District 13: Ultimatum

DISTRICT 13: ULTIMATUM (2009) - May 8, 2010
A disappointing sequel.  This one finds the last film's two protagonists uncovering a government conspiracy (in a storyline that ultimately becomes a really clunky Iraq war critique -- Harriburton?  Really?).  The film is decently made and entertaining enough; the main problem is that it tends to get really bogged down in the government conspiracy shenanigans -- there is an absurd amount of exposition in this film.  Just get to the fights and the parkour alreadly.  The other problem is that the film is surprisingly light on action -- what is there is decent enough (though a bit heavier on the old shaky-cam/quick-cutting than I'd like), and there are actually a couple of pretty exciting sequences.  But there's nothing that can even hold a candle to the exhilerating chase scene that opened the first film (though there is a scene that tries really hard to replicate that), or some of the other action set-peices from the original.  This was a passable action film, but given how awesome the first movie was, it's definitely a disappointment.  **1/2

The Descent: Part 2

THE DESCENT: PART 2 (2009) - May 8, 2010
Well, that was a pleasant surprise.  Though not quite on the same level as the first film, it's actually kind of close.  About the rescue team that goes in to attempt to rescue the missing girls from the first film -- including the sole survivor, who has amnesia and thus has no memory of the horrors that lie within.  The movie is quite well directed by Jon Harris, who does an admirable job of replicating the claustrophobic feel of the original, and who is able to maintain a fairly good level of tension throughout.  This was definitely a lot better than I was expecting.  ***1/2  

Iron Man 2

IRON MAN 2 (2010) - May 7, 2010
Like the first movie, this was a somewhat uneven but still very good comic book movie, this time finding Tony Stark going up against an angry Russian scientist.  The movie definitely drags a bit in parts, but it's well directed by Jon Favreau, who refreshingly avoids the old shakey-cam/quick-cut style -- some of the action scenes are pretty spectacular.  ***

The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans

THE BAD LIEUTENANT: PORT OF CALL - NEW ORLEANS (2009) - May 5, 2010
An enjoyable film about an increasingly drug-addled cop investigating the murder of a family of immigrants.  A fairly routine cop movie, elevated by a pretty great -- and hypnotically bizarre -- performance from Nicolas Cage.  ***

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (2010) - April 30, 2010
A bad though suprisingly not terrible remake -- this is probably the best of the Platinum Dunes remakes, though that's really not saying much.  Samuel Bayer's direction was decent enough (though the film still definitely had that Platinum Dunes look), and some of the dream sequences were actually fairly effective.  One of the film's bigger problems is that none of the characters were really worth caring about -- the Freddy shenanigans were afoot right from the first second of the film, and we never really get a chance to know any of the characters, who are all fairly generic and who are never developed beyond the superficial.  They're marginally better than the annoying douchebags from something like Friday the 13th, but they're pretty dull.  Still, I was pretty much going with the film for the first half or so, as it was reasonably well made, and there was a death every ten minutes or so to liven things up.  But there came a point, about half-way into the film, where the two surviving characters try to uncover the mystery behind Freddy's origins.  The film seriously slowed down at this point.  Oh well.  Considering how bad I feared this would be, it was kind of a pleasant surprise.  **

Footloose (1984)

FOOTLOOSE (1984) - April 28, 2010
An entertaining film about a high school kid who moves to a small town where dancing has been outlawed.  It isn't nearly as campy as it sounds (aside from a somewhat ridiculous scene where Kevin Bacon goes alone to an abandoned warehouse to dance out his anger), and in fact is mostly fairly low-key -- including some really good performances, particularly John Lithgow as the conflicted preacher who outlawed dancing in the first place.  ***

Scoop

SCOOP (2006) - April 27, 2010
An enjoyable movie about a student reporter who starts investigating a charming aristocrat when she receives a tip that he may be a murderer.  Well made and well acted, this was a fun film -- not exactly up there with the Woodster's classics, but then it's not trying to be.  ***

Dread

DREAD (2009) - April 26, 2010
An interesting if somewhat overlong horror film about a guy who, after watching his parents' grisly murder as a child, becomes obsessed with the idea of fear; he convinces a film student to do a documentary about what makes people afraid.  There's definitely a lot of good stuff here, though the film's origin as a short story is fairly apparent, as it does feel a bit stretched thin. I don't know if the characters were necessarily good enough to support the somewhat uneventful first hour, but the film is definitely commendable for trying something a bit different.  **1/2

You Don't Know Jack

YOU DON'T KNOW JACK (2010) - April 25, 2010
A well made and exceptionally well acted bio-pic about Dr. Jack Kevorkian, AKA Dr. Death.  Al Pacino gives a really phenominal performance as Kevorkian -- certainly, it's his best performance in a while and probably right up there with his best work.  All the other performances are just as good, though it's definitely Pacino who makes the biggest impact.  The film is well over two hours but doesn't feel long at all, and is surprisingly well directed by Barry Levinson, who hasn't made a film this good in many, many years (which really surprised me, since his output over the last two decades or so has been so horrible).  Good stuff.  ***1/2

The Losers

THE LOSERS (2010) - April 24, 2010
Meh.  A basically entertaining if kind of mediocre action film about a group of ex-soldiers who set out to get revenge on the man who tried to kill them.  It's definitely not as fun as it's trying so hard to be, but it was decently made and I was never bored.  **1/2

How to Train Your Dragon

HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON (2010) - April 24, 2010
Wow!  This was actually a lot better than I thought it would be.  Not that I didn't think it would be good, but it was definitely one of the better movies I've seen in a while, and will no doubt rank as one of the best movies of 2010.  About a kid who lives with a village of vikings whose whole society seems to revolve around fighting dragons, and who makes a surprising discovery when he befriends an injured dragon.  Boy, I really enjoyed this movie, from the direction to the performances and even the 3D (!), I loved everything about this film.  ****

Drag Me to Hell

DRAG ME TO HELL (2009) - April 23, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Man, what a great movie.  This was even more enjoyable than I remembered it being.  Sam Raimi's direction is pretty much perfect, and the whole movie is just so fast-paced and entertaining.  Raimi keeps things moving at an almost absurd pace, with very little downtime between the set-pieces, and it's just so much fun.  And that ending... it's perfect, and definitely one of my favourite endings ever.  ****

8 1/2

8 1/2 (1963) - April 22, 2010 (Second Viewing)
I’m about to say something that you’re probably not going to agree with. No point in beating around the bush, so here goes: I don’t like 8½. That’s not to say that I hate it; there are some classic films where the appeal just completely eludes me, and that’s certainly not the case here — this is an exceptionally well made movie, and I can definitely see why someone might love it. But it just didn’t connect with me. I don’t know why. I won’t say I was bored, but I wasn’t exactly riveted.  One thing that I can unequivocally say about this film, despite my feelings on the movie as a whole, is that Federico Fellini’s direction is really top-notch. This is an amazingly good-looking film, and almost every frame looks great. Even when I wasn’t necessarily enthralled by the film itself, I was at least able to appreciate what Fellini had achieved on a visual level.  But… I don’t know, the movie itself I just found kind of dull, despite Fellini’s striking direction, and despite the presence of Marcello Mastroianni, who is one of those actors who can liven up a scene without even saying a word. I’ve liked some of Fellini’s other movies (in fact I’ll soon be revisiting Amarcord, which is a film I remembered enjoying), and this is, by most accounts, his masterpiece. Many call it one of the best movies of all time. And yet it just doesn’t do much for me. Oh well. I’m sure there will be a third viewing at some point in my future. Maybe I’ll like it better then. **

Margot at the Wedding

MARGOT AT THE WEDDING (2007) - April 21, 2010
Well, that wasn't so good.  Filled to the brim with unlikable, angsty, unpleasant characters, this was decently made (other than the unappealingly muted/brownish colour palette), but just wasn't particularly entertaining.  It's not even that I was bored, I wasn't, I was just never particularly keen on spending 90 minutes with these absurdly unpleasant people.  The titular Margot, in particular, was almost comically unlikable.  In Greenberg, Noah Baumbach's most recent film, the title character is self-absorbed and a bit of a jerk, but he's like Cary Grant compared to the dour and unpleasant Margot.  Plus, he's surrounded by more likable characters to balance things out.  No such balance here, where pretty much every character acts like they're constantly on the verge of hanging themselves.  **

Animal Farm

ANIMAL FARM (1954) - April 20, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Well, this is the second time that I’ve seen Animal Farm, and I definitely liked it a bit better this time around. I still don’t think it’s a classic on the same level of some of the movies I’ve already watched for this blog, but certainly, it is a good film. The first time I watched it, I had just read George Orwell’s classic book, and some of the liberties that Halas and Bachelor took with their adaptation kind of irked me (most notably, the choice to make most of the animals mute, and the tacked-on happy ending). It’s been a few years since I’ve read the book, and now that it’s not particularly fresh in my mind, I was able to appreciate the film on its own merits.  It was actually kind of interesting to watch this so soon after 1900, which had a pretty strong pro-communist message. Obviously, Animal Farm is pretty much the opposite, as it’s well known to be an anti-communist allegory (and in fact, rumour has it that the film was partially funded by the CIA to act as a piece of anti-communist propaganda).  Just speaking as a fan of classic animation, you have to appreciate this movie just based on the visuals alone. The fluid, stylish animation is right up there with the best stuff of the era, and an iffy DVD transfer notwithstanding, this is a must-see for anyone who has any kind of interest in animated film. As for the story, it’s fairly compelling, if not quite on par with the book. The movie does a good job of making us care about the animals, and it’s hard not to get wrapped up in their plight, especially towards the end of the film when things start to really go sour for the embattled denizens of the farm.  The movie certainly has its flaws, but I can’t deny that it’s worth watching. ***

