From 7e6a54375c0acfbdf8aecdb65596787f14dc9497 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shristi Rawat Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 16:14:32 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] InvalidSchema Error when Fetching URLs in getSoup and NoneType Error When Parsing HTML in getReviewText --- ...vie_review_imdb_scrapping-checkpoint.ipynb | 679 ++++++++++++++++++ 2639.txt | 1 + Movie_review_imdb_scrapping.ipynb | 478 ++++-------- data_scrapped/data.csv | 460 ------------ 4 files changed, 811 insertions(+), 807 deletions(-) create mode 100644 .ipynb_checkpoints/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping-checkpoint.ipynb create mode 100644 2639.txt diff --git a/.ipynb_checkpoints/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping-checkpoint.ipynb b/.ipynb_checkpoints/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping-checkpoint.ipynb new file mode 100644 index 00000000..064b07fe --- /dev/null +++ b/.ipynb_checkpoints/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping-checkpoint.ipynb @@ -0,0 +1,679 @@ +{ + "cells": [ + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 232, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "import requests\n", + "from bs4 import BeautifulSoup\n", + "#importing beautiful soap for scrapping the data" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Dependencies\n", + "\n", + "`BBeautifulSoup` : pip install BeautifulSoup" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 235, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "\n", + "import pandas as pd\n", + "import numpy as np\n", + "import itertools #to create efficent looping to fetch more data in a go\n", + "import re \n", + "import random \n", + "from textblob import TextBlob" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "### Creating BS4 Functions for scrapping" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + " Movies are cateogirsed into seven and each category is processed by indivitual team members.\n", + "- category 1: [1940 to 1980 200 movie listing with rating=10000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=1940-01-01,1980-12-31&num_votes=10000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 2: [2020 to 2021 200 movie listing with rating=20000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=2020-01-01,2021-12-31&num_votes=20000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 3: [2000 to 2021 200 movie listing with rating=60000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=2000-01-01,2021-12-31&num_votes=60000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 4: [1940 to 1980 200 movie listing with rating=10000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=2005-01-01,2015-12-31&num_votes=30000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 5: [1980 to 2019 200 movie listing with rating=500000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=1980-01-01,2019-12-31&num_votes=500000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 6: [1980 to 2019 200 movie listing with rating=80000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=tv_series&release_date=1980-01-01,2019-12-31&num_votes=80000,&count=200) \n", + "- category 7: [2005 to 2010 200 movie listing with rating=5000](https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=2005-01-01,2010-12-31&num_votes=5000,&count=200) \n", + "\n", + "#Sample files are put into Data_scrapped folder." + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 256, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "url = \"https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature&release_date=2009-01-01,2011-12-31&num_votes=2000,&count=200\" #2000 - 2021 6000votes filter 200 titles (imdb not letting to filter >200 titles in a go)\n", + "\n", + "def getSoup(url):\n", + " \"\"\"\n", + " Utility function this get soup function will fetch the above url which stored in url var.\n", + " \"\"\"\n", + " headers = {\n", + " 'User-Agent': 'Your User-Agent String',\n", + " 'Authorization': 'Bearer Your_Authentication_Token' # Include this if authentication is required\n", + " }\n", + " try:\n", + " response = requests.get(url, headers=headers) # Removed custom headers\n", + " response.raise_for_status() # Check if request was successful\n", + " return BeautifulSoup(response.text, 'html.parser')\n", + " except requests.exceptions.RequestException as e:\n", + " print(f\"Failed to fetch URL: {url} - {e}\")\n", + " return None\n", + "\n", + "def getReviews(soup):\n", + " '''Function returns all reviews including postive and negative..'''\n", + " \n", + " # get a list of user ratings\n", + " user_review_ratings = [tag.previous_element for tag in \n", + " soup.find_all('span', attrs={'class': 'point-scale'})] \n", + " #can search div by inspect elementor\n", + " \n", + " \n", + " # get the review tags\n", + " user_review_list = soup.find_all('a', attrs={'class':'title'})\n", + " ans = []\n", + " for i in range(5):\n", + " ans.append(user_review_list[random.randint(0, len(user_review_list) -1)])\n", + " links = [\"https://www.imdb.com\" + tag['href'] for tag in ans]\n", + " return links\n", + "\n", + "\n", + "def getReviewText(review_url):\n", + " '''Returns the user review text given the review url.'''\n", + " if review_url is None:\n", + " return None\n", + " try:\n", + " # Assuming we're looking for a specific tag for reviews\n", + " tag = review_url.find('div', attrs={'class': 'text show-more__control'})\n", + " return tag.get_text() if tag else \"No review text found\"\n", + " except AttributeError as e:\n", + " print(f\"Error extracting review text: {e}\")\n", + " return None\n", + "\n", + "\n", + "def getMovieTitle(review_url):\n", + " '''Returns the movie title from the review url.'''\n", + " # get the review_url's soup\n", + " soup = getSoup(review_url)\n", + " # find h1 tag\n", + " tag = soup.find('h1')\n", + " return list(tag.children)[1].getText()\n", + "\n", + "def getNounChunks(user_review):\n", + " # create the doc object\n", + " doc = nlp(user_review)\n", + " # get a list of noun_chunks\n", + " noun_chunks = list(doc.noun_chunks)\n", + " # convert noun_chunks from span objects to strings, otherwise it won't pick\n", + " noun_chunks_strlist = [chunk.text for chunk in noun_chunks]\n", + " return noun_chunks_strlist\n", + "movies_soup = getSoup(url)" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Filtering the movie tags" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 258, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "name": "stdout", + "output_type": "stream", + "text": [ + "There are a total of 25 movie titles\n", + "Displaying 10 titles\n" + ] + }, + { + "data": { + "text/plain": [ + "['/title/tt0327597/',\n", + " '/title/tt1273235/',\n", + " '/title/tt1375666/',\n", + " '/title/tt1131734/',\n", + " '/title/tt1259521/',\n", + " '/title/tt1262416/',\n", + " '/title/tt1591095/',\n", + " '/title/tt1130884/',\n", + " '/title/tt0361748/',\n", + " '/title/tt0758746/']" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 258, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "movie_tags = movies_soup.find_all('a', attrs={'class': \"ipc-title-link-wrapper\"})\n", + "\n", + "# filter the a-tags to get just the titles\n", + "movie_links = [tag.attrs['href'][:tag.attrs['href'].index('?')] for tag in movie_tags]\n", + "\n", + "# remove duplicate links\n", + "unique_movie_links = list(dict.fromkeys(movie_links))\n", + "\n", + "print(\"There are a total of \" + str(len(unique_movie_links)) + \" movie titles\")\n", + "print(\"Displaying 10 titles\")\n", + "unique_movie_links[:10]" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Filtering the movie URL's" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 262, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "name": "stdout", + "output_type": "stream", + "text": [ + "There are a total of 25 movie user reviews\n", + "Displaying 20 user reviews links\n" + ] + }, + { + "data": { + "text/plain": [ + "['https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327597/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1273235/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1131734/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1259521/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1262416/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1591095/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1130884/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758746/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1201607/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1467304/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1311067/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1189340/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0947798/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119646/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0926084/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1853739/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1014759/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1438176/reviews']" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 262, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "\n", + "base_url = \"https://www.imdb.com\"\n", + "movie_links = []\n", + "\n", + "for tag in movie_tags:\n", + " href = tag.attrs.get('href', '')\n", + " if '?' in href:\n", + " movie_url = base_url + href[:href.index('?')] + 'reviews'\n", + " else:\n", + " movie_url = base_url + href + 'reviews'\n", + " \n", + " movie_links.append(movie_url)\n", + "print(\"There are a total of \" + str(len(movie_links)) + \" movie user reviews\")\n", + "print(\"Displaying 20 user reviews links\")\n", + "movie_links[:20]" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 264, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "movie_soups = [getSoup(link) for link in movie_links]\n", + "# get all movie review links from the 200 listing\n", + "movie_review_list = [getReviewText(movie_soup) for movie_soup in movie_soups]\n" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 265, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "name": "stdout", + "output_type": "stream", + "text": [ + "500\n", + "There are a total of 500 individual movie reviews\n", + "Displaying 10 reviews\n" + ] + }, + { + "data": { + "text/plain": [ + "['N', 'o', ' ', 'r', 'e', 'v', 'i', 'e', 'w', ' ']" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 265, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "#Checking how many movie review were able to filter.\n", + "movie_review_list = list(itertools.chain(*movie_review_list))\n", + "print(len(movie_review_list))\n", + "\n", + "print(\"There are a total of \" + str(len(movie_review_list)) + \" individual movie reviews\")\n", + "print(\"Displaying 10 reviews\")\n", + "movie_review_list[:10]" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Converting into the Pandas Data Frame" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 252, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "ename": "TypeError", + "evalue": "str.find() takes no keyword arguments", + "output_type": "error", + "traceback": [ + "\u001b[1;31m---------------------------------------------------------------------------\u001b[0m", + "\u001b[1;31mTypeError\u001b[0m Traceback (most recent call last)", + "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[252], line 1\u001b[0m\n\u001b[1;32m----> 1\u001b[0m review_texts \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m [\u001b[43mgetReviewText\u001b[49m\u001b[43m(\u001b[49m\u001b[43murl\u001b[49m\u001b[43m)\u001b[49m \u001b[38;5;28;01mfor\u001b[39;00m url \u001b[38;5;129;01min\u001b[39;00m movie_review_list]\n\u001b[0;32m 3\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# get movie name from the review link\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 4\u001b[0m movie_titles \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m [getMovieTitle(url) \u001b[38;5;28;01mfor\u001b[39;00m url \u001b[38;5;129;01min\u001b[39;00m movie_review_list]\n", + "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[239], line 43\u001b[0m, in \u001b[0;36mgetReviewText\u001b[1;34m(review_url)\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 40\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mreturn\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;28;01mNone\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 41\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mtry\u001b[39;00m:\n\u001b[0;32m 42\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# Assuming we're looking for a specific tag for reviews\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[1;32m---> 43\u001b[0m tag \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[43mreview_url\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;241;43m.\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43mfind\u001b[49m\u001b[43m(\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mdiv\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m,\u001b[49m\u001b[43m \u001b[49m\u001b[43mattrs\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;241;43m=\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m{\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mclass\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m:\u001b[49m\u001b[43m \u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mtext show-more__control\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m}\u001b[49m\u001b[43m)\u001b[49m\n\u001b[0;32m 44\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mreturn\u001b[39;00m tag\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39mget_text() \u001b[38;5;28;01mif\u001b[39;00m tag \u001b[38;5;28;01melse\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mNo review text found\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\n\u001b[0;32m 45\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mexcept\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;167;01mAttributeError\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;28;01mas\u001b[39;00m e:\n", + "\u001b[1;31mTypeError\u001b[0m: str.find() takes no keyword arguments" + ] + } + ], + "source": [ + "review_texts = [getReviewText(url) for url in movie_review_list]\n", + "\n", + "# get movie name from the review link\n", + "movie_titles = [getMovieTitle(url) for url in movie_review_list]\n", + "\n", + "# Filtering the dataframe with only User_reviews by avoiding links and title\n", + "\n", + "# construct a dataframe\n", + "df = pd.DataFrame({\n", + " 'user_review': review_texts })" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 192, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "data": { + "text/html": [ + "
\n", + "\n", + "\n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + "
user_review
\n", + "
" + ], + "text/plain": [ + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review]\n", + "Index: []" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 192, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "df.head(5) #displaying the resultant data frame" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## The data frame need to remove index and filter the limit review length by 250 words" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 195, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "text_list = [m for m in df['user_review']]\n", + "#text_list" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 197, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "data": { + "text/html": [ + "
\n", + "\n", + "\n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + "
user_reviewlength
\n", + "
" + ], + "text/plain": [ + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review, length]\n", + "Index: []" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 197, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "#calculating the length of the text\n", + "text_list_length = [len(m.split()) for m in text_list] \n", + "df['length'] = text_list_length\n", + "df" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 199, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "data": { + "text/html": [ + "
\n", + "\n", + "\n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + "
user_reviewlength
\n", + "
" + ], + "text/plain": [ + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review, length]\n", + "Index: []" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 199, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "df = df[df['length'] < 250] #limiting the df by 250 in length\n", + "df" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 201, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [ + { + "data": { + "text/html": [ + "
\n", + "\n", + "\n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + " \n", + "
user_review
\n", + "
" + ], + "text/plain": [ + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review]\n", + "Index: []" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 201, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" + } + ], + "source": [ + "df.drop('length', axis=1, inplace=True)\n", + "df\n", + "#dropping the len row" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 203, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "#converting only reviews to CSV & removing the index\n", + "df.to_csv('data_scrapped/data.csv', index=False) " + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Splitting the csv file to the indivitual text files" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 206, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "import csv\n", + "\n", + "with open(\"data_scrapped/data.csv\", \"r\") as f:\n", + " reader = csv.reader(f)\n", + " rownumber = 2639\n", + " for row in reader:\n", + " g=open(str(rownumber)+\".txt\",\"w\")\n", + " g.write(str(row))\n", + " rownumber = rownumber + 1\n", + " g.close()" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": 208, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [ + "def analyze_sentiment(text):\n", + " \"\"\"\n", + " Analyzes the sentiment of the input text.\n", + " \n", + " Returns:\n", + " - 'positive' if sentiment polarity > 0\n", + " - 'negative' if sentiment polarity < 0\n", + " - 'neutral' if sentiment polarity == 0\n", + " \"\"\"\n", + " blob = TextBlob(text)\n", + " polarity = blob.sentiment.polarity\n", + " \n", + " if polarity > 0:\n", + " return 'positive'\n", + " elif polarity < 0:\n", + " return 'negative'\n", + " else:\n", + " return 'neutral'\n", + "\n", + "# Assuming df is your DataFrame containing the reviews\n", + "df['sentiment'] = df['user_review'].apply(analyze_sentiment)\n" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## <------------------------------------------------------EOL----------------------------------------------------------------->" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [ + "## Final Dataset\n", + "\n", + "Here is the Link to Final Dataset: [Drive Link](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sTNAeuy-99Hao0V5AOVznLXyDJC2zuFn/view?usp=sharing)" + ] + }, + { + "cell_type": "markdown", + "metadata": {}, + "source": [] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": null, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [] + } + ], + "metadata": { + "interpreter": { + "hash": "23784c1f7cb08f751fc8275aaeeb793366452f178ab646d6f5c554e80b94c083" + }, + "kernelspec": { + "display_name": "Python 3 (ipykernel)", + "language": "python", + "name": "python3" + }, + "language_info": { + "codemirror_mode": { + "name": "ipython", + "version": 3 + }, + "file_extension": ".py", + "mimetype": "text/x-python", + "name": "python", + "nbconvert_exporter": "python", + "pygments_lexer": "ipython3", + "version": "3.12.4" + } + }, + "nbformat": 4, + "nbformat_minor": 4 +} diff --git a/2639.txt b/2639.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..5a6eecbb --- /dev/null +++ b/2639.txt @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +['user_review'] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping.ipynb b/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping.ipynb index c89119c8..064b07fe 100644 --- a/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping.ipynb +++ b/Movie_review_imdb_scrapping.ipynb @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ "cells": [ { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 1, + "execution_count": 232, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -22,34 +22,9 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 5, + "execution_count": 235, "metadata": {}, - "outputs": [ - { - "name": "stdout", - "output_type": "stream", - "text": [ - "Requirement already satisfied: textblob in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (0.18.0.post0)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: nltk>=3.8 in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (from textblob) (3.8.1)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: click in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (from nltk>=3.8->textblob) (8.0.4)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: joblib in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (from nltk>=3.8->textblob) (1.2.0)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: regex>=2021.8.3 in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (from nltk>=3.8->textblob) (2022.7.9)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: tqdm in c:\\users\\umesh\\anaconda3.x\\lib\\site-packages (from nltk>=3.8->textblob) (4.65.0)\n", - "Requirement already satisfied: colorama in c:\\users\\umesh\\appdata\\roaming\\python\\python311\\site-packages (from click->nltk>=3.8->textblob) (0.4.6)\n" - ] - }, - { - "ename": "ModuleNotFoundError", - "evalue": "No module named 'textblob'", - "output_type": "error", - "traceback": [ - "\u001b[1;31m---------------------------------------------------------------------------\u001b[0m", - "\u001b[1;31mModuleNotFoundError\u001b[0m Traceback (most recent call last)", - "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[5], line 7\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 5\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mimport\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;21;01mrandom\u001b[39;00m \n\u001b[0;32m 6\u001b[0m get_ipython()\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39msystem(\u001b[38;5;124m'\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mpip install textblob\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m'\u001b[39m)\n\u001b[1;32m----> 7\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mimport\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;21;01mtextblob\u001b[39;00m\n", - "\u001b[1;31mModuleNotFoundError\u001b[0m: No module named 'textblob'" - ] - } - ], + "outputs": [], "source": [ "\n", "import pandas as pd\n", @@ -85,7 +60,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": null, + "execution_count": 256, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -99,9 +74,13 @@ " 'User-Agent': 'Your User-Agent String',\n", " 'Authorization': 'Bearer Your_Authentication_Token' # Include this if authentication is required\n", " }\n", - " response = requests.get(url, headers=headers)\n", - " soup = BeautifulSoup(response.text, 'html.parser')\n", - " return soup\n", + " try:\n", + " response = requests.get(url, headers=headers) # Removed custom headers\n", + " response.raise_for_status() # Check if request was successful\n", + " return BeautifulSoup(response.text, 'html.parser')\n", + " except requests.exceptions.RequestException as e:\n", + " print(f\"Failed to fetch URL: {url} - {e}\")\n", + " return None\n", "\n", "def getReviews(soup):\n", " '''Function returns all reviews including postive and negative..'''\n", @@ -123,11 +102,16 @@ "\n", "def getReviewText(review_url):\n", " '''Returns the user review text given the review url.'''\n", - " # get the review_url's soup\n", - " soup = getSoup(review_url)\n", - " # find div tags with class text show-more__control\n", - " tag = soup.find('div', attrs={'class': 'text show-more__control'})\n", - " return tag.getText()\n", + " if review_url is None:\n", + " return None\n", + " try:\n", + " # Assuming we're looking for a specific tag for reviews\n", + " tag = review_url.find('div', attrs={'class': 'text show-more__control'})\n", + " return tag.get_text() if tag else \"No review text found\"\n", + " except AttributeError as e:\n", + " print(f\"Error extracting review text: {e}\")\n", + " return None\n", + "\n", "\n", "def getMovieTitle(review_url):\n", " '''Returns the movie title from the review url.'''\n", @@ -157,33 +141,33 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 13, + "execution_count": 258, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { "name": "stdout", "output_type": "stream", "text": [ - "There are a total of 200 movie titles\n", + "There are a total of 25 movie titles\n", "Displaying 10 titles\n" ] }, { "data": { "text/plain": [ - "['/title/tt1318514/',\n", - " '/title/tt1375666/',\n", - " '/title/tt0361748/',\n", - " '/title/tt0914863/',\n", - " '/title/tt1563738/',\n", - " '/title/tt0458525/',\n", + "['/title/tt0327597/',\n", " '/title/tt1273235/',\n", + " '/title/tt1375666/',\n", + " '/title/tt1131734/',\n", + " '/title/tt1259521/',\n", + " '/title/tt1262416/',\n", + " '/title/tt1591095/',\n", " '/title/tt1130884/',\n", - " '/title/tt0947798/',\n", - " '/title/tt0780504/']" + " '/title/tt0361748/',\n", + " '/title/tt0758746/']" ] }, - "execution_count": 13, + "execution_count": 258, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -211,43 +195,43 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 20, + "execution_count": 262, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { "name": "stdout", "output_type": "stream", "text": [ - "There are a total of 200 movie user reviews\n", + "There are a total of 25 movie user reviews\n", "Displaying 20 user reviews links\n" ] }, { "data": { "text/plain": [ - "['https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1318514/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0914863/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1563738/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458525/reviews',\n", + "['https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327597/reviews',\n", " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1273235/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1131734/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1259521/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1262416/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1591095/reviews',\n", " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1130884/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758746/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1201607/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1467304/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1311067/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1189340/reviews',\n", " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0947798/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780504/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270798/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1570728/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/reviews',\n", " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119646/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454029/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1255953/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375670/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446029/reviews',\n", - " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/reviews']" + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0926084/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1853739/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1014759/reviews',\n", + " 'https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1438176/reviews']" ] }, - "execution_count": 20, + "execution_count": 262, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -255,7 +239,16 @@ "source": [ "\n", "base_url = \"https://www.imdb.com\"\n", - "movie_links = [base_url + tag.attrs['href'][:tag.attrs['href'].index('?')] + 'reviews' for tag in movie_tags]\n", + "movie_links = []\n", + "\n", + "for tag in movie_tags:\n", + " href = tag.attrs.get('href', '')\n", + " if '?' in href:\n", + " movie_url = base_url + href[:href.index('?')] + 'reviews'\n", + " else:\n", + " movie_url = base_url + href + 'reviews'\n", + " \n", + " movie_links.append(movie_url)\n", "print(\"There are a total of \" + str(len(movie_links)) + \" movie user reviews\")\n", "print(\"Displaying 20 user reviews links\")\n", "movie_links[:20]" @@ -263,7 +256,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 30, + "execution_count": 264, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -274,19 +267,27 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 22, + "execution_count": 265, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { - "ename": "NameError", - "evalue": "name 'movie_review_list' is not defined", - "output_type": "error", - "traceback": [ - "\u001b[1;31m---------------------------------------------------------------------------\u001b[0m", - "\u001b[1;31mNameError\u001b[0m Traceback (most recent call last)", - "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[22], line 2\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 1\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m#Checking how many movie review were able to filter.\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[1;32m----> 2\u001b[0m movie_review_list \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;28mlist\u001b[39m(itertools\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39mchain(\u001b[38;5;241m*\u001b[39m\u001b[43mmovie_review_list\u001b[49m))\n\u001b[0;32m 3\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28mprint\u001b[39m(\u001b[38;5;28mlen\u001b[39m(movie_review_list))\n\u001b[0;32m 5\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28mprint\u001b[39m(\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mThere are a total of \u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;241m+\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;28mstr\u001b[39m(\u001b[38;5;28mlen\u001b[39m(movie_review_list)) \u001b[38;5;241m+\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m individual movie reviews\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m)\n", - "\u001b[1;31mNameError\u001b[0m: name 'movie_review_list' is not defined" + "name": "stdout", + "output_type": "stream", + "text": [ + "500\n", + "There are a total of 500 individual movie reviews\n", + "Displaying 10 reviews\n" ] + }, + { + "data": { + "text/plain": [ + "['N', 'o', ' ', 'r', 'e', 'v', 'i', 'e', 'w', ' ']" + ] + }, + "execution_count": 265, + "metadata": {}, + "output_type": "execute_result" } ], "source": [ @@ -308,9 +309,22 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 12, + "execution_count": 252, "metadata": {}, - "outputs": [], + "outputs": [ + { + "ename": "TypeError", + "evalue": "str.find() takes no keyword arguments", + "output_type": "error", + "traceback": [ + "\u001b[1;31m---------------------------------------------------------------------------\u001b[0m", + "\u001b[1;31mTypeError\u001b[0m Traceback (most recent call last)", + "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[252], line 1\u001b[0m\n\u001b[1;32m----> 1\u001b[0m review_texts \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m [\u001b[43mgetReviewText\u001b[49m\u001b[43m(\u001b[49m\u001b[43murl\u001b[49m\u001b[43m)\u001b[49m \u001b[38;5;28;01mfor\u001b[39;00m url \u001b[38;5;129;01min\u001b[39;00m movie_review_list]\n\u001b[0;32m 3\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# get movie name from the review link\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 4\u001b[0m movie_titles \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m [getMovieTitle(url) \u001b[38;5;28;01mfor\u001b[39;00m url \u001b[38;5;129;01min\u001b[39;00m movie_review_list]\n", + "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[239], line 43\u001b[0m, in \u001b[0;36mgetReviewText\u001b[1;34m(review_url)\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 40\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mreturn\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;28;01mNone\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 41\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mtry\u001b[39;00m:\n\u001b[0;32m 42\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# Assuming we're looking for a specific tag for reviews\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[1;32m---> 43\u001b[0m tag \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[43mreview_url\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;241;43m.\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43mfind\u001b[49m\u001b[43m(\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mdiv\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m,\u001b[49m\u001b[43m \u001b[49m\u001b[43mattrs\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;241;43m=\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m{\u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mclass\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m:\u001b[49m\u001b[43m \u001b[49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43mtext show-more__control\u001b[39;49m\u001b[38;5;124;43m'\u001b[39;49m\u001b[43m}\u001b[49m\u001b[43m)\u001b[49m\n\u001b[0;32m 44\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mreturn\u001b[39;00m tag\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39mget_text() \u001b[38;5;28;01mif\u001b[39;00m tag \u001b[38;5;28;01melse\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mNo review text found\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\n\u001b[0;32m 45\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mexcept\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;167;01mAttributeError\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;28;01mas\u001b[39;00m e:\n", + "\u001b[1;31mTypeError\u001b[0m: str.find() takes no keyword arguments" + ] + } + ], "source": [ "review_texts = [getReviewText(url) for url in movie_review_list]\n", "\n", @@ -326,7 +340,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 13, + "execution_count": 192, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { @@ -354,40 +368,17 @@ " \n", " \n", " \n", - " \n", - " 0\n", - " That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 1\n", - " Despite there being no Scream movies for a dec...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 2\n", - " The \"Scream\" film franchise carved a memorable...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 3\n", - " Fifteen years have passed since the original W...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 4\n", - " Fifteen years have passed since the original W...\n", - " \n", " \n", "\n", "" ], "text/plain": [ - " user_review\n", - "0 That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - "1 Despite there being no Scream movies for a dec...\n", - "2 The \"Scream\" film franchise carved a memorable...\n", - "3 Fifteen years have passed since the original W...\n", - "4 Fifteen years have passed since the original W..." + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review]\n", + "Index: []" ] }, - "execution_count": 13, + "execution_count": 192, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -405,7 +396,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 14, + "execution_count": 195, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -415,7 +406,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 15, + "execution_count": 197, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { @@ -444,84 +435,17 @@ " \n", " \n", " \n", - " \n", - " 0\n", - " That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - " 208\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 1\n", - " Despite there being no Scream movies for a dec...\n", - " 337\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 2\n", - " The \"Scream\" film franchise carved a memorable...\n", - " 957\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 3\n", - " Fifteen years have passed since the original W...\n", - " 352\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 4\n", - " Fifteen years have passed since the original W...\n", - " 352\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " ...\n", - " ...\n", - " ...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 995\n", - " I watched Film 2009 with Jonathan Ross, and re...\n", - " 316\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 996\n", - " Kind of a tame CGI fest Hebrew Exorcist regard...\n", - " 506\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 997\n", - " This is an astonishing story about a vengeful ...\n", - " 430\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 998\n", - " Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was...\n", - " 248\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 999\n", - " The Unborn has come in for some criticism whic...\n", - " 300\n", - " \n", " \n", "\n", - "

