What is the Haps?

Hey dudesters! Sorry I've been MIA, and yes I did just write the word dudesters. I'm cool right? Anyway same blah blah blah about being a grad student and papers, and projects, and my heroin addiction*, and smiling at Liev Schreiber. I was actually able to cobble together a post for you, but I promise I have more forthcoming this week! The semester is winding down and I'm finishing things up which gives me more time to devote to this blog...that 5 people read. I do it all for you.

So a preview of coming events: Reviews for The Fantastic Mr. Fox and The Blindside. I may throw in some DVD picks of the week and maybe, if you're good, a retro movie of the week too. See I'm capable of maintaining a blog of some sort on a nearly regular bi-monthly/annual basis!

-your partial, prejudiced, and ignorant film student

*Mom-I am not actually addicted to heroin.

Why Don't You Ever Wear a Shirt?: New Moon

Directed by Chris "I'm a Hack" Weitz
Starring the Twilight Trinity and some hot shirtless dudes

SYNOPSIS: If you don't know what Twilight is can you tell me what far away tropical island you live at so I can escape there? But seriously, the first one was about some vampires. The second is about some werewolves. Some teen shirtless werewolves.

THE GOOD: Once again the soundtrack delivers. I'm a big fan of Carter Burwell and his soundtrack for Twilight was a nice mix of instrumental with some great indie music thrown in. Amazingly for New Moon they got Alexandre Desplat to do the soundtrack! This amazes me because he has an amazing roster of films. This year alone he's done the soundtracks for The Fantastic Mr. Fox and Coco Avant Chanel. How do they do this?? And then they get bands like Death Cab for Cutie, Muse, Bon Ivor, Thom Yorke, and Ok Go to contribute tracks. And not just tracks, but original tracks. That they wrote. Just for this movie. Honestly, it's mind-boggling.

Also worthy of note is a "montage" with some great transitions and camera work. I probably liked it mostly because of the song choice for the scene.

THE BAD: Oh Lord, where to start? The writing, the acting, the cinematography? It's all just sub-par. Well let's dive right in.

The writing: Everyone knows, at least everyone with a brain knows, that Stephanie Meyer writes like a 12-year-old. Her oddly compelling, must-read staying up for days at a time deal with the devil writing style has snared me in its horrible, obsessive claws. Yes I will admit it on this blog: I am officially obsessed. Anyway, if I were the screenwriter I would try and tone down the obvious, hit-you-over-the-head melodrama and cheesy dialogue. Maybe it's just me, but I would actually try and make a good movie, possibly one that subverts the books themselves cause I'm ironic like that. Instead, Melissa Rosenberg chose to emulate, and even at times make worse, Meyer's original writing. This involves a series of montages that don't tell any story, bad dialogue, and poor scene choices and transitions.

This leads into the acting: Again as a director I would try and actually bring out the latent acting talents of my cast possibly adding more nuanced layers to two-dimensional and unrealistic characters. Chris Weitz, in his infinite wisdom, chose not to go that route. Instead he chose to increase the horrible dialogue by ramping up the awkwardness of each character action, instructing his actors to talk three inches from one anothers' faces, and encouraging them to talk in awkward, stilted phrases. Also have you heard of lavalier mics, Chris? They're these little mics you can hide on your actors so I can actually hear the dialogue over the absurdly loud rain you've got going in some of your scenes, for no reason I can fathom. I don't know maybe the dialogue's important to the film, but what do I know Chris? I'm an ignorant film student and you're a "big-time" director. Besides the dialogue is horrible anyway. Maybe you could just do a cut where all the dialogue is covered by inappropriate rain sounds, the like of which I have never heard in real life. (Whoa...did that get a little bitter there? Sorry dudes, but its just...so easy to fix...even in post...sound mixing...gaaaaah...)

Finally the cinematography: Trick photography is cool, I'm all for 360 degree rotations, upside down transitions, impositions, and dissolves, but preferably not in the same movie. Within five minutes of each other. Don't rely on trick photography to cover up your inability to competently direct a movie. I am not impressed that you can turn a camera around a chair. Hey have you heard of a guy named Joe Wright? You should he's actually a good director. He did this little thing in a movie called Pride & Prejudice where he uses a swing and 360 degree pan to illustrate the seasons passing. It doesn't have cuts and it's an extremely beautiful shot. Oh heyyyy there's a shot in New Moon exactly like that, except I get to look at the back of a chair for about 30 seconds. Wow, stealing a better directors technique, normally I would applaud you. It's a cool transition, but hey if you're going to steal do it right. And don't half-ass your way into a horrible scene transition that is stupid and I hate it. I hate it, ok? I hate it and I hate you Weitz! That's right! You don't get a first name anymore. You ruined The Golden Compass and now you've...ruined...well that's not right, but you've kind of ruined this movie. Really only for me. Silly me, I was actually expecting something. Anything. Cause it was going to be bad anyway. Yo Summit Entertainment, if I email you a script for Breaking Dawn will you read it? Just kidding I have better things to do with my time than write a ground-breaking script for a mediocre, best-selling, fan fiction turned into a novel.

whoa long post, dudes-hope I didn't scare you off.

THE VERDICT: Just don't. Don't go see it. Even ironically, hipsters. I mean I totally saw it unironically, but it was a disappointment even for my low expectations. There's so much potential. I know those people can act-somewhere there's a good movie in there I just know it. You've got to believe. David Slade...you're up!

I give it 1/2 out of 5. That's right 1/2...I'd give it a 0 if it weren't for the soundtrack.*

sidenote: I refuse to call it a saga...a saga is something epic and not about sparkly vampires...oh I could go on and on and on...I told you I'm obsessed, but I'll spare the reader from my ramblings.

Disney's A Christmas Carol 3D

Directed by Robert Zemeckis
"Starring" Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, and Robin Wright Penn

SYNOPSIS: Yet another iteration of Charles Dicken's A Christmas Carol. This time Robert "Motion Capture" Zemeckis has tried to bring the classic story to life.

THE GOOD: I will preface this by saying I don't like Robert Zemeckis, at least not anymore. Yes he directed Forrest Gump, but his recent foray into the world of 3D has left me confused and also frightened. Very, very frightened. Basically he uses motion capture technology to digitally animate actual actors and then puts them in 3D. I find this ridiculous. Why not just shoot real actors in a real environment. Not to mention that his visualizations end up looking profoundly creepy resulting in double takes of the "Is it Colin Firth or not?" variety. Beowulf is a prime example of this-he didn't even bother changing their appearance! It's just Angelina Jolie glowing with a tail! And when the lute came out I was just...done. Okay rant over.