Creep

CREEP (2004) - April 17, 2010
An effective horror film about a woman who gets trapped in the London subway overnight, and finds herself stalked by some kind of strange creature.  Well directed by Christopher Smith, there wasn't anything particularly amazing about this film, but it was well made and accomplishes what it sets out to do.  ***

Kick-Ass

KICK-ASS (2010) - April 16, 2010
A really fun comic book movie about a high school kid without any particular powers or abilities who decides he wants to be a super-hero; meanwhile, a much better prepared father and daughter also don masks and fight crime (quite violently).  This was a really enjoyable film that managed to work both as a self-aware take on superhero comics in general, and just as a really good superhero film in itself.  Matthew Vaughn's direction was quite effective -- the over-the-top action scenes were pretty much awesome, despite the presence of a bit more CGI blood than I'd like.  The performances were all quite good, particularly Mark Strong, who gave another really... strong... performance as a ruthless mob boss.  ***1/2

1900

1900 (1976) - April 12, 2010 (Second Viewing)
I’m going to admit that I actually received this movie from Zip.ca way back in January, and it has been sitting on my desk ever since, collecting dust and just waiting to be watched. I’ve seen this movie once before, and I remembered liking it a lot, but how often do you feel like sitting down and watching a five hour Italian epic (five hours and fifteen minutes, to be precise)? Of course, the obvious solution would be to watch it over two nights — it’s even broken up over two discs, which would make deciding when to stop watching remarkably easy. But that just feels like cheating to me, and so the movie sat around unwatched for months, waiting for me to be in the right mood.  The sad thing about my reticence is that this is a really good movie, and I knew that since I’d seen it before — though the only thing I really remembered from my first viewing was the scene in which Donald Sutherland kills a cat by headbutting it (with a running start, no less), in order to illustrate the proper way to deal with the perils of communism. It’s kind of hard to forget something like that.  Yes, the movie is super long. Almost absurdly long. And yet it somehow justifies its length far better than American Graffiti, which was under two hours and still felt way longer than it needed to be. The length allows you to spend such a long time with the characters — from their childhood all they way through to their middle age and beyond — that you really get a sense of knowing them that would simply be impossible from a shorter film. Many of the characters, De Niro’s in particular, undergo transformations that could have easily seemed forced in a shorter movie, but seems completely natural given the scope that Bertolucci chose to work with.  Bertolucci, working with famed cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, creates a film that is really beautiful to look at. And of course, the performances are all quite good; De Niro in particular does a really great job of making his character subtly change as he grows older. Really, I don’t have many complaints about this film. Some of the characters tend to be a bit simplistic, either being clearly good or clearly evil, without many shades of gray (ie. Donald Sutherland’s cat-headbutting Fascist). Also, the actors in this film all spoke their own languages (Depardieu spoke French, De Niro spoke English, etc.) and were dubbed over in post. The DVD has an English track, an Italian track and a French track, which means that it’s impossible to watch the film and hear all the actors speak with their own voices. I chose English because I wanted to hear De Niro speak since he’s the main character, but it wasn’t exactly ideal.  ***1/2

Greenberg

GREENBERG (2010) - April 9, 2010
A really well made character study about a self-absorbed 40 year old who returns to LA after several years to house-sit for his brother.  While there, he reconnects with an old friend and a forms a tentative relationship with his brother's personal assistant.  Noah Baumbach's direction is quite good, and he does a really good job of getting us to care about the characters -- Greenberg himself is a bit of a jerk, but Ben Stiller is pretty much perfect in the role and ensures that the character is always relatable.  The other performances were just as good, and all the characters were exceptionally well drawn and compelling, making the film's kind of meandering vibe and lack of a plot a distinct non-issue.  ***1/2

American Graffiti

AMERICAN GRAFFITI (1973) - April 8, 2010
Meh. Wasn’t crazy about this one. I guess the streak of really good movies had to end eventually. Not that this was a bad movie, but it’s not exactly something I’m going to run out to add to my collection.  I should note that the original original Star Wars trilogy (ie. the non-adulterated versions) are among my favourite films of all time, so this is a movie that I’ve been meaning to watch for a while. American Graffiti is the last film George Lucas made before moving on to Star Wars, and along with THX 1138, it’s the only feature film that he directed without the words star and wars in the title.  So what was wrong with it? Lucas’ direction is fine, if nothing particularly spectacular. The performances were all good (and it was kind of neat seeing a really young Harrison Ford and Richard Dreyfuss). But the film feels long and meandering, and I just never connected with the characters in a meaningful way. Every scene seemed to go on a bit longer than it needed to, and while I was never all-out bored, I was never particularly riveted, either. Some of the subplots were more interesting than others, but to be honest they all kind of over-stayed their welcome to a certain extent. Meh. That’s really the best way to describe my feelings about this movie.  **1/2

Chloe

CHLOE (2009) - April 7, 2010
A decently made melodrama about a woman who suspects her husband is cheating on her, and who hires a prostitute to see if he'll remain faithful.  Atom Egoyan's direction was serviceable enough, and the whole thing was well made, but it was just kind of middling -- it's the type of film that you forget about almost as soon as the lights go up.  Though the performances were really good, I will give it that.  **1/2

Wall-E

WALL-E (2008) - April 6, 2010 (Seventh Viewing)
A brilliant film -- this is such a great movie from start to finish, and I really don't think I can think of a single flaw.  I love it.  For sure, it's one of my favourite movies ever.  ****

All The President's Men

ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN (1976) - April 4, 2010
It’s odd — on the surface, it seems like the movie shouldn’t be that great. It’s very long (almost two hours and twenty minutes), and consists entirely of the minutia of Woodward and Bernstein’s (or “Woodstein,” as their editor calls them) investigation. We never learn anything about either Woodward or Bernstein’s personal lives, or at least nothing that we can’t glean from their fastidious investigation. You’d think that the lack of any significant character development would hurt the film, and yet somehow it doesn’t. It helps, I’m sure, that both Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford are great actors, and are at the top of their game here.  It seems like the movie should be dull, but it isn’t. Woodstein spend an inordinate amount of time chasing down leads over the telephone, visiting with people and running into dead end after dead end. Somehow, director Alan J. Pakula manages to make a scene like someone simply talking on the phone surprisingly tense. There’s something really compelling about watching the pieces of the investigation very slowly fall into place.  Pakula’s direction is definitely top-notch, as is Gordon Willis’ cinematography; from the bustling expansiveness of the newsroom, to the dark, shadowy parking lot where the meetings with Deep Throat take place, this is a really visually compelling film. This is, of course, a movie that not only rewards but demands your full attention — with the sheer volume of names and information being constantly thrown at the viewer, it’s easy enough to fall behind. But assuming you’re in the mood for a movie like this, it’s definitely worth your time. The book calls it one of “the most gripping, deft and utterly compelling of thrillers,” which I definitely agree with, despite the absence of any of the elements you might expect from a typical thriller — there are no car chases, no shootouts, and nothing even remotely resembling a typical action scene. There’s just the investigation, and it’s absolutely compelling.  ***1/2

Clash of the Titans

CLASH OF THE TITANS (2010) - April 2, 2010
A silly and kind of mediocre film about a half man, half god who decides to take on the god Hades after his family is killed.  Huge action set-peices ensue.  Louis Leterrier's direction was decent enough, and the film was basically entertaining, though it kind of lagged between the action scenes -- none of the characters were particularly compelling (with the possible exception of Mads Mikkelsen), including Sam Worthington, who was pretty bland as the main character.  Some of the action scenes were decent enough in a really over-the-top way, but the film was just kind of mediocre.  **

Repo Men

REPO MEN (2010) - April 1, 2010
A basically enjoyable film about a repo man of artificial organs in the not-too-distant future, who finds the tables turned when he can't pay for his artificial heart.  There were a lot of things I liked about this movie, from the (admittedly absurd) premise to the futuristic setting, but it dragged a bit in the middle, and I found myself seriously losing interest.  The movie definitely won me back, however, with the gleefully violent, way over-the-top finale, which was pretty awesome.  **1/2

Ip Man

IP MAN (2008) - Mar. 31, 2010
A really enjoyable film about a martial artist in 1930s China whose life is turned upsidedown when the Japanese invade.  Featuring a nicely charismatic performance from Donnie Yen as the titular Ip Man, the non-action stuff was actually fairly compelling, which is really just a nice bonus in a movie like this.  The action itself was pretty much superb, with some really well cheoreographed fights, perfectly directed by Wilson Yip.  Yip is such a perfect action director because he knows exactly how to keep things exciting and cinematic, while still letting the action speak for itself instead of obscuring it with quick cuts and other directorial trickery.  ***1/2

