. Then again, he's not doing Showtime with Eddie Murphy, right? Robin Williams makes his greatest departure from comedy here, playing a lonely, pathetic killer, quite well. Hillary Swank also does a great job, playing a, not as naive as she appears, young local cop. What makes her performance stand out is that many of her scenes are not aided with the crutch of dialogue, but she definitely holds her own in this film. This type of praise cannot be heaped on the man I dare you no to acknowledge as "that guy from Boston Public." With the exception of a mustache, he's changed nothing, his stiffness, his acting, nothing. Oh well. The movie is still very worth checking out.

Well, I'm glad I watched this one alone, because I was, once again, weeping uncontrollably, and I dare anyone not to. Okay, so maybe I'm just a big softie, but this film is indeed the best animated film I've ever seen. The story of a young boy, Hogarth, who befriends an alien robot that crash lands on Earth he calls, well, Giant. Set in the backdrop of the 50's, the anti-Red sentiment and "duck and cover" film shown in Hogarth's class take on quite humorous aspects. After some local destruction caused by Giant is reported, Agent Kent Mansley arrives and is without a doubt the most tenacious and villianous government official since those in E.T. but this zealot is not how all government officials are presented. The reasoning general played by John Mahoney, better known as Frasier's Dad, is a tempered voice of duty and obligation. Needless to say, Giant is hunted down, leading to a spectacular resolution. this film is a wonderful lesson in friendship, love, understanding and choosing your own destiny. The long and short of it is that this underrated film is one that everyone should see at least once, and, if I may be so bold, one that most everyone should own a copy of.

While some suspense was drained from this film due to trailers and the box description, it was surprisingly good. My only real problem with the film was that I knew for a fact which character wasn't coming back from the job, because it was just a tad overwritten. It was a nice ensemble film, with good performances all around. Only Edward Norton seemed a bit underused, I don't know if it was the character or if Norton could only commit so much time to the film, but it seemed like he's a better actor than they really needed. Still, a good film with count 'em, two heists, and a car chase that wasn't mindnumbingly painful (please see Ronin if you want to feel that kind of pain.) Also, interesting to note, the writers didn't go to the Scorsese/Tarantino school of film where the dialogue needs to be filled with cussing in order to sound "natural," and the film, while it did have some swearing, didn't suffer from it's lack of "fucks" in every sentence. It also wasn't very violent, some punches, limited gunplay to the point where if someone did fire a gun, it seemed out of place. And these situations, which have become a staple of this genre, well, it's good without them. I won't say excellent, but I will say very good. I, in no way, felt I wasted my money renting this one.

The good news is that Jason does not get his makeover where he looks like Max Steel's nemesis, Psycho, until the end of the film. The bad news is everything else. Open to Jason in a research lab, inexplicably not Hell, where after a few killings he get cryogenically frozen. Flash forward 450 years into the future where his body is discovered, and then taken via spaceship to Earth 2, not the crappy television show. After some lame exposition, and non-nude scenes of sexual perversion that might shock Eleanor Roosevelt, Jason thaws out and starts killing. All of the sudden, the film becomes a shit ass Aliens rip-off as the military unit on the ship hunts down Jason. This area takes far too long and involves none of Jason's trademark stalking vicitims, resulting in a myriad of scenes where Jason appears out of nowhere and kills his victims immediately. Oh, the suspense. You, as the audience, are just waiting for this part to end as you are aware that the research crew, after some thinning of their cast, will be the ones to "kill" him. So on and so on, the research crew is hunted down, and you are forced to sit through yet another Matrix reference where it is blatantly revealed that almost 500 years in the future, humanity will still be using 20th century bullets.
Credit goes to Tim for pointing this out.
In the end, there was not enough killing/impending killing for a Friday The 13th film, and there were only maybe 3 killings worthy of the franchise.

