Cyrus

CYRUS (2010) - July 6, 2010
Meh.  About a man who meets the woman of his dreams, only to find himself in conflict with her bizarre adult son, who still lives with her.  My main problem with this film is that the premise, and the over-the-top way these characters tend to act (particularly the Jonah Hill character), seems like it would be more at home in the latest Happy Madison or Adam McKay film.  However, writer/directors Jay and Mark Duplass imbue the film with a realistic, documentary-like tone and style which is entirely at odds with the more outrageous elements of the plot.  It feels very incongruous.  The movie is basically entertaining and very well acted, but it's definitely at its best in the quieter moments.  Also: the Duplass brothers' directorial style, with its jittery camerawork and inexplicably random zooms, is completely unappealing.  **1/2

The Invention of Lying

THE INVENTION OF LYING (2009) - July 4, 2010
An enjoyable enough film about a man who discovers lying in a society where everyone always tells the truth and speaks their minds.  All of the performances were quite good, Ricky Gervais in particular.  The whole thing was kind of middling but mostly entertaining.  **1/2

Futurama: Bender's Game

FUTURAMA: BENDER'S GAME (2008) - July 2, 2010
Another fun but somewhat subpar (compared to the best episodes of the show, at least) Futurama movie.  The weakest stretch was the extended fantasy sequence towards the end; it seems to be a rule that all animated shows must do this at some point, and it rarely works all that well.  Oh well, still an enjoyable film.  ***

Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer

AILEEN WUORNOS: THE SELLING OF A SERIAL KILLER (1992) - July 1, 2010
Well, this is a bit of a puzzlement. The list isn’t exactly doc-heavy (this is the first documentary I’ve watched for this blog thus far), so this seems like kind of an odd choice — it’s interesting enough, I guess, but it’s kind of low-rent and not exactly a shining example of what the medium is capable of. Not that I’m a huge documentary guy; I’ll admit that my interest as a filmgoer lies more with fiction than non-fiction. But even as an unseasoned documentary viewer, it’s pretty clear that this just isn’t all that great.  In fact, I had to consult the book itself to see why this mostly unremarkable doc warranted inclusion on a list of essential films. Apparently, it “[sheds] a piercing light on the underbelly of the American character” and is a “riveting, hop-scotching documentary.” Fair enough on the first count, I suppose, though personally I would disagree that this is anywhere near riveting.  I think the main problem here is that the film is never entirely sure about what it wants to be — is it about Arlene Pralle, a woman who bizarrely adopted Wuornos after she had already been arrested for seven murders? Is it about Wuornos herself? Or is it about director Nick Broomfield’s attempts to get access to Wuornos? The film doesn’t really have a clear focus, which prevents it from being quite as effective as it could have been. Pralle is probably the film’s most interesting figure (well, aside from Wuornos herself, but the film seems to have no interest in exploring her crimes in a meaningful way), but Broomfield sort of meanders around, spending just as much time with Wuornos’ incompetent, guitar-playing lawyer, a thread which doesn’t particularly go anywhere. Ultimately, it’s this lack of any kind of unifying thesis that really prevents this doc from being particularly effective.  **1/2

The Last Airbender

THE LAST AIRBENDER (2010) - July 1, 2010
Why, M. Night?  Why?  Though I didn't think that this was the all-out disaster that a lot of people are proclaiming it to be, certainly, it is Shyamalan's worst film, and the first of his movies that I thought was all-out bad.  The main problem is that none of the characters are particularly compelling; they're all kind of bland and without much personality.  That the film is filled with questionable, somewhat clunky dialogue doesn't help matters.  Nor does the fact that the whole thing has that artificial, overly-CGIed sheen.  I was sort of going with it for the first little bit, but about half-way through it started to really lose me, and by the time the requisite epic battle rolled around, I was pretty bored.  I did kind of like Shyamalan's direction; his penchant for long, meticulously composed takes remains intact here, leading to some fairly interesting visuals.  But the movie overall just doesn't work.  **