Heart Condition

HEART CONDITION (1990) - Mar. 30, 2010
A mediocre film about a racist cop who begins seeing the ghost of a black lawyer he received a heart transplant from.  Despite the seemingly sure-fire premise (and cast!  Denzel Washington as the lawyer and Bob Hoskins as the cop) the film just wasn't all that good.  James D. Parriott's direction was surprisingly poor, and the film looked really dated.  Washington and Hoskins were both, not surprisingly, really good, and the scenes with just the two of them were the clear highlight.  But the film itself was just kind of shoddy, and it dragged in parts.  **

Triangle

TRIANGLE (2009) - Mar. 28, 2010
A mind-bending thriller about a woman and her friends, out on a yachting trip, who wind up getting stranded on a mysterious old cruise ship; temporal shenanigans ensue.  The film was really well directed by Christopher Smith, and featured a narrative that became more and more time travel heavy as it went along; comparisons to Timecrimes are definitely appropriate, though Timecrimes seemed to tie together fairly neatly by the time the end credits rolled -- I'm not so sure if the same is the case here.  There are certain things about this film that are still pretty baffling to me -- particularly the origin of the final Jess.  Where did she come from?  And why was she pretending to be all confused and deja-vu-ridden on the cruise ship when, presumably, she knows exactly why she's there?  Still, despite my lingering questions, this was a stylish and effective thriller, and one I'm sure I'll be revisiting at some point in the future.  ***1/2

Hot Tub Time Machine

HOT TUB TIME MACHINE (2010) - Mar. 27, 2010
An enjoyable comedy about four friends who get into a hot tub at a ski resort, only to find that they've time-traveled back into the '80s.  The four friends definitely have good chemistry, and the film is quite enjoyable and funny in parts (particularly a running gag involving Crispen Glover's arm).  ***

Broken Embraces

BROKEN EMBRACES (2009) - Mar. 26, 2010
Yet another really well directed film from Pedro Almodovar about the affair between a filmmaker and an actress.  Though not quite on the level of the other Almodovar films that I've seen, it was still quite enjoyable throughout despite the relatively long running time of over two hours.  ***

The Ghost Writer

THE GHOST WRITER (2010) - Mar. 26, 2010
A well made but somewhat dull thriller about a man who is hired to be the ghost writer for a controversial ex-Prime Minister, only to slowly (very slowly) find himself embroiled in some sinister shenanigans.  The movie is stylishly directed by Roman Polanski and very well acted -- the main problem here is that the movie just takes such a long time to go anywhere, and even when it does it does it in such a leisurely way that it really makes it hard to classify this as a thriller at all.  Certainly, Polanski fails at evoking the Hitchcockian vibe that he is clearly going for.  But the performances were good, and I was never all-out bored, though I was never particularly into it, either.  **1/2

The Horseman

THE HORSEMAN (2008) - Mar. 25, 2010
An almost absurdly grim and gritty thriller about a father who is out for revenge after the death of his daughter, and who befriends a young girl along the way.  Brutally violent -- and not stylized, Kill Bill style violence; this is gritty, uncomfortably brutal violence -- this was a surprisingly intense, really engaging film.  I could definitely see this film just being unpleasant if it weren't so well made, but first-timer Steven Kastrissios directs this with a sure hand, and some of the scenes were almost unrelentingly tense.  There's very little down-time between the action sequences (if you can call them that), but it definitely works, creating a level of tension that really doesn't let up until the end credits roll.  ***1/2

Yi Yi

YI YI (2000) - Mar. 21, 2010
This is a film that frequently pops up on “best of the decade” lists, so my expectations were fairly high. It’s nice to watch a well-regarded film that really lives up to its acclaim — it’s distressingly common to watch a movie that gets a lot of hype and then walk away wondering what all the hubbub was about (yeah, that’s right — I said hubbub. I like that word; people don’t use it enough). That’s definitely not the case here.  I won’t lie: this is not a fast-paced film, not even a little bit. Acclaimed (and tragically deceased) director Edward Yang’s style consists mostly of unusually long, wide shots, in which things tend to unfold at a slow, meticulous pace. The imdb claims that Antonioni is one of Yang’s favourite directors, which doesn’t come as a particular surprise as the two definitely share a lot of the same sensibilities. However, unlike Antonioni, who always keeps you at an arm’s length, there is a warmth and richness to this film that really draws you in. It’s very long and very slow, and yet you don’t really feel it. Also, unlike the cool, restrained characters of someone like Antonioni, the people here feel much more vibrant, with some scenes almost approaching melodrama, but never in a way that feels forced or artificial.  This is a long film — it’s almost three hours long, which on the surface is a bit daunting. But when you actually watch the movie you realize that the length is pretty much perfect. Yes, some of the scenes go on a bit longer than you’d think they would, but it all adds up to a film that is surprisingly compelling, and one in which you really get to know and like the central characters. Honestly, by the end of the film I would have been happy to spend another couple of hours with that family.  ***1/2

Alice in Wonderland

ALICE IN WONDERLAND (2010) - Mar. 19, 2010
A surprisingly dull and boring film about Alice's return to Wonderland as a young adult, where she finds the place in turmoil and run by an evil queen.  Featuring Tim Burton's standard quirky visual style, which has long since lost its ability to dazzle or impress (and combined with the drab, grayish colour palette, is actually kind of a bore), the film does a really terrible job of making us care about the plight of the citizens of Wonderland, or even about Alice herself.  It all feels kind of slipshod, like a random assortment of scenes in which the quirky characters get to be quirky, but in which not all that much of interest happens.  It doesn't help that Alice herself is really not an interesting character -- she spends most of the movie stumbling around looking bewildered and repeating that she expects to wake up at any moment.  The characters she's surrounded with don't fare much better.  I really couldn't have cared less about Alice's quest or about the fate of the citizens of Wonderland, which meant that the movie was kind of a drag.  Tim Burton, what happened to you?  Also: I hate 3D so much.  *1/2

The 400 Blows

THE 400 BLOWS (1959) - Mar. 14, 2010
François Truffaut is definitely my favourite director from the French New Wave. I can appreciate guys like Jean-Luc Godard and Alain Resnais, but it’s fairly clear that they were more interested in challenging the traditional notion of what a film can be than actually making something that most people would want to watch. I don’t know how pretentious you’d have to be to really love something like Weekend, but I’m not there yet.  Honestly, I don’t have a whole lot to say about this movie. I’ve seen it a few times now, and I definitely like it, but it’s one of those movies I like and respect but am fairly ambivalent towards. Truffaut does a great job getting really naturalistic, convincing performances from the kids, and the widescreen, black and white cinematography always keeps things interesting on a visual level.  ***

Green Zone

GREEN ZONE (2010) - Mar. 12, 2010
An enjoyable if somewhat heavy-handed film about a soldier in Iraq circa 2003 whose job is to find WMDs, and who becomes increasingly frustrated when it becomes clear that the intelligence they're working with is incorrect.  As an indictment of the way the Americans initiated and handled the war in Iraq, the film was far from subtle -- however it was well made and the action sequences were fairly exciting, if (obviously) a bit heavy on the old shaky-cam.  ***

Pandorum

PANDORUM (2009) - Mar. 10, 2010
A fairly mediocre film about a couple of officers who wake up, bewildered, on a space ship after a long period of stasis.  The film isn't quite as terrible as everyone made it out to be -- it started out pretty terribly, but actually improved quite a bit in the second half (not that that takes much).  **

Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs

CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS (2009) - Mar. 9, 2010
An enjoyable cartoon about a the shenanigans that ensue after a scientist accidentally invents a machine that makes it rain food.  Delightfully cartoony, this was fast-paced and fun.  It's not exactly Pixar level, but then not much is.  ***

All About Eve

ALL ABOUT EVE (1950) - Mar. 8, 2010
It was interesting to watch this film so soon after All About My Mother, which pays pretty extensive homage to All About Eve. The two films aren’t particularly similar, but Mother outright references Eve at least a couple of times; I’d be interested to watch it again just to see if there were any other allusions that flew right over my head. As for which “All About _____” is the superior film, I’m going to have to go with a tie. Yes, that’s a pretty lame answer, but what can I say? I liked them both.  So yeah, it is definitely a justified classic and deserves its place on the list. Both Bette Davis and Anne Baxter give really compelling, above-average performances. Baxter in particular does a great job of starting out sweet and letting the insidious nature of her character come out really gradually. It’s definitely an impressive performance. The supporting performances are just as good, with the standout being George Sanders as the smug and vaguely sinister Addison Dewitt. The scene towards the end of the film where he completely eviscerates Eve (verbally, of course) was definitely one of the better things I’ve seen in a while. I like Sanders because he’s one of those rare actors who has the ability to liven up even the dullest of material; when he’s given something that’s already good… well then he’s really good.  ***1/2