Kevin Smith got old. There, I said it, and I'd say it again if I had too. Now, barring that this film is a tribute to Smith's father (and a damn sight better than Mike Myers attempt at that, Goldmember) and the fact that Smith announced this film was "not for critics," there was something missing here. This story of a widower who struggles between trying to raise his young daughter and his desire to return to his old life isn't that bad. It's easy for me to pick at what I had problems with in this film, but I don't want this review to be overcome with the negative right away, so let's look at what worked in this film. I can't find any fault in the acting. Ben Affleck was able to escape a lot of the shit he does in other films and really act well here. He even transcended any performance he's put in for Smith thus far as well. Even the little girl, Raquel Castro, was a good actress and not annoying to me in the least. I think the role of Affleck's father is the role George Carlin has been waiting to do all his life, and it shows with the care and intensity he puts in here. I also loved the inclusion of many of the Smith stable of actors in cameo roles, including his wife, Jen Schwalbach as a reporter. The song from Sweeny Todd they do at Castro's school pageant is a step few directors would take, and I'll give Smith credit for that. In most cases, I'd very much expect them to go with "Memories" which Smith in fact, makes fun of. Hell, for true Smithophiles, he even managed to work in his Star Wars reference into this one. In the good/bad category, Smith provides the audience with several laugh out loud moments in the film, however, it is nowhere near the comedy that Smith has produced in the past. In this film, not every line should be a knee slapper, so it's not a criticism. Also, what has been pointed out as being perhaps the movie's biggest achilles heel, Ben and Jennifer Lopez together, is not a problem. I wouldn't go so far as to say they really manage to pull off a couple falling love cause they were at the time, but they were far from grating in their scenes together.
In fact, my real troubles come from shooting, framing, editing, things Kevin or Scott Mosier, who I know are usually very involved in the post-production of their films, should have done something about. There were even a few moments that I will describe as levels of hackdom, unimaginable to me when I entered the theater that appeared on screen. While these moments are often short and few between, I just expect better, and I want to clarify this, from anyone who puts in real time and effort on their films. Just to show how nit-picky I'm being here , I'm going to be verbose about a ten to fifteen second scene that exemplifies what I considered a hack moment in the film. This scene would be Smith's version of the love interest rushing into her apartment and sobbing behind her door. There is nothing interesting or new done with this shot, and despite the inherent irony or comical aspect that she runs in to the Adult section of the video store in this case, it isn't played up in the least. And this even goes beyond the fact that I've seen this shot a million times in a million films or television shows, no, the truly horrible thing is that the shot could have been removed and not been missed at all in the film, so what it becomes is Smith hitting me over the head with this bit of hackery because otherwise he doesn't think I'll get what he was trying to say in the previous scene. I don't know, maybe everyone was too close to it and didn't realize that their audience would understand without clubbing them with this fucking cliche, but really, could have done without it. On a much more painful note, who's bright idea was it to end the film with "Let My Love Open The Door?" Yeah, my problems were all little shit like that, not because it was Smith's picture, but because it's me watching it, I'm sure. I will say, if you're the jock fanboy of Kevin Smith, this film isn't going to be you're cup of tea. However, if you actually like film, you can probably get past the flaws on this one, because they are, as I'll admit, minor. What I think is missing in this film, from a Smith film, is the best friend role, and because of that you lose some humor, some conflict, making this seem like the vanilla of Kevin Smith films. However, the truly disappointing aspect of this being a Kevin Smith film, where I will make this comment because it's his, where the first line of this review comes into play, is that this film is more than likely going to be easily enjoyed by your parents. This truth does make me more leary of how tame he will be treating his upcoming, more Hollywood-type features.

Long tails and ears for hats! Though it fails in it's anti-corporate message, Josie (and don't forget Val and Mel) put on one of the funniest shows I've seen of late with one of the best, original soundtracks (...you will buy the soundtrack, you will buy the soundtrack...) ever. What else can I say beyond that?
Rachael Leigh Cook is so aggressively cute that despite her playing the lead role, I still can't tell if she can act, and it doesn't matter to me. Tara Reid does a great job playing the incredibly dim Melanie, and is very, very funny. Rosario Dawson plays a strong, intelligent female role without degenerating into the irrationally angry, out of control necked, black woman stereotype of modern cinema that is oh so working on my last nerve. Parker Posey is at her full-blown spookiest here, but then again, she is the villainess. Overall, It's a great film that never takes itself too seriously, punctuated by the jabs it makes at itself and its source material. Any film that can make the character of Alan, not only sympathetic, but endearing, is worth a look, two even.
Rent it, buy it, hold a theater hostage, just see this movie.
Rated E for everyone.

Lots of people thought Tarantino had lost his chops. Jackie Brown, although an excellent film, didn’t make the waves he was hoping for. And though Four Rooms was a fun project for viewers and creators alike, it didn’t keep his balloon inflated. Most of what he has recently touched has been smegma, at best (Little Nicky, Iron Monkey: “Who does this fuck think he is, right?”), but then he runs into Uma at a party. As a muse, I could definitely get behind Uma (know what I mean, nudge nudge, wink wink, eh?). The reunion leaves the two of them inspired. So who cares about what Tarantino did before, right? Normally nobody gives a crap what the director's name is unless it was Spielberg, right? Well it isn’t important to know who directed this movie but it may be important to know who wrote it. Tarantino wrote it. That’s why we care.
Now I loved this movie so much I could go on and on. I won’t because I want you to see it. It’s violent, and occasionally vulgar. It contains material that will doubtlessly make some people uncomfortable. There is decapitation, rape, and pedophilia. That’s in addition to the regular everyday murder you are already used to. If this doesn’t sound like your cup of tea, see it anyway. Just wear dark sunglasses. A nice 50% tint should do it. And, for Christ’s sake, if any of you see a child within 40 feet of a screen playing this film, call social services.
Screw the warnings now. How about the movie? Every moment of this film is homage to something. Some have said that every moment is derivative but they can suck my ass. If it wasn’t for homage, good movies wouldn’t get made. If anyone actually made a truly original film it would be deemed too bizarre for pop culture consumption. The writer borrows heavily from Japanese samurai movies and television serials (live action and animated), Hong Kong action films, spaghetti westerns, and more. By heck, he even uses actors and characters from these influences (Hatori Hanzo, Pai Mei). Anything you see in the film that doesn’t make sense really is that way for a reason. No, seriously, it is. All actors deliver superbly; especially Buck, who twitches quite convincingly. See this film. If you see it and decide you’d like to get more from it than you did the first time, then watch The Seven Samurai (the movie The Magnificent Seven was “derived” from), The Good The Bad The Ugly (recently remastered and released on DVD), Lady Snowblood (a.k.a. The Princess Blade) and The Killers (Woo/Fat). Then see it again. You don’t have to understand or recognize the influences to enjoy the movie but it will tickle your nerd bone (Oh yeah, baby, tickle it!).
P.S. I liked Iron Monkey but calling it a historical film made makes me faint. Also, From Dusk ‘Till Dawn was a big stinky pile of weasel crap.