This has a lot going against it. Namely that studios have just beaten this tale into the ground. However, Zemeckis does some cool things with his cinematography, stuff that obviously would not be possible in the real world. It is also a decidedly darker version of the tale. If you've ever read the story it's dark. Dickens was a moralist and all of his books have a certain slant. Most of the time it isn't pleasant and certainly not kid-friendly. So Zemeckis has made it dark, but with many funny moments, although I might have been scared if I was a kid. What I liked most was his portrayal of the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. It was very well done, although his scene didn't really make any sense to me. I won't spoil it for you, but it was definitely new and really cool looking. The 3D really does add a nice visual component as opposed to some movies who rely only on the novelty to entrance viewers Zemeckis really uses the technology to tell the story and immerse the viewer (run-on sentence I know).

THE BAD: Well the ubiquitous of the story is definitely a negative. Zemeckis doesn't really do anything new with the story, although he adds a great visual element that is definitely new. I don't want to belabor this point, but the people in the movie are not people. There is something decidedly off about them. Maybe it's because he was trying to change existing actor's anatomy, but everyone looks a little weird and I was generally frightened. Especially when they're my favorite actors. I just can't help wondering why Zemeckis wants to use real actors for his facial characteristics. The technology is so good that he could create entirely new people, so why make Gary Oldman look like some sort of mutant hobbit? I just don't know.

Although I liked the faithfulness of the dialogue it just doesn't translate to a modern audience. Using 19th century dialogue while telling a story in 2009 is a hard thing to pull off and Zemeckis doesn't quite succeed. Coupled with the fact that often Jim Carrey is barely intelligible and I could see how audiences might get lost.

THE VERDICT: I'm really torn on this one. I know my being creeped out by the characters is something that maybe only I feel. But I can't help but feel that this just isn't worth seeing. Yes the 3D was cool, but I don't really see any other strong points other than the visuals. And even those visuals CREEPED ME OUT. Did I say this enough? I was creeped out. So I would say wait for it on DVD...maybe...unless you really like 3D....but don't pay extra.......yeah.

I give it 2 out of 5 stars*

Note: I re-read this post and it's riddled with contradictions. Is it scary? Yes sometimes, but it's also funny. Did I like it? I honestly don't know-I'm befuddled by it so take this review as is I guess.

Nightmare Before Christmas

Editing is hard gang! But I have slaved away on my poorly shot iPhone movie and edited down to the part with Nightmare Before Christmas stuff. It has a soundtrack and everything! Credits to Fall Out Boy-I hope I won't have to take this down...I think it counts as Fair Use? Anyway here it is for you viewing pleasure! More videos soon...I have have a whopping ten whole minutes of footage!

Leave That No Account Oogie Boogie Out of This!

The Tim Burton Exhibit at MoMA featuring original content and films by the master himself! Through April 26th, 2010

Well dear readers, I have some content for you at last!! My awesome cousin Hallie got me tickets for the preview of the Tim Burton exhibit at MoMA. It was packed and awesome!!! I went with my friend Brittan and took a lot of video which I will edit and post on the site sometime this weekend. There were models from Corpse Bride and The Nightmare Before Christmas, original sketches, notes to directors and modelers (even one to Johnny Depp about a line in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory!). There was a model of Oogie Boogie that glowed in the dark. Original shorts and commercials. Free drinks and more! I highly recommend you go see it if you're in New York. It's open until April of next year!
Also free drinks! And weird breadstick thingies! MoMA will also be showing all of his films over the coming months, which kicked off with Pee-Wee's Big Adventure on Wednesday. A nice guard let us in near the end of the movie even though we didn't have a ticket. We heard he was introducing the film and thought we might catch him, but sadly he must have snuck out...Pee-Wee was as good as I remember it though!
So an Awesome Night followed by an all-nighter to finish a long paper! But fun was had and I don't regret it!! Anyways video forthcoming!

No News is Good News, Right?

Hello readers, all 5 of you! I know I've been MIA this past...well...month, but school is hard. I don't get that many opportunities to see movies anymore. In fact I haven't seen any new movies in weeks. If you don't count me watching the Corpse Bride repeatedly on Netflix. So once the break comes I know I will have reviews for you! Keep obsessively checking my site for new content, it makes me happy to see my numbers go up (Thank You Google Analytics!)!

Blindness

Directed by Fernando Meirelles
Starring Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo and Danny Glover

Sorry no witty title...it was too good! Also got distracted reading the imdb message boards....

SYNOPSIS: Before you read this I highly recommend that you read the book by Pulitzer Prize winning author Jose Saramago of the same name. Basically the plot centers around an outbreak of "blindness" in a small city. In Saramago's book it's a metaphor for human interaction and he probes the depths of what it means to be human in his book.

THE POSITIVE: I don't want to end up talking about the book but it's written almost stream of consciousness without names or punctuation. I was quite surprised when it had been adapted, but didn't go see it because I read critical reviews that panned it. Remind me never to trust critics again. I thought it was beautifully and wonderfully acted by everyone involved. Julianne Moore especially stands out because in the film she is not affected by the outbreak. So of course a lot of the film centers around her and how she copes in a world suddenly without sight. The cinematography was also excellent. Saramago's novel is very visual and the film conveys that through point-of-view shots and steadicam work. There's also a washed out look to most of the film that really works with the tone and subject. Basically I loved it.

I'm going to digress here and talk about my somewhat hypocritcal stance on film adaptations. While I agree a film should stand on its own as a work separate from its literary counterpart that is not to say that it should completely disregard the literary works original style, tone, and substance to achieve that end. This film is a balancing act for me. Since I've read the book I obviously got a lot more out of it than the average user a fact brought home to me when reading the imdb message boards for the film that read WORST FILM EVER. And there's not just one like, there are several. Then upon actually reading what people have to say and discovering that their opinions are completely uninformed and unjustified makes me want to go on a long and extensive rant. Which I am doing right now on this blog since I refuse to post on the message boards. But what was I saying...Oh a balancing act yes. For the average moviegoer this film is not the average movie. It requires a little more understanding to work it out. I'm not in a position to say if without reading the book you could enjoy because I have read the book therefore my opinion on the subject can't really be taken into account, but I do think if you walk into the film with an open mind you can sincerely enjoy it.