Universal Soldier: Regeneration

UNIVERSAL SOLDIER: REGENERATION (2009) - Mar. 6, 2010
A mediocre film about a group of Russian terrorists who, with the help of an advanced Universal Soldier, take over a nuclear reactor and start making demands.  The film was decently directed and featured reasonably high production values for a straight-to-video action movie; my main problem with it was that it didn't really bother developing any characters to the point where we care about any of them, and that the action was (for the most part) fairly dull.  It occurred to me about half-way through that the reason why the action wasn't really working was that the evil Universal Soldier was so over-powered that most of the fights were ridiculously one-sided, which is an easy way to drain any excitement out of an action sequence.  Though there was some decent action towards the end, including a pretty spectacular show-down between Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren that definitely had all of the energy and excitement that most of the film was lacking.  Oh well.  **

House of the Devil

HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009) - Mar. 6, 2010
About a young girl in the '80s who, against her better judgment, takes a babysitting job at a weird old house in the middle of nowhere.  Not a whole lot happens for the bulk of the film (in fact, much of the movie consists of the girl wandering around the house) and yet there's a surprising amount of tension and a very ominous sense of unease as it becomes increasingly clear that sinister shenanigans are afoot.  Ti West's retro-inspired direction suits the material perfectly, and definitely helps turn what might have otherwise been dull into something special (props must also go to Jeff Grace's nicely ominous score).  ***1/2

Brooklyn's Finest

BROOKLYN'S FINEST (2010) - Mar. 5, 2010
An enjoyable if somewhat overlong film about three cops (one undercover, one about to retire and one desperate for cash so he can move out of his mould-infested house) in a gritty New York neighbourhood.  Pretty much filled to the brim with cop movie cliches, there wasn't anything particularly fresh about this film, though it was surprisingly well directed by Antoine Fuqua and very well acted.  It dragged a bit, particularly towards the end, but then there was a tense and downright riveting finale that definitely redeemed the film.  ***

The Unborn

THE UNBORN (2009) - Mar. 4, 2010
A decent horror film about a girl who finds herself haunted by a sinister little kid.  Yes, yet another film with a sinister kid and a years-old mystery to be solved.  Despite the complete lack of anything even resembling originality, this was basically entertaining if a bit tedious in parts.  Though I'm not sure if there were reshoots or what, but the ending seemed oddly abrupt. **1/2

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

PRECIOUS: BASED ON THE NOVEL PUSH BY SAPPHIRE (2009) - Mar. 3, 2010
Meh.  About the struggles of a poor young girl from an abusive family, this was a really well acted and decently made film.  Lee Daniels' direction was fine, though I'm not crazy about the washed-out visual style he employs here, and some of his stylistic flourishes were a bit iffy.  I dunno, it was decent enough I guess, though there wasn't anything terribly memorable about it.  **1/2

Where the Wild Things Are

WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE (2009) - Mar. 2, 2010
A kind of bizarre film about a kid who finds himself in a strange land (where it's apparently always either dawn or dusk) inhabited by talking monsters.  I have to hand it to Spike Jonze and cinematographer Lance Acord -- this is a visually stunning film.  I have to assume that this is much (if not all) of the reason why this was critically acclaimed, as it otherwise really doesn't add up to much.  It's kind of uneventful, like a low-key indie movie that happens to have monsters in it.  It doesn't help that none of the characters are particularly well developed or likable -- this movie is co-written by Dave Eggers, who (not coincidentally, I'm sure) also co-wrote Away We Go, the recent king of low-key, plotless movies with unlikable characters.  It kind of blows my mind that a big studio greenlit this as a children's film -- not that I'm against studios taking chances, but they rarely do, and this is about as far from a traditional children's movie as you can get.  **

In The Loop

IN THE LOOP (2009) - Feb. 28, 2010
A really fast-paced, sometimes hilariously profane comedy about a few mid-level politicians in the leadup to a war (with a country that is never named).  The direction is pretty bland, but the film is really all about the crackling, rapid-fire dialogue, which is often quite funny (and kind of like a funnier, more profane version of something Aaron Sorkin might do).  ***

The Crazies

THE CRAZIES (2010) - Feb. 27, 2010
A surprisingly well made film about a strange outbreak in a small town that turns people insane.  Well directed by Breck Eisner (and certainly a pretty huge step up from his debut film, Sahara) the movie wastes no time getting things into gear, and does a great job of ratcheting up the tension when it needs to and keeping up a really fast pace.  There were some pretty riveting sequences here, and all in all it was definitely an above average horror outing.  Also, Timothy Olyphant gives yet another really charismatic, compelling lead performance -- I don't get why the man isn't a bigger star (aside from his surprisingly ineffective role in Live Free or Die Hard, which I'm sure wasn't his fault).  ***1/2

Ponyo

PONYO (2008) - Feb. 26, 2010
Yet another really enjoyable, visually dazzling film from Hayao Miyazaki.  The visual style here is a bit simpler and more colourful than Miyazaki's usual fare, but it absolutely works.  ***

The Last Action Hero

THE LAST ACTION HERO (1993) - Feb. 25, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Though not exactly the underrated gem I rememebered it being, this was a decent enough film about a boy who winds up getting sucked into the world of his favourite action hero.  Though the film is a sometimes amusing send-up of Hollywood action movies, it's also an action film itself, and that's one of the main problems -- the action just isn't all that good, and it is quite plentiful.  It's over-the-top and, for the most part, not particularly exciting.  The film is also *way* overlong at over two hours, and definitely feels it.  Arnie is quite good though, not surprisingly.  **1/2

The Lovely Bones

THE LOVELY BONES (2009) - Feb. 24, 2010
A disappointing and pretty mediocre film from Peter Jackson about a young girl who is murdered, and who then observes her family from the afterlife.  The film is well made, and I was enjoying it for the first twenty minutes or so, but after a while I just found myself losing interest, and by the end I was quite bored.  The movie felt really disjointed, like a random collection of scenes -- the afterlife stuff and the family drama never quite gelled, and the movie really lacked any kind of narrative momentum.  It didn't help that the film spent an absurd amount of time with the girl just wandering around in the afterlife, and that the nature of how she was actually observing her family was never really made clear -- the movie would cut between something happening with her family and her standing in a field or something, and the implication would be that she was somehow watching her family, but how?  Was there a big TV screen in the sky?  That's a definitely a nit-pick, though.  There were some individual scenes that I liked (such as the tense scene in which the girl's sister sneeks into the killer's house), and the film was certainly well made and well acted, but overall it just didn't work.  **

Aliens

ALIENS (1986) - Feb. 23, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Thanks to his almost absurd success with Avatar, James Cameron is currently the man of the moment (and will likely be taking home another Oscar come Sunday). Say what you will about Cameron, but he has a pretty much flawless track record (the only film of his I haven’t seen is the Abyss, but I’ll just assume that it’s good). I don’t think there are any directors right now who can direct action quite as well as James Cameron, and Aliens is probably his best film.  The thing about Aliens is that it may just be the perfect sequel — it takes everything that was great about the first film and cranks it up to eleven. It also manages to be different enough so as not to be seen as a mere rehash, trading in the more slow-paced eerie suspense of the original in favour of a surfeit of riveting and exciting action sequences. The other nice thing about Aliens is that, like the original, it’s not in any rush to get to the action, and gives us time to really get to know the cast of characters, which makes the action-heavy second half all the more effective. I watched the director’s cut of this film, which is just over two and a half hours long, and the film was completely entertaining from start to finish; it absolutely never feels like it’s overstaying its welcome.  And then there’s the action, which is amazingly intense, and probably the best work that Cameron has done. A couple of highlights include the scene in which a couple of characters find themselves locked in a room with a facehugger, and the final confrontation between Ripley and the alien queen (including the incredibly bad-ass moment in which Ripley emerges in the robot suit and utters the now-classic line “get away from her, you bitch!”). Good stuff.  If I were to compose a list of my favourite action films, Aliens would definitely be right near the top (if not on top). It’s that good.  ****

Hatchet

HATCHET (2006) - Feb. 22, 2010
Boy, what a let-down!  Jeez.  The first film from Adam Green, the director of the far, far, far, far (far far far far) superior Frozen, this was a surprisingly mediocre film about a tour group who wind up getting stalked by a hulking maniac in the swamps of New Orleans.  Visually bland almost to the extreme, I don't think there was a single aspect of this film that didn't feel ultra-low rent (other than the over-the-top gore effects, which is clearly where most of the budget went).  This was a horror "comedy," though the jokes were uniformly lame.  There was no tension or suspense whatsoever (not that they even seemed to be going for that).  Oh man.  The visuals were just so bland, I can't believe it.  Especially after Frozen.  It was like TV movie visuals.  I was so sure it was shot digitally, just because of how flat and low-rent the cinematography was -- I was stunned to see in the credits that it was actually shot on 35mm film.  It just goes to show you that shooting on film isn't some sort of magic solution to make your movie look good, you still need some talent behind the camera (which Green seemed to have in spades based on Frozen, but which is now seriously in doubt).  I have no idea how this has become a cult hit.  I can only assume the over-the-top (and admittedly impressive) gore had a lot to do with it, because this is otherwise an exceptionally mediocre film.  *1/2

Bolt

BOLT (2008) - Feb. 21, 2010
An enjoyable cartoon about a dog who thinks that the TV show he stars in is real, and who must travel across the country when he is accidently shipped from LA to New York.  Like pretty much every other non-Pixar computer-animated film from the studios, this is quite enjoyable but not much more.  ***