Okay, I'm going to get flamed to all hell for this review anyway, so I'm just going to start this review by saying Quentin Tarantino SUCKS! Let the angry letters begin. Now, I don't really believe that, but I am a little sick of everyone thinking everything he touches is fucking gold. I watched both Kill Bills thanks to a friend who was generous enough to supply me with the films by creative means. Thank you so much. I had a huge problem merely with the marketing gimmick of this film where they broke up what was a three hour film into two films clocking in at 3 hours and 50 minutes, which is maybe why it was so...YAAAWWWWWNNNN! While the first film was ultra-violent, the ultra-violence became a parody, which I considered a hair's breath away from a Troma film by the end. And okay, I've realized now, that was the point, but still... And the second film, was long, drawn out, and boooooring. I don't really want to mince words about this, because I honestly don't think it's worth it. I am hoping that unlike the version I saw, that there were subtitles during the very long stretches of Japanese being spoken throughout both films. Because those were testing my patience, and I'm a little more patient than the average American moviegoer. If there were, maybe that fucked up my experience a little, but I don't think that was responsible enough to totally blame for my lack of interest in either film. The mixing of genres worked on some levels, the kung fu flicks meets spaghetti western was fine, but the whole noir opening of Vol. 2 came out of left field and really didn't play out as a noir film in the end. The best (I'm not really sure what I want to say here, reason? positive?) I can give for these films is that it seemed Tarantinio was trying to homage b-movies on several levels, and while at certain times he would punch it up to the level he needed to, at other times it seemed like the films were taking themselves way too seriously and that sort of negates the b-movie homage. I guess the big success end, and where I have to congratulate them, is on milking this cash cow for all it was worth, Quentin and Miramax, making the dupes pay twice as much not only in the theaters for this one film, but then screwing the home video/DVD renters and purchasers as well. You guys are fucking marketing geniuses. Allow me to quote Bill Hicks here, "kill yourselves." And no, I wasn't making some cute, movie reviewer pun there, just fucking do it. "You are fucked and you are fucking us, kill yourselves."

It's a modern day, medival Footloose!
Take that as you will. The worst part of this one isn't even the cast.
I loved Heath Ledger in the lead. Also, the guy playing Geoffery Chaucer (from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels) was excellent.
I think the problems were inherent in both the storytelling and its inability to pick a feel within the film. Storywise, I think it was one plot thread too heavy. From Heath learning to be a knight to his rivalry with the evil knight (the guy from Dark City) to his love affair with Princess Goodstuff to his years-spanning relationship with his father, I think it was the last plot thread that caused this film to be crushed under its own weight. Also, the fact that this plot seemed just sort of wedged into the film wherever they thought it might fit didn't help my interest factor and caused it to end up incredibly half-assed.
As for the feel, I could accept the classic rock soundtrack. However, when they decided to use Motown and the low rider song, they broke from that feel in an unpleasant way jarring the viewer. I could accept unconventional color or cuts of somewhat traditional costumes, even Ledger's Han Solo outfit. However, when outfits appeared off the rack from Chess King, I lost my suspension of disbelief. Let's not even get into Princess Goodstuff's hair, and the Jim Henson Muppetmakers that styled it. Of course, there's always the dance scene where they start out doing a faux traditional dance, but then the rock music kicks in and they pretty much lose any thread of the dance they were doing. I guess we all should thank our lucky stars that they didn't start freakin'. This one really disappointed me because it had the elements within it that could have made a great film. Unfortunately, it seems no one could make up their minds about just what the fuck film they were making at any given moment.

This film would have gotten my attention with it's cast alone. Vin Diesel, Seth Green, John Malkovich, and Dennis Hopper, any two of them would get me seeing this one. Also, I remembered the trailers where this long delayed film was played up as a neo-gangster comedy about a group of young screw-up sons of the mob looking to finally take their place in the Family. This was yet another point of interest for me, though I could easily see that premise being done wrong and being very stupid. Unfortunately, much like the ad campaign for Kangaroo Jack, these trailers were boldfaced lies in their portrayal of this very straight material of a job gone sour, that must be rectified in order to get gangster, Dennis Hopper out of trouble with his bosses. While the acting is good, and lead, Barry Pepper can be much more proud of this job than his starring role in Battlefield Earth, the plot becomes a bit complex and the story became a bit grim for my tastes, especially considering I thought it would be a comedy. I found a few too many recycled, melodramtically obvious moments, and just when it would start to make some strides into Japanese ganster film territory (which I find much more enjoyable) it would almost immediately retreat from it. Also, I was more than a little confused by this film starring a group of young actors that ended with little to no sequel possibility. In all honesty, I would not have reviewed this one, but felt it was my duty to inform others before they rented it on the false pretenses of the studio.