1000 rows × 2 columns

\n", "" ], "text/plain": [ - " user_review length\n", - "0 That wasn't really I question for my review. B... 208\n", - "1 Despite there being no Scream movies for a dec... 337\n", - "2 The \"Scream\" film franchise carved a memorable... 957\n", - "3 Fifteen years have passed since the original W... 352\n", - "4 Fifteen years have passed since the original W... 352\n", - ".. ... ...\n", - "995 I watched Film 2009 with Jonathan Ross, and re... 316\n", - "996 Kind of a tame CGI fest Hebrew Exorcist regard... 506\n", - "997 This is an astonishing story about a vengeful ... 430\n", - "998 Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was... 248\n", - "999 The Unborn has come in for some criticism whic... 300\n", - "\n", - "[1000 rows x 2 columns]" + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review, length]\n", + "Index: []" ] }, - "execution_count": 15, + "execution_count": 197, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -535,7 +459,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 16, + "execution_count": 199, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ { @@ -564,84 +488,17 @@ " \n", " \n", " \n", - " \n", - " 0\n", - " That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - " 208\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 5\n", - " Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Darcy (Kate Huds...\n", - " 169\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 7\n", - " Overall I can see why this movie got bad revie...\n", - " 135\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 8\n", - " Surprisingly not that bad. Very predictable an...\n", - " 11\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 9\n", - " 23 December 2016. Credit can be given to the p...\n", - " 135\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " ...\n", - " ...\n", - " ...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 984\n", - " Another Film that plays the Same Scenes again ...\n", - " 154\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 985\n", - " I would love to hate Richard Gere. He's too go...\n", - " 243\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 987\n", - " An Akita Inu puppy, transplanted from a Japane...\n", - " 232\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 989\n", - " Based on the true story of a faithful Akita, t...\n", - " 198\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 998\n", - " Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was...\n", - " 248\n", - " \n", " \n", "\n", - "

455 rows × 2 columns

\n", "" ], "text/plain": [ - " user_review length\n", - "0 That wasn't really I question for my review. B... 208\n", - "5 Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Darcy (Kate Huds... 169\n", - "7 Overall I can see why this movie got bad revie... 135\n", - "8 Surprisingly not that bad. Very predictable an... 11\n", - "9 23 December 2016. Credit can be given to the p... 135\n", - ".. ... ...\n", - "984 Another Film that plays the Same Scenes again ... 154\n", - "985 I would love to hate Richard Gere. He's too go... 243\n", - "987 An Akita Inu puppy, transplanted from a Japane... 232\n", - "989 Based on the true story of a faithful Akita, t... 198\n", - "998 Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was... 248\n", - "\n", - "[455 rows x 2 columns]" + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review, length]\n", + "Index: []" ] }, - "execution_count": 16, + "execution_count": 199, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -653,20 +510,9 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 17, + "execution_count": 201, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [ - { - "name": "stderr", - "output_type": "stream", - "text": [ - "C:\\Users\\sanja\\anaconda3\\lib\\site-packages\\pandas\\core\\frame.py:4163: SettingWithCopyWarning: \n", - "A value is trying to be set on a copy of a slice from a DataFrame\n", - "\n", - "See the caveats in the documentation: https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/user_guide/indexing.html#returning-a-view-versus-a-copy\n", - " return super().drop(\n" - ] - }, { "data": { "text/html": [ @@ -692,73 +538,17 @@ " \n", " \n", " \n", - " \n", - " 0\n", - " That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 5\n", - " Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Darcy (Kate Huds...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 7\n", - " Overall I can see why this movie got bad revie...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 8\n", - " Surprisingly not that bad. Very predictable an...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 9\n", - " 23 December 2016. Credit can be given to the p...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " ...\n", - " ...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 984\n", - " Another Film that plays the Same Scenes again ...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 985\n", - " I would love to hate Richard Gere. He's too go...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 987\n", - " An Akita Inu puppy, transplanted from a Japane...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 989\n", - " Based on the true story of a faithful Akita, t...\n", - " \n", - " \n", - " 998\n", - " Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was...\n", - " \n", " \n", "\n", - "

455 rows × 1 columns

\n", "" ], "text/plain": [ - " user_review\n", - "0 That wasn't really I question for my review. B...\n", - "5 Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Darcy (Kate Huds...\n", - "7 Overall I can see why this movie got bad revie...\n", - "8 Surprisingly not that bad. Very predictable an...\n", - "9 23 December 2016. Credit can be given to the p...\n", - ".. ...\n", - "984 Another Film that plays the Same Scenes again ...\n", - "985 I would love to hate Richard Gere. He's too go...\n", - "987 An Akita Inu puppy, transplanted from a Japane...\n", - "989 Based on the true story of a faithful Akita, t...\n", - "998 Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was...\n", - "\n", - "[455 rows x 1 columns]" + "Empty DataFrame\n", + "Columns: [user_review]\n", + "Index: []" ] }, - "execution_count": 17, + "execution_count": 201, "metadata": {}, "output_type": "execute_result" } @@ -771,7 +561,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 18, + "execution_count": 203, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -788,7 +578,7 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 27, + "execution_count": 206, "metadata": {}, "outputs": [], "source": [ @@ -806,22 +596,9 @@ }, { "cell_type": "code", - "execution_count": 6, + "execution_count": 208, "metadata": {}, - "outputs": [ - { - "ename": "NameError", - "evalue": "name 'TextBlob' is not defined", - "output_type": "error", - "traceback": [ - "\u001b[1;31m---------------------------------------------------------------------------\u001b[0m", - "\u001b[1;31mNameError\u001b[0m Traceback (most recent call last)", - "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[6], line 22\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 20\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# Example usage:\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 21\u001b[0m text \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mI absolutely loved this movie! It was fantastic.\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\n\u001b[1;32m---> 22\u001b[0m sentiment \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[43manalyze_sentiment\u001b[49m\u001b[43m(\u001b[49m\u001b[43mtext\u001b[49m\u001b[43m)\u001b[49m\n\u001b[0;32m 23\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28mprint\u001b[39m(\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124mSentiment:\u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124m\"\u001b[39m, sentiment)\n\u001b[0;32m 24\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;66;03m# Assuming df is your DataFrame containing the reviews\u001b[39;00m\n", - "Cell \u001b[1;32mIn[6], line 10\u001b[0m, in \u001b[0;36manalyze_sentiment\u001b[1;34m(text)\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 1\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mdef\u001b[39;00m \u001b[38;5;21manalyze_sentiment\u001b[39m(text):\n\u001b[0;32m 2\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;250m \u001b[39m\u001b[38;5;124;03m\"\"\"\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 3\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;124;03m Analyzes the sentiment of the input text.\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 4\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;124;03m \u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[1;32m (...)\u001b[0m\n\u001b[0;32m 8\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;124;03m - 'neutral' if sentiment polarity == 0\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[0;32m 9\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;124;03m \"\"\"\u001b[39;00m\n\u001b[1;32m---> 10\u001b[0m blob \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m \u001b[43mTextBlob\u001b[49m(text)\n\u001b[0;32m 11\u001b[0m polarity \u001b[38;5;241m=\u001b[39m blob\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39msentiment\u001b[38;5;241m.\u001b[39mpolarity\n\u001b[0;32m 13\u001b[0m \u001b[38;5;28;01mif\u001b[39;00m polarity \u001b[38;5;241m>\u001b[39m \u001b[38;5;241m0\u001b[39m:\n", - "\u001b[1;31mNameError\u001b[0m: name 'TextBlob' is not defined" - ] - } - ], + "outputs": [], "source": [ "def analyze_sentiment(text):\n", " \"\"\"\n", @@ -866,6 +643,13 @@ "cell_type": "markdown", "metadata": {}, "source": [] + }, + { + "cell_type": "code", + "execution_count": null, + "metadata": {}, + "outputs": [], + "source": [] } ], "metadata": { @@ -873,7 +657,8 @@ "hash": "23784c1f7cb08f751fc8275aaeeb793366452f178ab646d6f5c554e80b94c083" }, "kernelspec": { - "display_name": "Python 3.8.5 64-bit ('base': conda)", + "display_name": "Python 3 (ipykernel)", + "language": "python", "name": "python3" }, "language_info": { @@ -886,10 +671,9 @@ "name": "python", "nbconvert_exporter": "python", "pygments_lexer": "ipython3", - "version": "3.11.4" - }, - "orig_nbformat": 4 + "version": "3.12.4" + } }, "nbformat": 4, - "nbformat_minor": 2 + "nbformat_minor": 4 } diff --git a/data_scrapped/data.csv b/data_scrapped/data.csv index 26c11244..2ae77a86 100644 --- a/data_scrapped/data.csv +++ b/data_scrapped/data.csv @@ -1,461 +1 @@ user_review -"That wasn't really I question for my review. But if you have seen the movie you might know where I am going with my summary line. The joke up front does not really work out that well. Even though a character in the movie points out one of the flaws, it is still not that appealing. And while there quite a few holes in the internal logic of the movie (the recording thing being one of them, especially as we arrive at the final act), I didn't find them too distracting.Unfortunately though there wasn't a really big surprise in here as was in the second one. You can see things coming and you kinda guess where this is going. Even the old ""how did he/she know that"" cliché get warmed up, but you might not mind. There is quite a lot of humour in here and most of it actually works (which might be attributed to the fact K. Williamson is back on script writing duties, who was absent for the third Scream movie). Apart from that, if you have seen the other ones, you will watch this one. And I don't think you will be too disappointed (thanks part 3 for being so bad then I guess)" -"Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Darcy (Kate Hudson) are life long friends. Dex (Colin Egglesfield) was Rachel's college friend when Darcy budded in. Now Darcy and Dex are about to get married. But Rachel still has feelings for Dex and they sleep together.This movie has 2 problems and 1 great positive.Colin Egglesfield is a horribly bland lead. It's unbelievable that two great girls are battling over him. John Krasinski is an infinitely better lead. There are countless others that would be a vast improvement. Although Krasinski and Ashley Williams have some funny jokes.Second problem is that Rachel jumped into bed with Dex so early. It puts her in a moral deficit right off the bat. It makes rooting for her next to impossible.The one great positive is Ginnifer Goodwin. She pulls off the impossible by being such a sweetheart. I can't help but root for her no matter what. I don't think the movie people actually questioned the premise. At least, they could have given GG the moral high grounds." -Overall I can see why this movie got bad reviews and wasn't a hit. The story is more painful and unpleasant than entertaining. The characters are not interesting and you don't feel for any of them especially Ginnifer's character who isn't very endearing. She falls in love with her best friend's fiancé - what's to like? It is a waste of a good cast. Colin isn't that hot that he is so out of Ginnifer's league. Kate's character is slightly irritating. And John's is just plain lame. The missed opportunity is a bit of a silly thing to be a central story line. Don't bother with this one even if you are a fan of the actors - it's just a silly story about nothing much. It's a movie that didn't have to be made. -Surprisingly not that bad. Very predictable and had a few laughs. -"23 December 2016. Credit can be given to the producers and scriptwriters in trying to accomplish something different with this drama-comedy romance. Unfortunately, the tortured ending sequences don't quite make this movie really that different from most mainstream comedy romances. What this movie tried to explore was the more serious, real dilemmas in romances, triangular relationships. Something Borrowed didn't offer up a My Best Friends Wedding (1997) balance of comedy and drama as well as the more sobering reality of romance, instead of the more typical Cinderella experience. This movie did offer up a more dramatic romance outline instead of a comedic bent and instead incorporating humor within its dramatic plot outline for a nice change. Overall, Something Borrowed becomes something borrowed but was ultimately returned to the more unoriginal outcome found in most movies." -"Writer Diablo Cody won an Oscar for her screenplay for Juno. She becomes unstuck with Jennifer's Body as the film is unsure whether it wants to be a horror, a parody or a dark comedy about high school kids.Jennifer's Body was probably only green-lit with Megan Fox attached as the lead. She certainly has the face and the body but not necessarily the acting ability as the hot high school cheerleader who all the boys fancy.After an encounter with a rock band with satanic undertones at a gig where the place burns down in a fire, Jennifer has been transformed into a succubus who has to devour flesh. Her gawky geeky friend Needy (Amanda Seyfried) thinks that Jennifer is involved somehow with students turning up dead and reckons her boyfriend (Johnny Simmons) could be in danger.The film really wants to be a modern hip Carrie but director Karyn Kusama does not have the elan of Brian De Palma and the script is not good enough." -"Consensus is that this film is a disappointing major studio effort, with the hottest star and hottest screenwriter combining for strictly mediocre results. I'm not a fan of Diablo Cody, and still am wondering how she conjured up enough Oscar votes to win the statuette -perhaps with that ballot box acuity she should be the G.O.P.'s next presidential candidate instead of Palin? IMHO the current queen of softcore screen horror is Darian Caine, who has co-starred in dozens of Misty Mundae films over the past decade and even occasionally ventured over the line into hardcore assignments -always lesbian oriented. While watching JENNIFER'S BODY it eventually dawned on me that (surprisingly) the iconic Ms. Fox was styled to be nearly a dead ringer for Darian Caine. Probably because of the lesbian subtext here -I suspect the filmmakers had seen a few of Ms. Caine's movies. Suffice it to say that this misfire would have been much better if filmed in New Jersey for something like 1% of its MAJOR STUDIO budget and assigned to Darian (with the proper tinted contact lenses) instead. That version would have had nudity (painstakingly avoided here even though much bigger stars like Angelina Jolie deliver the goods in these vehicles), probably 50 fewer groaner lines of dialog (thanks a heap Diablo!), and would at least possibly satisfied the cravings of the one-armed viewers out there." -"This film is about two groups of people trying to sabotage a German Nazi film premiere in Paris.""Inglourious Basterds"" as an interesting story, but it does not engage me as much as I hoped. The plot is quite thin, there is not much happening in two and a half hours. A lot of time is spent to make a shot atmospheric. As a result, the pacing is very slow, I keep having to wait a long time for something to happen. For example, the initial scene in a farmhouse lasted over 20 minutes, when in fact it could have been over and done with in five minutes. ""Inglourious Basterds"" needs very generous editing to shorten the film, in order to enhance its thrill and suspense. The only reason I think that ""Inglourious Basterds"" managed to be engaging in its current form is because people wanted the good guys to win, and hence stick to their seats to hope their desired finale happen." -"A fairly standard romance. Jake Gyllenhaal plays a representative (i.e., salesman) for Pfizer who meets up with Anne Hathaway in a doctor's office and falls for her. At first he just assumes she's a prescription medicine junky (which he obviously doesn't look down on, since he's pretty much just a pusher). It turns out, though, that she really does have Parkinson's disease and is refusing to let him get closer to her because she doesn't want to hurt him (or be hurt by him if he runs away when things get too rough). The film does work, though, mostly because Hathaway is excellent. Gyllenhaal's pretty good, too. You also get some good supporting performances from people like Hank Azaria, Oliver Platt and Judy Greer. One big negative aspect: Gyllenhaal's fat, obnoxious younger brother played by Josh Gad. I think they wanted to cast Jonah Hill, but he was too big a star for such a role. Gad is a lookalike with about half as much talent. But, really, the flaw is mostly in the writing. The guy's a pretty poor excuse for comic relief. He does completely unbelievable things (like masturbating to a sex tape starring his brother and his brother's girlfriend, then, when getting caught, asking his brother how his penis got so big?!?!), and his joke lines are completely unfunny." -"LOVE AND OTHER DRUGS (2010) **1/2 Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway, Oliver Platt, Hank Azaria, Josh Gad, Gabriel Macht, Judy Greer, George Segal, Jill Clayburgh. Well-acted yet disjointed romantic dramedy with cocksure pharmaceutical salesman Gyllenhaal facing his biggest challenge: free-spirited and equally callow artist Hathaway – and ultimately falling in love with some consequences (she has first-stage Parkinson's Disease). While Edward Zwick keeps the pace snappy as director his screenplay with Charles Randolph and longtime partner Marshall Herskovitz – based on Jamie Reidy's book ""Hard Sell: The Evolution of a Viagra Salesman) – has its work cut out for it in attempting to be a breezy sex comedy and a disease of the week TV movie that ultimately is cancelled out by the dynamic chemistry of its handsome leads (and hot sex scenes) yet it is more than a LOVE STORY meets JERRY MAGUIRE pitch; it's what one will sacrifice to be a better person; lesson learned indeed. Trivia note: sadly this is Clayburgh's last film performance, which is more so since it's practically a glorified cameo as Gyllenhaal's WASPy mother." -"'Hall Pass' is not as purely funny as the Farelly brothers's best-loved film, 'There's Something About Mary'; but it's in a similar tradition, combining gross-out comedy with a sentimental undertow. Unlike the majority of mainstream Hollywood romantic comedy, it works because the brothers are actually interested in how real people are, whereas the generic blockbuster has a tediously standard plot and set of motivations behind a very thin veneer of particularity. By contrast, aspects of 'Hall Pass' that feel true to life, and acutely observed - the fact that the heroes emphatically don't end up in bed with the most beautiful girls in the room is (sadly) a recommendation in itself compared with the orthodox rom-com. Even Owen Wilson, who usually makes me want to punch the screen, is watchable in this. But at the same time, it's all a little lightweight; certainly for the male characters, who quickly discover they don't really want their freedom and who therefore have relatively little at stake as the plot unfolds. Amusing but slightly bland, maybe the brothers, like their characters, are simply reaching middle-age." -"""Hall Pass"" by the Farrelly brothers is a film that perpetuates the myth about American men not maturing at all, living in fantasy worlds where the most vivid memories were the time spent in high school, when everything was carefree and happy. ""Hall Pass"" is not one of their most inspired comedies, but that seems unfair because most fans are forever comparing any new effort from the brothers to their classic hit ""There's Something About Mary"".The premise here gives us two men, Rick and Fred, who have been married for a while. Their marriages are now at a point where most fail, if not given a breath of fresh air. Which is what Maggie and Grace their wives decide to let them have: a whole week by themselves where the two guys can do whatever they want, get it out of their system, and return home to a much better relationship. The film spends most of the time following Rick and Fred not having fun.It is almost impossible to think Owen Wilson had two movies in 2011 so different from each other as this one and ""Midnight in Paris"", a much serious one, of course. While Mr. Wilson has funny moments, his Rick is basically a serious man, a fish out of the water, left to his own devices. Jason Sudeikis has some good moments. Jenna Fischer and Christina Applegate take second seat to their male counterparts." -"Simply dreadful 2011 film with Owen Wilson and his pal given a hall pass by their wives. This simply means that for one week, they can act as single guys and cavort with whomever they choose to do so.The movie then goes into their various experiences during the week. The wives also go into hall pass mode so that both the men and women are cheating on one another.The situations are ridiculous just like the film. There is a chase by the police, a guy jumping all over their car with a gun whose mother, played by Joy Behar, is the one delight of the film.After seeing this wreck, they would have been better off if they never returned from their honeymoon." -"I found Halloween 2 to be an awful movie, but I have seen worse. The directing was awful. There was no continuity for the script, and the concurrent movie stories did not intertwine well. The movie had no build up for the story just action. Even the action scenes were predictable. Does Rob know how to create characters who are other than trailer trash. Everyone uses the f word and yells. Rob needs more balance persona for his movies characters. There were a few good parts to the Halloween movie. One see's how angry and deranged Micheal is. Just nothing but anger with this guy. The other theme that big people are hard to hurt message got across well with the film. I notice silence with the Michael character creates a stronger emotion than dialogue. I give the movie a 3 out of 10." -"Halloween 2 (2009): Dir: Rob Zombie / Cast: Malcolm McDowell, Scout Taylor-Compton, Brad Dourif, Danielle Harris, Sheri Moon Zombie: Starts off where the first film left off just as the original Halloween 2 began where the original Halloween left off. Director Rob Zombie takes a different path by going ahead a few years and using only the first act to reference the substantial hospital scenes in the original Halloween 2. This is effective because in the original sequel, Myers is reduced to a zombie like stalker in hospital corridors. Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Sam Loomis survives the attacks from the previous film but unlike Donald Pleasence, he turns the character into a fame seeker selling his book about his encounters. This adds some humour as well as critical reception when he is accused of exploiting the murders. How Loomis is ultimately dealt with is another lame and graphic encounter with Myers. Scout Taylor-Compton as victim Laurie Stroud is given more to do. The Sheriff finds her that night and after extreme therapy she is living with him and his daughter Annie. She discovers her birth right before she ultimately visits a Smiths Grove. Brad Dourif plays the Sheriff while Danielle Harris plays his rebellious ill fated daughter. Sheri Moon Zombie appears briefly as mother Myers leading a white horse about. Visually well made alteration of the original sequel. Score: 4 ½ / 10" -"One sin defines it - to be only a package for special effects and the image of a pop culture character. all the ingredients - from love story to noble intentions - are not convincing. the story is cheap, the message to obvious, the picture of the Captain - not more than American propaganda, useful, maybe, under the Cold War but not today. it is difficult to criticize it because , at the first sigh, it seems be wrong because this is its purpoise. so, a film for little kids. or, for great fans of comic - books." -"I love superhero movies when they are done right, and Captain America is one of the better ones I've seen recently and a big improvement over the 1990 film. Is it perfect? No. Entertaining? Yes, I think so. It is a very well made and efficiently directed film, with wonderful costumes, effects and settings and the cinematography and editing also impress. The music is rousing, and I just love Star Spangled Man, one of Alan Menken's best songs in my opinion. The script is witty and smart. Cheesy also? Perhaps but in an endearing sort of way. The story has a strong start, but loses its way to sluggish pacing and clichés in the final act. The characters are clichéd too in a sense but like the actors are engaging. Chris Evans is perfect in the title role, and he is joined by sassy Hayley Atwell and a wonderfully gruff Tommy Lee Jones. Hugo Weaving wasn't quite there for me, he is a great actor and he is charismatic and menacing, but his accent is inconsistent and the character could have been delved into more. Overall though, a lot of fun. 8/10 Bethany Cox" -"While I am a huge fan of the franchise, then this reboot or remake, call it what you will, is somewhat unnecessary. It would have been better, had director Marcus Nispel opted to go with something new to add to the franchise instead.However, that being said, then this 2009 version of ""Friday the 13th"" is still enjoyable, because it is still Jason Voorhees that we are talking about here. I just don't enjoy the fact that he is running around, because that is not something seen in the other movies.There is a good mood to the movie, traditional to all the movies in the franchise, and you know what you are in for when you sit down to watch the movie. And this 2009 movie doesn't fail to deliver. There is a fair amount of dead bodies piled up once the movie has ended. Although there is just something missing from the movie to make it as enjoyable as the rest of the franchise.Derek Mears as Jason Voorhees, well he sure ain't no Kane Hodder that's for sure. He did an average job, but he just didn't really bring any finesse or personality to the character.This movie is a good introduction to the franchise for those not already familiar with the movies - shame on you! And it does make for an adequate addition to the movie collection of any fan of the ""Friday the 13th"" franchise. But the movie just didn't stand out in any way." -I like the bit where all those funny events occurred -"There isn't anyone in this movie that I would ever say I wanted to see in a movie. The entire cast is completely unknown, so I can't have any preconceptions.Of course, it did get a lot of Teen Choice nominations, which would make it a movie I wouldn't go near except it may possibly make it on the expanded Best Picture list next year, so I have to sorta watch it.The funniest parts of the movie were the supporting cast: the wedding chapel manager, the cops (Ken Jeong & Cleo King), the doctor (Matt Walsh), the naked Japanese guy, Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), the tiger. There was not one funny moment involving the main characters except for the escape in the cop car." -"There isn't anyone in this movie that I would ever say I wanted to see in a movie. The entire cast is completely unknown, so I can't have any preconceptions.Of course, it did get a lot of Teen Choice nominations, which would make it a movie I wouldn't go near except it may possibly make it on the expanded Best Picture list next year, so I have to sorta watch it.The funniest parts of the movie were the supporting cast: the wedding chapel manager, the cops (Ken Jeong & Cleo King), the doctor (Matt Walsh), the naked Japanese guy, Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), the tiger. There was not one funny moment involving the main characters except for the escape in the cop car." -"Just finished watching this movie with my mom and aunt. They both liked it but were also-especially on Mom's part-a little dizzy from all the 3-D action sequences. Director James Cameron's script-while not really Oscar worthy-certainly moves the story along to the point that you're riveted almost throughout the whole thing. (I have to admit here that during some of the beginning live action sequences, I fell asleep but I managed to be awake when the first computer animated scene came on and stayed so afterwards.) Sigorney Weaver is certainly compelling as the scientist character and it was a nice to see Michelle Rodriguez, who I last watched on ""Lost"", as a heroic pilot. And how awesome were many of those creatures in the jungle, not to mention those action sequences that climaxed the movie! Okay, so on that note, Avatar is definitely worth seeing." -"I was told on several occasions to skip this film. While I felt it took a long way to get to the point, I found it intriguing and engaging. I've really grown to like DeCaprio and find him to be an interesting actor. One reviewer did criticize him for hanging around the dark side a bit much, but that could be said about Nicholson and a host of others. This is one of those mind puzzles that force one to guess a good deal. Because of the pace, I eventually figured it out. Nevertheless, it is told in a very interesting way. With ""Inception"" capturing the box office recently, this seems a mild effort to explore the subconscious. It is multi-layered and complex. It throws curves and red herrings, but I never felt toyed with. This is certainly worth a shot." -"THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO (2011) **** Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, Christopher Plummer, Stellen Skarsgard, Robin Wright, Joley Richardson, Steven Berkoff, Yorick van Wagenigngen, Goran Visnjic. Filmmaker extraordinaire David Fincher's highly stylized techniques meet their match with the Americanized adaptation of the international best-seller by Stieg Larsson's novel (skillfully orchestrated by vet scribe Steve Zaillian) about disgraced Swedish journalist (Craig nicely underplaying the bookish Mikael Blomkvist) who teams up with troubled yet tenacious researcher savant/cyber-punk hacker incredible Lisbeth Salander (Mara in a truly audacious Oscar worthy performance; one for the ages) after being enlisted as a detective/writer for hire by industrialist magnate Plummer to investigate the mysterious decades-old disappearance of his young relative, a girl who may have met her demise by a nefarious cabal –their family. With a knotty plot involving rape, Nazis, torture and other-things-that-go-bump-in-the-collective night, Fincher keeps a sharply clear-eyed viewpoint : the inhumanity humanity inflicts upon itself in the vicious circle of life's evils unleashed. To wit: one of the most harrowing on screen rapes and the subsequent vengeance thrust upon her attacker, Mara's Lisbeth Salander becomes an iconic character with her ingenious plans and underestimated resilient intelligence. From its relentless Trent Reznor cover of Led Zeppelin's ""The Immigrant Song"" with its post-BONDian title sequence the film gets its tenderhooks in you..and.never.lets.you.GO! One of the year's best films!" -"This wasn't too bad. It wasn't GOOD but it wasn't too bad. Basically I went merely to get out of the rain. I was already soaked to the skin and two things had backfired earlier in the day. I was passing a Multiplex, checked out the fodder and this was the best of a bad bunch. I saw the first two Swedish films but took a rain check on the third. Also I've never read the novels. But it held my attention. More so as time went on. I wouldn't go so far as to actually accuse anyone of Acting but on the whole the majority of the cast phoned it in adequately. I'm not sure if I'll pursue it when the other two legs are released but as an escape from torrential rain I guess I could have done worse." -"This is a Remake of a 2009 Film and therein lies the Curiosity. The Original Film was Excellent and well thought of by Cinema Fans and Lovers of the Book Trilogy. Fincher's Remake comes much Too Soon to Avoid Microscopic Comparisons, especially since the Original was so Well Done. It can't help but Beg the Question...WHY? It is the kind of Style and Subject the Director Excels and Flourishes (Se7en), but He might have Gone Elsewhere for Inspiration and Exploration.This one is Disturbing and Fittingly Frightening and Fascinationg at times with a Good Cast and Exceptional Photography and Score, but, after all, You have to ask WHY So Soon?" -"So, the series comes to an end, with Harry and his friends in the big showdown with Voldemort. ""Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2"" continues the style that the series began to adopt in part 5, as a look at resistance to totalitarianism: you may recall that the Death Eaters aim to ""purify"" the wizarding world by eliminating anyone whom they don't consider a ""real"" wizard.Obviously, the movie can't really compare to the book, but I still found it to be a good conclusion to the series. It was always good to see that, as with the books, each successive movie got more mature and complex. Therefore, I recommend it, even if it isn't the ultimate masterpiece." -"Well, it's better than the four films that preceded it and also an improvement on J. K. Rowling's novel, so this final instalment in the HARRY POTTER series is doing something right. After an awfully po-faced and mock-serious opening, this film soon settles down by concentrating on sheer spectacle – and when it comes to on-screen magical mayhem and destruction, even director David Yates can't mess it up.The film is split into two halves, the first focusing on the set-up to the final battle between the forces of good and evil. This section slightly improves on what's come before, although there's still an unwelcome reliance on needless flashbacks and over-complicated