Whew! Done that was a long one sorry about that...Also since I like to think of myself as a filmmaker, even though I don't make films. Basically I fantasize about turning movies into books. When I finished this book I had a perfect shot in my head for the ending and guess what? THEY DID IT!! That alone sealed the deal for me liking it.

THE NEGATIVE: There isn't any...it's just so awesome. I guess a negative would be that you have to read a book to fully understand it, but since when is reading a book a bad thing? In fact go read the book right now.

THE VERDICT: Definitely see it! It's on netflix right now!!! With or without having read the book! It's totally awesome!

I give it 5 out of 5*...yes you read that right.

I've Always Hated You: The Invention of Lying

Directed by Ricky Gervais and Matthew Robinson
Starring Ricky Gervais, Jennifer Garner, Rob Lowe, and Tina Fey with a whole bunch of cameos...

SYNOPSIS: Imagine a world where no one can lie. Then some dude can. What happens?

THE POSITIVE: I liked all the actors in it. Jennifer Garner is so cute and I love Ricky Gervais. I thought it was well acted. There were also some very good humorous moments.

THE NEGATIVE: It was way too long. The plot made sense in a micro way, but as I left the theater and thought about all the implications of a world without lies it fell through. The concept of the film basically also implies that there is no imagination hence no lying. While this is interesting it doesn't explain how the world evolved. Without imagination most of the inventions we have wouldn't exist. The love story also didn't work for me either. I think Ricky should have not starred in the lead role. I'm so used to him being an unlikable character that it was hard to see him as actually nice. It was also not very funny which is not what I was expecting.

The big "controversy" of the film is that the world never evolved a religion and it also implies that religion is an invention of mankind. While hard core Christians might take offense at this I think that everything in reality is largely an invention. How we perceive ourselves and each other is largely a manifestation of our own particular world views. Sorry to go all pedantic, but it seemed like a moot point to me. It's not treated in a crass way, in fact the genesis of his religion is from a very, unexpectedly, sad and touching moment. I don't think it was meant to make fun of religion, but perhaps to expand our thinking.

THE VERDICT: Even with all the thought-provoking I wouldn't go see it in theaters. I would definitely rent it though. I feel bad for Ricky, but this was not his best work.

I give it 2 out of 5.*

What Kind of Place is Japan Anyway?: The Informant!

Directed by Steven Soderbergh
Starring Matt Damon, Melanie Lynsky, Scott Bakula, and Tony Hale

SYNOPSIS: Based on a true story Mark Whitacre is an executive for a large corn plant or something. He becomes embroiled in an FBI investigation and acts as an informant for the government over corruption in the corn industry. I know what can be corrupt about corn? Oh so so much...

THE POSITIVE: Extremely well-acted. This is a great point for the film since it as very character driven. Most of the action of the plot revolves around Mark Whitacre himself and I think Matt Damon does a superb job in a nuanced role. The film really pivots on Whitacre's testimony and how it eventually unravels. Damon portrays a man on the edge very well, but also a seemingly normal guy caught in a bigger situation. I also love Soderbergh's direction. It's very old school and captures the mood and kind of zaniness of the case very well. The entire cast acts as an excellent straight man to Damon's Whitacre. Really just a superb film

THE NEGATIVE: It's not for the average movie goer. If you're expecting a conclusion or easy answers you're not going to get it in this film. Not everything is packed together nicely, but it works for the film. It was a tad too long, but I really don't have anything negative about it.

THE VERDICT: Really awesome! You should totally go see it! I loved it!

I give it 4 out of 5.*

SPIKE JONZE!!

So a quick post about what I did tonight:



-Went to MoMA and saw Spike Jonze's film about Maurice Sendak and their collaboration: Tell Them Anything You Want

-Heard Sendak and Jonze talk about what inspired them to make Where the Wild Things Are and talk about their friendship

-Watched a short film Spike Jonze and Catherine Keener made for Maurice Sendak's 80th Birthday-sooooo funny!

-Saw a clip from Jonze's new film Where the Wild Things Are (Out Oct. 16th!)

-Saw Julianne Moore, Karen O. (of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs), and Catherine Keener

-Spoke to Maurice Sendak and told him what a fan I was

-Embarrased myself in front of Maurice Sendak because I was told he wasn't doing autographs and I had my sketchbook out

-Ogled Karen O. and Catherine Keener (Julianne Moore skipped out quick) wondering if I should try and get their autographs-I didn't

-Got Spike Jonze's autograph in my sketchbook!!!!!



On an unrelated note I also saw Matthew Morrison, Mr. Schu, from Glee walking down 5th Avenue. It's been a good week. Going to DC this weekend so maybe new posts Tuesday..

Brittan went with me here's a link to her blog post about it: http://brittanclaire.blogspot.com/2009/10/i-met-spike-jonze.html

She rights way more eloquently then me plus she has more pictures!

Let's Celebrate Mediocrity: Whip It!

Directed by Drew Barrymore
Starring Ellen Page, Drew Barrymore, Kristen Wiig, Juliet Lewis and Academy Award Winner Marcia Gay Harden

SYNOPSIS: In the small town in Bodine, Texas Bliss is a lost girl looking for her passion. Her mother forces her to do beauty pageants, but her real talent is in roller derby! Enter motley crew of bad ass roller derby girls! From there the film becomes about Bliss affirming her identity and challenging her town's preconceptions.

THE POSITIVE: Once again Ellen Page manages to blow me away. Her range is great and she really does a great job in this film. The rest of the cast supports her well. Kristen Wiig once again shines being both comedic and dramatic. Drew Barrymore plays a sideline in the film, but it's actually very nice to see an actor-director not insert themselves unnaturally in a film (I'm looking at you M.Night Shyamalan!) I also thought the story was well written and executed. It managed to be both light-hearted and touching at the same time.

THE NEGATIVE: I thought this film could have done with some editing. It was a little too long. There seems to be a trend going on with longer films, but this story could have been told in less time. Even though I found the story interesting I knew where it was going. I don't know if this is just me, but it seems like every movie I've seen recently has been a little unexciting. While I liked this film I didn't really get very excited by it.

THE VERDICT: I think it's a cute story and despite my qualms it's worth seeing. So go support Drew's directorial debut at the box office!

I give it 3 out of 5.*

i Haven't Cried Like That Since TItantic: Zombieland

Directed by Ruben Fleischer
Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin

SYNOPSIS: In a world run by zombies 4 unlikely heroes set out on an adventure across the country or something like that. I don't know. It's hard to explain.