I'm sure there are many of you out there, like myself who did not follow Tom Hanks down the slippery slope from meaningful dramatic performances, such as in Philadelphia, to horribly boring pointless dramatic performances, such as in Castaway, or those who did and found yourselves regretting as the years dragged on. Well, the descent has ended here, with Tom being funny in a very funny film. Tom Hanks, as a somewhat squirrly learned Southern gentlemen, leads a ragtag group of not-so-brilliant criminals in an attempt to tunnel and steal cash from the local riverboat casino, from under the nose of a god-fearing old woman (Irma P. Hall) who is letting Hanks rent her spare room. What is great is that the film is as much Hall's as it is the thieves. Even the portrait of her dead husband has a humorous role to play in the film. And I cannot forget the film's breakaway star, Pickles. Overall, the film flows well, if a bit slowly at times, with the exception of the introductions of the rest of the gang of thieves in their normal lives. Though the short clips are funny, they didn't make much sense of who you are supposed to be meeting or how they fit into the grand scheme of the film until the gang arrives for their first appearance together. I was also disappointed in what appeared to be a too neatly wrapped end of the film, until the actual ending unfolded. The Coen brothers have managed to maintain their own unique bizarre nature within this remake, which I think is easily summed up in a single scene of a bulldog in a gas mask, that then needs to be given CPR. And while oddity may be their trademark, they also understand how to make a truly great film, most notably here in their very deliberate method they employ in what they show you throughout the film. They get another gold star because I wasn't thinking about that sort of thing until the film had ended. The Ladykillers is not the best film ever made, or even the best film I've ever seen, but it was very enjoyable and definitely worth the money spent. If you like the Coens or the good old days of Tom Hanks, I would very much suggest that you go see this one in the theaters.

Or LXG as they liked to call it in the trailers, as if someone would get confused and think it was the new X-Men film. Don't ask me about marketing, and I won't have to show you my severed head collection. In this film, literary heroes (Allan Quatermain, Tom Sawyer, and Captain Nemo,) and monsters (Mr. Hyde, The Invisible Man, and Mrs. Harker) are put together in a team to stop the coming apocalypse, mechinization. My problem with this film was mostly that due to the large ensemble cast, no one character gets much time in the way of characterization done, or makes much of an impression on the audience. Also, I haven't seen digital imaging that blatant since Titanic. I will say the monsters looked good for the most part, and were at least somewhat interesting. However, the villain's whole odd and ambiguous plans left me wanting a new villain.
I will give the film credit for getting the heroes to the site of the disaster they're in charge of stopping as it's occurring. However, the characters couldn't be a bigger bunch of idiots if they tried, hell, I knew who the traitor way back in reel two of the film. I'd like to feel bad for James Robinson, a favorite writer of mine, for writing this dreck, but if I've learned anything from rant after rant from Joss Whedon, it's that directors, actors, editors and studios can all destroy your writing, individually and collectively. Hence, LXG marketing. For all it's flaws, the damn thing can be pretty enough, and full of enough action for it to be passable in eyes certain audiences. It also holds little bonus items for people who know their old sci-fi, such as the cameo of the coffee urn robots from the serial, Undersea Kingdom. Yeah, this film could have been worse, but it also could have been a lot better. It's not that it was bad, it's just that is wasn't very good. Simple flourishes could have made this film shine despite its flaws, however, that doesn't seem to be cost effective, I guess.

For anyone out there worried about my morals, I didn't give Disney my money, I gave Blockbuster my money. Also, every once in a while, when they're not theatrically releasing sequels almost 30 years after the originals release or paying Pixar to make money for them, Disney manages to produce an original film that doesn't suck ass, proving their reputation of being able to make quality animated films that can be enjoyed by all ages isn't just some antiquated notion. Luckily for me, this was one of those non-ass suckers. More bizarre, it's two main characters are very un-Disney. Lilo is way too strange/normal for a Disney film, a little chubby, depressed and not part of anything resembling a nuclear family. Stitch is an aggressively cute engine of destruction. However, he is not annoyingly cute. his mimicking of Elvis is an integral part of the story, in stark contrast to the Genie's pop culture references in Aladdin. I think that's telling as to why Lilo & Stitch succeeds, it doesn't use forced or contrived humor. Nor does it ram its emotional thrusts down your throat, not afraid to be funny in serious moments, leaving you with a light, fluffy, funny film.
My only word of warning, which actually has nothing to do with the film itself. The tape/DVD does start showing the Disney horns with almost 15 minutes of promos for upcoming Disney features, home videos, and Disney Channel shows prior to the film ever beginning.

Terence Stamp plays an felon just released from jail investigating his daughter's death. While playing out and sounding a bit like any 60's/70's 'out for justice' type flick, this film has a very independent film style and its shooting alone will give you anything but the ordinary. Also, with this film being more of an exploration of familial realtions, while keeping itself from devolving into the usual bullet festival for which the genre is known, The Limey truly views as an original. The only confusing, yet a fairly cool, part of the film comes through the use of footage from Stamp's 1967 film Poor Cow as flashbacks, even though this film is not a sequel. Also, the harsh cockney accent adopted by Stamp is jarring as Stamp does not seem nearly as gutter bum as he sounds throughout the pic. All in all, this is a definite recommend. It is excitingly composed and certainly different.