Avatar

AVATAR (2009) - Feb. 21, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Yep, I don't like 3D.  This is supposedly the pinnacle of 3D technology, and while this is probably the best implementation that I've seen for 3D thus far, that's really not saying much.  The technology still feels inherently gimmicky to me, and just serves to constantly remind you that you're watching a film, making any real immersion in the story much more difficult.  Plus, I don't think the technology is quite there yet, particularly for the live action stuff -- the 3D technology tends to make everything seem more flat, which is pretty much the opposite of what its supposed to do.  That said, in any format this film is still a masterful piece of popcorn entertainment  ****

Alien

ALIEN (1979) - Feb. 20, 2010
I have mixed feelings on Ridley Scott — on one hand, he made films like this and Blade Runner, which is easily one of my favourite films of all time. On the other hand, the quality of his output has been erratic of late, putting it kindly. But no matter how many mediocre films the man makes, there will always be a place for him among the greats if only for making a film as assured and downright perfect as this one.  I’ve seen this movie a couple of times before, and I remembered it being really good, but wow — this is an absolute classic, and definitely one of the most effective films of its type. For one thing, Ridley Scott’s direction is absolutely perfect (it’s hard to believe that this is directed by the same man who recently made the mediocre and dull American Gangster). I love the pacing of this movie — yes, it’s slow by contemporary standards; the alien doesn’t pop out of John Hurt’s chest until about the 56 minute mark, and we don’t actually see the full-grown alien until well after an hour has passed. But the slower pace helps to establish the kind of tension and dread that otherwise wouldn’t have been possible, and ensures that the audience is familiar with the characters and the layout of the ship. This is a remarkably tense, suspenseful film.  Scott also makes the wise choice to never really give us a good look at the alien, which just makes it creepier (despite the fact that after several sequels, spin-offs, comic books and video games, modern audiences obviously have a pretty good idea of what the alien looks like). I also really like the design of this movie — from the ship where most of the action takes place, to the ruined alien ship, to the alien itself, this is a really visually compelling film. Derek Vanlint’s dark cinematography is also quite stunning (and oddly, at least according to the imdb, the man only has a handful of credits to his name).  Hmmm, what next on the laundry list of superlatives? The performances are really good. Sigourney Weaver is obviously pretty much perfect as a more vulnerable Ripley (at least compared to the grizzled alien ass-kicker she became in the sequels). The other performances are just as good. Also, the special effects have aged remarkably well.  This is one of those rare movies that accomplishes nearly everything it sets out to do with perfection. It’s a classic, no doubt about it.  ****

Shutter Island

SHUTTER ISLAND (2010) - Feb. 19, 2010
About a couple of cops who go to a sinister island-bound asylum to investigate the mystery of a missing girl, this was a really entertaining thriller.  Stylishly directed by Martin Scorsese, this slowed down a bit in a couple of spots, but was otherwise a really engaging, well made thriller.  ***1/2

Valentine's Day

VALENTINE'S DAY (2010) - Feb. 19, 2010
Oh, the humanity.  About a bunch of characters in L.A. on Valentine's Day, this was a surprisingly awful film.  It started out decently enough -- it was pretty much just a compendium of hoary romcom cliches from minute one, but it was basically entertaining for a while (the novelty of seeing a familiar face in pretty much every role helped).  But after a while the hackiness of it got more and more grating, and the familiarity of the whole thing meant that there wasn't a single surprise, or even a single moment that I hadn't seen many, many times before.  It was boring, and by the end of the film I was very ready for it to be over.  Just imagine every bad romantic comedy that you've ever seen crammed into one intolerable film, and you have this movie in a nutshell.  *

Body Parts

BODY PARTS (1991) - Feb. 18, 2010
A silly but mostly enjoyable thriller about a man who has an arm transplant after a car crash, only to find that his new arm came from a vicious killer and that the killer's thoughts seem to be seeping into his brain.  The film is a bit more slow-paced than it needs to be, and contains a third act that is quite ridiculous, even given the already absurd premise of the film -- but for what it is the film pretty much works.  **1/2

The Wolfman

THE WOLFMAN (2010) - Feb. 14, 2010
A surprisingly dull movie about an actor in 19th century England who returns home when his brother disappears under mysterious circumstances, only to find his brother dead and a strange creature on the loose.  Did I mention how dull it is?  I'm normally a pretty big fan of Benicio Del Toro, but his performance here was lifeless and just not interesting at all (which is generally the last thing you'd say about a Benicio performance).  The movie itself is way, way too slow-paced to be the fun escapism a monster movie like this should be, and way too bland and generic to suceed as any kind of character study or serious drama, so it's pretty much a complete fiasco.  There is, however, one really good sequence that finds Del Toro's character transforming into the wolfman in front of a group of horrified onlookers, and then rampaging through the streets of London.  This was easily the best part -- if the film had been peppered with more sequences like this, it would have been much more tolerable.  Oh, I should also mention the ending, which was bizarre and unintentionally comical.  *1/2

All That Heaven Allows

ALL THAT HEAVEN ALLOWS (1955) - Feb. 12, 2010
I enjoyed this movie. This was my first Douglas Sirk film, and of course, Sirk is well known his stylized, vibrant colour palette — even knowing that, I was still unprepared for just how lush the visuals were. The film is almost absurdly colourful. It’s quite striking, and it’s easy enough to see why Sirk has been so influential over the years. Most notably, Sirk’s influence on Pedro Almodovar seems fairly apparent, both in his vibrant use of colour and the emphasis on larger-than-life melodrama.  Yes, this film is quite melodramatic — another Sirk hallmark. Melodrama can be painful to watch when done wrong, but Sirk obviously knew what he was doing. The characters and plot developments are far from subtle, but it all really works. I liked it; list, you’ve done it again! Actually, the list has been pretty good to me so far — out of the 13 films that I’ve watched, there have only been two overt duds. If the good to bad movie ratio can stay at about that level, I’ll be very happy indeed.  ***

Airplane!

AIRPLANE! (1980) - Feb. 8, 2010
I’ve been a fan of this movie for a while, though it’s been a few years since I’ve seen it — I was a bit afraid that it wouldn’t be as good (and as funny) as I had remembered it being. This is, after all, a movie that is regularly called one of the funniest films of all time. It’s easy to go into a movie like this, one that you remember loving but haven’t seen in a while, with overly-heightened expectations.  So, was it as funny as I remembered? Nope. Funnier. This is indeed a classic in the genre, and features a frantic, joke-a-minute pace that is often imitated but never duplicated. For the first ten minutes or so you’re basically wondering how long they can keep up the constant stream of legitimately funny gags, but it never lets up. The film has an oddball, anything-for-a-laugh mentality that could be disastrous if done wrong, but it absolutely works. In that way I’m almost not sure what to think of this movie — it is undoubtedly pretty great, and yet it has spawned so many like-minded, yet woefully inept imitators. Pretty much every crappy “______ Movie” spoof film probably wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for this movie (well, this and some of Mel Brooks’ films from the ’70s). But it’s hard to fault a film for being so good that it essentially spawns its own comedy sub-genre, even if that sub-genre is almost uniformly terrible.  I don’t have much else to say about this film, other than that it’s hilarious and you should watch it. And if you haven’t seen it in a while, watch it again.  ***1/2

From Paris With Love

FROM PARIS WITH LOVE (2010) - Feb. 6, 2010
Though definitely the weakest of Pierre Morel's films, this was still a basically enjoyable action film about an uptight rookie secret agent teamed up with a loose-cannon veteran.  The main problem here was that neither of the two main characters were particularly compelling, which made it hard to care too much about them.  However the action was plentiful and decent enough, though it was a bit too heavy on the old quick-cut/shaky-cam.  The whole thing was a bit of a let-down considering the general awesomeness of Morel's last two films.  **1/2

L'Avventura

L'AVVENTURA (1960) - Feb. 6, 2010 (Second Viewing)
I think it probably goes without saying at this point that L’Avventura does not make Speed  look like a slow ride to grandma’s house. I’d probably even go so far as to describe it as boring, though I think that word is a bit too derogatory since I would ultimately recommend this film — to certain people at least. If you consider yourself to be serious about cinema at all, then you need to see this film. But if you’re the type of person who goes to the movies once or twice a year and occasionally heads to Blockbuster to rent a movie or two — yeah, you can easily go the rest of your life without watching this movie. It’s absolutely beautifully made with stunning black and white cinematography, and it is kind of compelling in its own strange way, but it isn’t entertaining in the traditional sense at all. Not even a little bit.  It’s kind of odd, because my general philosophy on cinema is that, no matter what a director is trying to say or how noble his intentions are, a film’s first purpose should be to entertain — it doesn’t matter how insightful, artfully-crafted, etc. a movie is, if it isn’t entertaining then it is almost invariably a failure. And there is no doubt that Antonioni wasn’t concerned at all with making his films enjoyable in a traditional sense. And yet I do consider myself a fan of his, and would recommend his films (though, as I mentioned before, not to everyone). It’s odd. I think watching an Antonioni film is kind of like being forced to eat vegetables as a kid — you’re not necessarily going to enjoy it, but you will be enriched by it.  ***