Grown Ups

GROWN UPS (2010) - June 30, 2010
Jesus.  Almost absurdly boring, this was almost certainly Adam Sandler's worst film -- he's made sillier films, stupider films, and films that were even more painfully unfunny, but he's never made one that was quite this boring, or quite this dull.  Esentially just a series of vignettes revolving around a group of old friends getting together for the weekend, there was just nothing interesting about these characters or the way they interacted.  They certainly seemed to be having a good time, with a good chunk of the movie consisting of reaction shots of the various characters laughing at their own jokes -- but none of this merriment translates over to the audience.  It just doesn't work.  The characters never become people we particularly care about, so the whole thing winds up feeling like watching a home video with high production values -- it's just people I don't know or care about having a good time.  There came a point, I guess about an hour into the film, where it felt like things should be wrapping up.  But it just kept going, and going, and going (AND GOING) and it was interminable.  *

Knight and Day

KNIGHT AND DAY (2010) - June 26, 2010
Kind of light on plot and character but still good fun, this was an enjoyable film about a woman who finds herself mixed up with a secret agent on the run.  Tom Cruise gives a really charismatic, charming performance (he probably hasn't had a role this lighthearted in well over a decade) and has good chemistry with Cameron Diaz.  James Mangold directs the over-the-top action with a (mostly) sure hand, and while the whole thing doesn't particularly add up to much, it's a fun ride.  ***

Toy Story 3

TOY STORY 3 (2010) - June 22, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Yep.  Pixar!  ****

The Karate Kid (2010)

THE KARATE KID (2010) - June 18, 2010
Not so good.  A beat-for-beat remake of the original Karate Kid which really has no reason to exist -- it's essentially just a duller version of the original film.  The one aspect that should have been improved -- the fighting scenes -- are ruined by Harald Zwart's shoddy direction (he shoots pretty much every fight scene in agonizingly tight close ups, which kind of robs them of any real excitement).  This is a step down from the original in every regard; it just feels perfunctory.  Plus, it's bloated and way overlong at well over two hours.  I was pretty bored.  *1/2

Killers

KILLERS (2010) - June 16, 2010
Oh man.  Further proof that Robert Luketic is a complete hack who shouldn't be allowed within ten feet of a camera.  About a woman who realizes that her husband is actually an assassin, and an audience who realizes that they just wasted their time and money and should have just watched True Lies again instead.  The film starts out mediocre but sort of watchable, but as soon as the action starts kicking in, Luketic's deficiencies as a director become woefully apparent (this is a film that features the action movie trifecta -- car chases, fist-fights, and shootouts -- and somehow manages to make it all so dull and boring).  It doesn't help that Ashton Kutcher and Katherine Heigl have almost no chemistry, and are both pretty bad in their roles -- Kutcher is never convincing as a expertly trained killer, and Heigl is just shrill.  Plus, the two spend much of the latter half of the movie bickering in the most grating way imaginable.  And the notion that pretty much every single person that the couple knows are all actually hired assassins stretches credibility to its very breaking point.  Man, this movie made me angry.  Oh, I should mention that seeing Tom Selleck back on the big screen in his full mustachioed glory was pretty sweet.  I have no other good things to say about this movie.  *

Toy Story 3

TOY STORY 3 (2010) - June 16, 2010
Well, I'm not entire sure if this tops Toy Story 2, but it's pretty darn close.  I'll watch it a couple more times, then I'll decide.  Seriously though, I don't know how Pixar manages to keep making such absurdly good films -- their track record remains spotless, even after 11 films.  This was a really fun, egaging film.  It maybe slows down a tad somewhere in the middle, but it recovers nicely with one of the best action climaxes that I've seen in a while.  It's seriously good.  Plus, the film manages to do a really good job of wrapping up the Toy Story... story... in a really satisfying way.  ****

Toy Story 2

TOY STORY 2 (1999) - June 14, 2010 (Fourth or Fifth Viewing)
Even better than the original.  It takes everything that made the first Toy Story so good, and improves it in pretty much every way.  The stakes are higher, the gags are funnier and it's just overall more enjoyable.  And that's saying a lot, considering how good the first one was.  ****