Original reviews for this movie seemed to all read like a report card on little Sofia’s first semester at school. I don’t give a rat’s ass who directs movies or who acts in them. I just want to feel involved with the characters and/or be entertained. And I did, and I was. The film uses Japan to great affect. It maintains visual interest by showing us all the stuff we already know, but still find foreign, about Japan. We don’t get a heavy dose of Japanese culture (glow-in-the-dark plastic pellet gun wielding bartenders and Karaoke aside) but there is an awful lot to be observed in the film. Now it’s not hard to make Tokyo look cool, however being able to switch from capturing the tranquility of Japanese maple trees and Buddhist temples to the garish, bright, and suffocating environment of Pin Game Arcades (I think that is what they are called) and Ultra-Swank gentlemen’s clubs is kind of fun for Americans used to a less homogenous culture with much less juxtaposition (that’s a mouthful and a contradiction, isn’t it?)
The film is dotted with some mood building travel scenes that serve to highlight the feeling of being isolated in a crowd and how uncomfortable it would be to stand on a commuter train next to a man reading a nudie rag right in the open. I don’t know if reading over the shoulder is considered rude in Japan or not. There is very little dialog in the film and maybe a few too many meaningful stares but if you possess the ability to empathize or have been in the situations these characters are in, you won’t miss it. Words are said because they have meaning to the characters, not to advance the story for the viewers. All of the acting was subtle, which is good because a little Bill Murray goes a long way. We get a real enough sense of what is happening in the character’s minds that it becomes interesting to see how the waves inside will ripple the surface which they try to maintain. I was surprised at the quality and the interest of some of the briefly seen Japanese actors. After the film I was struck by the complexity of instructing a group of Japanese actors through such a thick language barrier, especially when filming a scene of Japanese people trying to instruct an American actor through the same language barrier.
One of my favorite jokes of all time, by the way, is where someone speaking something other than English goes on for 30 seconds and the translation is reduced to two sentences. Sometimes the oldest tricks in the book are still fun. There were some things I wouldn’t have missed in the movie. The “actress” played by that skeez from Scary Movie and The Hot Chick should be shot. But we weren’t supposed to like her character, so I will attribute her presence to quality casting. The strange “rape fantasy prostitute” scene was more than I could wrap my head around. The goodbye scene at the end could have gone. Or at least the kiss could have. I wondered, during that scene, if I had missed the moment where both characters really had lost their minds. I supposed, though, that without that ending it really wouldn’t have been the story they were trying to tell, would it. One last thing… God Damn it Ribisi is a fugly troll. Otherwise, great movie.

This is perhaps the worst film to market ever. Everyone who loves Jim Carrey is most likely not going to enjoy it, and those who would are more than likely thrown by him starring. This is a retro flick, an homage to Capra wherein Carrey, playing a blackballed Hollywood screenwriter who has car accident and is taken in by a small town who believes him to be one of their war dead. Carrey, who has amnesia, must come to terms with who he is and who he wants to be in both the eyes of his new home, and later, in terms of his old life. Carrey does perhaps his best acting job (at least tied with his work in Man On The Moon) with no mugging, no wacky humor, but great emotion and a great Jimmy Stewart everyman-ness. In fact, the whole cast does a great job. Martin Landau is wonderful as the old man convinced that Carrey is his son. And I even got passed the fact that David Ogden Stiers was on M*A*S*H, which I have never been able to do.
So, what's wrong with this film? Well, it's not an unpardonable sin, but it is very prone to drive off some viewers. It moves very slowly, and doesn't hit it's stride until after the first hour, I'd say. Also, if you are not a fan of the old school films, you may find it boring, or lame, even after that point. I, however, am a big fat, film nerd, and despite it's slowness, which was testing my patience, ended up really enjoying the film. It would be a shame if the poor box office returns from this film ended the Studios or Carrey's interests in his doing serious roles for the future.