Frozen

FROZEN (2010) - Feb. 5, 2010
About three twenty-somethings on a skiing trip who wind up stranded on a chair lift, and who quickly realize that they're in some pretty serious trouble, this was a really well made, effective and quite suspenseful film.  It's been compared a lot to Open Water, and that's definitely apt but I liked this film even better.  It did a really good job of setting up the characters, putting them in the situation and then not over-staying its welcome.  It also does a really good job of sustaining a fairly high level of tension for pretty much the entire time.  Good stuff.  ****

The Blind Side

THE BLIND SIDE (2009) - Feb. 2, 2010
About a wealthy woman who welcomes a homeless, dim-witted but good-natured teen (who turns out to be an amazing football player) into her home, this was a well made, well acted and generally well put-together film that just wasn't all that compelling.  I was basically entertained for the first hour or so, but after a while it became clear that the movie wasn't particularly going anywhere, and was moving far slower than it really should have.  **

Edge of Darkness

EDGE OF DARKNESS (2010) - Jan. 30, 2010
Mel Gibson's first acting role in ages, this movie finds him as a father who must investigate his own daughter's murder.  The movie wasn't quite the relentlessly-paced revenge thriller that the trailer makes it out to be, but there was still something awfully compelling about Gibson's dogged investigation.  Martin Campbell's direction was good -- definitely better than his last film, the disappointing and overlong Casino Royale. ***

Suddenly

SUDDENLY (1954) - Jan. 29, 2010
An entertaining and well directed film about a group of criminals who plan on killing the president when he comes through town, and who hold a family hostage in their home.  Frank Sinatra was quite good as the determined leader of the gang, as was Sterling Hayden as the town's sheriff who finds himself in the house as it all goes down.  ***

An Affair to Remember

AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER (1957) - Jan. 27, 2010
If you were to make a list of, say, the top ten Hollywood movie stars of all time, Cary Grant would have to be on top, or very close to it. He just epitomizes the classic Hollywood movie star in so many ways, and along with people like Clark Gable and James Stewart, is one of the benchmarks by which most stars are measured. And with good reason, too — though he essentially played a variation on his established persona in pretty much every movie he made, he was so darn good at it, and so charming, that it really didn’t matter.  So it goes without saying that Grant was quite good in this film; his co-star, Deborah Kerr, was just as good, and the two have palpable on-screen chemistry (which is probably one of the reasons why this movie has endured so strongly over the years).  I definitely liked this movie, though there are a couple of things that irked me about it — the main thing being the absurd amount of time that the couple spends apart (essentially the entire second half of the almost two hour film). Now, I think we’re all aware of the unwritten rule of romantic movies — there will always be a part towards the end of the film in which the couple breaks up, usually due to an unfortunate misunderstanding. We as the audience know that the couple will get back together, but we put up with this because there is something inherently satisfying about seeing two people who love each other overcome the odds and find happiness, and because pretty much every movie (and broadly speaking, every story) must contain some sort of conflict for the characters to overcome. However, there is a reason why this section of the film generally lasts about five or ten minutes — since we know for a fact that the couple is going to get back together, there’s not so much interest in seeing the couple apart; the real interest is in seeing them reunite. So, almost one hour of this? A bit much.  The other thing that bothers me about the latter half of the movie is the flimsy (and downright illogical) reasoning that’s keeping the couple broken up. In the film, Kerr’s character is struck by a car on the way to their six month reunion, rendering her unable to walk. She elects to keep this a secret from Grant because she doesn’t want his pity, and because she doesn’t want him to have to take care of her. In the meantime, Grant simply thinks that she didn’t care enough to show up, and is, of course, heartbroken. I find the fact that anyone would be insensitive enough to make that particular decision (or stupid enough to not realize how insensitive it is) a bit tough to swallow, putting it mildly.  Despite all that, I still enjoyed this film — thanks mostly to Grant and Kerr. The first half was definitely better than the second, but I was never bored, and… well, the ending kind of got to me (uh, I mean, I bit into a pepper).  ***

Legion

LEGION (2010) - Jan. 23, 2010
About an angel who goes rogue after God decides to wipe out humanity, in order to protect a pregnant woman who is carrying mankind's future savior.  This film was decently made, and started out well enough, though I lost interest as it went along.  It didn't help that the tone was kind of all over the place -- the movie is at its best when it doesn't take itself too seriously and embraces its fun, B-movieness (such as a scene featuring a demonic grandma).  **

Akira

AKIRA (1988) - Jan. 22, 2010 (Second Viewing)
 I’m a sucker for films that present a dark, dystopian take on a future society (stuff like Blade Runner and Brazil) and this is one of the best. The film’s vision of Neo-Tokyo in 2019 is always visually stunning. And in fact, this whole movie is a definite visual treat — from the haunting opening moments of Tokyo being decimated in a nuclear blast, to the bizarre, somewhat baffling but still-awesome conclusion, this is a movie that always looks really good. The animation is top notch (plus, it’s kind of refreshing to watch old-school traditional animation with very little computer assistance) as is the visual design of the film.  Of course, there’s the narrative, which is condensed from the 2000+ page comic (which I have not read). It starts out simply enough, with the shenanigans between two rival motorcycle gangs, though as it goes on it becomes somewhat more complex, leading up to a conclusion that probably raises as many questions as it answers. I wouldn’t say that’s a bad thing, though. Did I understand everything about that ending? No. Did I enjoy it? Definitely. As I said in my post for 2001, I think there’s something to be said for an ending that leaves some things ambiguous and invites debate.  ***1/2

All That Jazz

ALL THAT JAZZ (1979) - Jan. 19, 2009
I really did not care for this film. Though it started out decently enough, its meandering plotlessness and its emphasis on long dance numbers that ranged from watchable to downright interminable eventually completely wore me down. By the time Roy Scheider’s character had a heart attack and wound up in the hospital, I was pretty much ready to pack it in, and at that point the film was just barely over the half-way mark. Up to this point the film had featured a smattering of fantasy sequences in which Scheider’s character talks to a woman who is supposed to represent… I dunno, his mother? Or maybe she’s supposed to represent a little bit of all of the women in his life, since his relationship with women is rocky at best. It’s never made entirely clear. And yes, in case you couldn’t tell by now, Bob Fosse clearly took a good deal of inspiration from 8 1/2, which is by far the superior film. Clearly, Bob Fosse — as legendary as he might have been as a choreographer — is no Fellini.  But I was talking about the fantasy sequences, which essentially take over the film once Scheider ends up in the hospital. At this point the film completely lost me, and I was actively bored and just waiting for the thing to end. It was just dance sequence after dance sequence, and the whole thing started feeling a lot like a pretentious excuse to stage elaborate (and yet oddly dull) dance numbers. Boy, I did not like this film. List: you have failed me. But you’ve been pretty good to me so far, so I guess we’re even.  Oh, but I should mention that Roy Scheider was really, really good — far better than the movie deserved, in fact.  *1/2

(500) Days of Summer

(500) DAYS OF SUMMER (2009) - Jan. 17, 2009
A delightful and really well made romantic comedy that actually manages to feel fairly fresh, a tough task given how well-worn the romcom genre is.  The movie is funny, original and highly entertaining throughout.  The superb performances are also a big reason why the film works as well as it does -- Joseph Gordon-Levitt is just as good as usual, and Zooey Deschanel easily keeps up with him.  Plus, Marc Webb's direction and Eric Steelberg's cinematography were definitely top-notch -- this is a surprisingly good-looking film.  ***1/2

The Book of Eli

THE BOOK OF ELI (2010) - Jan. 16, 2009
A really well made film about a lone wanderer in a post-apocalyptic wasteland who is on a mission to bring his bible (the last remaining copy) west until he finds a suitable home for it.  Stylishly directed by the Hughes brothers, this featured a vision of a post-apocalyptic wasteland that was undeniably familiar but still quite striking (I also thought that the score was a really good accompaniment to the visuals).  Denzel Washington was expectedly good, as were the other performances -- in fact the whole movie has more gravitas than you'd expect from what is ostensibly an action film.  ***1/2

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert

THE ADVENTURES OF PRISCILLA, QUEEN OF THE DESERT (1994) - Jan. 15, 2010
So here we are, The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert... did the list steer me wrong? Not really. Though I’m not going to be adding this to my list of favourites anytime soon, I’m definitely glad that I watched it. Weaving, Stamp and Pearce were all really good (not surprisingly), and the film was quite enjoyable throughout, if a bit slow and meandering in parts (though definitely never boring). It pretty much plays out the way you think it will (they have fun, they bond, they occasionally encounter adversity from small-minded bigots, which they overcome) but it was well made and very entertaining. I’m definitely a fan of road movies, and this is more proof that, with very few exceptions, it’s pretty hard to go wrong with that genre.  ***

Stir of Echoes

STIR OF ECHOES (1999) - Jan. 14, 2010
A really well made thriller about a man who, after being hypnotized, starts seeing some strange things, all of which seem to revolve around a missing girl.  David Koepp's direction was really effective, and the whole thing was quite fast-paced and tense in parts.  Kevin Bacon really should act more.  ***1/2