THE POSITIVE: It was quite funny and the acting was great. Plus a surprise cameo will leave you laughing! Normally I'm not a fan of narration, but Jesse Eisenberg provided a lot of the humor in the movie. I also liked the comedy style and its overarching theme. The cinematography was excellent as well. There was a lot of zombie killing as well! I love zombie killing!

THE NEGATIVE: I thought it was a little too long and I saw a lot of scenes that could be cut. I also thought the plot was formulaic, but that can be fun especially when it's a little subversive. More killing would have been appreciated, did I mention I love zombie killing?

THE VERDICT: It's a fun movie! I think it's worth the $12.50 to go see it. Plus Jesse Eisenberg is so cute in a nerdy way.

I give it 4 out of 5.*

No Teenager Talks Like That: Jennifer's Body

Directed by Karyn Kusama, Written by Diablo Cody
Starring Megan Fox and Amanda Seyfried

SYNOPSIS: Two best friends become seperated over the fact that one of them becomes a man-eating demon monster, standard high school drama.

THE POSITIVE: I thought the acting was really good and it was pretty well written. I don't really like Diablo Cody's writing because she kind of invents this language that no one speaks in, but it's turned down in this film unlike in Juno. Megan Fox was great playing her "type" a beautiful airhead and Amanda Seyfried was great as her dependent best friend. I thought the storyline was pretty good as well.

THE NEGATIVE: This is where marketing can bite you in the ass. I think they marketed this movie entirely wrong. They tried to make it a vehicle for Megan Fox but she's just doesn't have that kind of star power yet. If they had gone a more standard horror flick route I think it might have had better box office success. That being said it's not your standard horror flick, it's not even scary. It's more like an exercise in the horror genre-like a film student reexamining what the horror genre means. All in all I think it tries to hard to subvert the genre without making any kind of point about it, but maybe this is because I just don't like Diablo Cody.

THE VERDICT: I think it's worth seeing. It's got good acting, a reasonably good storyline, and some pretty funny lines. But you can also wait for the DVD.

I give it 3 out of 5.

Support Kate Beckinsale!: Whiteout

Directed by Dominic Sena
Starring Kate Beckinsale, Gabriel Macht, Tom Skerrit, and Columbus Short

This post would have been a lot more effective for supporting Kate Beckinsale's acting career had I actually written it when the movie came out, but you live and you learn...

SYNOPSIS: On a remote Antarctic research station, a sexy US Marshal is stalked by a crazed killer on the ice. That's it.

THE POSITIVE: Oh Kate Beckinsale why do you force me to watch these movies you're in? Who is your agent? Why did you do this movie? I don't understand...also Gabriel Macht is in it. I'll give them points for some nice flashback scenes.

THE NEGATIVE: All the standards generic plot and characters, bad pacing, obviousness of the killer. Bad musical timing, I mean you can't just play scary music and have nothing happen. Also weird ending that didn't make any sense to me...it was anti-climatic especially after all this buildup.

THE VERDICT: I love you Kate Beckinsale but do not see this movie. Now would you go and do some indie movie now, please?

I give it 1 out of 5.

You Must Take the Ring to Mordor: 9

Directed by Shane Acker
Starring the voice talents of: Elijah Wood, Jennifer Connelly, Christopher Plummer, and John C. Reilly

Oh an actual post, see I told you I could keep this blog thing going didn't I? Didn't I? For those who don't get the title Elijah Wood is the title voice and who is Elijah Wood, everyone say it with me: FRODO! Ok Ok on to the review....

SYNOPSIS: 9 is a computer-animated story set in a post-apocalyptic world. Written and directed by Shane Acker, who also did the short film of the same title, it features 9 mechanical puppets who become kind of the stewards of the world after the humans are gone.

THE POSITIVE: Great visuals, I mean really great! Some of the best computer animation I've seen, the technology is really coming along. There was also some really great voice acting, I mean you can't go wrong with Elijah Wood or Christoper Plummer can you? The story was pretty engaging and I liked the blend of both fantasy and science fiction that form the core of the story.

THE NEGATIVE: Maybe I was just too hyped up about it, but the story seemed a little simplified. There weren't a lot of twists or turns, but maybe this was just because it was different than I expected. I also found the story a little boring at times and if it weren't for the great visuals I don't think I would have been engaged as I was.

THE VERDICT: If you're really into animation it's definitely worth seeing, but I would wait for the DVD for this one.

I give it 2 out 5.

Housekeeping

OK guys, schedules are a lot easier to keep when you're not in school and don't have a job, so I'm changing some stuff on the site for all 2 of my readers. Hi Mom and Dad! Basically I'll review whatever movie, show, DVD I happen to see that week. Which means I might review the premiere of The Office or some strange old movie I saw in a class. I will try to keep updating weekly, so do check every week.

Thanks for reading!

Hilarity Ensues: The Office Season 5

Starring Steve Carell, Jenna Fischer, John Krasinski, and Rainn Wilson

SYNOPSIS: The series chronicles the events of a regional branch of a fictional paper company. It's shot in a documentary style. But really you should know this because you should be watching it already. Season 6 premieres this Thursday at 9!

REVIEW: This DVD set is definitely worth picking up. I usually don't buy whole seasons of shows, but this has commentaries, deleted scenes, a gag reel, and some other featurettes. I really love the show and it's great to re-watch everything especially without commercials!

The commentary is also very funny! They can sometimes go off topic, but it still ends up being funny or informative about the show. Some of the commentary they picked though were a little strange to me. There's one with the caterers of the show which I thought was odd and I would have preferred more commentary with the stars of the shows rather than the behind-the-scenes people though that's always interesting to me.

The deleted scenes are also really good. With most films the deleted scenes deserve to be deleted, but with these I think they just don't have enough time because at 3/4 of them are hilarious! I also liked that their are deleted scenes for each episode and not just some-it's great to see what they took out and some of the bits also say more about the characters or the story arc.

The other features that caught my eye were the webisodes and the gag reel. The webisodes are mini-arcs with supporting characters. They were both funny and we learn a lot more about the characters. I wish that you could play them continuously instead of having a credit break in-between, but since they were on the web they were originally distinct episodes and, presumably, put up each week rather than all at once. The gag reel is also really funny. I love gag reels because you get to see a little more about the production and this one is excellent. It's not just people messing up their lines or laughing, though there is a lot of that, but their also some cast pranks and funny moments.

THE VERDICT: If you're a fan I would definitely say it's worth buying. There's also a special package version with the Schrute beet farm as the theme. I think you get a stress beet, mousepad, and some other Schrute farm related things. If you're not a fan go out and buy season 1 and watch it!