Rather than wanting to hurt myself with something blunt upon watching Man On Fire, as I assumed I would based on the trailers I'd seen, I found myself actually enjoying it. Now, story-wise, it's still a little on the weak end. Denzel Washington, plays a washed up counter-insurgency specialist AKA killer, who is hired by a wealthy family in Mexico City to be their daughter's bodyguard. This is, of course, after the film is introduced with heavy, and fast and loose numbers about kidnappings in Latin America, just to help reinforce their premise. And I'll bet you can't guess if at some point that daughter will be kidnapped, after all that. So yeah, you wait through about an hour of character and relationship development, before the event, which is fine. It happens, Denzel is horribly injured, and the family with the police go along with the kidnappers, when there is a horrible double-cross at the drop of the ransom. The girl is killed in retaliation, and Denzel goes on his "kill them all" rampage, which you also knew was coming. There's nothing especially new done in the story, but the "bang your skull against the fucking wall" cliches are avoided for the most part, and the killing/ destruction is inventive, disgusting and kinetic. So, if nothing else, it keeps itself interesting, and that's a feat considering the film has a run time of almost two and a half hours. The actors are good, and I wasn't thinking about anyone doing a horrible job, which is itself a sign that someone is doing a really bad job. I would like to say the supporting role I enjoyed most in the film was Christopher Walken, who for once does not play an over-the-top scary motherfucker, but rather Denzel's old friend, who's now a businessman with a family, just looking to help his buddy out.
Now, from a film standpoint, director, Tony Scott really makes this film stand out. He gives the entire a film a look, that is unlike any other I've seen. The way the film is shot, the cuts all enhance this film rather than detract from it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's real pretty, and you can tell it's real pretty, but it doesn't overpower the story or the acting. The fact is that this film was probably a fairly mediocre concept, but with the actors hired and direction, the film actually shapes up into something worth watching.
Now, this film is not for everyone. It is rather gruesome at times, but if you can handle Tarantino, there's nothing especially shocking here. However, if you're looking for a good guy movie (shit blowing up) or a fan of well shot cinema, this one should definitely be put into consideration the next time you're at the video store. You never could have convinced me that I would be saying what I'm saying about this film as recently as six months ago, so it must have made some impression with me. And if you're coming from the filmic perspective, I'd recommend making this one a double feature with Steven Sondenburg's The Limey, if you haven't seen that one yet.

Ironically, one of R.E.M.'s most haunting, soul sucking, jingle-like songs inspired the production of this film which I can only describe as amazing. This is by far one of the best films I've seen in the past five years, if not the best. Jim Carrey, not being Jim Carrey, is a delight and for his work in this film, he truly does deserve recognition. I really don't know how to talk about this film. It touched me (and so can you for $5) deeply and got as near full blown crying in the theater as I've come in quite a while. It reminded me that life is here to be enjoyed. So go out, enjoy it. (So, what are you still doing here?)
Note: This is being written by a man who still won't leave the house.

Reloaded is the word. Not that I didn't enjoy the film. However, like the first installment, it suffered from some major flaws. Now, most good sequels up the ante across the board. I could relate many examples from Star Wars to Empire right off the top of my head. And while, Reloaded raised the bar on the overall story arc and they did upgrade Smith, did anything else seem pumped up to you? Neo, while confident in his abilities, which were mostly revealed in the first film, is still as dumb as a bag of hammers. He has no real agenda that isn't force fed to him by the Oracle and when confronted with the army of Agent Smiths, he doesn't think to fly away until he is almost overcome by them. Then, later in the film, it takes him equally long to realize that if he can change things in the Matrix, he can also heal people within it. And this is their "savior?" Trinity and Morpheus aren't advanced as characters. The actors do some more intense stunts, but no new ground is covered with them. New crew member, Link, while having one of the most interesting backstories in the film, does less than Tank or Dozer did in the first film. And Serif, who I'll put in the hero category for now, has his neat, little (being the operative word) fight scene, but is definitely a candidate for the Boba Fett Award.
Now, let's take a look at the villains. Agent Smith is upgraded, and while even I got a charge from hearing "Mister Anderson," he has a whopping two impotent fights with Neo (which we know will see resolution in the third film) but for right now, this film,..eh. Enter the foppish European, who makes Jabba The Hutt not only look like a skilled administrator, but a genuine threat and his jealous, plot device wife. Though able to write code for an orgasm inducing cake, he needs like ten bodyguards to protect him from digitized humans. Oh, and besides the twins, I honestly can't remember what any of them looked like. Speaking of the twins, they are candidates 2 and 3 for the Fett Award,..pretty, pretty, danger, danger, chase scene, chase scene, oh, they're dead. Guess they weren't so badass after all. A couple of minutes are taken to remind us that agents are a threat, and aren't just all at the bar, crying in their beer, "all of the sudden, we're backstory." Of course, they're not such a threat that they achieve anything. Finally, Neo meets the Emporer, the "father" of the Matrix, who again makes the Emporer seem like a competent nemesis, and proceeds to bore the audience with an exhaustive bit of exposition that tried my patience, especially since it was obvious that there were maybe five more scenes, tops, before the end of the film. It's called pacing Wachowski Brothers, work with us here..
Okay, I'll stop bitching now as you're all saying to yourselves, "God, he just doesn't like anything." To quote Neo, "Bullshit!" I liked "Mister Anderson." I was like a giddy schoolgirl. I liked the useful exposition, like the councilman's discussion with Neo about the symbiosis between man and machine. I liked the Oracle (it's a shame we won't see her in the third film, for those who don't know, the actress died.) I liked mindless, pretty fight scenes, the freeway which got me genuinely worried me ("If they kill Morpheus, I'm going to trash the theater!") seeing how a good Superman movie should look in the future, and everything that went boom. Surprisingly, I liked Jada Pinkett Smith whose character and motivation might be considered subtle, if I wasn't so aware of how unsubtle the Wachowskis writing is. Frankly, there was a lot to like. I don't feel I wasted my money. It could have ended with Morpheus asking, "What if tomorrow it could all be over?" and I would have been satisfied. But to be completely honest, while I must and will see Revolutions, unless it's truly spectacular, I'll probably only ever own the first film.