Ultraviolet

ULTRAVIOLET (2005) - Jan. 12, 2010
About resistance fighter in a future society where some kind of disease turns people into vampires, this was a pretty mediocre film.  The movie featured a clunky, disjointed narrative which, for the director's sake, I hope can be attributed to the fact that the studio cut half an hour out of the film.  Because of this it was hard to ever particularly get into the movie or care about the protagonist too much.  The odd, hyper-stylized and seemingly intentionally artificial visual style didn't really help matters -- it made the whole thing seem like a cutscene for a videogame (the style actually reminded me a bit of Mirror's Edge -- only that had to be rendered in an Xbox; you'd expect a bit more from a big-budget film).  The action scenes were all super over-the-top but pretty entertaining, but that's really all the film had going for it.  *1/2

2001: A Space Odyssey

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) - Jan. 11, 2010 (Third or Fourth Viewing +2)
I love this movie. Absolutely, positively love it. Stanley Kubrick is without a doubt my favourite director of all time, and this is probably my favourite film of his — they’re all stunningly good, particularly the batch of films beginning with this one and ending with Eyes Wide Shut. It was really starting with 2001 that Kubrick became the obsessive perfectionist that we know and love; as great as Kubrick’s earlier films are (such as The Killing and Paths of Glory), there’s a refinement to his later films, a sense that every single shot has been meticulously framed and perfectly selected that I don’t think any other director ever has (or will) match.  There’s so much I love about this film, not the least of which is how beautiful it is to look at. Kubrick was a master of framing and shot composition (among other things), and he is definitely at his best here. Every shot is perfect; from the breathtaking vistas of outer space to the austere whiteness of the spaceship bound to Jupiter, to the claustrophobic interior of of the pods (“Open the pod bay door, Hal”). The special effects have aged remarkably well, with a few small exceptions that aren’t even worth mentioning — in fact, I’d argue that the special effects in this movie look better than the CGI-heavy films of the late ’90s and early aughts (with the Star Wars prequel trilogy being the worst offender in this category). I think it’s a real shame that this type of model-work has been almost entirely replaced by computer-generated imagery (and if you’re skeptical that there is still a place for traditional models, see Duncan Jones’ stunning Moon), but I’ll save that argument for another day.  Another area in which Kubrick is unparalleled is in his ability to match music with visuals, and again, he is at his finest here. His use of classical music during the outer space scenes is pretty much legendary at this point, and the eerie and unsettling music of Gyorgy Ligeti is used to absolute perfection. The use of silence in some scenes, or near silence (ie. just the sound of someone breathing) is just as striking, and just as perfect. I know I’m coming off like a gushing schoolgirl here, but what can I say, I love this film.  A common complaint about this movie is that it’s not exactly fast-paced. This is true, however the pace suits the film absolutely perfectly, and it is never, ever boring in the slightest. Not every film needs to move at the same pace, and in fact a faster pace would be doing this movie a disservice; the film’s pace sets a tone that is amazingly hypnotic and that really draws you in. Some of the later sequences, when Hal starts malfunctioning, are amazingly tense.  Another complaint is that the film doesn’t make much sense, particularly towards the end. This I take issue with — yes, the film is out there and a bit ambiguous in parts, but I like that about it. I like that it’s open to interpretation, and that it doesn’t spell everything out for you. I recently read the novel, which I think does clarify things a bit, but even without that I was perfectly happy with the way the film unfolded, and completely unperturbed at not having the answer to every single question that the movie poses.  ****

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

THE IMAGINARIUM OF DOCTOR PARNASSUS (2009) - January 10, 2010
A slightly disappointing but still entertaining and visually stunning film by Terry Gilliam about a traveling group of performers led by the immortal Doctor Parnasus.  Terry Gilliam's visuals were quite spectacular, though the movie itself wasn't really as compelling as some of Gilliam's classics (the closest comparison would probably be the Fisher King, which was definitely the superior film).  ***

Sherlock Holmes

SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009) - January 8, 2010
A generally well made but somewhat disappointing film about Sherlock Holmes, who must solve the case of a sinister criminal with seemingly supernatural powers.  The main problem with this film is that the case itself just isn't all that interesting.  Guy Ritchie's direction is good, if not exactly his best work (and the grimy, somewhat monotonous visuals did get a bit tiresome after a while).  Robert Downey Jr. is quite good in a more rough-and-tumble but still accurate depiction of Holmes, and Jude Law is equally good as his sidekick Watson.  The film actually gets pretty much everything right, it just isn't all that compelling.  Oh well, the foundation is there, so hopefully the sequel will be better.  **1/2

39 Steps

39 STEPS (1935) - January 7, 2010 (Second Viewing)
This is not my first time watching the 39 Steps, but I was definitely happy to revisit it — Hitchcock is one of the all-time greats, and even relatively early in his career he was already hitting them out of the park. Of course, the “innocent man on the run” theme was a favourite of Hitchcock’s, and many of the elements in this film are ones that he spent the rest of his career honing to perfection.  This film really just reminded me why I like Hitchcock so much — when it comes to thrillers like this, he’s clearly in a league of his own. There are so many great sequences in this film, including a really tense sequence towards the beginning of the film set on a train (which begins with the famous moment in which a woman’s scream is replaced by a train’s whistle). The performances are also quite good, particularly Robert Donat as the man on the run.  ***1/2

12 Angry Men

12 ANGRY MEN (1957) - January 6, 2010
And boy, what a film. Superbly directed by Sidney Lumet (yes, the same Sidney Lumet who just a couple of years ago directed the acclaimed Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead. The man is prolific), this is pretty universally regarded as a classic, and justifiably so. Aside from a couple of brief moments at the beginning and end of the film, we never actually leave the jury room. And yet the film never seems stagey, thanks entirely to Lumet’s assured and breathtakingly cinematic direction. Under a lesser director, the movie may have seemed like a filmed stage play, but Lumet always seems to know exactly where to put the camera in order to accentuate the tension and get the most out of all the great performances.  Those performances... as great as Lumet’s direction is (and it is great), this is definitely a film whose success depends heavily on its actors. All twelve men are equally good, with each creating a distinct and memorable character — an impressive feat, considering there are twelve men and this is only a 96 minute movie. And of course, mention must be made of Reginald Rose’s screenplay. This is just one of those rare cases of every element of a film coming together perfectly, creating a final product guaranteed to become a classic.  So yes, in case you couldn’t tell, I liked this film. Certainly, it deserves its placement on any list of essential films.  Good stuff. ****

An Actor's Revenge

AN ACTOR'S REVENGE (1963) - January 5, 2010
I’ll admit that I had never even heard of this movie prior to flipping through the list, nor had I heard of its director, who was apparently quite prolific in Japan. 1001 Movies  calls this “one of the most outrageously entertaining Japanese films ever produced,” which I can’t really say I agree with. On a technical level I admired it quite a lot — the direction, cinematography and score were all quite striking and certainly memorable. The whole look of the film is extremely stylized, and so on a visual level alone it remained entertaining for a while. However the narrative was exceptionally muddled, and there were parts where I had a hard time figuring out what was going on (though it probably didn’t help that as the film went on my attention was really starting to wane).  What else to say about this film? It’s a movie about revenge, which makes you think it’s going to be much more compelling than it is — however, Ichikawa piles on superfluous side-characters and odd asides which really add very little to the film itself. The review in the book states that “the conventions of kabuki theater are affectionately parodied,” so… maybe I needed to know more about kabuki theater to really appreciate this film? I always knew that my lack of kabuki knowledge would come back to haunt me one day.  All in all I’m not sure if I agree that this is one of the essential films of all time, but the visuals were so impressive I’m almost ready to give it a pass just for that.  *1/2

All About My Mother

ALL ABOUT MY MOTHER (1999) - January 4, 2010
Almodóvar is fairly well known for telling stories with very strong female characters, and that is certainly the case here.  The film is pretty much all women, with only a few men on the absolute periphery, and a couple of transvestites thrown in for good measure.  Though there is one main character (a woman who loses her son and who travels to Barcelona to try to find his father), the movie is more of an ensemble, with some really strong performances all around. The film is pretty much plotless, but when the characters and performances are this strong, the importance of having a well-defined plot is significantly reduced.  One of the things that has really stood out for me in all of the Almodóvar films I’ve seen so far is his beautiful use of the widescreen frame. I also like Almodóvar’s bold use of colour. You have to admire a director who can consistently craft visually interesting shots; there’s something about a really well composed 2.35 frame that’s just irresistible, at least to a nerd such as myself. A director with a clear visual sense who also has a strong command of characters and storytelling is definitely something to be treasured. Almodóvar, at least based on the three films of his that I’ve seen, seems to be one of those directors.  ***1/2

A Perfect Getaway

A PERFECT GETAWAY (2009) - January 3, 2010
A really well-crafted thriller about a young couple in Hawaii who start to suspect that the couple they're spending time with may be killers.  The film features primo direction from the reliable David Twohy, and is really entertaining throughout despite the fact that the thrills are mostly psychological -- there isn't really any action until the third act, but it definitely works.  Plus, the twist ending was kind of ingenious.  ***1/2

Avatar

AVATAR (2009) - January 2, 2010
James Cameron!  Though it's been about twelve years since his last movie, James Cameron proves that he's still got it, and his streak of awesomeness remains unbroken (well, I haven't seen the Abyss, but I'm just going to assume that it's good).  About a soldier who finds himself living among a group of tree-dwelling aliens on a strange planet, the first thing you really have to say about this movie is that it's visually dazzling.  The alien planet is rendered in awe-inspiring detail, and the Na'vi themselves are always convincing; they're not quite photorealistic -- at least not all the time -- but they're not distractingly weird a la Robert Zemeckis' mo-cap fiascos.  In fact, James Cameron proves here that mo-cap can be a worthwhile technology when used appropriately, unlike Zemeckis' creepy zombie-filled boondoggles.  Cameron is at the top of his game here, at least as a director -- aside from how good everything looks, the action is all impeccably directed, with Cameron reminding us why he's regarded as one of the masters of the genre.  The action-heavy third act is one of the most exhilerating things I've seen in a while, and unlike something like this year's Transformers movie, the film actually earns its copious action, and it never feels overwhelming or too action-heavy -- it seems completely organic to the story.  As for the story and the characters, there's absolutely nothing here that we haven't seen many times before, but it's excecuted with such craft and aplomb that the familiarity of the story never feels like a significant detriment.  James Cameron!  ****

The Informant!