Toy Story

TOY STORY (1995) - June 14, 2010 (Fourth or Fifth Viewing)
A classic.  This was Pixar's first film, and it's pretty astonishing that they were able to come right out of the gate with such a quality feature.  It's not quite on the same level of some of Pixar's best stuff, but all the hallmarks of what makes Pixar so great are present here -- the memorable, perfectly-voiced characters, the top-shelf filmmaking, the amazing set-peices...  Pixar!  Good stuff.  ***1/2

The Karate Kid

THE KARATE KID - June 13, 2010
Though almost absurdly dated, this was an enjoyable enough film about a kid who learns life lessons while learning karate.  ***

The A-Team

THE A-TEAM (2010) - June 12, 2010
About a team of mercinaries who set out to prove their innocence after being framed for a crime, this was really silly and never quite as fun as it's trying to be, but nevertheless enjoyable enough.  It's definitely at its best when it was just fully embracing its silliness -- a scene involving a falling tank was a highlight.  The finale, on the other hand, was muddled and bland, and went on far too long.  **1/2

Shrek Forever After

SHREK FOREVER AFTER (2010) - June 12, 2010
Meh.  Another mediocre Shrek instalment.  I think it's safe to say that everything that made the original so unique and fun has been completely run into the ground at this point, so I hope they stay true to their word about this being the last Shrek film.  Yet again, the film falls back on tried-and-true characters and situations, but without the spark of the original (and the first sequel, to a lesser extent).  It feels like a cash-grab, and while the film was decently made, I just wasn't particularly entertained.  **

42nd Street

42ND STREET (1933) - June 10, 2010
This is the second musical I’ve watched for this blog, with the first one being All That Jazz. Boy, they could not be more different. Where Jazz was torpid, dull and pretentious, 42nd Street was fun, fast-paced and immensely memorable. It’s funny, because both films have a fairly similar plot and structure (a play being prepared, followed by an extended sequence of musical numbers). But 42nd Street just does it so much better.  One of the hallmarks of a good musical is that it leaves you humming the songs to yourself — I definitely have at least one of the songs stuck in my head pretty conclusively, so the film certainly succeeded on that count.  The film essentially breaks up into two parts: the first hour, with all the behind the scenes stuff, followed by the musical itself. The whole thing was well made and engaging, though it’s the last 20 minutes or so (which features some really visually dazzling musical sequences choreographed by the legendary Busby Berkeley) in which the film really comes alive.  Really, this is just a movie that puts a big smile on your face. It’s quite enjoyable throughout, and definitely one of the better musicals I’ve seen in a while.  ***1/2

Black Dynamite

BLACK DYNAMITE (2009) - June 8, 2010
A fun film about a badass lady's man who springs into action when his brother is killed.  Much like Grindhouse, the film is shot in a style meant to emulate exploitation cinema of the '70s (blaxploitation, in this case).  This probably works better than either of the films from Grindhouse; it's laugh-out-loud funny at times, and doesn't really overstay its welcome (though it does drag a bit in parts towards the end).  Much of the film's sucess is thanks to Michael Jai White's surprisingly hilarious performance as the titular Black Dynamite -- I doubt the film would have been nearly as effective with someone else in that part.  ***

Dragon Tiger Gate

DRAGON TIGER GATE (2006) - June 6, 2010
Hmmm...  About a couple of estranged brothers who were brought up at a school for kung-fu, and the stuff that happens.  Honestly, I'm having a hard time summing this movie up, as it was never particularly clear what it was about.  It was pretty muddled; in particular, I had no idea who the bad guy was, or what his deal was -- why did he want to kill the main characters?  What was at stake?  I really wasn't sure.  The movie kind of felt like it was originally much longer, and was cut down in a really sloppy way.  I'm not sure if that's actually the case, though I suspect it is; it was a bit of a mess.  Aside from that, it was decently directed by Wilson Yip, and featured some expectedly exciting action (though it was much more over-the-top and wirey than the previous Yip / Donnie Yen collaborations).  **