Review contains spoilers, if you really give a shit, and you shouldn't:

Having seen the third film now, I feel bad I spent so much time in reviewing the second film. I walked off from the film thinking, that is wasn't so bad, but the moment I started thinking about it, it fell apart like a house of cards. I have divided the film into three sections, Going to pick up Neo, The Battle of Hoth, and Kneel Before Zod. We start off and it seems Neo forgot his subway tokens, so Mom and Dad have to go pick him up. Basically, we get some nice shoot 'em up action, and a pointless return of the Frenchman, which I think was just an excuse to get Monica Belluci to be falling out of a dress once more. I wanted to complain about the horribly gaudy S&M techno club that they're in, but then I realized if anyone would run a place like that, he'd be French. Anyhoo, Neo meets a little girl who has no real purpose in the film and has a philosophical discussion with her father that was semi-interesting. We see the new Oracle, only to find it's the least dramatic change they could make with the character, substituting a old black actress for another old black actress. Eventually, the gang's all back together. We get a shitload of Aliens rip-off moments and a few "The first transport is away!" moments. Also, the filmmakers finally found their limits with the APU machines that moved like they were straight out of Clash Of The Titans. The good thing about the Hoth section of the film is that it keeps us out of the hand-to-hand, martial arts action that was drilled into the ground in Reloaded. Still, it's too long, and not that interesting. The one thing I did like in this section was the race scene with Jada Pinckett-Smith at the wheel. That played well and was fairly new to the series. Meanwhile, Neo fights Smith, the version of him in a real world body. Yawn. This subplot was so underused as to be ridiculous, and a stupid inclusion in either Reloaded or Revolutions. Then Neo's off to the machine city and ends up fighting Smith who has taken over the Matrix. It's what a Superman movie fight should be, to a degree. I won't go into it, as I sound geeky enough most of the time, but there were flaws. Oh, and in the end, did they have to have Smith rape a child to prove he's the bad guy? Did they think we didn't get that from the first two films? And as a program, why would he do that anyway? Of course, that's not the big flaw. The big flaw is that in the end, the Architect says all the humans who weren't out of the Matrix will be freed. But weren't the humans the batteries that kept the machines going? What's the point of the Matrix if there are no more humans to pacify? Who came up with that shit ending? Of course, they don't bring this shit up, it's up to you to realize that they wrote themselves into a corner, roll credits. They really should have stopped this franchise at one. Of course, then they couldn't have made the buttload of money they made on these two subsequent pieces of shit.

If you've seen a Guy Ritchie flick in the past few years, looking at this case will bring you a lot of familiar faces. However, they are played very different in this non-Ritchie film about a soccer player on the skids (Vinnie Jones, often a hardass in Ritchie flicks) who gets tossed in jail, where he has no friends. Eventually, he is caught in a tangle of wills between the Warden and Head Guard, which leads him to setting up a cons vs. guards soccer match, him leading the cons, of course. Over the course of the training, there are several well presented scenes where Jones earns the respect of his fellow jailbirds. One of the greatest relationships in this film is between Jones and his shit collecting partner, the old con, played by David Kelly (Waking Ned Devine.) If you've seen Jones play over-the-top aggression in a Ritchie film, he will downright shock you with the tenderness and seriousness he brings to this role. The film is peppered with bad jokes that I couldn't help laughing at, and incredible moments that blew me away. My only complaint about this film was the "evil" con who was creepy enough, but then the director must have decided that foaming at the mouth like Hooch would be a bonus to the viewer. We watched the UK version on the DVD, and frankly, when anything is changed for American audiences, it usually has it soul sucked from it, right? Ask anyone who's seen the dubbed and subtitled versions of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

Guy Pearce stars as a man who cannot make new memories after the rape and murder of his wife. Using polaroid photos to help him through his day to day life, he searches for his wife's killer with the help of Sarah (Carrie Anne-Moss) and Teddy (Joey Pantoliano.) This film runs both forwards and backwards leading toward the central climax which explains all. Whatever you think is going on at any point is more than likely at least slightly wrong. I'd like to be able to go into detail on this film, but I'd hate to ruin anything. I will say this film makes a great balance between drama, violence and humor and it is definitely one of the top ten films I've seen this year. If you have the time, go and see it. If you don't have time, make some.

While watching The Mexican, I couldn't help but think, "Wow, this would make a great movie." Not only was this one of the slowest films I've seen in a while, the filmmakers overextended attempt to appeal to several audiences at once detracted greatly from what was an interesting story. It's not even all the tales weren't worth telling, but when you're telling five stories at once in detail, it's going to really test your audiences patience. Oddly enough, that's my only complaint, but it is a large one. I'd only suggest you see this film if you wanted to see it to begin with, and to the filmmakers of The Mexican, in the future, remember editing if your friend. There's no reason to be afraid of it.