Shane Acker's 9

Directed by Shane Acker
Starring the voice talents of Elijah Wood, Jennifer Connelly, Christopher Plummer, and John C. Reilly

SYNOPSIS: Our world has ended. It's up to life-like mechanical puppets to stop the machine terror that threatens to devour the world. Also there are 9 of them.

THE POSITIVE: The visuals were stunning! One of the best digitally animated films I've seen this year. The voice casting was also excellent and worked well with the characters. It's very story-driven as well so there isn't a lot of dialogue. The story also combines a good mix of technical achievement with mythology. I really also like that even though it was animated it told an adult story. This isn't a kid's movie. There are definitely mature images and themes. I liked this because I've felt for a long time that the American film industry doesn't utilize animation to its fullest potential. In Japan, animation is often treated as a serious medium and isn't reserved for kid's fare. It was nice to see an animator step out there and give us a product that made you think and wasn't dumbed down.

THE NEGATIVE: The story didn't seem to be fleshed out that much. This may be because it was originally a short film, but the story was a bit lacking. There wasn't a traditional character or story arc, not that this is necessarily bad, but it had a more episodic feel to rather than a cohesive one. The film also just ends which annoys me. I mean it doesn't really make any sense how it ends and it was just...annoying. The back-story wasn't explained either, but that's not that crucial to understanding the film as a whole.

THE VERDICT: For all the hype it is worth seeing. I think maybe I was disappointed because I had built it up in my mind. The story wasn't what I expected either. But really you should go see it!

I give it 3 out of 5 stars*

Hahahahahahaha: Gamer

Directed by Neveldine/Taylor
Starring Gerard Butler, Amber Valletta, Kyra Sedgewick, and Micheal C. Hall

Since I haven't seen any other movies this week (I'm busy ok!) I thought I would "review" Gamer.

THE POSITIVE: The cinematography was pretty good actually. There were some very cool shots and they really tried to mimic the feel of playing an actual game. Lots of action. There was also an interesting concept to the movie, I mean what if we really could play people. The storyline held together reasonably well. Also soooo many cameos.

THE NEGATIVE: It was just ridiculous. So poorly executed of a concept. The legal ramifications notwithstanding the motives of the "villain" didn't make any sense. Having absolute control of something is a standard villain trope, but usually there's a purpose. I mean what kind of goal is to have control of people just for kicks? Even that might have been acceptable if Michael C. Hall's character was a little more sociopathic or insane. I mean he was an evil genius, but the creation of the game netted him millions of dollars and status as one of the most powerful men in America. They wanted to go with a puppetmaster angle, but he just didn't play it crazy enough for that. Also the story just fell apart at the end. And it was ridiculous, did I mention that?

THE VERDICT: Should you go see it? Hahahahahahaha...no no don't ever ever ever see it. Ever. Ever.

I give it 1 out of 5 stars.*

Even though this movie was silly I will do an Actor's Spotlight on Michael C. Hall because I love him. I don't really blame him for not being crazy enough because he was really trying his hardest to act like a complete sociopath (which he does well: DEXTER!). The script just didn't establish his motivations at all and I can see that he tried to ramp up the insanity with all of his scenes, but there's not much to do when you really only have about 10 minutes of screen time. 5 minutes of that was also a song and dance number which was totally awesome! I'm actually being serious. This number at the end of the movie is the only reason to see the movie. He sings and he dances! Is there anything Michael C. Hall can't do?!! I think the answer is possibly be more awesome.

Sidenote: Amber Valletta looks exactly like Radha Mitchell and I've been pretty much been thinking Radha Mitchell has been in all the movies I've seen with Amber Valletta. These include: Gamer, Transporter 2, Hitch, and Raising Helen (yes I saw this movie).

DVD of the Week: The Edge of Love

Directed by John Maybury
Starring Keira Knightley, Sienna Miller, Matthew Rhys, and Cillian Murphy

SYNOPSIS: This film chronicles the relationship between poet Dylan Thomas, his wife Caitlin, a childhood love Vera Phillips, and her husband William Killick. It's loosely based on Thomas' life during World War II.

THE POSITIVE: When I first saw the trailer for this I assumed it was sort of triangle between Dylan Thomas, Vera Phillips, and his wife Caitlin. It's really not. The acting was quite good, I'm a big fan of Keira Knightley, and the story was...interesting. Honestly, it was kind of weird and I'm really only including it because it happened to be what I could watch on Netflix. I mean it holds together pretty well, but a lot of it is confusing and not fleshed out very well. Plus there's some weird things going on with the cinematography.

THE NEGATIVE: I kind of accidentally already talked about it, but there was a lot of CG work done to simulate London during the blitz that just looked cheesy. Most of the outside shots were like this and very stylized. I'm okay with giving a certain look to a film, but make it across the board-don't include it some scenes and not in others. Also the story was confusing. I couldn't figure out if Vera really wanted to be with Thomas or not. No character motivations were clear at all and all the characters seemed to do things for no reason or to simply move the story along.

THE VERDICT: Don't even rent it. I saw it on Netflix, so if you already have an account you can watch it on your computer for free if you're really interested. A classic case of good acting not being able to make up for a bad story.

I give it 2 out of 5 stars.

A new feature on the site: Actor's Spotlight!

Actor's Spotlight On: Sienna Miller.
I didn't even know who she was until Jude Law had an affair and she was in all the tabloids with their two kids looking like the wronged woman. All that aside she's had some good roles in the last couple of years. She was on G.I. Joe where she managed to keep me interested in her character despite G.I. Joe just being a bad movie. Her performance in this role stands out because she played a complex woman and she played it well. As Caitlin Thomas she is both free-spirited and closed off, she is willful and loving, she's playful and deceitful. Her character really had three dimensions for me and she embodied all those traits well. All of the other actors were great, but they each seemed to have more of a purpose in the movie. Caitlin was the only one of the four who was directionless. Dylan had his poetry, Vera had her singing, and William was in the army. All three characters seemed to actively participating in their own lives, in contrast Caitlin reacts. You get the sense that this is all she can do. She has no trade and she lives off her friends. Her and her husband have frequent affairs, some for fun, some in retaliation. Her life is influenced by other people and not by her own actions. Sienna Miller did a great job of bringing this fact to life without overdoing it and making her melancholy or lifeless. Indeed she had a great deal of life and a great presence in the film.