Splice

SPLICE (2010) - June 5, 2010
An interesting film by Vinceno Natali about a couple of scientists who create a strange creature featuring human DNA mixed in with several other animals.  The film sort of veers between sci-fi, drama, horror, and thriller, but somehow it all comes together in an effective whole.  Natali's direction is above average, as are the performances.  This wasn't a perfect film, but I enjoyed it (aside from some third-act shenanigans that I don't really buy -- mostly how readily Adrian Brody would do it with the creature). ***

Get Him to the Greek

GET HIM TO THE GREEK (2010) - June 4, 2010
An enjoyable if somewhat overlong film about a record company employee who is tasked with escorting a flamboyant rock star from London to the States.  Wackiness ensues.  Jonah Hill and Russel Brand are both quite funny and have definite chemistry, and though the movie is quite familiar all the way through, it's well made and fun.  ***

Synecdoche, New York

SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK (2008) - June 3, 2010
An strange film about a theatre director who begins to stage an increasingly elaborate play, a task that winds up taking up a good portion of his life.  There's something really odd and almost inscrutible about the dream-like world that writer and first-time director Charlie Kaufman creates, and it doesn't always exactly work.  But the film is definitely compelling in its own quirky way, and I think Kaufman is to be commended for trying something different (which does seem to be his M.O., though this is weird on a far more epic scale than his previous work).  Plus, there's the performances, which are uniformly great -- particularly Philip Seymour Hoffman, who gives what is probably one of his best performances in the central role.  ***

3-Iron

3-IRON (2004) - June 1, 2010
It’s a rare pleasure to go into a movie knowing nothing about what it is about, and then slowly letting the plot unfold. It’s an experience that you really don’t get to have all too often (the internet has made that nearly impossible), at least outside of a film festival. But it’s how I got to watch 3-Iron, so I wasn’t even aware that the film was a love story, and I was completely unaware of its central gimmick — that the two main characters never speak a word to one another (in fact, the man never speaks at all, and the woman has maybe three lines of dialogue). It’s an odd concept for a love story, but it works. Basically.  For the first twenty minutes or so, I kept thinking “oh, okay, now they’re going to start talking to each other… oh, okay, they were waiting to leave the house, now they’ll start talking.” Eventually it became fairly clear that the two characters were never going to speak, which is kind of neat. I mean, it feels a bit contrived at times, but it’s such a unique premise for a film that I was willing to cut it some slack. And it really does work; there’s definitely a palpable chemistry between the two characters, with brief looks and sideways glances many times saying more than words ever could. It is kind of odd that they absolutely never speak to each other, but you don’t think about it as much as you’d think you would.  Aside from that, director Ki-duk Kim shoots the film with an austere, minimalist style that suits the story perfectly. The acting is pretty great, with both actors admirably rising to the challenge of creating memorable characters without saying a word. It’s a movie that easily could have been disastrous, but all involved definitely rise to the challenge.  ***

Back to the Future Part III

BACK TO THE FUTURE PART III (1990) - May 31, 2010 (Umpteenth Viewing +1)
I don't care what anyone says: awesome.  ****

Back to the Future Part II

BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II (1989) - May 30, 2010 (Umpteenth Viewing +1)
Also awesome.  ****