Despite promises earlier in the night of sitting down to watch Tango & Cash again, I popped in this film. It's almost as funny as Tango & Cash,..almost. Okay, if you've seen or heard of the other films in this series, Waiting For Guffman or Best In Show, you have some idea of what's going on here. In this installment of Christopher Guest's documentary-styled comedies, a Folk Song producer has died, and this film is the story of his son putting together a reunion concert of the best of his father's groups, in tribute to him. This film is perhaps the least dramatic of the three, the narratives have very limited arcs, and perhaps that is because of the sheer size of the cast. It is still incredibly funny. Eugene Levy really performs in this one and is, as always, the stand out actor of the film. Catherine O'Hara and The Folksmen (AKA the Spinal Tap reunion) are also bright spots in the film. Fred Willard does an all too believable portrayal of a washed up has been, that is almost painful to watch. My favorite bit though, I think, was a few scenes of the stage manager dealing with the concert promoter. It's one of those universal scenes, of dealing with an idiot second-guessing you. It's a point we've all been to at some point. As I've said it's a bit breezy, but then again, it's a comedy so it doesn't have to have too much meat to it. Overall, I'd recommend giving this one a look if you haven't seen it yet. Or maybe you should go ahead, and get Tango & Cash. You pick, I can't do everything for you.

There's a crazy bomber on the loose, and it's up to Sandra Bullock to stop him. Okay, so this one is pretty cookie cutter on the outside. Sandra Bullock is an ugly tomboy (i.e. they got rid of her make-up, powdered her down, gave her big glasses and put her in baggy clothes) working for the FBI, and she just happens to be the FBI's only chance to infiltrate the Miss USA contest which is the bomber's next target. Actually, Bullock is okay in this one, which is a fairly unbiased statement as the only male in North America who doesn't think she's the hottest thing to come down the line since Jenny McCarthy. The storyline was actually entertaining. And finally, Michael Caine does a wonderful job as the trainer who must smooth Bullock's rough edges. He is hilarious. The greatest downfall of the film however is a half-assed attempt at the end to say that pageant contestants are more than the sum of their bodily parts, when for the past 90 minutes all you've seen is just how catty and stupid these girls are with no real redemption for any of them, with the exception of Bullock who was an intelligent character before she entered the contest. It really seemed just kind of thrown in there with nothing to really back it up, like it was there to avoid lawsuits or perhaps some screenwriter's sad ass attempt to get laid.

Stu,
I saw your review of my review of this horrendously hideous failure to do anything or stir any kind of emotion in any fiber of my being of a movie. GOD! It doesn't even deserve that name "movie". This was shit on the same type of stuff they use to make real movies. I can't believe that this and Fight Club or Matrix are called the same thing...that should be a crime, it's DAMN wrong I tell you - damn wrong. I just wanted to thank you for voicing my (and Lloyd's) opinion of this waste of money, film space, and most of all precious sleeping, crapping, or eating time (Jesus - anything is better time well spent than this!) to all those out there who may be in the dark on this movie or may be wasting thinking time wondering if they should go see it or not. It is not my intention to get anyone's curiosity up about this movie - save yourself for I was not spared and it was not fun. GOD, AND I PAID FULL PRICE!!! Is there any justice anymore!
I'm sorry I'm just bitter that I can't get back anything I lost from seeing this. There's a lump in my throat, I have heavy baggage I must carry, but I proclaim these words so you may not carry the same baggage. I could do this forever....
Seriously, thanks for the mention. I feel as if I've help save some dignity in this world, if only just a little...
Humbly yours,
Vicki

A highly stylized musical tragic love story plays fairly well. The acting is superb, and even Nicole Kidman managed not to be as stunningly annoying as I usually find her in film. John Leguizamo does a great job as Toulouse Latrec. Overall, as far as love stories go, this one had more going for it than your usual Julia Roberts fare, viewing more like a play, i.e. someone took time to actually write the script and make it good. Visually, it knocks you on your ass taking on an appearance as brightly colored pop-up book. The music is alright, but for the most part, when it draws from modern songs, which is often, they seem out of place and make the writers seem a little lazy. The main exception to this I found to be the use of the Police's "Roxanne." I recommend you all take a look at this one if you haven't. It's definitely different from what you seen before.

Loren Dean (Billy Bathgate) plays Doc Mumford, a psychologist in the town of Mumford. This relatively small town is just full of troubles that all could use some sorting out. There's a compulsive shopper ordering things just to possess them, a man who doesn't even star in his own fantasies, and a lonely computer whiz who wants the perfect companion played by Jason Lee, finally allowed to show off some of his skateboarding skills. Even Doc Mumford is troubled when he falls in love with one of his patients. However, the easiest route to solve his problem is to expose himself for the fraud that he is, leaving him with a tough choice indeed. I don't know exactly what most compelled me in liking this film. It's happy, funny, and bizarre, but I think I liked Doc Mumford. I feel I could relate, just wanting to help people, even if it's just by listening. Maybe that's it. Maybe it was just a really good film. I think it was a little of both. Come on folks, everybody now, watch this one alone or with someone special. Mumford will make your evening.

Okay, other than the total butchering of the original story for this film, and the fact that the CGI was comparable to the special effects in Clash Of The Titans, I have just one question to any of you out there who have seen this film. If one half of the group, at the end of the film, arrived at the City of the Dead by means of an airplane that crashes, and the other half arrived by means of the Mummy's sandstorm, can someone, please, explain to me just where the hell the saddled camels came from that they ride home on? I'm just curious.

Note: No one has bothered trying to answer my inquiry.