The Prawns are Coming!: District 9

Directed by Neill Blomkamp
Starring Sharlto Copley, Vanessa Haywood, and Jason Cope

I got distracted reading the imdb boards while writing this post... *shakes fist angrily in the air*

SYNOPSIS: If you've somehow managed to avoid the buzz surrounding this film then here's a basic rundown. The film's protagonist is Wikus Van De Merwe, a South African bureaucrat. The film is set in Johannesburg sometime in the late eighties (which I actually didn't realize until after the film) and chronicles the arrival of alien beings, derogatorily dubbed "prawns." Wikus is an official whose task is to rehouse them, since the area they currently reside in has become a slum and the people of Johannesburg have rioted to remove them. It's shot in a documentary style format as the camera follows Wikus performing his duties. There are also talking head interviews from various professors and people involved.

THE POSITIVE: WOW. Is all I have to say. This film was unlike anything I've ever seen before. I already want to see it again and I just saw it yesterday. The story is gripping-I was on the edge of my seat wondering what was going to happen next-and the acting is superb. It's a sci-fi story that is original, bold, and well done. The entire storyline and setting had obviously been well-rehearsed and the film really does look real. It also had a conflicted man as the hero (or anti-hero), who wasn't mild-mannered on the outside, but able to manipulate complex weaponry when called to as so many action heroes are. He was a bureaucrat whose life spins out of control and forces him to decide what side he's really on. The film was also a great metaphor for apartheid and also racial relations in general. It was just great on every level.

THE NEGATIVE: I want more!! That's all I have to say. I want to see what happens next. It definitely left me with a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of things that I want to see happen.

THE VERDICT: short and sweet: Go See It.

I give it 5 out of 5.

Whew...

Wow....4 in about an hour. I'm tired readers so if there are spelling or grammar errors leave them in the comments. If you see anything else I left out-let me know. I'm going to add the directors to the other films I've reviewed later-I think I mention them, but don't name them. I'll have a new DVD of the week for you tomorrow: The Edge of Love.

Who Says You Can't Rewrite History?: Inglourious Basterds

Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Starring Brad Pitt, Eli Roth, Melanie Laurent, Christoph Waltz, Diane Krueger, and Daniel Bruhl

Yes it's spelled correctly.

SYNOPSIS: The plot is too crazy and convoluted to really explain, but basically it's a about a guerilla unit of Jewish-American soldiers in France fighting the Nazis.

THE POSITIVE: So much killing. Ok I know some of you might not have me pegged as a blood and gore kind of girl, I guess I inherited it from my dad. I like action and violence and this film definitely has a ton of both. The thing you really have to remember when watching a Tarantino film is that the action, story, and characters have no basis in real life. They belong to a different world that exists only in Quentin's head. I really liked it, it was typically Tarantino, but it was also a lot of fun. Which one of us wouldn't want to rewrite the Holocaust, and he was just crazy enough to do it. He makes caricatures of Hitler's high command and glorifies the American's even as they do the most barbaric things but it all just makes sense some how. It was also shot beautifully. There is some great cinematography in this film and of course the music is perfect! Also I loved the film splicing techniques and Samuel L. Jackson narrating the properties of nitrate film stock...what could be better than that?

THE NEGATIVE: It's hard to write something negative, because the film is just so different, and unexpected than anything out there. Yes the violence is a little absurd, but it's also so obviously fake and over the top. The story is convoluted and unbelieveable, but that's the point of the movie! It's long, but honestly I didn't notice I was so involved. It's great! GO SEE IT!

THE VERDICT: For real, dog, though if you don't like a lot of violence this movie is not for you. If you like you're movies to be grounded in reality (which doesn't make sense, why would I want to watch my own life?) than this film is not for you. If you don't like reading subtitles-also not for you. But for whoever's left go see it! I saw it twice!! Double Points! (also I got carded because I look like I'm 12, but that only put a slight damper on the evening).

I give it 5 out of 5!*

Dude Where'd My Husband Go?: The Time Traveler's Wife

Directed by Robert Schwentke
Starring Rachel McAdams, Eric Bana and Ron Livingston

Haha, if you imagine Ashton Kutcher saying this post's title it's even funnier....yessss

SYNOPSIS: Imagine a person could time travel, naked, and then imagine that someone was your husband...what would you do? Well this film answers that question. It is of course based off a book, as all good movies are, by Audrey Niffennegger the woman with the worst last name in history. But seriously Henry DeTamble is an ordinary boy until he learns that he time travels against his will and always without clothes. The interesting part is that he revisits events in his own life and one of those events is the life of his wife Clare. The film is about their meeting and also about the affects of his traveling on their marriage.

THE POSITIVE: I have read this book and it is awesome so I was a little leary going in. I thought it would be hard to translate into film, but it works suprisingly well. Rachel McAdams and Eric Bana are perfect as Clare and Henry and they have great chemistry. I thought it was paced well and shot very nicely. The film had a great look to it and I really liked the cinematography, which is of course enough for me to enjoy any film. I'm also a sucker for romance so this was really well done. It had a certain inevitability about it that was both sad and uplifting. The acting was also superb from the whole cast (do you notice that I say that a lot? it's because I'm not an acting judge so feel free to ignore whatever I say about actors).

THE NEGATIVE: I thought his disappearing effect was a little cheesy and would have liked to see something a little better than a slow dissolve. There were also some interesting camera tricks (a steadicam shot, some interesting angles and tilt ups) that were used at random times in the film, which I didn't get. I'm all for trying new things, but do it with a purpose. Of course, my constant gripe-the book was better. There's just so much to fit in that they had to pare down a lot of it and whereas the book is really about Clare, the movie is about Henry.

This isn't a negative of the film, but I will say that by the end I was in tears and when I was wiping my eyes in shame I looked over at my friend, Meghan, who sat with dry eyes looking at the screen with a confused expression. Meghan you have a heart of stone and that's all I have to say.

THE VERDICT: If you have some extra cash lying around go see it, but otherwise wait for the rental. It's a nice film to watch on a rainy night and will leave you, hopefully, feeling hopeful rather than sad.

I give it 3 out of 5 stars.*

Bon Appetit!: Julie & Julia

Directed by Nora Ephron
Starring Amy Adams, Chris Messina, Meryl Streep and Stanley Tucci

I know, I know I couldn't resist! Now for the main course...