scripting. Radcliffe isn't bad, but both Grint and Watson are on autopilot and their supposed chemistry is non-existent, making any romance scenes a real laugh. The good news is that Alan Rickman gets (slightly) more screen time than before, although there's so much happening that nobody else does.The second half is all about the special effects, and splendid they are too. The story isn't so great, but I can ignore that for the sheer energy that's gone into bringing the climax to life – an energy notably missing from most of the series. There are still glaring flaws – like the cheat ending, which doesn't follow through with necessary consequences and instead follows Rowling's embarrassing insistence in protecting her little darlings. Just this once, I wish they'd changed it from the book." -"After the movie had played for the last time in a cinema, you could hear the cinema owners moan. The Harry Potter movies were a cash cow. Not only for the studio that produced them, but also for anyone who played them in their cinema (chain). Now it's over and everyone is thinking: What's next? While that may sound like something that may not be of interest to you, think of that: When you watch Daniel Radcliffe, do you immediately think of Harry Potter? What about the other young actors in this? It might be difficult for them to find themselves. While they all tried other things, even during the ""Potter years"", they became the faces of this movie franchise.Getting back to the movie. The special effects are up to date (something you should expect), the story concludes nicely (for someone who hasn't read the books, including myself). The acting is solid throughout. There is one scene though, that was really bad. And it involves Daniel R. and a train station. Unfortunately he can't convey the emotions he is going through in this pivotal scene. Other than that, you will watch it if you have seen the other movies and won't be disappointed" -Pretty decent movie but I think the book is better -"This film tells the story of five friends going to a remote cabin for a holiday. Little do they know that there is something very sinister going on in the cabin, and soon they find themselves fighting for their dear lives.""The Cabin in the Woods"" looks a bit like a low budget film because of the harsh lighting and the way visuals are presented. However, it has Chris Hemsworth and Richard Jenkins in it, so it can't be a low budget film. Sigourney Weaver appears right in the end too, which is quite a pleasant surprise for me! As for the story, it is interesting and entertaining. The gory horror scenes are so over the top that they are comedic at times. It is a bit wrong to chuckle at these scenes but I cannot help it. Overall, the film is certainly different from other horror films, and is quite entertaining." -"THE CABIN IN THE WOODS (2012) *** Kristen Connolly, Chris Hemsworth, Anna Hutchison, Fran Kranz, Jesse Williams, Richard Jenkins, Bradley Whitford, Brian White, Amy Acker, (Cameo: Sigourney Weaver) The eponymous genre flick gets itself turned inside out in this at times too-cool-for-its-own-school underpinnings from filmmakers Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard : five stereotypical young adults venture into the secluded topiary where upon visiting the abandoned edifice ….well let's just say things start to happen and then …things…really…start…to..HAPPEN! While the clever premise gets giddy in its final act where the collective horror ya-yas are set loose (literally) there is little terror and more in the line of show-me-how-you-can-top-THIS ethos, the expectations high eventually plateaus but those-in-the-know fanboys/girls will eat this up begging for more. Kudos to Kranz as the clear-eyed stoner getting in touch with his inner Shaggy in this long-form SCOOBY-DOO meets THE EVIL DEAD by way of a cosmic Rubik's cube plotting." -"Interesting concept, but quickly it becomes obvious that the writer/director's concept was too clever for its own good. Many holes in the concept and plot. Plus, there is an attempt to build a moral implication and stand to a fictitious, barely-believable, concept. Quite lame.After the initial scene setting, the movie quickly degenerates into stock-standard chases and action sequences. So, quite predictable after a point.Solid enough performance from Justin Timberlake. Amanda Seyfried and Cillian Murphy are OK. Pity Olivia Wilde only has a minor part." -"Just watched this futuristic thriller with my movie theatre-working friend. It has people wearing a ""watch"" on their arms which digitally gives them a certain number of time that they use to pay for whatever means they need for survival. It stars people like Justin Timberlake, Olivia Wilde, Amanda Seyfried, and Cillian Murphy. Oh, and also Johnny Galecki from ""The Big Bang Theory"". The writer/director is Andrew Niccol who also penned the screenplay for another movie I liked called The Truman Show. This was almost as good as that with many expositions in the dialogue that explain whatever plot points you may be a little confused by. So on that note, In Time is a worthy thriller that makes you think about how precious time really is." -"Neil Gaiman isn't doing very well in regards to his film adaptations, with this following on from the disappointing MIRRORMASK made a few years ago. CORALINE is the most dull, uninteresting and downright annoying animation I've seen in recent years, which is a surprise given that it was directed by Henry Selick, who made THE NIGHTMARE BEFORE Christmas so endearingly odd all those years ago.The problem with CORALINE is the dumb Americanised storyline and the irritating characters. The titular character, complete with Dakota Fanning's whiny voice, is the worst offender, but even the likes of the normally reliable Ian McShane come out of this badly. The only one who fares well is Keith David playing a cat, but then he's barely utilised.The animation was apparently done with stop motion, but you can't tell. There's none of the endearing jerkiness you expect from stop motion, instead this looks and feels like just another soulless CGI monstrosity. In addition, the storyline is extremely slim and stretched to breaking point by an over-long running time, and the visuals just aren't there. CORALINE is a film I can recommend to nobody, unfortunately." -"I'm a Neil Gaiman fan when it comes to his novels and comic book work, though I admit I've come across a miss or two among his hits. I never read 'Coraline', so I don't know how to compare it to the movie as others have done on this board. Be that as it may, I thought it was a pretty clever story utilizing the alternate reality the main character discovered by crawling through the tunnel behind the brick wall. It reminded me a little of 'Alice in Wonderland' where she met up with all the weird inhabitants of that fairy tale land. This film is a bit on the dark and scary side I would think for real young kids, with Gothic elements exhibited by the characters both 'human' and 'animal'. There was a point in the story when I thought it was all over, but the final denouement was still to come with the defeat of Other Mother. As animated films go, this one was original and creative with a compelling message of not accepting things at face value until you've taken the time to understand what's behind the facade. For that, Coraline had a pretty good head on her shoulders." -"In New York, the twenty-eight year-old Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) is a dedicated and perfectionist ballerina of the ballet company that lives with her controller mother and former ballerina Erica Sayers (Barbara Hershey). The director Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel) decides to renovate the company for the next season that will open with the Swan Lake with a new face and retires the prima ballerina Beth MacIntyre (Winona Ryder). Nina is his first option to perform The Swan Queen, perfect for the role of the White Swan, but too restrained to perform the Black Swan. Nina feels threatened by the newcomer Lily (Mila Kunis), who can perfectly perform the Black Swan, and is stressed with the situation. When Nina has a nervous breakdown, she gets in contact with her dark side and has constant nightmarish daydreams.""Black Swan"" is a beautiful but predictable film of Darren Aronofsky, with a cinematography that gives a nightmarish environment to the story that is too dark for a drama and too dramatic for a horror movie. Natalie Portman has a great performance but her character is too naive and with lack of confidence for a New Yorker indicated to be the prima ballerina of a ballet company. The theme is a variation of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with the case of split personality but the film does not justify the hype around it. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): ""Cisne Negro"" (""Black Swan"")" -"Just watched this movie on a Netflix disc. It features Natalie Portman in her Oscar-winning performance as a ballerina who seems to be lost in her role as the Black Swan. Mila Kunis plays her rival...or is she? Barbara Hershey is her mother, Winona Ryder an aged ballerina who resents being cast aside, and Vincent Cassel as the teacher who can be pretty controlling but still inspirational. Director Darren Aronofsky provides such haunting images concerning the transformation of the Portman character that you wonder if she's truly mad before coming to a definite conclusion. I'd say this was quite a beautifully realized dream-like drama that holds on to you till the very end. So on that note, Black Swan comes highly recommended." -"There is a point at which you have to throw caution to the wind and just go with a movie where it takes you, sometimes there is a movie that is so over the top that you have to just go with it where ever it takes you. Then there is another point where you have to throw your hands up and go as much fun as the film isn't paying me back for going with it blindly...Knight and Day is a nonsensical film about June who get mixed up with Roy a spy who drags her into an ever increasing series of huge action set pieces. Is romance far behind? The bits are very well done, but they are staged so knowingly that it kind of sucks the life out of it (one can be too knowing and too jokey). Worse the film constantly cheats to get you out of disaster and on to the next piece. I was admiring the technical virtuosity of the film but at the same time I never connected. (Worse Cameron Diaz is at best a non-actor with the result she never sells any of it.) Rereading this post I find it doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense but then again neither does this movie.Worth seeing for the great action, but wait for cable where the lack of a real plot won't be as painful." -"James Mangold gets to direct two eye appealing actors, Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz, is this globe-trotting action flick. June Havens(Diaz), the beauty she is, is on her way to her sister's wedding when she literally bumps into a man who will change her life. June finds herself in the middle of fight between a rogue government agent, Roy Miller(Cruise), and the FBI. Being warned of future questioning, June is whisked off to safety as Roy stays on the move to exotic locations like France, Spain and Austria. Amongst all the confusion and automatic gunfire, June forges a bond with Roy. It's like he couldn't shake her off if he tried. Roy confides to her he is actually trying to protect a newly invented energy source that could be of enormous wealth to who ends up controlling it. But does this mean good guys are going bad? Cruise and Diaz appear to work extremely well together. I wouldn't mind seeing this pairing again. Especially Cameron walking away. I think this movie may be able to cause more interest in Cruise, who I think may have lost some of his luster. Along with the action and attractive settings there is a very good soundtrack featuring the likes of Hall & Oates, The Kingsmen, Scorpion, Christopher Cross and probably the best song of all featured during the closing credits...""Someday"" by The Black Eyed Peas. This exhilarating action-comedy also stars: Peter Sarsgaard, Viola Davis, Jordi Molla, Maggie Grace and Marc Blucas." -"Carneron Diaz (""June"") is heading to her sister's wedding in Boston. Before and again on her flight, she encounters the handsome (small) ""Roy"" (Tom Cruise) and very quickly her life is turned upside down as she finds herself - with him - being chased all over the place. Why? Well, that's because he has pinched the world's only prototype of a tiny battery that will never run out, and swapped it into her luggage to avoid detection. The FBI are soon hot on their trail, as is Peter Skarsgaard (""Fitzgerald"") determined to regain his prize that he has to deliver to ams dealer ""Antonio"" (Jordi Mollà). The plot is pretty thin and predictable, but the film doesn't hang about - there is plenty of action, shoot 'em ups, car chases, pyrotechnics and there is just a hint of on screen chemistry between the two as Diaz adapts quickly to her new, somewhat perilous lifestyle! Not great, this, and it maybe takes fifteen minutes too long to get going - but once underway it is repetitive, but never dull." -"This is a textbook example of a bad remake of a horror classic and why it's such a creatively bankrupt idea to begin with. You take said classic, strip it bare of original ideas, remove all atmosphere and scares, and make sure you ""update"" the effects and cinematography to make it slick, polished, and pretty like a music video. Most importantly, you cast gorgeous young mactors in all the big roles. The exception to that last part is the guy behind the Freddy makeup. For him, you cast rat-faced Jackie Earle Haley. It should come as no surprise to anyone over 21 that Haley is the best part of this otherwise bland cast. But he's still no Robert Englund. Plain and simple there is nothing about this remake that is equal to or better than the original. As with the other remakes in recent years, the attention is on all the wrong things. More time should have been spent on a quality script and crafting some good scares. God forbid we try to make this thing frightening or creepy in any way. No, it's better that we set out to create a vehicle for Hollywood's overflowing gutter of beautiful young models, actors, and pop stars with no talent. The end result is a shallow, lifeless movie with nothing of value. Avoid this please and stick with the Wes Craven film." -"This is a textbook example of a bad remake of a horror classic and why it's such a creatively bankrupt idea to begin with. You take said classic, strip it bare of original ideas, remove all atmosphere and scares, and make sure you ""update"" the effects and cinematography to make it slick, polished, and pretty like a music video. Most importantly, you cast gorgeous young mactors in all the big roles. The exception to that last part is the guy behind the Freddy makeup. For him, you cast rat-faced Jackie Earle Haley. It should come as no surprise to anyone over 21 that Haley is the best part of this otherwise bland cast. But he's still no Robert Englund. Plain and simple there is nothing about this remake that is equal to or better than the original. As with the other remakes in recent years, the attention is on all the wrong things. More time should have been spent on a quality script and crafting some good scares. God forbid we try to make this thing frightening or creepy in any way. No, it's better that we set out to create a vehicle for Hollywood's overflowing gutter of beautiful young models, actors, and pop stars with no talent. The end result is a shallow, lifeless movie with nothing of value. Avoid this please and stick with the Wes Craven film." -"Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a slacker hipster in a garage band who's dating high school girl Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). He is self-absorbed and willing to abandon Knives as soon as he meets Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Before Scott can date Ramona, he must defeat her seven exes.Scott is a douche. The biggest problem for me is his unlikeability. It runs counter to Cera's usual good guy persona. Everybody is blasé and sarcastic which get some good laughs.The best thing about this is the 80s video game visual motif. Edgar Wright brings a fresh hip-without-the-irony sensibility. It also uses Toronto not as New York or as anything other than Toronto. It's refreshing and unique in a world where almost everything is a sequel." -"Plenty of suspense and anxiety to keep you wiggling in your seat. Kudos to Jaume Collet-Serra's direction of David Johnson's gritty screenplay. Wishes of a home sweet home go to the wayside, when Kate Coleman(Vera Farmigo)and husband John(Peter Sarsgaard), who recently lost a baby due to miscarriage, decide to adopt. Ready or not the couple visit an orphanage, where they meet Esther(Isabelle Fuhrman), a dark haired, dark eyed mature nine-year-old. The adoption seems to be a fresh start for all; except for the other two Coleman children. Not long after bringing Esther home, a series of accidents at home and school lead Kate to believing that her new daughter is not as innocent as she seems. John doesn't see the young girl's wicked side and loses confidence in his wife. No one really knows the truth about Esther's past...until it is almost too damn late.The snowy winter weather and demure creepy music blend into the anxious atmosphere. You can feel the simmering fear and the few scenes of real violence are definitely graphic. Miss Fuhram is an outstanding young actress. In this role she is mesmerizing. She appears to have the tools already for a very interesting career. Also in the cast: CCH Pounder, Jimmy Bennett and an impressive young Aryana Engineer. To me, ORPHAN has what you go to the movies for. Yes, some images are disturbing and the language is coarse; but still I recommended highly." -"Plenty of suspense and anxiety to keep you wiggling in your seat. Kudos to Jaume Collet-Serra's direction of David Johnson's gritty screenplay. Wishes of a home sweet home go to the wayside, when Kate Coleman(Vera Farmigo)and husband John(Peter Sarsgaard), who recently lost a baby due to miscarriage, decide to adopt. Ready or not the couple visit an orphanage, where they meet Esther(Isabelle Fuhrman), a dark haired, dark eyed mature nine-year-old. The adoption seems to be a fresh start for all; except for the other two Coleman children. Not long after bringing Esther home, a series of accidents at home and school lead Kate to believing that her new daughter is not as innocent as she seems. John doesn't see the young girl's wicked side and loses confidence in his wife. No one really knows the truth about Esther's past...until it is almost too damn late.The snowy winter weather and demure creepy music blend into the anxious atmosphere. You can feel the simmering fear and the few scenes of real violence are definitely graphic. Miss Fuhram is an outstanding young actress. In this role she is mesmerizing. She appears to have the tools already for a very interesting career. Also in the cast: CCH Pounder, Jimmy Bennett and an impressive young Aryana Engineer. To me, ORPHAN has what you go to the movies for. Yes, some images are disturbing and the language is coarse; but still I recommended highly." -"I consider Grown Ups to be a colossal failure. Is it the worst movie ever made? Not even. Is it the worst Adam Sandler movie? I don't know. What I do know is that he had all star talent in this film and the feature didn't produce. Rock, James, Spade, Sandler and even Schneider... all names that have had enormous success so I was expecting a laugh a minute; thud.Does this film prove that chemistry is more important than talent? Or does it prove that Sandler is losing his touch? It may be a little bit of both. For sure, Sandler is losing his touch, but it may also be that those superstar comedians don't do well sharing the stage. In either case the net result was the same; the movie did not nearly live up to the high expectations." -"I don't think you could have come up with a better ensemble of contemporary comics to make a film as you have here, but with that said, the picture is only slightly amusing with no real laugh out loud moments to speak of. Instead of going for a cheap gimmick like the four year old still breast feeding, the writers could have cleaned things up and gone for all around family entertainment, especially with all the couples basically on vacation with their kids in tow. The back story of Coach Buzzer's (Blake Clark) influence on the lives of the five teammates only bookends the picture and doesn't provide as meaningful a reunion as it might have if the men involved had gathered on their own to honor his memory. As it is, there are some humorous moments, and others that seem to have a build up and then fall kind of flat. The film's rating here on IMDb seems appropriate, pointing to it's worth as a somewhat amusing time killer." -"If you have never heard of Aaron Sorkin you should seek out West Wing. One of the best TV shows produced ... EVER. Really great writing and smart plot combined. I didn't know he was responsible for the script for that movie, before I went in, but I should have seen that coming (or hear it in the dialogs).Of course before all that, was the idea of a movie about Facebook. Or the ""Facebook"" movie as it was also called. It seemed like a joke. Until you heard the director attached to the project. David Fincher! Now why would he want to do a movie about Facebook? I can't really answer that, but I'm guessing he read the book, the main ""character"" of the movie wrote and he found something in it, he liked.Same must go for Sorkin. His fast paced dialog, might feel a bit distance for some. But for those who came to love it, they will really cherish every line spoken in the movie. If the real deal is as clever and eloquent as Eisenberg who is portraying him? Don't know, but it's not like everything is made as an ode to the Facebook Founder. And Mr. Timberlake might finally get recognized as a real actor, too. He's earned it." -"Just watched this movie on Netflix with my mom. While I don't think this was one of the best movies of last year (True Grit and The King's Speech were more worthy to me), The Social Network was certainly quite an attention-grabber what with the speedy dialogue from Aaron Sorkin, David Fincher's going back and forth from the depositions to the actual-if a little fabricated-events that lead to those court scenes and the performances of Jesse Eisenberg as the co-founder of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg and Justin Timberlake as that Napster founder who charms his way into being one of the investors. Another compelling performance was that of Andrew Garfield as the embittered co-founder of Facebook who ends up suing Zuckerberg because of the latter's betrayal. So on that note, The Social Network is well worth the viewing." -"I think that Ryan Gosling is the new Steve McQueen. That's not a criticism because I really liked Steve McQueen. He was a humble, understated actor who often played roles where violence ensued. This is a movie about getting in over your head through a moral code that requires you to become a protector, even if it's not in your nature. In addition to some pretty incredible car chases and organized mayhem, this gets down to the tussle between the guy who may want out and the guys who won't let him. It's about money and the Albert Brooks character (playing out of his usual element) is a pretty good adversary. He is offhanded in his appearance, but down and dirty in every aspect of his life, and like most wise guys, he doesn't hesitate to kill even his closest compadres. While there are great possibilities, I could never quite understand how one could sit on such opposite poles and keep it going. We are what we do and, of course, Gosling's driver, for all his skill will be made to pay the piper at some point." -"Everything about this film is excessive. Even the length, but that's forgivable considering just how good, all the time, this is. From the beautiful snowy opening that manages to combine magic and menace, to the thoughtful and anguished ending, this is one hell of a ride. The violence is truly awful yet impressively awesome in its magnitude while the invasive and uncompromising scenes of sexual depravity cannot but help to convey an appalling ambiguity. As I suggest, the length would normally inhibit me but I can assure anyone similarly put off, this is that good, bad and really weird you will not object. Oh, and some way into this extraordinary film I realised that there was an ultra dark humour working here too. Just to make things that little bit harder to comfortably digest." -It was deco. liked the intense-Ness of different scenes both with music and in silence. amazing acting. and how evil they made the villain. overall story is kind of stupid. he hurts countless other people to get vengeance on one person. unnecessarily gory and depressing (1 viewing) -"Everything about this film is excessive. Even the length, but that's forgivable considering just how good, all the time, this is. From the beautiful snowy opening that manages to combine magic and menace, to the thoughtful and anguished ending, this is one hell of a ride. The violence is truly awful yet impressively awesome in its magnitude while the invasive and uncompromising scenes of sexual depravity cannot but help to convey an appalling ambiguity. As I suggest, the length would normally inhibit me but I can assure anyone similarly put off, this is that good, bad and really weird you will not object. Oh, and some way into this extraordinary film I realised that there was an ultra dark humour working here too. Just to make things that little bit harder to comfortably digest." -"This is a prequel/sequel/reboot/rework to John Carpenter's 1982 classic horror The Thing. There is the big reveal twisting the story to loop it around. They could have played with this a lot more than what they actually did. It's convoluted but I'm willing to buy it. In fact, it added something interesting. Not the same for the FX.The aliens are now almost all CG. That's a big problem since the original had some of the most iconic real FX. It's a spit in the face for fans to replace it with CGI and it doesn't look good anyways. Going inside the saucer is a big mistake. This stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Eric Christian Olsen, but nobody really stands out. This is a good idea but executed without understanding the appeal of the original." -"This is a prequel/sequel/reboot/rework to John Carpenter's 1982 classic horror The Thing. There is the big reveal twisting the story to loop it around. They could have played with this a lot more than what they actually did. It's convoluted but I'm willing to buy it. In fact, it added something interesting. Not the same for the FX.The aliens are now almost all CG. That's a big problem since the original had some of the most iconic real FX. It's a spit in the face for fans to replace it with CGI and it doesn't look good anyways. Going inside the saucer is a big mistake. This stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Eric Christian Olsen, but nobody really stands out. This is a good idea but executed without understanding the appeal of the original." -"In 1982, the Norwegian Dr. Sander Halvorson (Ulrich Thomsen) invites the paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) to join his team in his research in the Artic. On the arrival, she learns that they have discovered a spacecraft deep below in the ice. They find a frozen alien life form nearby and they bring to their facility for research. Out of the blue, the alien revives and attack the scientists, contaminating them and assuming the shape of his victim. Kate finds means to identify the creature, but maybe it is too late to save the team members. In 1982, the master John Carpenter remade the 1951 ""The Thing from Another World"" ans his movie has become a masterpiece. The story of a shape-shifting alien that can assume any human form is tense, supported by a claustrophobic and depressing scenario, paranoid characters with Kurt Russell in the top of his successful career, haunting music score by Ennio Morricone and John Carpenter's top-notch direction. This remake disguised in prequel is not totally bad, but follows the format of the present Hollywood movies, supported by special effects but without the atmosphere and the psychological horror of the 1982 movie. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): ""O Enigma do Outro Mundo"" (""The Enigma of Another World"")" -"If you have heard what this remake (or the original) concerns itself about, you have probably correctly guessed that watching this movie isn't exactly a ""fun"" experience. But if you view it as an ""experience"" - that being how brutal rape can be - you'll probably consider it a pretty accurate recreation of the crime, and well made for what it is.How is it compared to the original? Well, this remake does do some things better than the original. While the budget may have been just $1.5 million, the production values are generally superior (though I did not like how washed-out all the colors appeared.) The part of the movie concerning itself with the revenge of the protagonist was more satisfying than how it was done in the original, partly due to the fact that we get to see the rapists really suffer before they ultimately die.Though in some aspects, the original did things better. In this remake, it is never explained how, after the rape, the protagonist survived out in the wilderness for so long (and got things like clothes after all of her possessions were destroyed.) Also, in this remake, the transformation of the meek heroine to someone hell-bent on revenge was too abrupt and not convincingly played by the actress.Overall, this remake can stand up to the original... though if you have the stomach or not to watch this exercise in brutality (or the original version) is something you'll have to determine on your own." -"I set my hopes quite low before watching this, and even then was disappointed. Dull and unoriginal. Nothing good about this at all.Avoid." -"Green Lantern does an efficient job for someone like me who was after a colourful bit of noisy entertainment. No expectation levels are set other than to not be insulted, so by and large this does a job. This falls more in line with a comic book adaptation that has no desire to set up a broody and conflicted hero, no hidden agendas or metaphors in the villain ranks, so yes! It's got a little campy flavouring to it. Which is fine if that is what you ordered.The effects work is very effective, though the sequences involving one of the villains, Parallax, are hindered by it being quite simply a very silly looking being. The story has some credible complexities about it, but the writers strain to keep it simple enough for a younger audience - which is both a blessing and a curse since it becomes uneven and corny whilst still retaining a watchable fun factor. The acting is only fine, but again this is because the script is never sure when to give emotional heft to the characters, or when to add some dramatic vulnerability.It's a safe superhero film, a creamy desert to satisfy the sweet palate, maybe one that is flavoured with Chartreuse? In other words it fills a gap for a while and is then quickly vanished from the memory. 6/10Footnote: Extended cut recommended as a preference since it puts more flesh on the human bones." -"The movie starts with a CG background science fiction origins of Green Lantern. The power of the Green Lantern is given to those who do not know fear. Parallax is introduced as the evil force which is ""fear."" As a Green Lantern lays crashed he releases his Green Lantern ring (force) to someone who doesn't know the meaning of the word ""fear."" Clearly that is Hal Jordon (Ryan Reynolds) who thinks he is Tom Cruise in ""Top Gun"" as he defeats 2 High tech pilot-less air craft by using a maneuver from Ironman.The movie spends a lot of time building background and lays the foundation for a multiple sequels. This is mostly an introduction of the character.While the Green Lantern is flying around impressing his former gf, mad scientist and son of a senator, Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) has been experimenting by injecting himself with microbes, which happen to be alien, creating the super villain for our super hero. They spent a ton of money on special effects. The ring may never make a mistake, but the casting director did. They should have gone the extra expense to get some real box office stars. Ryan Reynolds didn't hack it.No sex, no nudity, and no F-bombs. Good for kids." -"After witnessing the death of his father in an aircraft accident ""Hal Jordan"" (Ryan Reynolds) grows up trying to be as fearless as he presumes his father was. This leads him to test his limits and accept risks that most normal people would not attempt. Then one day an alien from another galaxy crashes his spaceship and upon realizing that he his death is imminent allows the essence within a powerful ring in his possession to seek out a worthy recipient who has the courage to face his fears. Needless to say, the essence immediately finds Hal and brings him to the alien who proceeds to give him the ring and some final last words before dying. And so begins the life and adventure of another member of the Green Lantern Corps. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this could have been an excellent superhero film if it had a more serious or coherent plot. Unfortunately, the director ""Martin Campbell"" apparently couldn't focus on what kind of movie he wanted and the result was one which had some rather bad CGI along with some heroes and villains who belonged more to a children's matinée than a prime-time movie. In other words, it lacked the necessary intensity. Yet despite some of the negatives, it wasn't necessarily a total disaster as it still remained fairly interesting and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Average." -"Darkness is descending on the world after the death of Dumbledore. Death eaters are everywhere and growing in power. Harry is on the run. He, Hermione, and Ron must find and destroy all the Hocruxes. All the while they must avoid being captured by Voldemort's forces.We are truly descending into darkness. The forces of good are on the run. The three friends are on their own. It was alway going to be this way. All the previous films have been leading up to this.What this movie needs is continuous danger and action. We need the three to be on the run. However for large sections in the middle, they are hiding rather than running. It's not as visually and cinematically exciting. While I understand that changing the story would be unacceptable. It may be better to add the other character's adventures to spice things up. Overall, I like the dark moody tone." -"World attention throughout much of this year has focused on uprisings in the Arab world. The Tunisian people forced the country's dictator to flee, and the Egyptian people overthrew Hosni Mubarak, while protests continue in Bahrain and Yemen.However, it's important to understand the roots of these uprisings. Denis Villeneuve's ""Incendies"" shows some examples. The movie focuses on Nawan Marwal (Lubna Azabal), an Arab immigrant in Quebec whose final wish is for her son and daughter to give some information to their father (whom they have never met) and their brother (who they never knew existed). So begins the children's journey to find out why their mother fled her native country.The native country is never identified, although it appears to be Lebanon. And in finding out what Nawan saw in her native country -- told in flashback -- we see some VERY ugly stuff. The movie leaves practically nothing to the imagination. But it's all part of the children's learning the family history. And certainly, the horror that Nawan witnessed should give the audience an idea of why the Arab world has been rising up for the past six months (in that respect, it probably would have been appropriate to give ""Incendies"" Best Foreign Language Film). Above all, it's a very good movie, although very gut-wrenching.Also starring Mélissa Désormeaux-Poulin, Maxim Gaudette, Rémy Girard and Allen Altman." -"This film tells the story of a young woman and her twin brother who go to Lebanon in search for their mother's past, as instructed by the mother's will. They discover one heartbreaking fact after another, shaking the ultimate core of her and her brother's existence.Just like the twins, I was unprepared for the shocking emotional roller coaster that unfolds gradually. Just when I thought it could not be worse, things turn for the worse. It's a very sad film, but somehow there's still hope, love and forgiveness in the air. The ending is very profoundly powerful, it leaves me paralysed in thoughts, entranced in emotions. ""Incendies"" is a must watch." -"Twins journey to the Middle East to discover their family history, and fulfill their mother's last wishes.Many of us, sooner or later, get interested in our family history and want to know our roots. Do we have a famous ancestor, or do we have connections to an Indian tribe, or maybe something else completely unexpected. Often, the journey is fascinating and can spark a real interest in history and a connection to our fellow man.Sometimes the journey is not so good. Many of us have Middle Eastern blood in us somewhere. Go back a hundred generations and we can trace our path just about anywhere. And the Middle East, as a whole, is a great place... but this film shows what can happen if the path goes askew." -"Greetings from Lithuania.""Incendies"" (2010) strength lies in its powerful and hardly forgettable story, which at the end left me speechless - literally. This movie is also wonderfully crafted - cinematography was amazing, it should have been nominated for Oscar in that category. Acting was good, especially by the lead who played Nawal Marwan. Directing was very solid by now famous Denis Villeneuve - he was a great guide in this at first kinda tough story. There are many names and places in this movie, but what matters most is what it tells at the end, which i definitely won't even hint at. Sure, the coincidence is one in a million, but this is a movie, and a very powerful one.Overall, ""Incendies"" is a highly recommended drama / mystery / war. It has very solid movie craftsmanship, but its biggest strength is the story - a hardly forgettable one." -"Not in the traditional sense that is. Because events are happening, just don't expect it to be something that will follow too much of a big drama you might expect from Hollywood. There are quite a few big names here and I guess some things may seem like a cliché to some people. But it's tough to make a movie about something like that and not touch some nerves or do something that people may expect.Still the movie has impact (even if it is slow driven and may feel ""senseless"") and is very well thought of. It may not satisfy your every need and may not fulfill what you'd hope for, but if you reflect on it, you may be able to see the real value of it. On the other hand, I can see that people really hated it (it's Soderbergh and should therefor be expected)" -"Before mars 2020, I saw it as a catastrophic fiction. After mars 2020, I saw it as a prediction or warning or good start point for few conspiracy theories. But the story remains significant for me. I t is Hollywood and that kind of stories are the favorites for reasonable audience. But the cast. The actors and their work are the real subject of this film about vulnerability, family, friends, hopes and death, fears and solutions. And, after a time, you see it being a film - warning about a more profound form of contagion." -"This film is about Harry Potter's sixth year at Hogwart's School for wizards.""Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"" excels in visual effects. The various wizardry phenomena, such as the various Weasley's shop are visual delights. The pensieve and the process of memory retrieval are the most impressive.The plot concentrates on romance and jealousy, with little wizard battles or action. The plot as it is still could have been entertaining, but the delivery of it suspense or thrill. Even the final climax that evoked outcry from Harry Potter fans around the world seems plain and dry. That scene certainly could have been more thrilling and exciting.That being said, ""Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"" is still adequate entertainment. I did not feel the film lasted for 2.5 hours at all, and I was actually surprised when the film ended, as I was expecting more." -"I've enjoyed watching the Harry Potter films (I've not read the books), but this is the first one that began to try my patience.""Half-Blood Prince"" doesn't make sense if you've not read the book it's based on, a crime for which I cannot forgive movie adaptations. The first half of the film deals with the adolescent romances of the Hogwarts students, treated as an aside by the entire film series but somewhat of a welcome relief from the dark brooding of Harry and his battle with Voldemort. However, the last half of the film lurches into action and seems completely disconnected with everything that came before it. By the time Dumbledore and Harry were off to find another piece of Voldemort's soul, I was lost and didn't much care about being found.Grade: B-" -"This movie was, I think, one for those who are in for the long haul. As a stand-alone movie it would make little sense to anyone not familiar with the story so far. It does not move the main narrative on very much. In fact, its two and a half hours are devoted to three things - one, developing the increasing romantic interactions among the teenage principals, two, setting up the mechanism which carries the bulk of the final book ie. Voldemort's potential downfall, and three, its shock denouement.Some might say that this isn't really good enough.I saw it in a crowded cinema, and the audience was attentive all the way through and responded the right way in all the right places, so they were clearly the audience at which it is aimed.And so am I. I enjoyed the relationships finally falling into place and, despite the fact that Jim Broadbent's Horace Slughorn was essentially a red herring, he was still a diverting and entertaining red herring. For a film which amounted to little more than treading water before the serious business of bringing the saga to a close begins, it kept me - and others - perfectly happy.But why was the colour desaturated all the way through? Most of the movie is in sepia, blues and greys. Some orange, yellow and green would have been nice." -"I've enjoyed watching the Harry Potter films (I've not read the books), but this is the first one that began to try my patience.""Half-Blood Prince"" doesn't make sense if you've not read the book it's based on, a crime for which I cannot forgive movie adaptations. The first half of the film deals with the adolescent romances of the Hogwarts students, treated as an aside by the entire film series but somewhat of a welcome relief from the dark brooding of Harry and his battle with Voldemort. However, the last half of the film lurches into action and seems completely disconnected with everything that came before it. By the time Dumbledore and Harry were off to find another piece of Voldemort's soul, I was lost and didn't much care about being found.Grade: B-" -"Romantic comedy starring Anna Faris playing her typical character in this rather dull and unfunny film. There's a smart, funny, observant comedy- drama to be made about the role our romantic pasts play in determining our futures. Faris and Evans have frisky chemistry until a dire, endless third act separates them for the most arbitrary reasons. Both of them play their part well as it shows, however the rest of the cast suffer. When What's Your Number? works at all, it's a testament to the charm of Faris. She delivers a joyously unashamed performance in a flailing, sputtering rom-com that gives her and the rest of a supremely overqualified cast ample cause for embarrassment. Though many scenes could have been better as it became a bore watching the final product unveil. The trailers for this film made it seem like such a funny comedy but once watching the film, it was not that funny. A few chuckles but not much else to offer. Also predictability is very evident." -"Yes, this avante-garde 2011 production certainly has multiple UNsimulated sex scenes (boy-girl and girl-girl), but this nicely-shot film offers MUCH more than that, and its story could NOT have been rendered properly without those scenes. Set in a small port on the English Channel coast -- probably around Normandy -- the story revolves around the misadventures of a half-dozen or so young middle-class early-twentysomethings who all seemingly lack motivation to do anything more with their lives than work in menial jobs (or steal cars, in a couple cases)...and have sex (the poor current economic situation in France is implicitly blamed for this, it seems). Brassy-slut-who's-really-just-looking-for-love-and-the-perfect-guy Cecile is the pivotal figure. It's quite interesting to see how she interacts with all the other key characters, and how her actions end-up actually helping a variety of people with their relationships. Turns out there's actually a HEART above that vagina..." -"This was boring for me. it might be an interesting piece for those who haven't watched enough of soft/erotic kind of flicks, but for me this is nothing new nor creative because I couldn't grasp the story gem. sorry but this was a really outrageously lame filming and acting, because honestly nowadays porn companies produce way better scenarios than this and more convincing as well I give this four for the effort." -Good movie to watch for especially the love connection the movie is not bad at all it speaks in moving love. -"Director Laurent Bouhnik had an interesting idea, but it didn't translate well on screen. I consider almost every aspect of this film a very rough draft.1. Character development is almost non-existent. 2. The narrative is choppy and many scenes are unnecessary. 3. The plot lacks direction. 4. The acting is okay at best. 5. None of the characters are particularly likable.Bottom Line: I've read several reviews that praise this film for it's success in it's depiction of eroticism, however, Bouhnik's overly-heavy focus on sex and erotic behavior doesn't leave enough room for the characters or the story to develop properly. I will admit that there are several (individual) scenes that are strong--diamonds in the rough, if you will--but when the film was over, I had taken nothing from it, felt nothing during it, and was generally uninterested in the story and the characters." -"Even though it is a French film, it's quite good. Beautiful scenery, quaint little French café's, beautiful countryside. HOWEVER, the movie takes a twist and turn and the explicit sex scenes are what we would see in a pornographic movie. They don't really add much to the context of the story but, for some, and especially the main character, will excite. I was mortified and shocked when I was given a ticket to preview a special screening, sitting their with my grandmother who lived in France for many years, I thought it would be nice for her to see France again. She saw a bit too much of France! I really don't know what to say about this film which has been branded 'Art', apart from : watch it, and make your own mind up. So ...um... yeah...(Normally my comments are more in-depth and detailed but I'm at a loss for words with this one.)" -"I always get caught short on the idea of the glorification of someone whose life revolves around the deaths of others, whose ""occupation"" is to steal from those who have no say in anything. What I mean is, our hero is not there to dole out justice or to even a score, he's a two bit punk who happens to be smoother and more handsome than the others around him. In the process, he begins to become more human because of falling into a relationship. I know that this attitude would negate ""The Godfather"" or any of the wise-guy movies so popular over time. So I enjoy the development of the characters, even if I have not one scintilla of admiration for them. The ugliness of the Boston streets works well here as does the criminal element and the ""honor among thieves"" thing. What works well is Affleck's brush with true humanity. One last issue. I'm getting a little tired of the incredible amount of fire-power that these guys have and how little carnage there really is. Also, there seems to be a lot of carelessness in police work if we are to believe this stuff." -"Four friends Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck), James Coughlin (Jeremy Renner), Albert Magloan (Slaine) and Desmond Elden (Owen Burke) are robbers working the Charlestown neighborhood of Boston. In their latest job, they take the bank manager Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall) hostage and then let her go. Doug fake dates Claire to make sure she can't ID them. He's also having sex with James' drugged out sister Krista Coughlin (Blake Lively). Meanwhile they are being investigated by the FBI led by Agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm).This is a richly character driven crime thriller. Ben Affleck knows these characters well. And acting with the intense Jeremy Renner makes Affleck better. The only actor who looks out of place is Blake Lively. She just can't get rid of that Cali feel and her accent sounds terrible. Brit Rebecca Hall does a better job than her. The action is exciting. And the story is riveting. But it's the characters and the actors that are so engaging." -"Ben Affleck directs, co-writes and stars in this riveting action-filled crime drama. The Charlestown neighborhood of Boston is known for turning out crafty armed robbers; generation after generation. Doug MacRay(Affleck)is a career bank robber planning his next hit. One of his crew is childhood friend Jim Coughlin(Jeremy Renner), who is quite volatile and obviously has a very short fuse. During the latest heist a bank manager Claire(Rebecca Hall)is kidnapped. Creating a major problem is the fact that Doug falls heavy for Claire thus causing doubts of judgment from mad dog Jim. That is not the worst; a head strong FBI agent(Jon Hamm)has MacCray and the recently fired bank manager under surveillance. Some very good car chases and gun battles. A strong supporting cast features: Pete Postlethwaite, Blake Lively, Owen Burk and Chris Cooper." -"Highly dangerous metal eating Nanomites could eat and replicate incredibly. Captain Duke Hauser (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) are transporting the dangerous Nanomites warheads when they are attacked by Cobra led by Anastasia DeCobray (Sienna Miller). Luckily they're saved by a special force called G. I. Joe. Duke and Ripcord join up with the Joes to battle Cobra.This is simply a blow em up action adventure. A lot of gadgets, and a lot of action mask a lack of acting and storytelling. This movie is a blunt instrument bashing in your brain into submission with loud thumping explosive action sequences. It is boys with theirs toys, and girls in their skintight outfits." -"FANTASTIC MR. FOX (2009) **** (VOICES OF: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Wallace Wolodarsky, Eric Chase Anderson, Michael Gambon, Willem Dafoe, Owen Wilson, Jarvis Cocker, Karen Duffy, Brian Cox, Adrien Brody) Truly – well, fantastic – animated adaptation of Roald Dahl's children's lit classic as envisioned by filmmaker Wes Anderson (who co-wrote with Noah Baumbach and actually provides a voice talent too) about sly, wry Mr. Fox (equally wry and sly Clooney, his voice as welcome as a blanket on a snowy winter's night) whose days of chicken rousting are numbered when he backpedals from his domestic bliss with wife & teen son (Streep & Schwartzman equally cozy tones) to abscond with poultry from three community farmers (read: villains) and the consequences unleashed upon his animal community with impunity. Fast, fun and sharply etched with fine comedic bravado throughout (thank you again Bill Murray for your insouciant vocals) and a truly amazing tour-de-force for the stop-motion animators and production design by Nelson Lowry (seriously should be considered for an Oscar) with its autumnal palette and homemade puppetry look (waycool how everything bristles to life!) One of my faves of the year and one of the best family films of the year too boot; hell one of the year's best!" -"Greetings again from the darkness. Sometimes being creative and clever just isn't enough. Writer/director Wes Anderson has a track record of extremely creative projects. Some work very well (Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore) while others fall just short of the mark (Life Aquatic, Darjeeling Limited). When Mr. Anderson hooks up with writer Noah Baumbach (Squid and the Whale) to take on a Roald Dahl (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) story, a movie lover can't help but get very excited! The look of the film is very unusual and ""fantastic"" in its own right. The fur or coats of the animals is pretty amazing and even the expressive faces are new to the big screen. What really fell short for me was the voice acting of some very impressive folks. George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman and Bill Murray all fall a bit flat and just play it too cool ... dare I say it ... they were all a bit boring! Willem Dafoe as the rat was really the only one who brought any life to his role.So while I absolutely love the look of the film and the characters, I was quite disappointed in the pace and passion of the story and the manner in which it's acted. It is probably too slow for both kids and adults, so I am not sure who the audience will be ... other than film technicians who will appreciate the look." -"Mr. Fox (voiced by George Clooney) is just a simple fox trying to make his way in the world. For him, stealing chickens is the quickest and easiest way to make a living. The chicken theft life caught up with him one day while he was on a caper with his wife Mrs. Fox (voiced by Meryl Streep). It was then that he promised to give up the chicken stealing game.Mr. Fox couldn't quite hold on to that promise. A couple of years later he was back at it again with his friend Kylie (voiced by Wallace Wolodarsky) and even his nephew Kristofferson (voiced by Eric Chase Anderson).""Mr. Fox"" is dry and subdued, but so very funny and entertaining. Though it's done in stop motion puppet animation, it will go over the heads of kids. The deadpan humor, particularly from Ash (voiced by Jason Schwartzman), Mr. Fox's son, was on point. Likewise, Badger (voiced by Bill Murray), Mr. Fox's attorney, chipped in with his own brand of comedy. I don't think I've seen a stop motion animation I've liked as much except if you count a few clips from ""Robot Chickin.""" -"Mr. Fox decides to end his wild days by doing one last raid. He plans an elaborate raid on farmers Boggis, Bunce and Bean.Wes Anderson brings his sense of filmmaking to claymation. He doesn't comprise any on the his visual, his color palette, and his language. There's no mistake that this is all Wes Anderson. The story isn't of much consequence. The dialog is filled with the dry wit that Wes Anderson is known for. The camera style on shooting head on remain even thought it's animation. Add to it, Wes has enticed the voice talents of all his famous friends including George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Bill Murray, and Jason Schwartzman. George is especially effective as the suave Mr Fox. It's interesting to see Wes Anderson try something different. However I don't this medium fits him that well. His style is already very static. The restriction of animation really decreases the emotional effectiveness of actors especially this type of claymation." -"Teenagers in 1979 Ohio, filming a Super 8-mm movie for entry in a competition, witness a derailment at the train station; assuming the kids have the incident on film, a hard-nosed colonel with the U.S. Air Force is soon on their trail, but he knows more than they do. Boys' adventure story-cum-monster movie from writer-director J.J. Abrams, who is slavishly faithful to producer Steven Spielberg's homey touch throughout. The scenario never jells and, although the production is elaborate, the narrative is scattered to the winds. The kids, leftover Goonies, have obviously been cast for their physical differences (one short, one tall, one with braces, etc.), but their personalities are one-dimensional on film; they're generic (much like the picture itself) and fail to generate interest—but I wouldn't blame the young actors, it's just not there in the writing. ** from ****" -"This film is about a young man who enters a seminary to learn to be a priest, despite his doubts about his faith. His doubts are shaken when he is sent to Vatican to learn exorcism.""The Rite"" is a film with adequate suspense and a fairly thrilling plot. It is also highly religious, and hence presents events in a one way manner. To me there is little doubt about whether the victims portrayed are possessed or psychiatrically ill. This is a pity, as presenting both sides of the argument to let viewers decide whether or not the victims are possessed can enhance suspense and engagement factor even further, as in the excellent film ""The Exorcism of Emily Rose""." -"This film is about a young man who enters a seminary to learn to be a priest, despite his doubts about his faith. His doubts are shaken when he is sent to Vatican to learn exorcism.""The Rite"" is a film with adequate suspense and a fairly thrilling plot. It is also highly religious, and hence presents events in a one way manner. To me there is little doubt about whether the victims portrayed are possessed or psychiatrically ill. This is a pity, as presenting both sides of the argument to let viewers decide whether or not the victims are possessed can enhance suspense and engagement factor even further, as in the excellent film ""The Exorcism of Emily Rose""." -"Olivier Nakache's and Éric Toledano's ""Intouchables"" looks at the friendship between people of dissimilar backgrounds. Philippe (François Cluzet) is a paraplegic tycoon who hires African immigrant Driss (Omar Sy) to be his caretaker. That paragliding scene made me want to go paragliding.Beyond the obvious plot, I see the movie as a look at France's - and much of Europe's - growing diversity. Even if a person in France or Germany doesn't like immigrants, he's still bound to have exposure to them (much like how racist southerners in the US are going to have exposure to blacks whether they want it or not). Of course, most important is the different backgrounds that the men have: Philippe is a modern aristocrat, while Driss is from the ghetto. Both have something to teach each other.Anyway, it's a really good movie. I recommend it." -"A comedy like that is tough to master. Balancing the funny and the dramatic stuff and still keep enough character development inside. And while I wouldn't say that both characters really redeem themselves (wholly), it gives them nice touches. Touches that include quite a lot of non-PC behavior (be alert and do not watch, if you are sensible to that sort of thing).It is a french comedy with heart. And it was a sleeper hit in Germany. Word of mouth made this a big success. A bit of credit has to go to the people who dubbed it I guess (I watched the original version with subtitles), because they must have done a phenomenal job. It is not perfect, but that fact makes it even weirder and more adorable" -"Having read the book and gone into the theater without reading any reviews, I was astonished at the venom directed at the film. I agree that it is disappointing, but so many said it was about the worst thing ever produced. When one sees speculative fiction like this, we are caught in our own preconceptions of what the afterlife would be. I hated ""What Dreams May Come"" because it had that pretentious view that we are spoon fed our whole lives of a palpable heaven and hell. This one has some of the same elements. What driving force in the universe would bother to solve a murder mystery or bring closure to people who are already dead. However, the acting is good. The story is moderately interesting. The characters are certainly worth the trouble. Stanley Tucci is really marvelous, so it's hard to imagine giving this only a one out of ten." -"THE LOVELY BONES (2009) *** Sairose Ronan, Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz, Stanley Tucci, Susan Sarandon, Jake Abel, Rose McIver, Nikki SooHoo, Reece Ritchie, Amanda Micahalka, Michael Imperioli. Peter Jackson's visually overloaded yet heartfelt adaptation of the vastly popular novel by Alice Sebold about the brutal murder of a 14 year old girl during the 1970s (Ronan in a remarkable performance) whose soul lingers in the afterlife trying to communicate with her loved ones to bring her killer (a truly creepazoid performance by Tucci) to justice. Strongly knit acting, impressive production designs and shrewd sprinkling of music (best sequence set to Tim Buckley's ""Song To The Siren"" by This Mortal Coil"" affectively hauntingly ethereal and pitch-perfect!) makes the story come alive even if its candy colored fantasia gets away with itself from the heart-breaking storyline crafted." -"This film is about a family grieving for the loss of their murdered 14-year-old daughter, while the daughter observes their lives from a perfect land above.""The Lovely Bones"" is so beautifully made. Susie, played by Saoirse Ronan, looks like a perfectly innocent angel. She instantly connects with viewers and her tragic events evoke much sympathy. How she sees the world she left behind and how she interacts with it is so moving. I particularly find the heaven sequences moving. Everything, including trees, sea and sky looks so perfect. Maybe, through these beautiful scenes, those who have gone through the loss of their loved ones might be consoled by the thought that their loved ones have gone to such a beautiful place.""The Lovely Bones"" is also engagingly suspenseful. There have been so many times that I cannot help myself but shout at the characters to do or not to do something. I was very engaged and moved by ""The Lovely Bones"", as it has all the ingredients to be a profoundly moving and heartbreaking tale." -"I have to admit, that I haven't read the novel yet, therefor can not judge the movie, by how faithful it is to the book. Now that that's out of the way, let me tell you that I thought it was one of the best movies I watched this year. It's poetic, it's acted very great and even the fact, that the ""twist"" comes very early on does not have a negative impact on the movie.Of course, it is almost impossible not to know, what the early twist is (even if you haven't read the book, like me). If possible try to avoid reading too much beforehand and just walk into the movie, just knowing Peter Jackson made it. And although even the mystery is taken away (you know who did what), it is beautiful from beginning til end. There are so many great visually stunning scenes, that are also acted great, that I just had to love it.The pace might be a problem for some. But try not to think about it too much. And hopefully you will enjoy it as much as I did." -"I have seen quite a few movies released this year, some brilliant(Tree of Life), some great(Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2), some good(On Stranger Tides), some disappointing(Green Lantern) and some really bad(Battle:Los Angeles). Bridesmaids is one of the brilliant films I have seen released this year, while there are one or two moments where the gross-out humour is a little tiresome, I haven't seen anything this funny and this original in a while. The production values are great, the cinematography is crisp and smooth and the scenery and fashions are very striking. The soundtrack also brought a smile to my face, as did the buoyant direction, the original and well-paced story and especially the sharp and acerbic writing. The characters are examples of those perhaps that initially you think am I going to like these characters, but the actors clearly make an effort to give them personality and likability. Of the talented cast, Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy stand out, both these actresses are brilliant, but Rose Byrne and Chris O'Dowd are also terrific. Overall, a great film and one of my favourites of the year so far. 9/10 Bethany Cox" -"This movie does divide people. It is very foul mouthed and it does not care if you like the language or the way the characters act in it. I do respect if people feel offended by it. Unfortunately that will cloud their view of the underlying themes in this. Just because it is crass and vulgar, it doesn't mean it's pointless.Quite the opposite is the case. You have strong themes of friendship, envy and growing older to bare (well our characters have to bare those things). Not to mention the whole wedding thing, that is quite a big deal for every woman. I didn't enjoy every joke, but I liked the way women handled themselves in this. Our main character has an arch and you can clearly see her progress through the whole film (and all the jokes).Again, if you are easily offended this is not for you. Don't expect it to be a female Hangover either. And then you might enjoy it too :o)" -"Oh, I laughed very often and very loudly. My favorite was Melissa McCarthy, one of the friends who could best be described as ""large and in charge"" in most scenes she is in. It was a brave choice, very un-glamorous with little or no makeup, she was a hoot in all her scenes.But the main character is Annie (Kristen Wiig) as the maid of honor for her best friend's upcoming wedding. Annie is in a bad run of bad luck, with her love life, her job, and her apartment mates. Most of it she causes herself, by being a real putz of a person.When she does get into the wedding planning, she is surprised to find another ""best friend"" of the bride who happens to be wealthy. The two of them end up competing for the status of ""best friend of the bride."" I like Wiig. She is funny and a good actress. This just isn't the best script. As I mentioned in my lead off comment, I laughed many times, and generally was entertained. But it really is a dumb movie.A free DVD loaner from my public library." -"Ok, but not great. Very funny in parts, but often just plain stupid, with the intention of grossing people out.How it got two Oscar nominations - Best Original Screenplay and Best Supporting Actress (for Melissa McCarthy) - I don't know. Neither nomination was deserved. Further evidence that the 2011-12 Oscar year was a fairly weak year for movies." -"Ever wondered what would happen if Woody Allen did his own version of British Sitcom Goodnight Sweetheart? Well if that's the case the closest we'll ever get to see it is in this film in which a Hollywood screenwriter turned aspiring novelist travels back in time in Paris, meeting his idols along the way and falling in love with a woman from the past.This was the first Woody Allen I'd seen so all the talk of this being a return to form meant nothing to me but for the most part it was enjoyable. It's a little slow paced and the ending rushed but the cast are all stellar names and Owen Wilson as the lead plays bewildered very well.An odd film to place as it's not really laugh out funny but equally not overly serious but nevertheless it's a decent film to seek out." -"Ever wondered what would happen if Woody Allen did his own version of British Sitcom Goodnight Sweetheart? Well if that's the case the closest we'll ever get to see it is in this film in which a Hollywood screenwriter turned aspiring novelist travels back in time in Paris, meeting his idols along the way and falling in love with a woman from the past.This was the first Woody Allen I'd seen so all the talk of this being a return to form meant nothing to me but for the most part it was enjoyable. It's a little slow paced and the ending rushed but the cast are all stellar names and Owen Wilson as the lead plays bewildered very well.An odd film to place as it's not really laugh out funny but equally not overly serious but nevertheless it's a decent film to seek out." -"I think that the timing of the release of ""Megamind"" hurt it quite a bit. If you look at the revenue for this film, it really is not that impressive, as it cost nearly as much as it made. However, ""Despicable Me"", which came out shortly before ""Megamind"" made a ton of money--many times what it cost to make. Now this does not mean one film is necessarily better that the other. I really think that ""Despicable Me"" stole ""Megamind""'s thunder and people were just not interested in seeing two films about an evil genius.So what's my verdict? Well, frankly I think both films are about equally good but have a slightly different audience. ""Despicable Me"" is clearly marketed more to kids and has cuteness as its advantage. The minions from ""Despicable Me"" are magnificent and adorable. It's also a tad formulaic--but not bad at all despite the predictability. ""Megamind"", however, is more a film for teens and adults--as cuteness is not really something I'd associate with the movie. It also has a few more surprises and a more adult sense of humor. My wife and oldest daughter preferred ""Megamind"" while I preferred ""Despicable Me""--but we all agreed that both were really nice films.I could say a lot more about the film, but since it's now out on DVD and already has a ton of reviews, I'll pass. Suffice to say it's well worth seeing and is excellent entertainment." -"And by that I am referring to the other ""bad guy"" animation movie of 2010 -> Despicable me. But it might be a bit unfair to compare those too. It's not like they have the same story. Still while one found a unique way to tell the story, this here relies on the jokes alone. Not a bad thing, since they are pretty good in general. And the voice cast is doing a great job too.Kids will not mind either (no pun intended), or care if and how clever this is. It's good family fun with a little message. Predictable and caring almost completely on the main characters, this is a movie you can enjoy if you let it. I'm not sure about the 3-D though. Wasn't really necessary." -"Villain Megamind (Will Ferrell) is an alien sent to Earth growing up alongside good guy Metro Man (Brad Pitt). While love and support showered Metro Man, Megamind was despised growing up in a prison. Then in one of his evil schemes, Megamind surprisingly kills Metro Man by accidentally discovering his copper weakness. Megamind loses his reason for being when he doesn't have a good guy to oppose him. So he sets out to create a good guy hero. Only it completely backfires, and Megamind must figure out how to save the day.There is some fun in this. The evil schemes should be more silly and less deadly. To start off the movie by killing a character is a little bit morbid and a little bit too serious. The twist is great. It takes the whole superhero genre much more seriously than the usual kiddie fare.The biggest problem is that this followed the much cuter Despicable Me. This is a more serious themed movie while the other villain led movie is a wacky cartoon. Even though both have minions, the Despicable Minions are super cute and super hilarious. Megamind just doesn't sell as well." -"Villain Megamind (Will Ferrell) is an alien sent to Earth growing up alongside good guy Metro Man (Brad Pitt). While love and support showered Metro Man, Megamind was despised growing up in a prison. Then in one of his evil schemes, Megamind surprisingly kills Metro Man by accidentally discovering his copper weakness. Megamind loses his reason for being when he doesn't have a good guy to oppose him. So he sets out to create a good guy hero. Only it completely backfires, and Megamind must figure out how to save the day.There is some fun in this. The evil schemes should be more silly and less deadly. To start off the movie by killing a character is a little bit morbid and a little bit too serious. The twist is great. It takes the whole superhero genre much more seriously than the usual kiddie fare.The biggest problem is that this followed the much cuter Despicable Me. This is a more serious themed movie while the other villain led movie is a wacky cartoon. Even though both have minions, the Despicable Minions are super cute and super hilarious. Megamind just doesn't sell as well." -"Sandra Bullock won an Oscar for her role as Leigh Anne Tuohy, who took the destitute Michael Oher under her wing. I certainly found ""The Blind Side"" to be worth seeing. Maybe not the ultimate masterpiece, but it is one that I would recommend. Criticism that I read about the movie is that it depicts a white family heroically helping an African-American. Well, even if that is the case, it's still an important story.Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron) grew up in foster homes in Memphis, always running away. When he got sent to a Christian school, he met Sean, whose mother Leigh Anne allowed him to stay in the house. On the tests, Michael scores in the 98th percentile in protective instincts, and it's clear that football is his talent. But both Michael and Leigh Anne still have issues to deal with on both their sides of the tracks.While the film does have its weaknesses, I still wish to assert that everyone should see this. Not just because it's a true story. Hell, I'm not even going for the whole ""triumph of the human spirit"" routine. I think that the most important thing portrayed in ""The Blind Side"" is the current state of race relations in the United States, and how each side has to deal with its own stereotypes. So definitely see it.Also starring Tim McGraw and Kathy Bates." -I like the bit at the start where he breaks his leg -I like the bit at the start where he breaks his leg -"If you are cynic, you might wanna steer clear of this. On the other hand, I like to be cynic here and there, and I still did quite enjoy this movie. It's not the best movie ever (far from it), but as a feel good movie, with a hint of danger here and there (and actually an upset that is almost ridiculous), it works very good. Performances are more than stellar too.I haven't seen all the movies that came out in 2009 in America to qualify for the best actress award, but I guess the theme of the movie, helped Sandra win this one. Don't get me wrong, she is pretty good in the movie. But it's the overall impact of the whole thing, that made her win (is my guess).While it might also be the TV movie of the week, the naturalistic approach by our main actor does upgrade it quite a bit. His down to earth character works really well ... unless you think real conflict is missing in the movie ..." -"From Roland Emmerich, a man who likes to destroy things on screen comes the apocalyptic disaster film 2012. Its 2012 and the scientists have discovered that the earth's core is melting, the crust will shift and lave will spew out causing earthquakes and rising tides. Even the poles would shift.Politicians, rich oligarchs, various royal families and a few conspiracy nuts know of the imminent disaster and have started planning for it by means of survivals arks being built in China. However a place in the ark comes with a huge price.John Cusack goes all out to get his ex-wife and kids to safety by tagging along with a rich Russian.Danny Glover is the US President who opts to stay in Washington. Oliver Platt is the realist but harsh Chief of Staff. Chiwetel Ejiofor is one of the scientists who alerted the government of the impending doom but fearful that the rich and powerful will callously leave millions to die.The cheese-fest is dialled up to 11 as Cusack just escapes disaster by car and plane. Roads splits, buildings come crashing down, volcanoes erupt. Emmerich even blows up the White House once again amongst other landmarks.Its like a roller-coaster ride but the characterisations are a bit paper thin, some of the effects look a bit too much green screened. A good end of the world flick with some tongue in cheek humour." -"This film is about the world coming to an end in December 2012, and the remarkable feat of people trying to escape from the seemingly unavoidable fate.""2012"" is truly amazing because the story is so engaging. There are no fillers, only one disaster after another. Grounds disappearing, trains flying, buildings collapsing, all the effects are spectacular and scarily real, that I felt myself sank into the seat as I watched the disasters unfold. The pacing is so tight that even just one hour into the film, all the possible calamities ought to have happened. But no, there really are even more disasters. It's like having all the other disaster movies and end of the world movies into one, but even better. I was so engaged by the film. ""2012"" is an excellent piece of storytelling, and a superb special effects galore. Be amazed by it!" -"A pleasant animated feature from Disney takes on the Grimm Brothers' tale of a lost princess secluded in a tower most of her life. Rapunzel(Mandy Moore)is a beautiful princess with extraordinary long magical hair. Rapunzel's evil step-mother Gothel(Donna Murphy)needs the rejuvenating powers of her hair to remain young; so she locks the beauty away in a tower. The story progresses with a bandit, Flynn Rider(Zachery Levi), on the run discovering Rapunzel. The smitten thief is willing to sweep her away to see the real world for the very first time. Mother Gothel in her fear of aging plots to recapture Rapunzel thus ending the romance with her rescuer. Since most Disney animated features are based on fairy tales, you can pretty well count on a happy ending. Super CGI places Rapunzel in the company of timeless classics like SNOW WHITE and SLEEPING BEAUTY. Disney never disappoints.Other voices you may recognize: Brad Garrett, Jeffrey Tambor and Ron Perlman." -Tangled captures all that is good about Disney animation with all the vivid colours and characters coming through combined with some strong songs and laugh out loud moments. It may not be the strongest of the 50 animated films but it is a more valid entry than previous Disney flops like Chicken Little.Unlike The Princess and the frog this doesn't feel like a girl orientated film and the character of Flynn is on equal footing with Rapunzel throughout.The voice actors are all good with Mandy Moore and Brad Garrett of Everybody Loves Raymond fame being the standouts.Although 2007's Enchanted starring Amy Adams was perhaps a better homage to the legacy of Disney there are enough elements in this film to satisfy Disney fans old and new. -"Back when this came out I had no children, and while I did occasionally watch films aimed at children, I had no specific need to do so. Some ten years later and Disney and Pixar are much more regular in my viewing schedule, which is what led me to watch Tangled - a film I was only slightly aware of, and remembered hearing that it was not as good as other similar films. This may well be true but actually Tangled is a solidly enjoyable film throughout. The plot is broadly the Rapunzel story, but done with energy, fun, and towards the end a little of bit of touching material. As a narrative it is simple and easy to follow - which is important for children as I learnt while watching Frozen 2 and trying to figure out the messy plot and explain it simply at the same time.The animation is smooth and polished, but not to the point that it lacks character. Speaking of characters, I enjoyed all of the main ones and they were engaging and did more than the basics. The best songs are upfront and the second half of the film is noticeably lacking in numbers, but the keys ones are catchy and well written. On the whole it is a solidly enjoyable family film which is easy to follow, has a good plot, good songs, and decent laughs/adventure." -"I've been around a long time, I have read lots of fiction, and I have seen lots of movies. But I must count myself among those who was only vaguely familiar with the story here, ""Alice in Wonderland."" I knew it had to do with falling into a hole, and encountering some unusual creatures, but not much else.This movie starts with Alice as a young girl, and discussing imagination with her father who always told her you can't do the impossible until you believe that it is possible.The main of this movie however is of Alice in her late teen years, and as she is proposed to by a geeky red-haired guy, she runs off to think. And that is when she accidentally falls down a hole at the base of a large tree. This is evidently her second time down the hole, the first when she was much younger. Seems everyone in that strange land is waiting for her. Because she must help defeat the large-headed red queen, in favor of the nicer white queen.Johnny Depp has top billing as the Mad (as in 'crazy') Hatter. Young Australian actress Mia Wasikowska is teenage Alice. Helena Bonham Carter is the Red Queen. Anne Hathaway is the White Queen. And Alan Rickman voices the animated Blue Caterpillar.Visually the film is excellent. It is not all fun and happiness, in fact it is a fairly 'dark' film. But I am glad I finally saw ""Alice in Wonderland.""" -"The trouble with many of the spectaculars today is that you can't tell if the actors are real, made up to look freakish, or some cartoon with just a voice attached. Modern computer generated special effects were a novelty when they were first making these, but now it's an attraction that often seems closer to ""Ice Age"" than real live action. Subtle use of this form of special effects made many of Tim Burton's earlier works, but I had a hard time really becoming engaged in this ""Alice in Wonderland"", feeling I had fallen into the rabbit hole myself and o.d.'d on a dinosaur size order of magic mushrooms.With many famous faces (obviously many of them Burton regulars), this is going to be artistically beautiful to look at, but difficult to become totally engaged with. First of all, you've got an overaged Alice (Mia Wasikowska) who seems like a college student playing dress up, a slam towards Lewis J. Carroll's conception of the lost little girl.The performances of the characters of wonderland are basically extended cameos. Helena Bonham Carter tries for camp and ends up a screeching shrew whose Stewie Griffin like head I wanted to see explode. Johnny Depp, for once, seems to be just an amalgamation of every Burton character he's played, not a bad thing, but basically a performance that he basically texts in. It's nice to look at like a fancy drawing at a museum but after five minutes, it's time to move on." -"Outstanding film detailing the lives of maids in Jackson, Mississippi before the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The film is outstanding not only with superb performances by the ensemble cast, it details the nastiness of prejudice and how it was deeply rooted in the institutions of the old deep south. Their rules regarding the alleged place of the African-American in society were absolutely revolting, but nevertheless, must be told.When a group of maids agree to tell their stories to a young liberal aspiring writer in the town, we're in for quite a ride. Despite the fact that she was nominated for best supporting actress, Jessica Chastain, as Celia, the writer, was given top billing. She is really the black sheep of the town with her liberal attitude.A terrific film with Viola Davis leading the way as the maid who will inspire others, as well as supporting Oscar winner Octavia Spencer, who reminded me of this century's Hattie McDaniel.It was said in the film that Margaret Mitchell never allowed Mammie (McDaniel) to express her feelings. The actresses in ""The Help"" did just that." -"The Help is a film about Black maids in a small Mississippi town set in the early 1960s. You gather that as the news covers the funeral of JFK at one point.The film is set on the eve of the civil rights era then but such things move slowly in the Southern states and here we have black women who practically raise the white kids from infants onwards and as they grow up they become like their parents including the prejudice and the cycle starts again as the maid raise their kids.Even though the discriminatory behaviour has been toned down for the film, part of it still feels very uneasy although in reality things were probably a lot worse for real life maids.Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer stand out from the cast as two of the maids. Also good performances from Jessica Chastain, Bryce Dallas Howard and Emma Stone.It may not be as powerful as you think it would be. Given that it seems to be aimed at a female audience you get the feeling the director did not want to cross a certain line and make it more hard hitting.It is funny as well as emotional and an interesting tale." -"For fans actually the only Avatar there is. I have to admit, I only got aware of this, when some online buzz was created, about Shyamalan having to change the title of the movie, because there was another movie with the title (you might have heard about this other movie ... it has blue people in it .. no not the smurfs, that might come out in 2011 though). But I haven't read any comics (Mangas) or seen the animated series that exists.Which in hindsight, I have to admit, might have been a bad thing. I think it is probably best to know the ""Avatar"" universe (this movie not the Cameron one), before watching this movie. And that goes against what I normally do and say. Not reading any review or anything else before watching the movie. This almost demands you to have some background knowledge.At least that's the feeling I got after watching it. It looks really good, but I didn't know what was happening most of the time. Yes things get revealed slowly, but with an ending like this ... well it will leave quite a few people disappointed (as the reviews and ratings show here too). Hardcore fans will still get their moneys worth I guess, but everyone else shouldn't go in uninformed as I did ..." -"Who will win the fight? Bane or the guy who fought The Thing? Seriously now, the acting in this movie was way above the genre of this film. I know it was a sports fighting movie and I expected things on par with van Damme Asian tournament films. Boy, was I wrong!The first thing to note about the movie is that it is long. It spans two hours and twenty minutes. The first half sets up the characters and how their dysfunctional family got them to where they are. I expected the second half to be filled with fighting action and it was, but only half. The makers of the film realised it was more important to show the mindset and state of spirit of the characters, let them develop rather than show only fights. And so they got a beautiful film.Bottom line: for this genre, the movie is clearly amongst the best. It doesn't uselessly inspire the audience to take up fighting or hate or love one of the characters. Much better, they give us two characters to love and the decision, up to the final fight, is the viewer's: how would you like this fight to end? That question, that situation in which you get to think and choose for yourself is almost unprecedented in a sports movie and more appropriate to more philosophical high brow films and makes the end result irrelevant. Good job!" -"Warrior is set in the world of MMA - that stands for Mixed Martial Arts, apparently. Heaven only knows what the rules are, other than that there don't seem to be any. It ends up with a knockout tournament for a $5 million prize.However, it turns out that this is no more than a hook on which to hang a tale of two brothers (Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton), estranged in their teens by virtue of an abusive alcoholic father (Nick Nolte), and his attempts to re-connect with them. In some respects, this is all a bit soap opera, yet these three people come across as real people, with credible problems and behaviour, and you care about them. The film is at its best when dealing with the family drama.Having said that, the action is well presented, and visceral, and the performances are all good. I find Nolte's croaky delivery increasingly difficult to understand, but he is unquestionably very good here, as are Hardy and Edgerton. In fact, the film fails only at the end when the result of the final bout of the tournament is used as the end, leaving too many plot threads unresolved." -"This film is about two men who struggles to stay alive in a world infested with zombies.""Zombieland"" starts out fun and stylish. The slow motion scenes is reminiscent of ""The Matrix""; while the way credits and rules appear and get destroyed on the screen look cool. However, ""Zombieland"" has a very thin plot, the first half is so boring. The thing is, they try to avoid zombies, so there is no gore, no escaping for life, no tension and no thrill. To fill time up, they senselessly wreck everything they see which is not exactly comedic. The second half is better, but by then I get bored already. I am disappointed with ""Zombieland"", and I think it is very overrated. ""Shaun of the Dead"" is way better." -"A man's wife leaves him and he has to start over in the dating world in middle age. So far, so 'Two and a Half Men'. This actually is a comedy starring Steve Carell, that people are rediscovering now, based on the fact that it stars Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling, who have danced their way into the public's hearts via 'La La Land'.It's a decent enough film. Quite why the review on the DVD box claims it's better than 'Love Actually' I don't know, but it's amiable enough.My main problem with it is that it doesn't seem to know whether it's going for heart-warming or lewd in terms of its humour. It flits between the two and ends up being neither properly.A talented cast do their best with a so-so film." -"Anton Checkov was wont to describe his great plays - Uncle Vanya, Three Sisters, The Seagull, The Cherry Orchard, as comedies but in England directors tend to stress the melancholy and there's a nice link here inasmuch as Julianne Moore appeared in arguably the best film adaption of Checkov that has so far appeared, Vanya on 42nd Street, a play in which, not unlike Crazy, Stupid, Love, characters are apt to fall in love with love objects who are themselves equally unrequitedly in love with someone else. It's further referential in the sequence where Gosling takes Carell's wardrobe in hand which echoes a similar sequence in Come Blow Your Horn where Sinatra, a swinger-about-town, takes strait-laced kid brother, Tony Bill, on a similar shopping and grooming expedition. Referential or not this is still an exceptional feel-good film albeit one with more of a spine than others of the ilk. The acting is uniformly up to snuff with Marisa Tomei making a strong bid to steal if from under the nose of Julianne Moore. Aimed at the Multiplex crown it is close to the crossover point between Multiplex and Art-house and well worth seeing." -"IRON MAN 2 is a surprisingly decent sequel and a definite improvement over the silly, convoluted and somewhat childish original. Try as I might, I could never get into the first film's storyline involving a supremely arrogant Robert Downey Jr. and a ""what's he doing here?"" Jeff Bridges. The effects were unremarkable and the story bogged down in the ""origins"" nonsense that made it a chore to sit through.This sequel gets into full stride straight away and explores what it's like to bear the weight of responsibility. Stark is by now an alcoholic who ends up alienating most people around him, and I just found the whole thing more involving and engaging. There isn't an overwhelming about of action, which is great, because the two set-pieces that do occur (the race track showdown and the extensive climax) are all the better for it.Downey Jr. remains a bullish and unlikeable character, but there are more interesting supporting roles here for Don Cheadle and, in particular, Mickey Rourke, who's enjoying something of a career renaissance as of late and who has a ball as the crazed, whip-wielding bad guy (and I absolutely LOVE those whips!). It's not perfect, because Gwyneth Paltrow is still a drippy irritant and director Jon Favreau needs to learn humility after casting himself in a supposed comedic part, but the presence of special agents Samuel Jackson and, in particular, Scarlett Johansson, add to the entertainment value immeasurably. I just we could have had more Kate Mara..." -"I was pleasantly surprised with this, thinking that it's probably another sequel that doesn't match up to the original. I was wrong; I thought this was better, a more likable and entertaining film than the first! Of course, it helps to know in advance that the ""hero"" (""Ton Stark,"" played by Robert Downey) is even more obnoxious in this film. Knowing that, I didn't let that bother me and just enjoyed the good acting in here and the excellent special-effects. Mickey Rourke (""Ivan Vanko"") is almost always interesting to watch so I enjoyed his role, too, even if I had a hard time understanding his Russian accent.The story is, yes, sophomoric but most action films today are. Just enjoy the funny lines, CGI, the pretty women (Gwyneth Paltrow and Scarlett Johannson) and wild heroes and villains and you should get your money's worth out of the viewing. See it on Blu-Ray and you'll enjoy it that much more." -"Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is back declaring that he has created world peace. The problem is that his arc reactor heart is killing him as fast as saving his life. And then there's Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) who is on a mission to avenge his father with superior arc technology.It's a good continuation sequel. I like Mickey Rourke as the new bad guy. He has the look and the menacing demeanor. I even like the accent. Sam Rockwell is normally a special actor, but his sleazy weapons manufacturer Justin Hammer feels very generic. And Garry Shandling is stupid as a Senator.Overall, it does feel a little bit bloat with the vast number of characters and the complicated history in this movie. There are a few characters they introduce that payoff in later movies. For example, Scarlett Johansson seems like nothing more than a simple T&A show. If not for the later movies, I would say she's a bad distraction.The fact is that it does two things all at once. It's Iron Man 2, but also pre-Avengers. And it does them both well enough. But like a ship with two masters, it can veer off at times. It could have been a great movie that is strictly Iron Man 2. But this is a good enough movie that advances both goals." -"Even the extended version of this movie (which I watched to prepare myself for the upcoming sequel) seems to have all its teeth and claws pulled. But puns aside and if you don't care that much about this being made PG-13 (the new Wolverine will have an R or unrated version released after its theatrical run), than you might be able to enjoy this Origin story.This comes down to Hugh Jackmans passion and drive. While he does act in musicals and plays too, he is able to be convincing in his action roles. The game based on this movie has much more blood in it. The story is not overwhelming, but it does do the trick. I hope the next one can be better though. It's also a shame that they did recast (L. Schreiber is the new player) for a role that has already been played (by Tyler Mane). But I guess they needed a better known ""name"" for that role (it is not mentioned in the directors commentary btw.)." -"When the credits began to roll, I was like: Of course it was Aaron Sorkin. I should have known. While according to IMDb he didn't write it alone (I guess he was the last to ""temper"" with the script), I'm pretty sure he had his hands on most of the dialogue in the movie. Really great stuff. And whoever thought Jonah Hill can't do anything ... well watch this movie and start believing.Of course the bigger name is Brad Pitt and he shows his love for the game by really sticking to this concept and getting it made in the first place (the four credited writers here are an indication that it took some time to get it off ground). Even a side-/sub-story that get thrown in halfway through the movie does not really temper with the mood or distract you too much (which was something I was afraid of, when Robin Wright came into the ""play"").Don't watch it though if you wanna see the game itself. There is not much of that happening. But the movie does not need any of the sports scenes to work. It works perfect as it is ..." -"Based on the book Moneyball, Oakland A's GM Billy Beane must rebuilt his ball club after the team is dismantled. He doesn't have the money but he'll use the computer to crunch the numbers to find his island of misfit toys. I'm not going to debate baseball history but this is a compelling story.Brad Pitt is wonderful as the fast talking GM. It's a tougher role than most people are give him credit for. Jonah Hill is the affable geeky number cruncher Peter Brand. The story has all the great touches. The underdog, the entrenched establishment, the overwhelming odds, this movie has got it all. But I suspect the biggest advantage it has is writer Aaron Sorkin and his pen." -"THE PROPOSAL (2009) **1/2 Sandra Bullock, Ryan Reynolds, Mary Steenburgen, Craig T. Nelson, Betty White, Denis O'Hare, Malin Akerman, Oscar Nunez, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Nouri. Relatively formulaic fish-out-of-water romantic comedy with harridan boss-from-hell Bullock (cast against type and acquitting herself nicely), an A-type book publisher exec whose expiring visa forces her to imbibe her long-suffering assistant (Reynolds ditto) into a sham marriage to avoid deportation back to Canada with the hitch that she go away to his family retreat for the weekend in the wilds of Africa. While the pedestrian script by Pete Chiarelli, the direction by Anne Fletcher allows her stars – and an able supporting cast particularly veteran national treasure White as Reynolds' feisty grandmother – to stretch their comedic muscles in a rather winning and sweet mix of slapstick and latter-day screwball comedy." -"Sandra Bullock, mid forties, and Ryan Reynolds, mid thirties, play the main roles in this romantic comedy. But the age of our ""couple"" isn't an issue throughout the movie. Which is a testament to Sandra and Ryan, because they pull it off.Of course this isn't the best romantic comedy ever, but the two have a good chemistry and play really well off each other. Sandra seems to really enjoy her role. Ryan is great when he get's a few good lines here and there. His comedic timing is good, the romantic aspect is working too, but as well. Quirky characters and a really bizarre scene in the forest (a scene that might leave some viewers completely baffled) add to the special flavour. Although the latter mentioned scene could almost have been a big downfall of the movie, Sandra somehow pulls it off (not completely, but enough for the movie to still work).If you're not bothered by the whole premise of the movie, than you might enjoy it. I did ... and when the credits roll, we get some ""extra footage""." -"This film is about a demanding and unreasonable boss who forces her subordinate to marry her, in order for her to stay in the USA.""The Proposal"" is excellent! The first scene looks so much like ""The Devil Wears Prada"", and I thought the film would not be good. Fortunately, the film gets better and better, until it just can't get any better! Sandra Bullock is great as a cold and demanding boss, and her subsequent emotions are so touching and heartfelt. I never thought of her as an amazing actress, but she impressed me in this film. Everything about the plot is right, it does not follow the typical romantic comedy plot line. It is packed with funny jokes. The viewers laughed so hard with the characters, and not at the characters. It has such a great uplifting and fun tone. Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds have great chemistry. Everything about this film is so right! It's perfect for a great laugh with friends, and it also fills you with warmth and love." -"Bitch on wheels boss needs her assistant to marry her so she can stay in the United States. He agrees and takes her home to meet his parents and to get married and then they somehow begin to fall in love. Good romantic comedy is the sort of film that follows the well worn path of all its predecessors to the point that there is no surprises. Its a well made formula, a tried and true instant recipe and it tastes pretty good, even if its got the aftertaste of being a bit too packaged. Honestly you're going to know if you like this going in or not. Its self selecting. The only downside is whether Sandra Bullock's character as the bitchy boss grates against your sensibilities. I wasn't completely thrilled with her and I think it lessened my enjoyment. Worth a shot, definitely a date movie." -"To me it has always been the theme song. I could watch just about anything to that sound track and think it was great. Fortunately we had a great film that explodes on the big screen. The gadgets were extremely high tech and I seriously doubt many of them really exist. Face scanner in a contact lens?The opening scene of Cruise in a Serbian high security prison being broken out, was superb. It becomes a mystery that plays constantly in the back of your mind during the film. Who was the man he took with him when escaped? Where is he now? It engages you and puts your mind into the proper framework. Tom Cruise is later written off along with the IMF and must operate rouge to save the US from terrorist named Hendricks who has the Russian launch codes and plans to use them against the US. Cruise's team are the guys that just happened to be with him at the moment...with no masks! Great Stuff.This is a good old fashion break out the tub of popcorn and enjoy the feature action-comedy-thriller. I didn't see it in IMAX, but clearly that is the way to go considering how the scenes were shot. After seeing it once, I want to see it again on the really big screen. And of course every ""impossible"" scene is made more complex, complicated, or twisted. Humorous and heart stopping action all in the same moment.Good Luck.No f-bombs, sex, or nudity." -"This film tells a team of secret agent on a secret mission to stop a Russian maniac detonating a nuclear bomb in USA. To achieve this, they have to do a series of almost impossible tasks spanning several countries.""Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"" is an action packed thriller. It has certainly gone a long way from the first one to this fourth installment. The Kremlin scene involving a screen looks a bit too high tech for the job, but that is the spirit of Mission Impossible I guess. Then the Dubai job is the highlight for me. The scenes involving heights really made my palms sweat! I was really on edge, wow - the stunts team really did an astonishing job. I enjoyed watching this film." -"This film tells a team of secret agent on a secret mission to stop a Russian maniac detonating a nuclear bomb in USA. To achieve this, they have to do a series of almost impossible tasks spanning several countries.""Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"" is an action packed thriller. It has certainly gone a long way from the first one to this fourth installment. The Kremlin scene involving a screen looks a bit too high tech for the job, but that is the spirit of Mission Impossible I guess. Then the Dubai job is the highlight for me. The scenes involving heights really made my palms sweat! I was really on edge, wow - the stunts team really did an astonishing job. I enjoyed watching this film." -"This film tells a team of secret agent on a secret mission to stop a Russian maniac detonating a nuclear bomb in USA. To achieve this, they have to do a series of almost impossible tasks spanning several countries.""Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol"" is an action packed thriller. It has certainly gone a long way from the first one to this fourth installment. The Kremlin scene involving a screen looks a bit too high tech for the job, but that is the spirit of Mission Impossible I guess. Then the Dubai job is the highlight for me. The scenes involving heights really made my palms sweat! I was really on edge, wow - the stunts team really did an astonishing job. I enjoyed watching this film." -"Unlike the other summer computer animated movies I've seen, Toy Story 3 and, yes, Shrek Forever After, Despicable Me was sort of blah for me. Yes, Steve Carell is pretty amusing as the voice of the leading character and seeing that character in scenes with his minions, those three orphan girls, and some others I won't mention provided some good laughs. And it's also amusing recognizing Julie Andrews as his mother while I couldn't place Kristen Wiig or Jason Segel until after the credits which was a nice surprise for me. And the 3-D effects are awesome as usual. But the story wasn't tight enough and seemed to rely too much on cuteness to provide much comic bite. Not to mention I was fighting sleep during the middle part. So in summation, Despicable Me was mildly entertaining but didn't totally hit it out of the ball park for me like the other two computer animated movies I mentioned at the beginning of this review." -"I honestly thought that nothing else I'd see this year could even come close to A Serbian Film for sheer outrageousness, but The Human Centipede, from writer director/warped genius Tom Six, has gone and proved me wrong: they don't get much more disgusting (or funny, if your sense of humour is more than a tad twisted) than this sick little puppy.Dieter Laser plays Dr. Heiter, an eminent German surgeon renowned for his work in separating conjoined twins; now retired, Heiter has a new goal in life—to create a 'human centipede' by surgically joining several unwilling victims 'ass to mouth'. Obviously, such an experiment leads to some rather unsettling moments, not least the stomach-churning moment when the 'head' of the centipede announces that he needs to do a dump—straight into the mouth of the poor woman behind him!It's not all 'disgusting for disgusting's sake' however: in addition to the totally revolting nature of his film's central experiment, Mix also manages to create an incredible sense of tension, both early on as his female victims wander unsuspectingly into the demented surgeon's lair, and later when the 'centipede' makes a desperate bid for freedom. Of course, this being an utterly depraved piece of cinema, all does not end well—the finalé is an absolutely gob-smacking downer designed to leave viewers stunned!" -"This film is about how the mutants with supernatural powers finding out about each other, group together and then help save the world.""X-Men: First Class"" is truly spectacular, even when my expectations are high for a summer blockbuster! The plot is engaging, understandable and most important of all, makes a lot of sense. Events happen to echo what will happen years later (the previous X-Men films) with great continuity. The special effects are marvellous, I am still in awe by the scene involving a fancy yacht and its anchor. I really like Michael Fassbender's character, he is cold and filled with hatred. When it comes to revenge, he means serious business! ""X-Men: First Class"" have many emotional elements to connect with the sensitive side, making ""X-Men: First Class"" appealing to an even broader audience. I am thrilled, entertained, marvelled and touched by ""X-Men: First Class""." -"In 1982 a spaceship appears over Johannesburg, South Africa. They find an alien population of ""Prawns"" and put them in a concentration camp called District 9. After 20 years, the local population has had enough of the aliens and plan to relocate the aliens to a location far away. Wikus van der Merwe is a meek bureaucrat who is given charge to organize the relocation plan by private corporation MNU. District 9 has become a vast lawless place with alien technologies. While rounding up the Prawns and getting signatures on paperwork, Wikus is infected with something that is slowly morphing him into the alien.What an amazing debut effort from director/writer Neill Blomkamp. It is richly original and so very human. It uses the documentary style to elevate its realism. The CGI Prawns are brilliantly grotesque without being a ridiculous horror. Wikus is such a wonderful comedic character. It is a scathing indictment of the treatment of the disenfranchised. The movie works on so many different levels. It is audacious beyond anything a big Hollywood blockbuster should be." -"Short, it is a film who must see it. For so many reasons than it escapes of any explanation. It is a Sci. Fi. and an action film and it propose a touching story. But it has, as basic virtue, the science to present the near reality in the most inspired manner. That defines it as one of films who are , in same measure, bitter and gentle and impecable work. It is a pledge. Foor a lot of causes. But, more important, it is a simple story of an ordinary man changing everything. A film about noble courage. Almost, wise use of an old fashion recipe. In fact, a great film. In few scenes, the film who you expect from a long, long time." -"Tilda Swinton is absolutely phenomenal as Eve. One can sense her character's sense of frustrations and exasperations at her son Kevin's strangely heartbreaking tendencies. I can't in good conscience say I enjoyed this artsy nature vs. nurture diatribe, yet I can say that even though I found myself disagreeing with the inevitable answer that the film seems to convey, I did respect the essence of the slice of cinema as a whole. It's the feel bad movie of the year. And although most would liken it to ""the Good Son"", I would more likely see it as a vaguely cinematic interpretation of Jeremy by Pearl Jam.My Grade: A-" -"From the outside, it looks like a perfectly ordinary family. From the outside, it's breadwinner John C. Reilly, housewife Tilda Swinton who works hard to make a beautiful home, son Ezra Miller, whose hobby is archery, and a cute little daughter. Such a pity that she lost an eye. From the inside, it looks very different, at least to Miss Swinton. Her son is a sociopath.This deeply disturbing movie offers the biography of a teen-ager who goes into school one day and shoots people. Reilly is, as always, excellent at playing a perfectly ordinary guy who doesn't notice anything. He doesn't even notice that his wife is expecting a child, until his son says that mommy is getting fat. He adores his children, buys his son his first bow-and-arrow set, buys his daughter a guinea pig -- which promptly disappears; Miss Swinton realizes Miller has run it through the garbage disposal.In the end, Miller goes to the school one day, locks all the exits and shoots people with his arrows. Why? What makes him a sociopath? The audience, looking for answers, is offered none." -"This film is about the painful life of a mother, whose son committed a massacre at his school.""We Need to Talk About Kevin"" is a very emotional story of a mother called Eva, who is well portrayed by Tilda Swinton. Despite the non-linear perspective, we get to see Eva's life slowly being torn apart by an exceptionally difficult son. Kevin is developmentally delayed, antagonistic and manipulative. She gets so desperate and disheartened by Kevin that she wishes Kevin was never born. It might be a terrible thought, but I could sympathise with her and even feel the same way.Kevin becomes increasingly antisocial as he becomes a teenager. He even harms his family. It is so infuriating that the husband can be so ignorant about Kevin.Life after the massacre is difficult for Eva. She lives in shame, guilt and fear. It is heartbreaking to see her being abused and bullied. People might be mad at her giving birth to a monster, but we must not lose sight of her losing her family, her job, her future and just about everything else, the moment the massacre began.""We Need to Talk About Kevin"" is a powerful drama. The visuals speaks louder than words, the acting is phenomenal by Tilda Swinton and the teenager playing Kevin. Storytelling is engaging and effective. ""We Need to Talk About Kevin"" is a top quality drama that will provoke the viewers to think long and hard." -"Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a best selling novel, turned to an award winning BBC television serial and now a condensed version has been turned to a film with a masterful performance by Gary Oldman at the centre.The film is effectively a 1970s British noir, a 'whodunit' as veteran spy George Smiley is brought back into the secret service to flush out a Soviet mole. Oldman has to bring a different take on Smiley from Alec Guinness and manages to bring a stillness where you try to figure out what he is thinking inside his head.Swedish Director Tomas Alfredson brings a stylistic retro view of the past and relies on actors such as Mark Strong, Tom Hardy, Colin Firth, Kathy Burke, Benedict Cumberbatch to bring out nuggets of their characters as Smiley gets closer to unearth the mole.The film has its detractors, those who have read the book or viewed the TV series felt short changed as the film had to cut out lot of the material. Karla is unseen and some may view Mrs Smiley being virtually invisible when her behaviour is fundamental to the plot.However the film has to be seen in its own merits and its a slow, thoughtful and a deceptively good version, finely acted." -"It's the 70's in the world of British Intelligence. One of their four senior operative is suspected to be a Russian mole. George Smiley codename Beggarman (Gary Oldman) was forced into retirement but brought back in to hunt down the mole. Percy Alleline (Toby Jones) is codenamed Tinker. Bill Haydon (Colin Firth) is Tailor. Roy Bland (Ciarán Hinds) is Soldier.If 007 James Bond is the glitzy fanciful action hero spy in an unreal world, then John le Carré writes the exact opposite vision of the spy world. His is a murky, morally corrupt, unsatisfying world. And that's what we have here. The actors are beyond reproach. It's full of double speak, lies, and misdirections. Can they truly figure it all out? It's a great head scratching watch." -"How many of us that adore the world of Sherlock Holmes, don't romanticise about the stunning Jeremy Brett series, or the modern dizzying cleverness of the Benedict Cumberbatch series.This film would have come as a massive surprise to both sets of fans. First off the visuals, it's a breathtaking affair, it's atmospheric and gothic, the blockbuster feel works incredibly well. Secondly, the humour, it's packed full of laughs, lots of witty lines and plenty of sarcasm. Thirdly, the acting, is tremendous, Downey and Law are sublime, it's a great cast.Overall, it's taken me some time to get used to it, initially I loathed it, as time has developed I've grown to enjoy it, and now cannot wait for the third film.The core essence of Holmes is actually captured here, plenty of what's in the books is brought to life, the darkness of the character, we're not given a member of the social elite, but a troubled, charismatic, fantastic slob.My only real issue is the plot itself, which is perhaps the most over the top element here, and that's saying something, enjoyable, but a little hard to follow.Crazy, complicated and fun, not my idea of Holmes, but a fun watch nonetheless. 7/10." -"Guy Ritchie transforms Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stoic and methodical super sleuth into a scruffy, rough and tough detective; not exactly the great Basil Rathbone. Robert Downey Jr. earns his Golden Globe starring as London's legendary Sherlock Holmes. His trusted side-kick Dr. Watson is played by Jude Law. Rachel McAdams stars as the only woman to best Holmes and continues a very testy relationship with the detective. Holmes and Watson will face off against a mysterious villain named Blackstone(Mark Strong). Plenty of thrills mixed with violence and action comedy. Very interesting chemistry between Law and Downey Jr. Well photographed. Apt supporting cast featuring: Eddie Marsan, William Houston, Kelly Reilly, Hans Matheson and Robert Maillet." -"How many of us that adore the world of Sherlock Holmes, don't romanticise about the stunning Jeremy Brett series, or the modern dizzying cleverness of the Benedict Cumberbatch series.This film would have come as a massive surprise to both sets of fans. First off the visuals, it's a breathtaking affair, it's atmospheric and gothic, the blockbuster feel works incredibly well. Secondly, the humour, it's packed full of laughs, lots of witty lines and plenty of sarcasm. Thirdly, the acting, is tremendous, Downey and Law are sublime, it's a great cast.Overall, it's taken me some time to get used to it, initially I loathed it, as time has developed I've grown to enjoy it, and now cannot wait for the third film.The core essence of Holmes is actually captured here, plenty of what's in the books is brought to life, the darkness of the character, we're not given a member of the social elite, but a troubled, charismatic, fantastic slob.My only real issue is the plot itself, which is perhaps the most over the top element here, and that's saying something, enjoyable, but a little hard to follow.Crazy, complicated and fun, not my idea of Holmes, but a fun watch nonetheless. 7/10." -"it has a touching message. this is its basic virtue. and, maybe, the most important. because it is a simple story about solitude, fundamental meetings, childhood, oldness and the dreams. because it is an adorable version of The Wizard of Oz for a generation who believes to have is more important than to be. and one of the applause for this splendid animation must be for the work of Edward Asner who impose a real fascinating Carl. not the adventure are the essence of film but the science to explore the essential traits of the ages. the beautiful transformation of characters who discover the meaning of life. the new perspectives about the past. and, sure, the importance of memories for an age who lives in the circle of memories and has the chance to discover the fascination of a living dream." -"By now everyone knows the work of Pixar and how they are so capable of producing magical moments of film and if anything Up cements their place at the forefront of animation.It truly is a lovely film - visually stunning, well written and with Ed Asner as the voice of the main character the film flows from scene to scene effortlessly.As with all Pixar films Up walks the line between being a kids film and and adult film with ease and the first ten minutes of the film have the power to make anyone cry and they are so moving.If you are looking to watch a film that can make you laugh and cry in equal measure then Up is the film for you." -"I immediately fell for this film. I think my favorite moment in the whole thing is when he meets Ellie for the first time. She is one of a kind and the animators did a lovely job of making her eternally beautiful. It has one of the most touching moments I've seen in any film. Then, of course, we need to suspend out disbelief, thinking that a house, propelled by helium balloons, can be raised from the ground, becoming airborne. What follows is a truly great story. We have a young Wilderness Scout who has all the hangups of modern youth, clueless in so many ways. We have a cast of incredible dogs who have been given the ability to speak through a device invented by the villain of the movie. There are complex relationships that transcend the usual kid plots. This one works to the end. Some people ask too many questions. While this movie is about science, we should not read too much into it. Just suffice it to say, it is full of adventure, close calls, bonding, and, of course, true love. I really believe this is one of the better films of this past year." -"Excellent, Excellent, Excellent! -I am a new found fan of Gong Yoo (Goblin) and find his performances in most of his movies to be outstanding and memorable. He did not disappoint me when I finally purchased a copy of Silenced (2011) since it isn't available in the USA online or even through Raukuten/Viki network. This film is a fictionalized version of an actual ongoing tragedy that took place at a school for Deaf children in South Korean. -Without revealing too much about the story, let it be said that the gross indifference, coverup, hypocrisy, and injustice portrayed in the film will move you to tears and then to anger. The stellar performances by Gong Yoo, Jung Yu Mi, and the child actors will linger in your mind long after the movie credits fade from your screen. Kudos to everyone associated with this sad but needful film. Be sure to have a box of tissues near by; you will definitely need them." -"I guess everyone knows the movie adapted from a real event, that's why I didn't even dare to watch until I noticed the impact of this movie which forcing Korean officials to reopen the case investigation and even amended related children protection laws and regulations. 10 points and all credit giving to conscientious crew which wanting to use it to remind us of injustice and make change to the world!Audience will cry most of the time while watching as we couldn't believe why there would be such ugly scums in the world. Most our tears are coupled with anger. Why has morality rotten to this level? All acting is natural and real which make me heart broken!" -And still not punished makes me more more angry... Wish justice wish -"Wow, what a well made and disturbing film. The film sends a very powerful message and also effectively illustrates manipulation, bribery, and abuse of power, believing money can right all wrongs.Although the film is a bit slow moving, it was never boring. I did, however, find the protagonist Kang In-ho (Yoo Gong) a bit too passive. Seo Yoo-jin was a much stronger character, portrayed by Yu-mi Jung - who did a very good job. The child actors were also good and I enjoyed their back stories, as well. The film is sexually graphic at times (involving children) and definitely not suitable for a young audience.Based on fact, this is a very disturbing film and the reality of the case is cringe worthy. At the time the film was made, the actual case was still in progress, so the true fate of all involved is not exactly known. As it is, this was not the ending I expected." -"In New York, the empty thirty and something year-old Brandon (Michael Fassbender) is a sex-addicted man that works in an office. His longest relationship lasted only four months and Brandon does not have any friend. Brandon has casual sex with women that he meets in bars; has sex also with hookers; visits porn sites in Internet; and collects sex magazines. However, he is unable to have sex with an acquaintance.When his also dysfunctional younger sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan) unexpectedly moves to his apartment, she has one night stand with Brandon's boss and the world of Brandon turns upside-down. ""Shame"" is one of the most overrated films that I have recently seen. Brandon is a man that was probably sexually abused when he was a child and is sex addicted. The plot is limited to show his empty existence shagging women and masturbating. His sister Sissy is also a dysfunctional young woman, weaker than him, that needs support from her older brother but he is unable to help her. In the end, ""Shame"" is a film with good performances, but with a shallow and empty story. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): ""Shame""" -"Steve McQueen's 'Shame' is a Mesmerizing Film, that deals with addiction affliction. It's a relentless, violent & depressing story, that kept me captivated. And, Lead-Star Michael Fassbender does Tour-De-Force!'Shame' Synopsis: In New York City, Brandon's carefully cultivated private life -- which allows him to indulge his sexual addiction -- is disrupted when his sister Sissy arrives unannounced for an indefinite stay.'Shame' is explicit, erotic, relentless, violent, depressing & captivating. It's a Mesmerizing Film, because its brave enough to stand out & say what it wants to, with absolutely no inhibitions.Steve McQueen & Abi Morgan's Screenplay is Magnificent. So is McQueen's Direction, which is violent in fact. 'Shame' certainly isn't for the faint-hearted!Michael Fassbender does Tour-De-Force! His portrayal of Brandon, comes across as an Embodiment. Its surprising how Fassbender didn't earn an Academy-Award Nomination for Best Actor. Carey Mulligan is equally fantastic, proving once again what a performer she is.On the whole, 'Shame' packs a solid punch. Don't Miss It!" -"Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) is an orphan living in a Paris train station. He is fascinated with toy shop owner Papa Georges (Ben Kingsley) and his goddaughter Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz). He steals to survive and hounded by station Inspector Gustave Dasté (Sacha Baron Cohen). It turns out that he's been maintaining the station clocks as taught by his drunken absent uncle Claude. He is a mechanical genius trying to repair his father's life project, an automaton (mechanical man). His father (Jude Law) found it rusted, abandoned in the museum, and without the key. He was killed in a fire. Papa Georges confiscates Hugo's notebook and threatens to burn it. Papa Georges is hiding a secret past and forbids Isabelle from seeing any movies.This is one of the most unique Martin Scorsese movie. The kids are great. The visuals are gorgeous. Scorsese is doing something completely out of his realm. At first, Ben Kingsley is playing a very mean-spirited man. As the movie develops, it becomes evident that this man is broken from his connection to the movie industry. It's probably something that is fascinating to Scorsese. He makes it fascinating to the audience. He bring his vision to life." -"Outstanding. Incredible. Director Sam Raimi teams with his brother Ivan in writing this genuine thriller. Special effects are superb and the pacing of the story line provides the anxiety and fear we want from a great horror film. The charming Alison Lohman plays Christine Brown, an eager Los Angeles loan officer bucking for a promotion. A mysterious old woman, Mrs. Ganush(Lorna Raver), arrives begging for a third extension on her mortgage. When Christine turns down the request, the old woman places a powerful curse on her. An evil spirit begins openly tormenting Christine and in spite of her skeptical boyfriend(Justin Long), help will be found in a soothsayer Rham Jas(Dileep Rao). The supernatural spirit tries its damndest to drag Christine to her eternal residence in Hell.Gruesome violence and some very disturbing images. One of the best horror flicks in a long time. Also in the cast: David Paymer, Adriana Barraza and Reggie Lee." -"Bradley Cooper (""Eddie Morra"") is a struggling author who takes the experimental drug ""AZT"" that allows him to fully utilise his brain. This renders him extremely sharp and focused, his senses honed beyond anything he could have imagined - and he puts these new skills to good use setting out to make himself a fortune. In so doing, however, he attract the attention of the evil Robert de Niro (""Carl Van Loon"") who once he has cottoned on to what it is that gives ""Morra"" his super-power, determines to get it at all costs. With his stash of pills running low, we've now got a great little cat and mouse chase as he tries to stay alive long enough to outwit the heavies in pursuit. Cooper is quite engaging, but the rest - including a rather wooden De Niro - are all just a bit flat. The script could do with some tightening and the whole pace of the thing is a bit lacklustre; there are quite a few plot holes that have you shouting at the screen 'Why did you do/say that?""... It's a fascinating prospect, though, it we really do only use 5% of our cerebral capacity - what could we all be like it it all worked?" -"Is it Sci-Fi or mystery? Both. Eddie Morra(Bradley Cooper)is an author without a novel; to be exact it is a strain to find inspiration to write just one word. If this isn't enough, Eddie's girlfriend Lindy(Abbie Cornish)dumps him and promises there is no way she will take him back. The hopeless writer runs into an old friend that offers him a powerful cutting-edge pharmaceutical called NZT. Talk about speed on steroids. NZT causes the brain to function at 100 percent and provides the power to understand very complex mathematics. A powerful businessman Carl Van Loon(Robert De Niro)wants to use Eddie's new abilities to share a fortune upon brokering a major corporate merger. One drawback; NZT has a debilitating side effect...the more you take your future is threatened. Being limitless is definitely hazardous to your health. The cast also features: Andrew Howard, Darren Goldstein, Anna Friel and Robert John Burke." -"Is it Sci-Fi or mystery? Both. Eddie Morra(Bradley Cooper)is an author without a novel; to be exact it is a strain to find inspiration to write just one word. If this isn't enough, Eddie's girlfriend Lindy(Abbie Cornish)dumps him and promises there is no way she will take him back. The hopeless writer runs into an old friend that offers him a powerful cutting-edge pharmaceutical called NZT. Talk about speed on steroids. NZT causes the brain to function at 100 percent and provides the power to understand very complex mathematics. A powerful businessman Carl Van Loon(Robert De Niro)wants to use Eddie's new abilities to share a fortune upon brokering a major corporate merger. One drawback; NZT has a debilitating side effect...the more you take your future is threatened. Being limitless is definitely hazardous to your health. The cast also features: Andrew Howard, Darren Goldstein, Anna Friel and Robert John Burke." -"""Antichrist"" by Lars von Trier has to be one of the most perplexing psychological horror movies I have ever seen.It's loaded with invented symbolism,explicit sex and graphic violence.The film is clearly influenced by Nietzsche's essay ""Guilt,Bad Conscience and the like"" from his book ""On the Genealogy of Morals"" with its main themes of life and death,guilt,castration,punishment,torture,grief,sacrifice of the first-born and 'the forest is the devil's church' as well as the symbolic 'Antichrist'.In a prologue a couple is having passionate and graphically detailed sexual intercourse.Their child escapes their watch and accidentally dies.The wife becomes severely depressed and traumatized,so the husband takes her to an isolated shack in the forest ironically called Eden to apply his aggressive methods of psychotherapy.""Antichrist"" is clearly the most personal film of Lars von Trier.The director has stated that ""Antichrist"" was a form of therapy for him following a long period of depression.There is pretty shocking scene of cliteroctomy with rusty scissors and an ejaculation of blood.The story is heavy with rich symbolism for example a baby bird falls dead out of a nest covered in ants or a fox lies dead in the grass eating its own entrails.The acting by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourgh is brave and the scene with talking fox totally cracked me up.All in all,""Antichrist"" is a bizarre,compelling,uncompromising and profoundly disturbing film.I can't recommend it enough.9 out of 10." -"The movie begins in slow motion ... and more than half the movie after that, will feel the same way, even if it's not. In other words, the first half of the movie, does take it's time. Slow moving would be an understatement of the biggest kind. That shouldn't surprise you then ... what surprised me though, was the fact, how explicit the movie was!Just a heads up on that too then. While I felt the first part of the movie was a bit dragging, in the end it gets insane (pun intended). Not every movie can say, that it is irritating and leave you with mixed feelings. And even those who do that, are not necessarily good movies. Rating this movie (and others similar to the feeling they leave you) is pretty hard. Just prepare yourself for something completely different and you will get something out of the movie ..." -"After the passing of Antonini and Bergman, it was thought that the art film was dead. Lars von Trier makes a valiant attempt to continue the tradition with a powerful film on the human condition dealing with a tragedy and it's aftermath.The film will be very difficult for many as there are some strong scenes involving sex and violence. Reportedly many people walked out when it was shown at Cannes. Those who make the effort to stay wit the film will be rewarded.The cinematography is brilliant, and the acting by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg is superb.It is basically a reason versus emotion narrative as Dafoe attempts to help his wife deal with the death of their child.Or, maybe I missed the point entirely." -"I've thought a bit before deciding on a rating for the movie, but I've decided to rate it under average. It is not that it could have been more and wasn't; most of today's movies are like this. It is not that the acting wasn't good or that the production values were not OK. It is because they left the film with an open ending, hinting that something this average could turn into yet another adolescent hero series or even a TV show. That I could not stomach.Good parts: the dog, the special effects, Kevin Durand.Bad parts: the evil henchmen with flashy weapons that can't hit anything, the ridiculous super powers, the storyline, the amount of cardboard used.Very good parts: Teresa Palmer.Very bad parts: the high school sweetheart+bully drama.Bottom line: perfect movie for when you are tired and can't think enough to watch a decent film." -"I mean seriously, with a title like that, what should we expect? Exactly! A movie that is done by the numbers. And not in a really good way. Though not a total failure either. It's just disappointing to see this cliché-ridden movie and imagine what could've been there, if only they really tried. While beautiful (Pettyfer or Ms. Palmer, depending on your taste) and nicely framed, with special effects that are decent enough, it all feels as old as the computer you bought 3 years ago. And normally, that means you don't use that computer anymore ...What does matter is, that teenagers will be satisfied (and I'm not trying to tell you how ""cool"" this movie is), as they were with the other recent directorial efforts from DJ Caruso (Disturbia, with one of the worst fake scares ever ... and I use that term lightly! ... and of course Eagle Eye with Mr. Transformer himself). So I guess what I'm saying is, if you liked the movie, I gave you another two to watch. And if you didn't ... well you know what to do/avoid" -"and Timothy Olyphant. a film who has the save sin and virtue - it is far to be original. it is a virtue because it is not fair to criticize it for the use of a lot of clichés who are basic ingredients in the films for teenagers. it is its basic sin because the expectation of public must be respected. but ""I am number five"" is the same mix of ambiguous bad boys, noble mission, love story, the super hero in high school and his dramatic love story. sounds well known, did it? so, all is reduced at the new meet with Pettyfer and Olyphant, few special effects, the secret and the run. is it enough ? maybe, because, after the first impressions, it remains a decent Sci. Fi/ youth literature adaptation ." -"John Smith(Alex Pettyfer)is Number 4 of nine aliens that have left their planet in hopes of finding peace on Earth. Looking human, John tries passing as a high school teen and his traveling guardian Henri(Timothy Olyphant)keeps warning him about attracting attention. Existence on Earth is not easy when you have pursuers from your former home planet tracking you to destroy you. The enemy killers are required to kill the nine in numerical order...the first three have met their death already. The Mogadorian Commander(Kevin Durand)and his crew have honed in and already killed Henri. Number Four has realized that he has inherited some unique special powers and he will need to use them to protect himself and his human girlfriend, Sarah(Dianna Agron). Arriving to put up a stronger fight is Number 6(Teresa Palmer). Some will find unanswered story line questions, but just go with it and enjoy the action and special effects in this Sci-Fi thriller. Also in the cast: Jake Abel, Callan McAuliffe and Emily Wickersham. The finale pretty well seals the deal on a sequel." -"I had previously enjoyed the first and third of the Johnny Depp pirate movies though I was confused by some of the sequences. This one that I just watched with my movie theatre-working friend, I understood a bit more and, as a result, I enjoyed a little more especially with the addition of the beautiful Penelope Cruz as a former paramour who may or may not be on his side. There's also some good sequences with some mermaids that positively floored me with how they operate here. And the return of Geoffrey Rush as the one-legged crew member was also a treat here. Plenty of witty lines from Depp and some good swashbuckling sequences here and there were also good under new director Rob Marshall. So on that note, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides is highly recommended." -"PIRATES OF THE Caribbean : ON STRANGER TIDES (2011) **1/2 Johnny Depp, Penelope Cruz, Ian McShane, Geoffrey Rush, Kevin McNally, Sam Claflin, Astrid Berges-Frisbey, Richard Griffiths, Greg Ellis (cameo: Keith Richards) Depp returns for his fourth outing as the swanning pirate Captain Jack Sparrow in Disney's ongoing juggernaut of adventures this time in search of The Fountain of Youth and facing the father of his ex (Cruz), the nefarious Blackbeard (stereotypical casting of the glowering McShane) and in cahoots with 'frienemy' Barbosa (a gleefully upstaging Rush). While there are a few moments of inspired hilarity (i.e. opening gambit involving British army, King George (Griffiths) and Sparrow's quest for a crème puff (!) new-to-the-franchise-helmsman Rob Marshall seems in over his head with a bit too much (i.e. waterlogged pacing) or not enough (man-hungry mermaids!) for the most part, yet not nearly captivating enough." -"Just when you thought that the endlessly bloated PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN trilogy had finally finished, along comes yet another blatant exercise in money-grabbing by Disney. By now, half of the original cast have bailed, leaving the shameless Johnny Depp to headline things in another overlong, over-boring adventure.This time around, Depp teams up with a stilted Penelope Cruz in search of the fountain of youth, or some such thing. It's a pirate-fantasy re-run of INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE, with Ian McShane taking over from Sean Connery as the larger-than-life elder. Sadly, the wishy-washy storyline is simply an excuse for endlessly dull action sequences and pretty but insubstantial special effects.I've never been a fan of these films, not even the first, which I found to be a soulless and bloated Hollywood blockbuster, but ON STRANGER TIDES really takes the biscuit." -"This film is about Captain Jack Sparrow and his coerced voyage to find the fountain of youth that is heavily sought after by various individuals and even countries.People in Hong Kong are lucky to get ""Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"" earlier than the United States, and even luckier is that most cinemas here already have evening shows the day before its official release.""Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"" has very good 3D effects. I have not watched a lot of 3D movies, but this is easily the best I have seen. Instead of the layered 2D effects that they call 3D, ""Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"" has real 3D that gives you the feeling that you really are there at the scene, watching events unfold.The plot is easily understandable, straightforward but very engaging. It's more action and adventure this time than previous instalments. It's also more funny, even adult humour finds its way into this Disney production (involving a comment on the viewpoint of a missionary). The mermaids are visually stunning, and I really thought the first mermaid is Amanda Seyfried, but it's a woman called Gemma Ward.Of course, the ending paves way for a sequel. I am looking forward to the next one already." -"So there's a family reunion in the middle of nowhere, a really good place to have a reunion if you ask me.Barbara Crampton and her husband, the bloke who's in a lot of Farrelly movies, are also celebrating their anniversary, so why not invite the family.But the family are a bunch of weirdos. Mums on meds, and the rest give each other suspicious looks, trying to remember what straight to DVD horror each one was in.But during dinner, some random people in silly masks ascend on the family, and having just seen The Purge, start to stalk them in a big house.Where's Ethan Hawke when you need him?....For another horror movie with over the top gore, this got surprisingly positive reviews. But again, it's just another average horror with added gore, and a silly twist come the end.All the hipsters have jumped on the positive bandwagon, and praised it, but its nothing special, it's not funny, and it's not tense at all.At the end of the day, it's just another film about the tables being turned on the killers, with an eighties edge to it to make it feel retro, but it's too reminiscent of The Purge, and averagely samey.Boring...." -"Home invasion horror You're Next opens with a couple being murdered shortly after having sex, and proceeds to wheel out every other hoary old genre cliché that writer Simon Barrett and director Adam Wingard can think of. While Barrett and Wingard seemingly believe that, in deliberately including every slasher trope possible, they are being both clever and funny, the reality is that their film is simply boring and hugely predictable.Sharni Vinson plays Erin, a pretty degree student who accompanies her boyfriend to a family gathering at his parent's isolated home. During the evening meal, the family comes under attack from masked assailants wielding crossbows, and Erin is forced to use her survivalist skills to stay alive.Within ten minutes I had guessed that the attackers were in cahoots with a member or members of the family; within twenty, I had narrowed it down to two suspects and had correctly identified the motive. With a narrative that never surprises, characters that are difficult to care for, unexceptional gore, and attempts at dark humour that frequently fall flat, there is very little here for me to recommend." -"YOU'RE NEXT (2013) *** Sharni Vinson, Nicholas Tucci, Wendy Glenn, AJ Bowen, Joe Swanberg, Margaret Laney, Amy Seimetz, Ti West, Rob Moran, Barbara Crampton, L.C. Holt, Simon Barrett, Lane Hughes, Kate Lyn Sheil, Larry Fessenden. Good ol' fashioned tweaking of the horror film sub genre, slasher/home invasion flick whereupon a well-to-do family's weekend get-together is upended when they find themselves being stalked/hunted by masked killers in an isolated woodland remote hell. What the intruders don't count on is namely an ace-in-the-hole of a non-family guest whose smarts and ingenuity turns-the-tables with ensuing carnage and other nefarious results. Bloodletting a go but with skill, imagination and sometimes too-cool-for- school attitude borderline obnoxiousness from filmmakers Adam Wingard (who pulls out all the stops directing Simon Barrett's quirky sharp screenplay). Kudos to Vinson as the oddly-at-ease dispatching violence at a moment's notice." -"Ghastly, graphic violence is filtered with tension, horror and a bit of comedy. The Davidson family is getting together to celebrate mom and dad's 35th wedding anniversary in their vacation home, in the woods or course. It has been a while since the three brothers and daughter have gathered together...this family's dysfunction is not well hidden. They all bring girlfriends/close friends. Director and screenwriter, Adam Wingard and Simon Barett, start the bloody, blatant butchering with the Dwight Twilley Band's ""Looking For The Magic"" put in the CD player and set on repeat. Before the gathering can start to make merry, one by one the family and guests are attacked by black-suited assailants wearing animal masks. Crossbows and machetes serve the attacker's purpose of ruthless murder well; but the monstrous slaying is interrupted by one house-guest(Sharni Vinson)that is well trained to fight back. If you like your violence bloody, you've got it! One method of killing is quite humorous. Twilley's haunting tune is featured throughout with a few sight gags laced in as the once-predators become the prey! This is home invasion on steroids. Filmed in and around Columbia, Missouri. Yes, there is some nudity/sexuality to help make an R rating. The Australian beauty, Vinson, is outstanding. Others in the cast: AJ Bowen, Nicolas Tucci, Wendy Glenn, Amy Seimetz and Rob Moran." -"Another highly Emotional Extravaganza from the Spielberg stable. It is a Loud and Ludicrous Story of a Bad Dad taught a Good Lesson from a Kid with the help of an endearing third party. In this case it is a Boxing Robot who of course has been Discarded just like our supposedly likable Little Boy.They make a Winning Combination when They get to it after all the Infighting and Bickering and set off to the Big Show in typical Movie machinations of unrealistic Time. But hey, this is a fantasy and that's OK. But what is Not OK is all the Yelling and Shouting and Screaming and Jumping and Cheering and Roaring. This Ear-Splitting decibel level is substituted for Real Emotion and Reel Steal has very little that is sincere and much that is Forced on the Audience.The CGI is standard and Fun and there is a Superficial, Watchable, Childish Story that can be Enjoyed by the Little Ones. What is Worrisome is that Hollywood thinks They are making these Movies with wide appeal and not just for the Kiddies. They might be Right." -"behind any verdict, it is a smart film. surprising fact for a successful film of our time. but one of the precious good points for a dramatic, touching and sensitive story about a delicate theme. the action scenes are present and real impressive. but the story and, sure, the acting ,are more significant. and this detail transforms ""Real Steel"" în a good opportunity to admire the return to the old fashion recipes of making movies." -"Essentially, REAL STEEL is a sci-fi spin on the whole ROCKY-era boxing movie, with robot fighters replacing human participants. And it's as juvenile and uninteresting as it sounds; this kind of premise could only work well in a quirky B-movie (I'm thinking of stuff like ROBOT JOX or the various Japanese flicks) as it feels staid and bland in a Hollywood context.Australian star Hugh Jackman works hard playing the main character, a boxing coach now fallen on hard times (gee, where have we heard that one before?). All goes well until he ends up saddled with one of those bratty kid characters, the type that American housewives seem to love while the rest of the world hates. From this point in it all gets very predictable, with good guys and bad painted in broad strokes and a singular lack of originality throughout.The highlights of the film should, of course, be the fight sequences, but I found them all very predictable. The CGI effects are excellent but it doesn't matter when the subject matter is so derivative and clichéd. You know exactly what's going to happen right at the outset and at no point does the film surprise you in any way. The really good boxing movies, like THE CHAMP or the early ROCKY films, are winners because they expose the heart of the fighters giving it their all. These robots have no character, thus the experience is a soulless one." -"This movie is as simplistic as it could become complicated. Eric Bana plays an ex-CIA operative that has secluded himself in Finland, where he has trained his now teen-aged daughter Hanna(Saoirse Ronan)in the arts of survival and killing. Not allowed to be a typical teenager, Hanna has spent her young life honing the important and dangerous skills passed down by her father. She has finally reached the time to put her abilities to the test and sets out on a trek across Europe, where she shows up on the radar of an intelligence operative Marissa(Cate Blanchett), who has waited for years for her anticipated arrival. The world just doesn't know the full extent of Hanna's skills let alone the identity of her suspected target. When Marissa closes in on Hanna, secrets from the past are discovered to cause questions about the young assassin's very existence. The scenery is fantastic and the acting of Bana and Blanchett couldn't be better. As for the talented Miss Ronan, it is obvious she is a friend of the camera. Also in the cast of this thriller: Oliva Williams, Tom Hollander, Jason Flemyng, Jessica Barden and Paris Arrowsmith." -"Wow What An Fantastic Movie, Again Aamir's Magic Worked!If You Plan To Watch, Better Take Kerchief With You Coz You Amy Cry While laughing ...Its A Funn Funnie Funnyest Movie, From Very Beginning To Till End.A Must Watch Movie If You Are A Student Specially Engineering Student.1st Half Aamir Rules & 2nd Half Madhavan & Sharman Joshi Gave Some Valuable Performance.And Kareena Kapoor Has Very Least Role In This Flick.Boman Irani Did Most Important Role Like he Did In ""Munna Bhai MBBS""I Am Planed Again To Watch Later !!! Story Is About Clash Between 3 Engineering Students (Rancho, Farhan, Hari) And Principle Of ICE College, New Delhi.Baby Delivery Scene Is A Serious One With Little Comedy In It ... Recommended To All ..." -"Until recently my only exposure to Indian cinema was Satyajit Ray. Like a lot of Americans, my knowledge of Bollywood was based entirely on film clips and American take-offs of lavish musical numbers.I looked on a few lists of top Bollywood films and settled on 3 Idiots, which turned out to be a wonderful decision. The movie is terrifically funny and engaging, seamlessly moving from comedy to tragedy to musical numbers.The story centers around a brilliant, iconoclastic technical student who spends the movie telling people to follow their dreams. While generally lighthearted, the movie strongly addresses the apparently terrible stresses on Indian college students. But in spite of some dark movies, overall this is about as feel-good as you can get. Feel-good to an absurd degree? Sure. But what's so bad about feeling good?When I think of Bollywood I think of big musical numbers, and there are a handful here, although they're a tiny part of the three-hour running time. Still, they are tremendous fun.To sum up, I saw a Bollywood movie, I laughed, I cried, and now I want to see more." -"Two friends are searching for their long lost companion. They revisit their college days and recall the memories of their friend who inspired them to think differently, even as the rest of the world called them ""idiots"".I am absolutely convinced that these Indian films get high ratings because Indians are voting them high out of national pride. They are not that funny, they tend to run much too long, and they are loaded with bright colors and silly songs. That may make them fun, but it does not make them good. (And even the fun wears out after the two hour mark.) But can one billion Indian voters be wrong? As much as I think yes, if majority rules then my opinion will have to be minority." -"A brilliant plastic surgeon (Antonio Banderas), haunted by past tragedies, creates a type of synthetic skin that withstands all kinds of damage. His experimental patient is a mysterious and volatile woman (Elena Anaya) who holds the key to his obsession.This is surely a Pedro Almodóvar film, but it's disturbing even by Pedro's standards. The flashback sequence will seem very convoluted at first, but you need to stick with it. Eventually, it gets to a beautiful compelling crazy place and the home of sexual icky obsessions. If you're an Almodóvar film fan, it'll be a very familiar place. I loath to say much more in case I spoil it." -"THE SKIN I LIVE IN (2011) **1/2 Antonio Banderas, Elena Anaya, Marisa Peredes, Jan Cornet, Roberto Alamo, Barbara Lenni, Susi Sanchez. Filmmaker Pedro Almodovar's latest examination of sexual politicas is a doozy: mad doctor Banderas (the 'other' muse of the director, in a return-to-form performance) whose obsession – literally – with a new synthetic skin experiment upon a very unusual case patient – the young man who raped his daughter! – is driven to his insanity. Almodovar provides the usual melodramatics with echoes of ""EYES WITHOUT A FACE"" and 'flesh for fantasy' auteurs Cronenberg, Lynch, Hitchcock and any Univision telenovella may have gone too far in its agent provocateur of aforementioned rape, sexual mores, borderline torture porn and good old fashioned mind-f#*#ing. Best scene: Sexy Anaya's sudden giantess transformation via the good doctor's security camera allowing him to voyeur her zoom/loom moment!" -"it gives many ways to discover a profound message about contemporary world. about revenge and obsession and power to the life of the other. about relations. and about sacrifices. about beauty. and, maybe, about Almodovar. nothing surprising. only the performance of Antonio Banderas who does not only a great job but who propose a new level of a career who seems be easily defined. a film who gives many suggestions to interpreted it. and many opportunities to understand it as a personal portrait of every day society. cruel, poetic and cold. a parable and one of wake up films. De Sade and Mary Shelley. and the inspired music. an Almodovar who gives more than his common story about women and relations and revenges and shadows of the past. each of theme is present here but only as tool for a kind of image in mirror. because it is just a story about power. and its ways." -"Off the bat I have to say I'm over thirty years older than what some pro critics have claimed is the demographic for this one. Sucker Punch, as reviews etc attest, is not for everyone, it has been called any number of things in derogative fashion, which since I enjoyed the film a lot means I'm a misogynist fetishist gamer, which to the best of my knowledge is not true. Lest I'm in the closet and now in middle age about to unleash traits and feelings previously untapped. Which if the latter is true you would have to say well done Zack Snyder, for that's serious film making...Sucker Punch is loud, full of visual orgasms, musically adroit, exciting, clever and very sexy. Snyder has made no secret of his fetish leanings when making this piece, but it hardy constitutes a dark seedy mind at work. It can easily be argued that the film is very much pro women, the story itself - in amongst the explosive thunder of the fantastical action - is tender and beautiful, complete with emotional kickers. Perhaps it's in the eye of the beholder? But I see a strong female led action movie, with shifting fantasy realms, and cunningly it calls for deeper ponder come the finale.Love it or hate it, Snyder has pushed buttons with this exercise. Better that than another cash cow sequel or another remake, re- imaging or rebirth. 7/10" -"Off the bat I have to say I'm over thirty years older than what some pro critics have claimed is the demographic for this one. Sucker Punch, as reviews etc attest, is not for everyone, it has been called any number of things in derogative fashion, which since I enjoyed the film a lot means I'm a misogynist fetishist gamer, which to the best of my knowledge is not true. Lest I'm in the closet and now in middle age about to unleash traits and feelings previously untapped. Which if the latter is true you would have to say well done Zack Snyder, for that's serious film making...Sucker Punch is loud, full of visual orgasms, musically adroit, exciting, clever and very sexy. Snyder has made no secret of his fetish leanings when making this piece, but it hardy constitutes a dark seedy mind at work. It can easily be argued that the film is very much pro women, the story itself - in amongst the explosive thunder of the fantastical action - is tender and beautiful, complete with emotional kickers. Perhaps it's in the eye of the beholder? But I see a strong female led action movie, with shifting fantasy realms, and cunningly it calls for deeper ponder come the finale.Love it or hate it, Snyder has pushed buttons with this exercise. Better that than another cash cow sequel or another remake, re- imaging or rebirth. 7/10" -"A young girl is on vacation with her parents when she decides to go to town to hang out with a friend. It's there where she and her friend decide to go get high with a complete stranger. It is at that point that the lives of these two teenagers is flipped upside down.The first thought that may have entered your mind is probably somewhere along the lines of: ""Don't you know better?"" But of course, they were in a small town and the guy seemed so innocent... which he was; it was just his dad, dad's girlfriend and his uncle that were ape nuts.This movie was more about the toughness and tenacity of a teen and the resourcefulness and fight of a couple of regular parents than anything else. From the character development you gather that the girl and her family are the epitome of normal while the criminals in this movie are the epitome of psychotic. Without a doubt you find yourself wishing for the demise of the bad guys while hoping for the triumph of the captives. Of course, there are the ""Oh My God, why did you do that?"" moments that are customary for any thriller/horror flick.There have been better movies from this genre; either better stories, or more affable characters, or gorier, or more sinister, etc. but this movie holds its own." -"This film is about a bunch of professional assassins hired to kill the leader of an island nation.""The Expendables"" has a very simple plot, it's so simple that it almost requires no dialog. As there is almost no dialog, screen time is filled by one fight after another. It seems that there is a fight in every scene, and there needs no reason for a fight. The action is packed, exciting and pumps adrenaline throughout the film. Yet, some violent scenes are excessively gory and unrealistic in a cartoon style, which undermines the credibility of the action. I think ""The Expendables"" delivers entertainment to action fans, which is what anyone can expect from these action stars." -"This film is about a bunch of professional assassins hired to kill the leader of an island nation.""The Expendables"" has a very simple plot, it's so simple that it almost requires no dialog. As there is almost no dialog, screen time is filled by one fight after another. It seems that there is a fight in every scene, and there needs no reason for a fight. The action is packed, exciting and pumps adrenaline throughout the film. Yet, some violent scenes are excessively gory and unrealistic in a cartoon style, which undermines the credibility of the action. I think ""The Expendables"" delivers entertainment to action fans, which is what anyone can expect from these action stars." -"It's probably no Surprise that the Script never rises above Sophomoric and that most of the Movie is Moronic, and that Viagra is for Sissies. This is nevertheless what it is supposed to be. A Testosteronian Tale of almost Over the Hill Mercenaries played by Over the Hill Action Stars. Is it Nostalgic Fun? There is precious little Fun here. Even the Lame One-Liners are Sparse. It is all about Strutting and comparing, well, You know.It moves along quite Fast and Furious, and if You were expecting a lot of Explosions, and Hand-to-Hand, and Gunfire and Knife Throwing, thats all here in Quantity if not Quality. This is Bulging, like Biceps, but Bottom Line, there isn't much Focus, on Character or Composite. It is Composed like a Heavy Metal Song, You can Feel it but has little Residual Resonance.Speaking of Focus. The Movie's Greatest Failing is a Modern Technique used in most Action Movies Today. A Combination of Shaky Camera and Quick Cutting. It is a Numbing and Nauseating effect that does not do all the Time and Money spent on the Thing a bit of Justice. It is virtually Impossible to distinguish Who or What is going on, except that Something is and Someone gets Dead or Destroyed very Loud and very Quick." -"There are very few long-running horror franchises where I can happily say that I have enjoyed every single chapter, but that is definitely the case with the wonderfully dumb and delightfully gory Final Destination series; admittedly that's probably because each successive sequel has been almost virtually identical in format to the enjoyable original, setting the stage with a spectacular disaster and allowing death to do the rest, but I have enjoyed them nevertheless.Part 5 certainly doesn't stray far from the formula. Barring one new plot device—the kill or be killed rule—and couple of twists that, if you've been paying attention, you may very well guess, this is business as usual: a group of people narrowly avoid being killed but find that their reprieve is only temporary while Death gets its act together. As always, expertly orchestrated and spectacularly gory demises await them all, and this time they're even bloodier than before!If, like me, you have enjoyed the previous instalments in this popular series, then it's almost certain that this one will also satisfy your yearning for inventive deaths and over the top splatter. I only hope that they keep 'em coming 'cos I'm not done yet." -I like the bit where the teenagers cheat death. This time on a bus. -"This film is about a nerdy high school misfit trying to be the coolest kid by becoming a superhero.""Kick Ass"" is quite a refreshing change from the established superhero movies, as there are not so many unconventional teenage superhero movies around. Dave is a nerdy character, and his claim to superhero power is being invisible to girls. After some funny mishaps, the real superheroes come out from hiding and do some real work. Hit-Girl is the show stealer, a super young girl doing all the super moves with courage like Rambo. Her impressive moves and almost ruthless heart contradict with her sweet and petite appearance, which makes her all the more memorable as a superhero. And the scene with the bazooka is over the top but hilariously funny! I enjoyed watching ""Kick Ass"", it is a very entertaining film." -"Although ""Rhiannon"" (Aly Michalka) is her best friend, a high school student by the name of ""Olive"" (Emma Stone) cannot stand the thought of going with her on a camping trip with Rhiannon's parents. So unable to think of any other excuse, Olive concocts a story about having a date with a college guy for that very weekend. Naturally, being a close friend, when Rhiannon returns she demands that Olive tell her everything about her date. This leads Olive to invent yet another story about losing her virginity in order to make it seem more appealing. This then creates a new problem as their conversation is overheard in the female restroom by a sanctimonious gossip named ""Marianne"" (Amanda Bynes) who then proceeds to tell everybody in the school. As a result, Olive quickly gets a reputation for being a promiscuous tramp which subsequently intrigues all of the guys-but infuriates all of the girls. Naturally, hormones being what they are, things take on a life of their own from that point on. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a cute comedy which started off reasonably well but then slowed down a bit before the end. Even so, I thought Emma Stone put in a pretty good performance overall and for that reason I have rated this film accordingly. Slightly above average." -"A film that answers the question: what would you get if you crossed Nathaniel Hawthorne with John Hughes? ""Easy A"" is a perky riff on ""The Scarlet Letter"" done up as a 1980s teeny-bopper movie. Emma Stone is adorable as a nerdy high school girl who gets a reputation for being a slut when a tiny lie goes viral, and then realizes that she kind of likes the attention notoriety wins her, even if it's all based on false rumor.Though mostly lightweight and funny, ""Easy A"" does convey some serious messages about the power of words, and it confirms the very real truth that what is true isn't nearly as important as what is perceived to be true (all you kids out there who think you can post whatever you want on Facebook without any consequences, take note).The adult cast features Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson as Stone's impossibly laid back parents (their characters are a total fantasy, but with those two actors playing them, who cares?), Thomas Haden Church as a favorite teacher and Lisa Kudrow as an unhinged guidance counselor who makes a big mistake.Grade: A-" -"Talk about a great time - 2010's Red is a fun and exciting experience.The film stars Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, Helen Mirren, Mary Louise Parker, Richard Dreyfuss, and Ernest Borgnine. Willis is an ex-black ops CIA agent, Frank, who enjoys talking on the phone with the young woman, Sarah (Mary Louise Parker) responsible for sending his pension checks. However, when he realizes that someone is trying to kill him, he also knows his phone has been bugged and she's in danger. So he kidnaps Sarah and takes her along while he reassembles members of his old team: Joe (Freeman) who is living in a nursing home, Marvin (Malkovich), who is living a bizarre, paranoid existence, and Victoria (Mirren), who seems to be some sort of socialite, and they try to find out why, after all this time of being retired, someone is after Frank, and who is it? Fast-paced, with great performances, Red is funny and fun, with nonstop action. Malkovich is a total scream in the wildest role, as is Mirren, an elegant British lady who is aces with a shotgun. Mary-Louise Parker is great as a woman who reads spy novels and now has a chance to live one, and her chemistry with Willis is wonderful.A total treat. Don't miss this terrific cast in an excellent film, directed by Robert Schwentke and written by Joel and Erich Hoeber, adapted from the graphic novel." -"This film is about the mysterious relationship between a guy called Tom and his female friend called Summer.I have heard so many positive word of mouth about ""(500) Days of Summer"", so I was very disappointed during and after watching it. Zooey Deschanel has vastly improved in her variety of facial expressions displayed, but still she looks like a cardboard cut out that tries too hard to be cute and fresh. The story is boring, plain and not engaging. The way that the story is delivered is unconventional, but it is not as groundbreaking as people think. Fortunately, Joseph Gordon-Levitt delivers a good performance, so it saves the film from being unwatchable. I find ""(500) Days of Summer"" very overrated." -"The story of a relation ship over the course of 500 days. Zooey Deschanel plays Summer, the object of Tom Hansen's eye (he's played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt). We watch the relationship out of order as we are told what day we are seeing. Off beat romantic comedy turns the notion of a romantic comedy on its head as well as the notion of what is romance anyway. Very well acted, Daschenel and Gordon-Levitt sell the films quirky construction enough that we accept the way the film is told.. I think this is the sort of film that we probably can all relate to, more so if we've had a relationship crash and burn and we've had to crawl from the wreckage. It is as, the advertising says, not a romantic film but a film about romance in all it joy (there's a musical number) and sorrow. recommended." -"THE FINAL DESTINATION (2009) ** Bobby Campo, Shantel VanSanten, Nick Zano,, Haley Webb, Mykelti Williamson, Krista Allen, Andrew Fischella, Justin Welborn, Stephanie Honore, Lara Grice, Jackson Walker. Fourth and surprisingly predictable installment of the gory horror franchise, this time in 3-D (which admittedly are not that great) with another quartet of bland teens cheating death and attempting to change their fates from one Wile E. Coyote meets Rube Goldberg via The Grim Reaper set piece after the other. The visual effects are very cheesy and look like bad video game reject schematics as well as the current chapter for an otherwise ingenious genre offering. (Dir: David R. Ellis)" -"A great movie about the terrible consequences of people being irrational and totally irresponsible. Melodramatic and a bit silly in the modern age, but a good message about the importance of birth control. Direction, performances, set design & cinematography were all exquisite." -"The Housemaid is a remake of a 1960 film of the same name. The new version tells the story of a young woman, Eun-yi, who is hired too look after twin babies for a wealthy woman, Hae Ra, and her small daughter, Nami. The husband, Hoon seduces the servant and begins an affair. Another maid sees the two and reports her discovery to Hae Ra's mother who also uncovers the mistress's pregnancy. An ""accident"" occurs but is unsuccessful and so a large sum of money is offered in order for Eun-yi to undergo an abortion, but she refuses and so the Lucretia Borgia solution is tried by these lunatics. I found myself caught up in the behavior of these people and the ending is a pretty good one that will stay with you for a while." -"A great movie about the terrible consequences of people being irrational and totally irresponsible. Melodramatic and a bit silly in the modern age, but a good message about the importance of birth control. Direction, performances, set design & cinematography were all exquisite." -"COUPLES RETREAT (2009) **1/2 Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, Faizon Love, Jon Favreau, Malin Akerman, Kristen Bell, Kristin Davis, Kali Hawk, Tasha Smith, Carlos Ponce, Peter Serafinowicz, Jean Reno, Temura Morrison, John Michael Higgins, Ken Jeong, Charlotte Cornwell, Amy Hill. Better than anticipated domestic comedy with four pairs of friends go on a tropical retreat to help one of the others' failing marriage with a lot of revealing, soul searching and oh yeah, comedy mixed in for good measure. Vaughn (who co-wrote with Favreau and Dana Fox) is at his taciturn, sardonic best with many of the film's best dialogue and his ensemble lets him have just enough room to hang himself when it gets to be too much of the star (thankfully not the case for the motor mouth's sake) yet without his presence it's a tedious task to get to the final act. Frequent Vaughn/Favreau collaborator (and former child star) Peter Billingsley's directorial debut has a lot left to be desired but is yeoman like in execution gets yardage in his stars' comic chops." -"Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) and his village is constantly attacked by dragons. Weakling Hiccup isn't much help. He befriends an injured dragon missing part of his tail fin. He helps it by making a prosthetic tail. In the meanwhile, he becomes a great study of dragons. Instead of fighting them, he's able to subdue them.DreamWorks has created a beautiful 3D animation. The story is a beautiful one of friendship between the boy and the dragon. Jay Baruchel is really terrific as the geeky boy. The whole group of kids have real charisma. I especially like the training sessions, and how the boy's relationship with the dragon pays off." -"Just watched this 3-D computer animated movie with my movie theatre friend who had seen this a couple of times before. It's an awesome tale of a young man named Hiccup (voice of Jay Baruchel) wanting to become a real Viking like his dad, Stoick (Gerald Butler). But one thing he doesn't want to do is kill dragons especially when he befriends one he names Toothless...While there's some witty lines and some humorous visuals, this was a mainly compellingly stirring adventure tale about standing up for your principals despite the prevailing mood of the crowd. I'll leave it at that and just mention the other voices that were heard here: America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Kristen Wiig, and, the only one I actually recognized while watching, Craig Ferguson. All of those and others contributed wonderful performances. Special thanks to the writer/directors Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders for the entire thing, which should come as no surprise since they also did the equally entertaining Lilo and Stitch at Disney back almost 10 years ago. So on that note, I highly recommend How to Train Your Dragon." -"It's always nice to see a non-Pixar movie being able to convey emotions not only to children, but also to the adults that accompany them. And while I'm sure you won't be able to tame a dragon after you watch this (first you have to find one of course), it is a very fine movie, that has just a few minor flaws.And even those will not really be seen by most people (as flaws), because they might just not care. It's a movie that is about peace of course, but there still is a big danger. And of course quite a few things might be a bit too simple. Now again, if it weren't for Pixar, I might not even notice or care about those things. But there is Pixar and to make a perfect animated picture has become really hard.Still very good (hence the rating), so more than worth a look! (Great voice cast)" -"This film is about a cowardly viking guy who is unable to fight and slay a dragon. He finds another way to deal with dragons, with unexpected results.I thought the dragons were were designed well. The dragons are scary and dangerous looking, and yet paradoxically cute at the same time. The main dragon has easy-to-interpret facial expressions which can be useful in teaching kids to read faces. The story is a little slow paced at first, but the intensity and emotional depths in the last half hour makes the whole film worthwhile. I particularly liked the message that if you understand, then you will be tolerant and can coexist with others. I enjoyed watching ""How to Train Your Dragon""." -"Blue Valentine is not an easy film to watch and it drags at times. That said, it is very powerful and heart-breaking. Two things especially make it so. One is the script, which is full of genuine emotional credibility and never falls into the trap of being too clever. The other is the story, with the time-skipping structure proving interesting and the story itself is so well-observed. Blue Valentine is shot beautifully yet with a lot of grit, and the soundtrack is amazing, for one it is one of 2010's best soundtracks. The film is also sharply directed, and the film instead of straightforwardly tracing the rise and fall of their relationship actually contrasts the young couple's hopeful beginnings with their subsequent grinding domestic discord. Some mayn't like this approach, I found it incredibly interesting and thought it worked wonders, considering how much effort was made into making this approach credible. The performances from Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams are simply wonderful, their characters are not the most sympathetic characters in the world, nor I don't think were they intended to be, but the performances themselves and the chemistry I couldn't fault. Overall, a very powerful and moving film. 8/10 Bethany Cox" -"Good, but not great, movie. Reasonably moving portrayal of a marriage on the rocks. However, overly drawn out, and the marriage break-down hardly seems surprising, considering their characters and how they got together in the first place. You don't sympathise with the couple (I was actually glad for Michelle Williams' character in the end, that she was looking to escape it). It would have been a lot more impactful if they genuinely loved each other all along, and one of them (Ryan Gosling's character) was not so loathsome.Good performances from Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling. Williams deserved her Oscar nomination." -"The worker of the Steinway Moving & Storage Dean (Ryan Gosling) meets the medicine student Cindy (Michelle Williams) and falls in love with her. Cindy has a personal problem with her boyfriend and the sooner she gets married with Dean.Years later, the family man Dean has no ambitions and is satisfied with his simple life together with his wife and their daughter Frankie. Cindy works as a nurse in a medical clinic and believes that Dean has potential to be someone. They love their daughter but Cindy rejects Dean's affection; Dean invites Cindy to go to the motel expecting to rekindle their love. But their marriage has ended a long time ago.""Blue Valentine"" is a simple and heartbreaking story, with magnificent screenplay, performances and soundtrack that make the difference. The romance is developed at two periods, in the beginning and the end of the relationship of a couple that does not talk anymore to each other. Their relationship is disclosed in the present days, entwined with flashbacks of period of sweethearts. In Brazil, ""Blue Valentine"" was released in the movie theaters with the title ""Namorados para Sempre"" (""Valentine Forever""), misleading the viewers that expect a romantic comedy instead of a drama. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): ""Namorados para Sempre"" (""Valentine Forever"")" -"This film is about a plastic surgeon who lies about being almost divorced in order to hook up with women. He faces a difficult situation when he is asked to live this lie, which rolls increasingly bigger.Many romantic comedies focus on romance and hence is not so funny, but ""Just Go With It"" is seriously funny and romantic at the same time. There is amazing connection between Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston, which is critical for the film's success. There are so many funny scenes, I laughed so hard at a few of them, such as Palmer being pushed into the pool and the coconut scene. Nicole Kidman has a small but memorable role, which sees her in situations (involving the coconut as well) which I would not have imagined a mega star to agree to filming. Together with the great Hawaiian scenery, lighthearted atmosphere and sweet romance, ""Just Go With It"" is the best romantic comedy in years." -"'Just Go with It' is A Decent Comedy, that raises genuine laughs in the goings-on, along-with with energetic performances from it's talented cast. Sure, this is not an out-and-out hilarious film, yet it passes your time.'Just Go with It' Synopsis: On a weekend trip to Hawaii, a plastic surgeon convinces his loyal assistant to pose as his soon-to-be-divorced wife in order to cover up a careless lie he told to his much-younger girlfriend.'Just Go with It' is based on the 1969 film Cactus Flower, & Director Dennis Dugan manages to deliver a decent comedy, that does make you laugh. Allan Loeb & Timothy Dowling's Screenplay entertains, especially when the story shifts to Hawaii. Dugan's Direction is steady. Cinematography & Editing are fair.Performance-Wise: Adam Sanlder gets it right. Jennifer Aniston is superb & her comic timing is just perfect. Nicole Kidman shines in a brief role. Nick Swardson is genuinely funny. Brooklyn Decker looks alluring & acts ably. Bailee Madison is excellent, as always. Griffin Gluck is confident. Dave Matthews is passable. Others lend support.On the whole, 'Just Go with It' does entertain." -"This film is about Percy Jackson who has to deliver to the Gods a lightning bolt that he was accused of stealing.""Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief"" is a great mix of Greek mythology, pop culture, adventure and thrill. It's interesting to see the trendiest product in a classical Greek background, and yet the context of it does not feel out of place. It reflects the clash between the descendants' modern life and their classical origin, which must have been so confusing for the kids if that really happened.I find myself shouting at the characters often because of their delayed response to their calamitous situations. For example, their delayed use of Medusa's head annoys me. Otherwise, ""Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief"" is an engaging adventure in fantasy land." -"'Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief' is a disappointment, here's why: 1. The Novel is hugely entertaining, my brothers loves the books. 