Back to the Future

BACK TO THE FUTURE (1985) - May 30, 2010 (Umpteenth Viewing +1)
Awesome. ****

Amarcord

AMARCORD (1973) - May 29, 2010 (Second Viewing)
Hmmm… I guess I just don’t like Fellini very much. Of the handful of his films that I’ve seen up to this point, I don’t think I’ve really liked any of them (I do remember liking Satyricon, but that was a while back, and is far from being one of the man’s most revered films). It comes as a bit of a surprise to me, because Fellini is one of those directors you’re supposed to like pretty much by default, at least as a film geek. And yet I don’t seem to particularly enjoy his movies.  I mentioned in my 8½ post that I remembered liking Amarcord — but I can’t say that I was particularly enthralled this time around. My first viewing was probably around ten years ago, and I’m pretty sure that I liked it. I don’t know why my opinion has seemingly changed; I guess I used to have a higher tolerance for handsomely made, meandering and egregiously slow-paced films.  Like 8½, I was definitely able to appreciate this film on a technical level, but I just didn’t derive all that much enjoyment from it. The movie was essentially a series of vignettes revolving around the inhabitants of a small Italian town; it kind of had a laid-back charm — and Nino Rota’s jaunty, memorable score was a perfect accompaniment to the visuals — but to be perfectly honest, after about fifteen minutes or so, I was sick of it. Almost none of the segments stood out to me as being anything other than a mild diversion. I’m sure they all had some kind of special significance to Fellini (the film is loosely based on his own childhood memories), but to me, watching them wasn’t much more interesting than going through somebody else’s old photo album (albeit an album presented with a fairly high level of visual flair).  **

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

PRINCE OF PERSIA: THE SANDS OF TIME (2010) - May 28, 2010
A decent if kind of mediocre film about a prince who finds himself framed for murder, and in possession of a mystical dagger that can rewind time.  The movie was basically entertaining, and featured some affable lead performances from Jake Gyllenhaal and Gemma Arterton.  Its main problem (aside from a mild case of overlength) is that Mike Newell's direction just wasn't very good.  It was passable enough most of the time, if nothing special, but Newell absolutely falls on his face when it comes to directing action.  With few exceptions, the action scenes were all poorly staged and sloppily edited, and were not nearly as exciting or fun as they should have been.  It also doesn't help that Newell WAY overuses Zack Snyder-style slow-mo to fast-mo, which gets old quite fast (and I don't even think that a lot of it was planned in advance, as much of the slow-mo looked like it wasn't shot with that in mind).  Also, the special effects were kind of questionable, and a lot of the time it looked like they were on sets.  I don't know.  It wasn't terrible, I guess.  I'm between a two and a two and a half for this one.  Meh, whatever.  The ever-elusive good videogame movie remains just out of reach.  **1/2

MacGruber

MACGRUBER (2010) - May 25, 2010
An entertaining though extremely silly and unabashedly juvenile adaptation of a series of really short SNL sketches.  The film follows MacGruber, a supposedly  super-skilled soldier who is actually wildly incompetent, in his quest to stop his old arch-foe from blowing up Washington.  The film kind of overstayed its welcome a bit, but aside from that it was enjoyable, and pretty funny in parts.  **1/2

Date Night

DATE NIGHT (2010) - May 23, 2010
Kind of silly and not exactly fresh but basically entertaining, this was a fairly mediocre film about the shenanigans that a couple get into over one long night -- elevated by really funny and likable performances from Steve Carrell and Tina Fey.  They both deserve better material than this, but they do their best and have really good chemistry together (hopefully they'll eventually re-team for a better film).  Plus, try as I might, I just can't not like a movie about people getting into wacky misadventures over the course of a few hours.  **1/2

Score: A Hockey Musical

SCORE: A HOCKEY MUSICAL (2010) - May 18, 2010
A dull musical about young hockey player who discovers that he is a prodigy at the game; much singing ensues.  One of the main problems here is that there really isn't a single element that feels fresh -- from the subplot with the friend who wants to be more than a friend, to his whole deal, where he lets the sucess of being a hockey player change who he is, there's really nothing here that I haven't seen a million times before.  Which of course wouldn't have particularly been a problem if it had been excecuted with any kind of panache, but the whole thing just feels dull and tired almost right from the get-go.  The other major problem is with the songs, which seem to only exist to convey exposition, and which are pretty much the opposite of memorable (they're not exactly hummable, that's for sure -- it's been less than a couple of hours since I watched the movie, and I can't remember a single song).  Boo-urns.  *1/2