SYNOPSIS: You know who Julia Child is right? Well if you don't she's a famous chef who had her own TV show and wrote the definitive cookbook on french cooking. You know who Julie Powell is right? Ok that may be slightly more understandable, but she started a blog where she cooked all 524 of Julia's recipes in 365 days. She later turned this blog into a book and then into a movie. Which is what I'm reviewing. The film is actually about both their lives. Julie Powell's creation and completion of the blog and Julia Child's post-war years in France and her creation of her cookbook.

THE POSITIVE: MERYL STREEP. I don't care who you are, you have to enjoy Meryl Streep's acting and the way she embodies Julia Child is amazing to watch onscreen. I'm also a big fan of Amy Adams and she was very cute, and very nervous, and very flustered as Julie Powell. I also thought the juxtaposition of their lives was good. The film doesn't actually spend that much time on Powell's life, but instead focuses more on Child's which I think is a good decision. We also see less of Powell's attempts at cooking, but more how she relates to Julia and how the blog affects her personal and professional life. Stanley Tucci and Chris Messina were great in the roles of the husbands and I thought they were able to bring a lot to some small roles.

THE NEGATIVE: Again I felt a little let down, there's no real climax to the movie. Julie finishes her blog and Julia finishes her book. There's not really a lot of dramatic tension especially since we don't get to see the real impact time-wise of Julie/Julia finishing their respective projects. For Julie it takes only a year to finish her blog, but it took Julia Child eight years to finish her cookbook! This isn't represented well on film and it just makes everything appear very easy. I don't agree with a lot of critics that Julie Powell's portion shouldn't have been in the film. While Julia Child's life is way more interesting Powell adds a nice counterpart and we get to see how Child's work touched the life of a woman and helped better herself, which was really what Child did for herself. Also she was an OSS spy, not just a file clerk! Look it up!

THE VERDICT: Honestly I would wait for the DVD on this one. It's very cute and if you're in the mood for something light and not very intellectual I would go see it, but I would not shell out $10.50 for it-even though I did. See what I do for you readers! See!

I give it 2.5 out of 5 stars.*

Life Begins Again: Ponyo (Gake no ue no Ponyo)

Directed by Hayao Miyazaki
Starring the voices of Frankie Jonas, Noah Cyrus, Tina Fey, Liam Neeson, Cate Blanchett, and Matt Damon.

Oh my god an actual post I hear you say in your head. Yes dear readers, you're partial, prejudiced, and ignorant film critic is back from hiatus! I know you were waiting with bated breath. I am all settled here in New York and bonus: I have internet access! So on to the review...

SYNOPSIS: For those not in the know, Ponyo is the lasted film from Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki. His previous films include Howl's Moving Castle and the Academy award-winning Spirited Away. I am a big fan of Miyazaki's work so I was a little biased going into the film. The story is a kind of a re-telling of the little mermaid and involves the relationship between Ponyo, a fish girl, and Sosuke, the boy who rescues her.

THE POSITIVE: As always Miyazaki delivers with great visuals and a compelling (if somewhat simple) story. Honestly the animation in this movie alone makes it worth seeing, it's very fanciful and Miyazaki does a good job of creating a world apart from our own. It was also very old-school, with less of a digital look which I think worked with the simplicity of the story. I also thought the voice casting was spot-on. Frankie Jonas and Noah Cyrus (who is a GIRL by the way-celebrities stop naming your kids weird names!) really seemed to go well together and their excitement was catching. Despite the "big names" casted I thought everyone was a good fit for the role. However, I would like to point out that Miyazaki really lets the visuals drive the story and it works well and it really kept me engaged. I thought it was a simple story and he told it in a simple way-of course his version has several twists so don't expect flounder to make an appearance. He also toned down the environmentalism and anti-war critiques(though it still makes an appearance) which was so rampant in Howl. Yes it's nice to make a statement in a movie, but don't just insert it into character actions-I'm looking at you Star Wars Episode II.

THE NEGATIVE: Liam Neeson, I love you, but I can't imagine you in anything but a serious role. Maybe this was my fault, but as the father of Ponyo he seemed a little too intense. I was also expecting a little more out of the film. Most Miyazaki films are rife with travels to different worlds and trials for the heroes, but this seemed a bit tame. Maybe it was because our heroes are both quite young, but it didn't seem to have the same punch as some of his other films.

This isn't really a negative, but it's kind of a warning. There are some unanswered questions in the film, with most Miyazaki films you just have to take the world as it is. There are spirit bathhouses, talking frogs, and creepy ghosts. Why these things exist isn't clear and it's the same with Ponyo. Where she comes from and where her powers come from is pretty much a mystery-I expect that from his film so I didn't have a problem with it, but don't go expecting everything to be clear at the end.

THE VERDICT: I would go see it. If you're looking for something cute and silly to go to this is it. It's funny and the animation is amazing. I think anyone will walk out of the theater smiling and you don't...then I don't know what's wrong with you.

I give it 4 out of 5 stars.*

Behold!
I have made it to New York, faithful readers, but am currently without Internet access (I'm texting this post) new posts forthcoming...I promise!

Seeing a movie...
I'm about to see a movie so reviews will go up later today. Plus I'll have a lot so you know bonus points for me...or something.

Must See Foreign Film: Waltz with Bashir

I just rented this film after wanting to see it for about six months and it was moving, groundbreaking, and just amazing.

Synopsis: The film chronicles a Lebanon war veterans attempts to reconstruct his memories of the conflict. After speaking with a fellow soldier he realizes that he has no memories of the war. His only memory seems to be a dream and it forms the basis for his search. He decides to speak with other veterans to find out where he was and what he was doing. It is also a semi-autobiographical account of the director's, Ari Folman, experiences during the war.

Review: It was excellent. The visuals were at times frightening and poignant. Folman takes us on a journey not only of a singular experience, but also of the war as a whole.The music in the film was amazing. The score is both uplifting and haunting. The addition of Israeli pop songs adds another layer to the film as well (unfortunately these songs are not on the CD). Overall, the film was engaging and moving and I would definitely see it again.

I give it 5 out of 5.

Specs: The film is animated with some live-action footage. In Hebrew with English subtitles with a running time of about 90 minutes. It is now available to rent at Blockbuster and Netflix. The original title of the film is Vals Im Bashir (2008). It was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Language film category.

Retro Movie of the Week!

Since I would like to actually have some content on this site I now present: Retro Movie of the Week! I will recommend one classic film each week that I feel is really important to film or is just a personal favorite. Now without further ado this weeks Retro Movie is...MILDRED PIERCE!