THE INFORMANT! (2009) - January 1, 2010
After the disappointing and relentlessly dull Girlfriend Experience, there was really nowhere to go but up for Steven Soderbergh, and this was certainly a step up.  About a executive who turns informant for the FBI, this featured expectedly primo direction and cinematography from Steven Soderbergh.  I'm normally not a particularly big fan of the somewhat overexposed visual style Soderbergh employs here, however he somehow makes it work.  I also quite liked Marvin Hamlisch's quirky score, which I think did a good job of underscoring how out of touch with reality Matt Damon's character tended to be.  The whole movie is sort of quirky and odd, which I liked -- it took a story which otherwise would have made for a generic corporate thriller, and turned it into something unique.  ***1/2

A Christmas Carol

A CHRISTMAS CAROL (2009) - Dec. 18, 2009
Another disappointing and visually unappealing mo-cap fiasco from the once-talented Robert Zemeckis.  I think I've already made my issues with Zemeckis' ill-advised ultra-real mo-cap style fairly clear, so I won't repeat them.  As for the movie itself, its main problem is that Scrooge just isn't a particularly interesting character, and since we're all abundantly familiar with his jerk to nice-guy character arc, the movie tends to feel a bit dull and pointless.  It doesn't help that there isn't really any conflict in the story -- there isn't much at stake for Scrooge to become a nice guy, other than Tiny Tim's life, I guess.  I don't know, the whole thing was basically entertaining I guess, but kind of dull.  **

The Princess and the Frog

THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG (2009) - Dec. 16, 2009
A mostly enjoyable though kind of disappointing cartoon from Disney -- Disney's first traditionally animated film since Home on the Range, which is why it's disappointing that it's not better than it is.  The film has definitely proved that there is still a place for traditional animation (or at least there should be), as it looked really really good.  The story, involving a girl who is transformed into a frog thanks to a voodoo curse, was fine, if not anything really groundbreaking -- I can appreciate that Disney is trying to play it safe since this is their first 2D outing in a while, with traditional animation  lamentably being an oddity these days.  The problem is that the film really starts to lag a bit in its midsection -- with the two main characters as frogs, surrounded by overly-quirky characters in a visually unappealing swamp (at least compared to the film's vibrant rendering of 1920s New Orleans).  However it starts and ends quite well, and I was definitely never bored.  If nothing else, the film is worth it just for its dazzling animation.  **1/2

Five Minutes of Heaven

FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN (2009) - Dec. 15, 2009
A really well made and extremely well acted film about a former UVF member who agrees to meet the brother of a man he killed several years earlier.  The film is really well directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel, and features some surprisingly tense moments.  However, it is the performances that really stand out, particularly Liam Neeson, who proves yet again that he's one of the best actors working right now.  ***1/2

Whatever Works

WHATEVER WORKS (2009) - Dec. 14, 2009
A really enjoyable comedy by Woody Allen about a grumpy old coot (a self-proclaimed genius) who befriends (and later marries) a young, small-town girl.  Easily Allen's funniest film in ages, this actually felt a lot like the films of his heyday, though not quite on that level in terms of quality.  It was definitely right up there with his better films of late, and a definite reminder that the Woodster can still knock 'em out of the park when he feels like it.  The film was at its strongest for the first hour or so, and runs out of steam ever-so-slightly by the end, but it was still quite enjoyable throughout and featured a surprisingly strong lead performance from Larry David.  ***1/2

Armored

ARMORED (2009) - Dec. 12, 2009
An enjoyable thriller about a group of armored truck drivers who decide to rob the truck that they're driving; things don't go according to plan.  This is Nimrod Antal's follow-up to Vacancy, which was superb.  This wasn't quite in the same league, but it was definitely enjoyable and really well directed (other than a short car chase which was a bit too heavy on the old shaky-cam).  ***

Fired Up

FIRED UP (2009) - Nov. 29, 2009
An enjoyable and wacky comedy about a couple of guys who decide to go to cheerleading camp in order to meet girls; wackiness ensues.  The movie unfolds pretty much exactly how you think it will, but it's quite entertaining throughout, and features a number of genuinely funny moments.  ***

Ninja Assassin

NINJA ASSASSIN (2009) - Nov. 28, 2009
A really silly but mostly enjoyable film about a member of an elite group of ninjas who goes rogue.  The action was completely over-the-top (and a bit cgi-heavy) but was mostly enjoyable.  The main characters were all kind of bland, but pretty much got the job done.  **1/2

Mission: Impossible 3

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 3 (2006) - Nov. 26, 2009 (Second Viewing)
While I think I enjoyed this a bit more this time around, it's still definitely not on the level of J.J. Abrams' directorial follow-up, Star Trek.  The action is all very well done, and it's quite entertaining throughout, though I still think it's probably a bit too action-heavy in the second half.  ***

Fantastic Mr. Fox

FANTASTIC MR. FOX (2009) - Nov. 26, 2009
I have to admit that I was a bit skeptical about this going in -- Wes Anderson is such a great director of live action, it seemed to me like he was just wasting his time dabbling in animation (much like what Zemekis has been doing for the last little while).  Fortunately, I couldn't have been more wrong -- this was an utterly charming film, and the shift from live action to animation has done nothing to dull Anderson's ability to create a really compelling group of characters; this is easily right up there with all of Anderson's best films.  The retro animation style is a bit off-putting when only seen in small chunks, however within the context of the film it works beautifully.  But no amount of great visuals would have helped much if the story were weak -- however, this isn't the case at all.  The film is funny, touching and really enjoyable throughout.  ****

2012

2012 (2009) - Nov. 21, 2009
About the events surrounding the end of the world in 2012, mostly revolving around a divorced author struggling to maintain a relationship with his kids, and a scientist who was one of the first to discover what was happening to the Earth.  The film definitely overstays its welcome a bit at over two and a half hours, and the plot/characters are far from fresh, but just for the spectacle of it all it's definitely worth watching.  Roland Emmerich is pretty much a master at destroying things on a huge scale at this point, and his direction in the action scenes is refreshingly devoid of the old quick-cut/shaky-cam.  Plus, the film features some of the best special effects that I've seen in a while, so the destruction is almost always fairly convincing.  ***

The Men Who Stare at Goats

THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS (2009) - Nov. 13, 2009
An enjoyable if somewhat episodic and rambling film about an American reporter in Iraq who gets caught up with a with a man who claims to be a member of elite group of soldiers with paranormal abilities.  The performances were all quite good, and it was well made, but it wasn't quite as engaging as I might have hoped.  ***

The Box

THE BOX (2009) - Nov. 7, 2009
About a couple in '70s-era Boston who receive a mysterious box containing a button, and are told that if they press it, they will receive a million dollars but someone who they don't know will die.  Oddball shenanigans ensue once the couple decide to start investigating who's behind the box.  The film features expectedly primo direction from Richard Kelly, who does a great job of establishing and maintaining an atmosphere of dread.  The problem is that the film just gets more and more bizarre as it goes along, eventually introducing a lot of bizarre sci-fi plot twists which may or may not hold up to scrutiny.  ***

Monsters vs. Aliens

MONSTERS VS. ALIENS (2009) - Nov. 5, 2009
A silly but enjoyable cartoon about a woman who is turned into a giant, and is subsequently locked up with a few other wacky monsters, and eventually called upon to save the Earth from a sinister alien.  It's not exactly Pixar, but then it didn't really seem like it was trying to be anything other than innocuous fun.  And for what it was, it was quite enjoyable.  ***

This Is It

THIS IS IT (2009) - Nov. 1, 2009
A really enjoyable but kind of sad concert film, documenting Michael Jackson's rehearsals for what was to be his final set of concerts, if he hadn't died.  It's sad because it shows that Jackson, despite outward appearances, was ready and completely able to put on a really great show, and was still clearly just as passionate of an entertainer as ever.  It's always apparent that this is just a rehearsal and not a real show, but it's just as apparent that the concert would have been pretty great.  ***1/2