Amelie

AMELIE (2001) - May 16, 2010 (Second Viewing)
This was not a film that I was particularly looking forward to revisiting. Not that I hated it, but it’s just not something that I felt any kind of desire to ever watch again. But hey, it’s been almost ten years, and obviously this movie has its fans (it currently stands at number 44 on the imdb’s top 250). I thought I might be able to appreciate Amelie a bit better this time around. Nope.  Like I said, I don’t hate this movie. I think that probably, as a fifteen or twenty minute short, I’d find it enjoyable enough. It does have its charms, and for a while it’s kind of endearing in an oddball kind of way. But it’s just so consistently, relentlessly hyper-stylized and insufferably quirky — and there’s really not much to it other than its style and its quirk. So if you find yourself ambivalent towards (or downright annoyed by) the film’s in-your-face aesthetic, then you’re really not going to be in for a good time, because the movie revels in its own exaggerated sense of style.  Plus, I just don’t think that Amelie herself is a particularly compelling central character — she is just far too outrageously quirky to ever really relate to on an emotional level. She makes Mr. Bean look like Jimmy Stewart (and at least we’re never supposed to identify with Mr. Bean as anything other than a clown, which isn’t the case with Amelie). She’s surrounded by other characters who are all equally quirky in their own bizarre ways, and certainly, I can see what Jean-Pierre Jeunet was going for here, but it just did not work for me. I found it pretty grating at times.  It occurred to me while I was watching (and not enjoying) this film, that my feelings about it must be how some people feel about The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, which is pretty darn quirky in its own way, but which I think is a masterpiece (yeah, that’s right, I said it — I think it’s Anderson’s best film, and easily one of the best films of the aughts). I’m not sure why I’m okay with Anderson’s hyper-stylized universe, but annoyed by Amelie’s. It’s just a matter of taste, I guess.  **

Robin Hood

ROBIN HOOD (2010) - May 15, 2010
Well, that was a bit of a disappointment.  Handsomely made and well acted, the main problem with this film is that it was just kind of dull and lifeless.  Essentially a Robin Hood origin story, the movie feels like setup for a much more interesting film.  I think there's a reason why pretty much every other Robin Hood story skims over (or entirely bypasses) this portion of the man's life.  It's just not all that interesting, or at least not as portrayed in this film.  There's also a lot of stuff with the new King of England and a scheming commander who is working with the French, which just isn't all that interesting.  I couldn't help but compare the film to Gladiator; a comparison in which this film falls quite short.  As much as I like Mark Strong, he doesn't make much of an impact here, and certainly doesn't come close to Joaquin Pheonix's slimy and memorable Commodus.  As for Russell Crowe, he was fine but I never cared about his Robin Hood the way I was really rooting for his Maximus.  I think the movie was just taking itself a bit too seriously.  Meh.  **

Gladiator

GLADIATOR (2000) - May 13, 2010 (Fifth or Sixth viewing)
I remember loving this film, but it's been quite a few years since I've seen it, and I was afraid it wouldn't be as good as I remembered.  Nope: I still love this film.  There are so many things I really like about this movie, from Ridley Scott's stylish direction, to the sweet action and the surfiet of memorable moments (the "my name is Gladiator" scene still ranks as one of the most badass things ever).  Russell Crowe gives what is probably his best performance, and a lot of the reason that the movie works as well as it does is that it really makes you care about him.  There's a lot of stuff with Joaquin Phoenix and his smarmy political maneuverings, and the movie has a pretty epic feel, but it never loses sight of Crowe's journey -- when it comes down to it, this is really just a movie about one man's quest to avenge the death of his family.  It's pretty great.  ****

Universal Soldier

UNIVERSAL SOLDIER (1992) - May 9, 2010
An entertaining action film about a soldier who died in Vietnam who is, years later, reanimated as part of the "Universal Soldier" program.  Also frozen is his captain, who went insane and killed him; the two eventually remember their previous identities, and shenanigans ensue.  Though it kind of drags in parts, it was mostly entertaining, and the action is well done.  ***

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.  **