Synopsis: When most people think of the forties they think of Nazi's, Hitler, and World War II. What many don't think about is empowered women! All over the country everyday women were joining the WAAC or filling the vacant positions left by men at factories (Rosie the Riveter!). This theme was picked up in Hollywood with a slew of films like Stella Dallas, Jezebel, and The Women that revolved around and were driven by female characters. A great example of this is Mildred Pierce.

The film stars Joan Crawford as Mildred Pierce, a suburban woman who leaves her philandering husband. Rather than giving up she strives to (and eventually becomes) a successful and independent woman. Another theme of the film is the relationship between Mildred and her daughter Veda, played by Ann Blyth. While Mildred works tirelessly to provide a better life for her Veda grows up to be a spoiled brat who doesn't appreciate anything her mother does for her. These two themes come to a head at the end of the film, but throughout Mildred proves herself to be an independent and thoroughly autonomous character. It's a great film and Joan Crawford won an Oscar for her performance.

Specs: The film also stars Jack Carson and Eve Arden. It was nominated for five Oscars, including Best Picture. Running time is about 2 hours. I would recommend getting this through Netflix or your local library as blockbuster no longer carries films from the BEFORE TIMES (i.e. before DVD's, also anything in Black and White).

Future?: I read in Entertainment Weekly that their might be a remake in the works with Kate Winslet tentatively tapped (say that three times fast!) to star as Mildred herself. It would be a mini-series rather than a film and I would be excited to see it. The film definitely has themes that can carry over to modern times, but it would also be great as a period piece (think of the colors!). Though I'm not the greatest fan of made-for-TV movies (or remakes for that matter) I think this one just might be worth it.


Shout out to Prof. Despina Kakoudaki from the literature department at American University for her great class "Melodrama" where we watched some really great films!

Blog Layout

I'm making some changes to the website since I discovered that my original format looked exactly like the Cake Wrecks blog. Let me know in the comments what you think and if everything is readable. I tend to favor darker schemes, but I don't want it to look depressing. Let me know. Coraline review still in the works for Thursday.

DVD Pick of the Week: Coraline

This is just a heads up with a fuller post to follow. I actually saw Coraline in the theaters (though sadly not in 3-D) and it was awesome, so I already think it's a DVD worth buying. But I'll check out the special features as well and give a buy/not buy verdict.

Still haven't been able to rent it yet...hopefully will get to it by Thursday.

Love is in the Air: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Directed by David Yates
Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Emma Watson and the Royal Shakespeare Academy.

This is going to be a long one so brace yourselves. Also I dressed up and saw this on opening night so that tells you how much of a dork I am.

THE POSITIVE: I think most Potter fans will disagree with me, but I really loved this one. It's right up there with Prisoner of Azkaban with me. I'm a big proponent of "no movie will ever be as good as the book", which is why I'm always happy when a filmmaker deviates rather than produces a carbon copy of a work. I think David Yates did a great job trying to turn a book which is mainly about exposition and long memories into something that can be seen by the average non-Potterphile. The truth is that most people will not sit through the carbon copy version of "Half-Blood Prince." It's interesting from a narrative perspective, but in terms of film it's pretty boring. I thought focusing on the romantic relationships of our three heroes was a good way to create dramatic tension and it really helped drive a lot of the story. The acting also just keeps getting better and better from all of the kids (I guess I can't call them kids now can I?) in the films. I also loved the entire look of the film which made it seem more otherworldly and it helped take the film out of the realm of reality and into that of fantasy. A lot of Potter fans have griped that leaving out so much will make the seventh book hard to understand, but I have spoken to people who have not read the books and they have basically guessed the entire plot of the seventh book just from seeing the sixth movie! I think it's important to step back from the text and really look at the film as a stand-alone. This is an important example of how a movie can be separate from the book and still be good and convey most of the book's information. Now watch me be a hypocrite when "New Moon" comes out.

THE NEGATIVE: Not a lot to say here. The one scene that everyone hates (the fight scene at the Burrow), I dislike for a different reason. I liked having a break from all the teenage angst, however, I did think it was drawn out and I didn't really see how it connected with the film as a whole. I understand why they needed the action, but I would have liked to see the fight between Harry and Draco drawn out a little more and where did Quidditch go? I also thought some of the romance seemed a little forced, but I can understand that it's a hard transition to make from friends off-screen to lovers on, especially when you've basically grown up together. I thought all four of them did well considering their age and the abruptness of it.

THE VERDICT: Go see it! And then when the DVD comes out buy the extended version with 17 hours of extra footage. But seriously, it's a film worth seeing for Potterheads (how many names for Harry Potter fans are there?) and Muggles alike.

I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars.*

Porkchop Sandwiches: G.I. Joe

Directed by Stephen Sommers
Starring Channing Tatum, Sienna Miller, Marlon Wayans, Joesph Gordon-Levitt, and Dennis Quaid.

Not the best movie to start out with, but I thought it was pretty decent. I never followed the TV series, so my only knowledge comes from the fake PSA's by Fenslerfilms: (Go watch them they're really funny!). So coming into it knowing nothing I have to say it wasn't that bad.

THE POSITIVE: I thought the story was actually pretty engaging and there were some twists that I did not see coming. The pacing was pretty good and if you completely believe that in the distant future we can don metal suits that accelerate our actions then you can have a pretty good time. I thought the fight scenes were actually very well choreographed, especially one that involved two nine year old kids. If you disconnect your mind this movie is a lot of fun and actually pieces together pretty well, there aren't really any plot holes and the cast is, in general, pretty good. I have to give props to Joesph-Gordon Levitt who did a lot with a small role. I also thought Sienna Miller did well in a pretty two-dimensional part.

THE NEGATIVE: Despite all the action there was a general lack of blood. It seemed that a lot of the actual violence had been toned down especially compared to something like Transformers 2. What also annoyed me is that every character seemed invulnerable. I don't know if this is part of the series, but if your car just got flipped I don't expect you to immediately get up and run up six flights of stairs-which is what happened.
I was most disappointed in Channing Tatum's acting, especially from what I've seen of his other work I expected more than just an unrelenting glare. I suppose he was trying to be the tough guy, but it came off pretty wooden. I won't go into any other actors since none of them had big enough parts to really do anything with-they were all decent.

THE VERDICT: If this is the one summer blockbuster you see then you missed the boat. I would save my money and maybe rent it, maybe depending on the special features. I didn't think it was worth it even for escapist fare like this. Definitely not even close to a fourth of the action as Transformers 2, which also had giant fucking robots!

I give it 2 out of 5 stars.*