2. It's been made by a Veteran Filmmaker Chris Columbus, this time again misses the bus, 'Beth Cooper' was a horror!'Percy Jackson' is a fascinating idea & Columbus could've done so much more. The film begins with a bang, but soon after Percy goes to save a loved-one it loses pace and ends up becoming an okay experience. The climax & the suspense are not up-to the mark. Coming the right point: The Graphics are amazing & the best part of the enterprise. Cinematography by Stephen Goldblatt is very good, he captures every frame wonderfully. The acting is also decent, Lerman plays Percy Jackson with good energy. He justifies his part to the T. Alexandra Daddario looks & performs well. Brandon T. Jackson is funny. Sean Bean as Zeus is wonderful. Pierce Brosnan is in from, plus his look in the film Long Bread and Hair looks killer on him. Uma Thurman is nice in a cameo. Others lend able support.'Percy Jackson' is a okay fare, watch it if you've got nothing to do." -"Two of the biggest Fantasy movies this year were really disappointing for me (Percy and the Titans Clash, more on the latter ... later). It's not the special effects or how the movie looks (I'm sure it will make a great Blu Ray). It also seems to hit every mark it is supposed to (story wise, character building/introducing-wise). But it also feels very forced and very wrong at the same time.Of course you just sit back, relax and enjoy. I couldn't even with such talent as Uma Thurman and Rosario Dawson (the latter especially being one of my favorite actresses) on display. Funny at times, with your sidekick (check), your love interest (check) and your ""obvious"" uber-villain (check). They know their formula ... but do you care or not?" -"Almost everybody has returned for this one. Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is going to college. He finds a shard of the AllSpark which has given him visions of symbols. Meanwhile the Autobots are battling the Decepticons with the help of human forces. However, the president's man is unconvinced, and wonder if the Decepticons are on Earth only to hunt the Autobots. And that maybe it would be better if the Autobots leave Earth and lead the Decepticons to follow them.It's good that both Shia and Megan Fox return as well as many of the others. The action is still over the top extravaganza. There're a few too many slow motion for my taste. I'd rather it speed by, and maintain the pace rather than sit there and gawk. But if you like the first one, the second one will give you more of the same. The big thing I don't like is that the Bots seems to be still kept a secret. That's really unreasonable considering what happened in the first movie." -"I am not really the ""target audience"" for this movie. I quit playing with toys before Transformers ever made the scene. I don't remember if my sons played with them.Anyway, if I were a professional movie reviewer, and I were to give this movie a review, I would say that it has lots of action, some of which makes sense, and you have Earth-friendly Transformers fighting Earth-enemy Transformers. The existence of the Earth is at stake.I like to watch the young actor Shia LaBeouf who is back as Sam Witwicky. He has a very cool car, a yellow Camaro, which is actually one of the Earth-friendly Transformers. The biggest and most powerful Earth-friendly Transformer gets disabled and Sam has to help figure out how to get the elusive Transformer ""mojo"" that will bring him back to functionality.Even more I like to watch the brilliant actress Megan Fox back as Mikaela Banes. She is brilliant because she is so gorgeous. I hope all her parts are natural, not man-made, otherwise she would just be another type of Transformer!The movie runs a bit too long, maybe even a lot too long, but on the whole I enjoyed watching it. Not a very good movie, as good movies go, but entertaining. Especially watching Megan Fox." -"Mr. Nobody isn't an easy movie to watch. For that the story is too weird, almost impossible to fully understand, it will make you think about it long time after you watched it. But weird doesn't mean bad, on the contrary, for a movie that is almost three hours long it's still entertaining. Visually it's sometimes stunning, the cinematography is just of really high quality. Jaco Van Dormael doesn't make a lot of movies but when he does they're just very good. After Toto Le Héros (1991) and Le Huitième Jour (1996), both excellent movies, he's coming with something completely different this time, but it's still an emotional movie like the other two were. The cast was this time not French or Belgian, besides a short appearance of Pascal Duquenne (the main autistic character from Le Huitième Jour), but they all did a good job in this movie. Jared Leto is a good actor and in Mr. Nobody he did a really good job. Mr. Nobody is one of those movies you have to watch more than once, to fully understand the story, or at least to try to understand the story. Another hit from Jaco Van Dormael." -"This beautiful surreal movie is full of memorable lines that will make you reconsider your outlook on life, but this one is my favorite:""At my age, the candles cost more than the cake. I'm not afraid of dying. I'm afraid I haven't been alive enough. It should be written on every schoolroom blackboard: Life is a playground - or nothing.""9/10" -"Of course I understand if someone says/thinks this is pretentious. But if you're a fan of weird Science Fiction and/or Terry Gilliam, you should feel right at home. This really out there movie, gives you a lot to think about (if you're up for it). It's also kind of a twisted version of Lola Runs.It just takes that ""what would happen if"" concept to another level (or is it dimension?). Every decision you make has consequences. The bigger the decision the bigger the consequences obviously. Which doesn't mean that small things don't matter. Quite the opposite, but the movie has to concentrate on a few things and it does so very well. Nicely acted and maybe not the easiest movie to follow this is executed very well ..." -"Mr. Nobody isn't an easy movie to watch. For that the story is too weird, almost impossible to fully understand, it will make you think about it long time after you watched it. But weird doesn't mean bad, on the contrary, for a movie that is almost three hours long it's still entertaining. Visually it's sometimes stunning, the cinematography is just of really high quality. Jaco Van Dormael doesn't make a lot of movies but when he does they're just very good. After Toto Le Héros (1991) and Le Huitième Jour (1996), both excellent movies, he's coming with something completely different this time, but it's still an emotional movie like the other two were. The cast was this time not French or Belgian, besides a short appearance of Pascal Duquenne (the main autistic character from Le Huitième Jour), but they all did a good job in this movie. Jared Leto is a good actor and in Mr. Nobody he did a really good job. Mr. Nobody is one of those movies you have to watch more than once, to fully understand the story, or at least to try to understand the story. Another hit from Jaco Van Dormael." -"Of course I understand if someone says/thinks this is pretentious. But if you're a fan of weird Science Fiction and/or Terry Gilliam, you should feel right at home. This really out there movie, gives you a lot to think about (if you're up for it). It's also kind of a twisted version of Lola Runs.It just takes that ""what would happen if"" concept to another level (or is it dimension?). Every decision you make has consequences. The bigger the decision the bigger the consequences obviously. Which doesn't mean that small things don't matter. Quite the opposite, but the movie has to concentrate on a few things and it does so very well. Nicely acted and maybe not the easiest movie to follow this is executed very well ..." -"This is supposed to be closer to the original book. I haven't read it, but there are a few twists and points that are different from the John Wayne movie. An early scene with the girl for example. A sort of prologue if you want to call it that. Stuff that was just mentioned in the original is being shown here.Matt Damon and Jeff Bridges seem to have a similar relationship as John Wayne had with his ""buddy-for-hire"" in the Original. All in all you have to say that Bridges did fill in the shoes that Wayne left him quite well. The new ""girl"" here is really good. And while the girl in the original was already an adult at the time of the shooting, the one here is actually really still a young teenager.Great storytelling and even fans of the Original True Grit movie, will be able to enjoy this." -"The real star in this movie is clearly Haliee Steinfield. The characters portrayed are exaggerated and unrealistic, bordering on unbelievable and cartoon-ish. This adds to the enjoyment of the film. Haliee as Mattie has developed a level of knowledge and maturity that most people don't achieve in a lifetime, let alone in 14 years. There are certain characteristics of background people that make things interesting. For instance the undertaker tells Mattie on two separate occasions that it is okay for her to kiss a corpse, then later tells her it is okay if she wants to sleep in the coffin. Is the undertaker a borderline necrophiliac? The Texas Ranger LaBoeuf talks about kissing Mattie, then later spanks her.Then there is the grandmother who snores. There is the traveling doctor wearing a bear's skin, including the head. He practices taking teeth out of dead people. It is these details that makes the movie interesting and quirky.Rooster Cogburn, the man Mattie hires to pursue her father's killer, proudly served with the infamous William Quantrill, a group of Confederate raiders which history has portrayed in a negative light. Mattie is obsessed with revenge, but not to the point where it consumes her so she can not think.The humor is dry:Mattie: Why were they pursuing you? -Rooster: I robbed a high interest bank. -Mattie: That is stealing. -Rooster: Umm. That is the position they took in New Mexico." -"Robin Longstride (Russell Crowe) is fighting along side King Richard the Lionheart as they loot their way back to England from the Crusades. Meanwhile the crown rests on the weak King John. Godfrey wants the French to invade England, and he has infiltrated the king's service as Earl Marshal of England. To further his aim, he destroys many towns to cause chaos in England.There is a lot of complicated story in this one. It is wholly unnecessary to do that. Ridley Scott directs great action scenes, but can't tame this beast of a screenplay. Russell Crowe is solid as Robin. In this shifting and unsteady story, he is the most stable platform. Meanwhile Cate Blanchett is wasted as Marion. She doesn't have enough chemistry for a romance with Crowe.Just when things seem to be reasonably realistic, they send the french invading like D-Day. It doesn't even look good. Ridley could never top movies about the real D-Day no matter what. And he looks ridiculous just for trying." -"OK, but not great. Most of the movie is fairly slow moving, overly simplistic, and seems to go nowhere. However, it redeems itself with its ending: very moving and profound.Plot is OK, but direction is fairly unimaginative. Performances are OK on the whole. Natalie Portman and Jake Gyllenhaal do well and the little girls shine. However, Tobey Maguire seems miscast - not for the emotional depth he brings (that was spot-on) but as a Marine captain. He just didn't seem right for that role.I was expecting more from this, so a disappointing movie, for me." -"The kids are scattered in the midst of WWII. Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund Pevensie (Skandar Keynes) are forced to live with their annoying cousin Eustace (Will Poulter). Then a painting in their room starts coming to life. The water in the painting floods the room and sweeps all three kids to Narnia where they are rescued by prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and The Dawn Treader. They find Narnia at peace. Caspian is on his way to the Lone Island where the seven lords of Telmar, who were loyal to his father, escaped to after his uncle tries to kill them. No one has had news of them, and Caspian wants to investigate. There they find a green mist that takes people away.The adventure feels very lackluster. The danger isn't up to standard. The green mist is done weakly. It's not very scary. There is a lot of time spent on the ship without much action. The swashbuckling action is passable. It's probably good enough for a kid's movie. I do like the fact that only two of the original kids go back to Narnia. I never really liked all the bickering. And Lucy has a great subplot of wanting to be as beautiful as Susan." -"The kids are scattered in the midst of WWII. Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund Pevensie (Skandar Keynes) are forced to live with their annoying cousin Eustace (Will Poulter). Then a painting in their room starts coming to life. The water in the painting floods the room and sweeps all three kids to Narnia where they are rescued by prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and The Dawn Treader. They find Narnia at peace. Caspian is on his way to the Lone Island where the seven lords of Telmar, who were loyal to his father, escaped to after his uncle tries to kill them. No one has had news of them, and Caspian wants to investigate. There they find a green mist that takes people away.The adventure feels very lackluster. The danger isn't up to standard. The green mist is done weakly. It's not very scary. There is a lot of time spent on the ship without much action. The swashbuckling action is passable. It's probably good enough for a kid's movie. I do like the fact that only two of the original kids go back to Narnia. I never really liked all the bickering. And Lucy has a great subplot of wanting to be as beautiful as Susan." -"The Chronicles of Narnia series have continued with this film adaptation of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. It's not as good as the first two films were, but it still is a respectable entry in the series. This film does not have as much action or any real battle scenes, but this is more of an adventure film and a film that has a heavy theme regarding family.This third installment is about a evil, in a form of a mist, trying to take over Narnia. Lucy and Edmund returns along with their bratty cousin, Eustace to join Aslan, Caspian, Reepicheep, and the other Narnian folks to stop this evil.The acting is solid. The one thing that stuck out to me is how Georgie Henley has matured as Lucy. She and Skandar Peynes were good at recapturing their roles.Overall, this was a good fantasy-filled film. It's a step down from the previous Narnia films but it still is very enjoyable. Despite the lack of action scenes, the special effects were well-done. I also liked how images from the novels were displayed in the end credits. I am disappointed that this film did not so better business here in America. I rate this film 8/10." -"I'm not only referring to the plot, but also to our ""über-villains"" on display here. It's obvious that Jennifer Aniston (first time I see her as evil as in this one) and Colin Farrell having a field day. Kevin Spacey has done similar things before, but that doesn't take anything away from his performance here.As always with comedies, quite a lot of the gags have been used for the trailer. The good news is however that there are still a lot of jokes in here, that work and haven't been used in the trailers. So while it would be good to not have seen the trailer, even if you have seen it, you will find this highly amusing.What I cannot understand however is, how they thought this should get a sequel (see IMDb, though only pro users have access to additional information at this moment). Of course the movie was successful, but still it should remain a one-off." -"Three friends have horrible bosses, and try to get rid of them. Nick (Jason Bateman) is in sales hoping for a promotion, but his boss Dave (Kevin Spacey) steals his job for himself. Dale (Charlie Day) has a boss Julia (Jennifer Aniston) who's sexually harassing him. Kurt (Jason Sudeikis) has a nice boss, but he dies and leaves the company to his douche son Bobby (Colin Farrell).It's a bit too serious at times. The stupidity gets a little funny. There are some hilarious moments. Charlie Day's manic idiocy can be very annoying and very funny. Sometimes it's both at the same time. In the end, the guys are just likable enough. The humor is just silly enough. It's a good comedy that breaks out every once in a while." -"Three disgruntled buddies Nick(Jason Bateman), Dale(Charlie Day) and Kurt(Jason Sudelkis)enter an interesting conversation while drinking maybe too many. The topic being eliminating their horrible bosses. But can they really go that far? One boss won't accept being a minute or two late. Another takes over after the death of his father and is just a mindless moron running the business into the ground. The there is the other boss, Dr. Julia Harris(Jennifer Aniston), that is obsessive with her sexual activities. Now can you imagine a dentist putting the move on her assistant. Borrowing from Elvis, ""Lord, all mighty; I feel my temperature rising"". The more serious the three friends get, they are given some advice from a con artist(Jamie Foxx); and when plots go into action...the wheels fly off. Lewd and crude sometimes go a long way. Others in this dark comedy are:Kevin Spacey, Donald Sutherland, Lindsay Sloane and Colin Farrel. One disappointment is the laughs are spread too far apart." -"Shucks. I thought for the first 45 minutes that I had found a Denzel Washington film that was right for him and worth watching in ways he helps. Mixing Kung Fu and Jesus is alarmingly common, but this seemed more pure, more cinematic than most — something of ""Last Man Standing"" meets ""Canticle for Leibowitz.""That latter was the first serious science fiction I read and am primed for things like this. But then...Gary Oldman starts to go slippery crazy; ""the girl,"" the obligatory girl is introduced and Denzel (who controlled the script) goes all Sunday School on us. To appreciate what an opportunity has been lost, you need to have been properly exposed to Last Man and Canticle. They matter.Incidentally, one is reminded that for some reason Denzel never learned how to convey pain. This works for the film from the beginning up until he stares down the chief henchman. After that, he needs to change, and he does. But it is only back to his drum major self!Ten years ago, the Hughes brothers made a similar mess that charmed with that initial promise that the style would carry us into dangerous places. Maybe some day they will succeed. But not here.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements." -"THE BOOK OF ELI loses points purely for being way too familiar. It's a film that sees Denzel Washington traversing a post-apocalyptic landscape, encountering violent ambushes and ruthless thugs as he continually searches for something kept from the viewer until the end.It's a dull, downbeat, often depressing movie, painted in shades of grey and brown just like in THE ROAD. There are a couple of decent action scenes thrown into the mix to keep things moving along, but MAD MAX this isn't; the story is predictable, and the bad guys even more so, despite Gary Oldman making a welcome return to his psychotic roots.There are highlights amid the mundanity: a run-in with a bizarre couple (Michael Gambon and Frances de la Tour, both fine although underutilised) plays out expertly, and as usual these days with Hollywood productions, the calibre of the special effects is something to behold. But the story is slimline in the extreme and come the end, you'll be thinking 'is that it?' instead of feeling genuinely awed..." -"Updated remake of George A. Romero's original underrated 1973 shock feature. Beck Eisner is straight forward with this tragic incident of a plane crash in Iowa turning a small town of friendly faces into raving murderous maniacs. The water supply is tainted with a mysterious toxin being transported by the military. Citizens become gravely ill and others turn into mindless slayers. Sheriff David Dutton(Timothy Olyphant)and his deputy(Joe Anderson)try to make sense of the chaos, but the government is rapid in placing the town under quarantine. A bullet to the brain seems to take care of the infected. Violent and gruesome is the battle between neighbors, friends the gas-mask wearing military. Also in the cast: Rahda Mitchell, Danielle Panabaker, Brett Rickaby, Christie Lynn Smith and Joe Reegan." -"This remake of George Romero's 1970s movie (which I never really took to) concerns the attempts of Sheriff Timothy Olyphant and his doctor wife Radha Mitchell to escape the small town of Ogden Marsh after a government accident dumps a chemical in the water supply which turns inhabitants into murderous quasi-zombies. Caught between the Crazies on the one hand, and the military on the other (which has in mind wiping out the entire population before they get out and spread the plague), escape is not going to be easy.This is a pretty solid movie, albeit with no great surprises. The sense of jeopardy never lets up, the action and effects are all top-notch, and there is the quality turn from Mitchell which we've come to expect (and Olyphant isn't bad either, albeit a little lightweight in the sort of role which we would have expected Bill Paxton to play 10 years ago).I don't have any great insights about it, all I have to say is that I thoroughly enjoyed it." -"CLASH OF THE TITANS is surprisingly fun for an effects-heavy Hollywood blockbuster, a remake of Ray Harryhausen's last movie (of the same title), made in 1981. While this is the inferior version - and I'll always plump for stop motion effects over CGI - it remains an engaging, entertaining piece of modern cinema.Meathead Sam Worthington gives another ultra-wooden turn as Perseus, a demigod on Earth who decides to go on a quest to teach the vengeful gods a lesson. He's teamed up with a bunch of characters who are far more interesting than him (including Mads Mikkelsen and a wooden golem type guy) and spends the rest of the movie battling various CGI creations.The story is slim and the dialogue slimmer, filled with predictable characters and stereotypes (Gemma Arterton's walking exposition-type character is particularly ill served). The scenes with the gods are silly and trite, with the likes of Ralph Fiennes and Liam Neeson looking like they're dressing up at the local panto. In essence, CLASH OF THE TITANS is a string of set-pieces involving the mythological monsters of old, including the Medusa and the Kraken.Yet something works. It's an easy film to watch, light-hearted and unpredictable in places in regards to the fate of certain characters. The movie is heavy on spectacle and the action isn't too bad at all. I enjoyed it, and I'll be sure to check out the sequel (WRATH OF THE TITANS) in due course..." -"In order to prevent the Kraken from destroying the city of Argos, Perseus, son of Zeus, travels to the other side of the River Styx where he must slay Medusa the Gorgon.I'm a big fan of mythological fantasy films, but found the the original Clash of the Titans to be a huge disappointment: the numerous big name Hollywood stars were unable to do much with the lousy script, the special effects were amongst the legendary Ray Harryhausen's least impressive work, and lead Harry Hamlin was out-acted by a mechanical owl.This recent remake features stunning, state of the art CGI special effects and an equally star-studded cast, but little effort seems to have gone into improving the script, which is just as pompous and dull as before; furthermore, in Sam Worthington they have somehow managed to find a pretty-boy actor every bit as wooden as Hamlin—which in itself is a feat almost as impressive as slaying a Kraken!" -"The Gods demand the sacrifice of Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) or they will unleash the Kraken against the city of Argos. Perseus (Sam Worthington), demigod son of Zeus, accepts the task to fight the Kraken. To fight the Kraken, he discovers that he needs the head of Medusa.They got some big names to play gods including Liam Neeson, and Ralph Fiennes. Gemma Arterton plays Io who guide the quest. This is chalk full of CG battles. The biggest problem with that is the rush to put it in 3D. Many complaints follow, but if you watch it in 2D, there shouldn't be any problems. The acting is basically stiff. Sam Worthington is not a natural acting, but he has the built to be heroic. It does get too chaotic, but it's pretty watchable." -"Is it always good for a son to be like the father? This is a movie based on real events surrounding the disappearance of Kathie McCormack (Dunst). Under mysterious circumstances she disappeared and though her husband Robert (Gosling) was suspected no one was ever brought to trial. The movie opens and we find out that was Robert was seven years old he saw his mom violently die in front of him, and through out the movie we see the effect this had on him. This is a good, but very slow moving movie. This is a different role for Kirsten Dunst, who hasn't taken on a part like this since ""Virgin Suicides"", and she did a good job with it. The movie's strength is the performance of Ryan Gosling who is excellent at playing a seemingly normal guy with major psychological issues. It was such a convincing performance that every time he is on screen you will tense up. Overall it was a good movie, but I was expecting more. Acting was really good though. I give it a B-.Would I watch again? - I don't think I would" -"The Amazon review describes the movie very well. I will say if the movie has a fault is that perhaps it was done too well, as realism sometimes has a way of being gritty. The acting was great as were the accents. The sister's hairdos are comical by today's standards, heck we laughed at them back then too. Christian Bale plays a role that seems out of his idiom, but does it very well. A must for boxing fans.Sex, f-bombs (Hey! It's New England.) No nudity." -"The Amazon review describes the movie very well. I will say if the movie has a fault is that perhaps it was done too well, as realism sometimes has a way of being gritty. The acting was great as were the accents. The sister's hairdos are comical by today's standards, heck we laughed at them back then too. Christian Bale plays a role that seems out of his idiom, but does it very well. A must for boxing fans.Sex, f-bombs (Hey! It's New England.) No nudity." -"This film is about a boxer who rises to stardom with the help of his half-brother, who is an ex-boxer that messes his career up by indulging in illicit drugs.I was expecting something as emotionally gripping and touching as ""The Wrestler"", but ""The Fighter"" is nowhere near as good. ""The Fighter"" is so dialog heavy, and most of the time the dialog is just arguments or some unimportant nonsense. This constant babbling already put me off early into the film. The story itself is not engaging, the emotional highs and lows are not so pronounced. It just does not grip me and does not offer me an emotional ride. As a boxing film, ""The Fighter"" may work, but not as an Oscar worthy tearjerker." -"The needy Gigi Haim (Ginnifer Goodwin) is an young woman seeking her prince charming in unsuccessful dates. After dating the real estate agent Conor Barry (Kevin Connolly), Gigi anxiously expects to receive a phone call from him. However Conor never calls her and she goes to the bar where he uses to go expecting to see him, but she meets his friend Alex (Justin Long) that works in the place. They become friends and Alex helps Gigi to interpret the subtle signs of the men.The aspirant singer Anna Taylor (Scarlet Johansson), who dated Conor, meets Ben Gunders (Bradley Cooper) in a supermarket and they begin a conversation, and Ben offers to help Anna in her career. Later Ben has a love affair with Anna, and his marriage with Janine Gunders (Jennifer Connelly) comes to an end.Beth Bartlett (Jennifer Aniston) lives with Neil Jones (Ben Affleck), who does not believe in marriage as an institution. When Beth's sister informs that she will get married, Beth pushes Neil to marry her affecting their relationship.""He's Just Not That Into You"" is a delightful movie about marriages, relationships and affairs. The entwined story with many characters is supported by a realistic screenplay and a magnificent cast. I saw this movie in a flight and I have really appreciated. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): Not Available" -"The needy Gigi Haim (Ginnifer Goodwin) is an young woman seeking her prince charming in unsuccessful dates. After dating the real estate agent Conor Barry (Kevin Connolly), Gigi anxiously expects to receive a phone call from him. However Conor never calls her and she goes to the bar where he uses to go expecting to see him, but she meets his friend Alex (Justin Long) that works in the place. They become friends and Alex helps Gigi to interpret the subtle signs of the men.The aspirant singer Anna Taylor (Scarlet Johansson), who dated Conor, meets Ben Gunders (Bradley Cooper) in a supermarket and they begin a conversation, and Ben offers to help Anna in her career. Later Ben has a love affair with Anna, and his marriage with Janine Gunders (Jennifer Connelly) comes to an end.Beth Bartlett (Jennifer Aniston) lives with Neil Jones (Ben Affleck), who does not believe in marriage as an institution. When Beth's sister informs that she will get married, Beth pushes Neil to marry her affecting their relationship.""He's Just Not That Into You"" is a delightful movie about marriages, relationships and affairs. The entwined story with many characters is supported by a realistic screenplay and a magnificent cast. I saw this movie in a flight and I have really appreciated. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): Not Available" -"It's a generational thing. When St. Elmo's Fire came out in the Eighties it was the same kind of film that He's Just Not That Into You is, a character study of the interrelated lives of several young people in the Washington, DC area. It's now over 20 years later and some young people who could easily be the kids of the cast of St. Elmo's Fire are having the same kind of situations. The area is even almost the same, the film was shot in the Baltimore and Baltimore county region of Maryland.If you've seen St. Elmo's Fire you know pretty much what will be happening in He's Just Not That Into You. I find the characters in this film though slightly less interesting and the story line a bit more difficult to follow. Standing out in the cast for me are Jennifer Aniston for the women and Justin Long for the men. Aniston is a woman who will wait to select and not just settle on whomever to marry. And Long could be the son of the free-wheeling Rob Lowe in St. Elmo's Fire. Both are burning the candle at both ends in their respective films.If you like St. Elmo's Fire you will most likely feel the same about He's Just Not That Into You." -"HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO YOU (2009) ** Jennifer Aniston, Ben Affleck, Jennifer Connelly, Bradley Cooper, Ginnifer Goodwin, Justin Long, Scarlett Johansson, Kevin Connolly, Drew Barrymore, Busy Philipps, Kris Kristofferson. Overstuffed ensemble romantic comedy adaptation of the popular book of the same name with several couples showcased on the verge of falling in and out of love with each other. The screenplay leaves a lot to be desired for by Abby Kohn and Marc Silverstein with some truly stilted dialogue and cringe-inducing situations that make both sexes seem inept at the subjects of love, sex and romance but the game and talented cast makes the most of what is given, particularly the clueless Goodwin and unlikely lady-killer Long as the obvious cute couple who don't recognize the obvious. Comes off like a second-hand Valentine's Day card. (Dir: Ken Kwapis)" -"Wow, that's all I can say! This should be the only film that has more nudity then any other film I have seen before! I think it should be in the Guiness book of records! I loved how the girls relationship blossomed throughout this film even though, they seem to have known each other for days or just the day they first met. The two actresses have absolutely have stunning figures like. It was funny hearing that waiter Max singing a pretty random Italian song, he has a pretty good strong voice. I was so relieved when he respected both girls privacy, it just wouldn't be right to invade their love because really the story is based on mostly them and not him. It was so amazing to hear each character speaking in a different language, I would only know my native language English unfortunately. I thought all languages had nice different words to learn off. I don't think I picked them up too easily I'm afraid haha! You guys should watch this movie, it's beautiful 💘💓💟" -"How else can I describe it? That's what it is. It's a bottle film in that it takes place in one location. The two main characters are interesting to watch(very interesting) as they talk and bang a few times. It's sensual and very philosophical. If you like art films, this's definitely for you." -"A worthy addition to the ""time out of life"" genre where the protagonists spend their final week, summer, day -or night in this case- of escape before returning to their realities.The characters are well developed, their back stories hold interest and there are moments of true dreamy escapism dotted throughout this picture set entirely in a sumptuous hotel room in Rome.However what carries this movie is the camaraderie and obvious sexual chemistry between the Alba and Nata-ssssha. The way their relationship and romance blossoms throughout the movie is never forced and there is next to nothing cringeworthy, a common affliction of ""love at first sight"" fare.What surprised me was the skill with which the director conveyed the acute feeling that the whole situation was so delicate, private and most importantly, fleeting: You could palpably feel the two squeezing the absolute most out of their time together.The sex scenes are prominent, powerful and sensual rather than titillating... If rather short ""coming to the point""..." -"Wow, that's all I can say! This should be the only film that has more nudity then any other film I have seen before! I think it should be in the Guiness book of records! I loved how the girls relationship blossomed throughout this film even though, they seem to have known each other for days or just the day they first met. The two actresses have absolutely have stunning figures like. It was funny hearing that waiter Max singing a pretty random Italian song, he has a pretty good strong voice. I was so relieved when he respected both girls privacy, it just wouldn't be right to invade their love because really the story is based on mostly them and not him. It was so amazing to hear each character speaking in a different language, I would only know my native language English unfortunately. I thought all languages had nice different words to learn off. I don't think I picked them up too easily I'm afraid haha! You guys should watch this movie, it's beautiful 💘💓💟" -"Director Ron Howard and star Tom Hanks re-team for the sequel to the highly accepted blockbuster THE DA VINCI CODE, although the book Angels and Demons was written first. Hanks stars as Robert Langdon, the most respected symbologist in the United States. He will be summoned for his knowledge in order to decipher a symbol on the skin of a murder victim. Soon Langdon once again finds himself deeply involved in an international conspiracy that is embedded in the Catholic Church. All information will lead to the naming of a new Pope.At times very sluggish; and then there are the rapid consequences that seem above your head. I found this film more hype than substance. The finale is actually the best part of the movie; suspenseful with eye-catching action. Also starring are: Ewan McGregor, Ayelet Zurer, Stellan Skarsgard, Cosimo Fusco and Nikoaj Lie Kaas." -"In the interest of full disclosure, I fell asleep during some of the more talky scenes in the beginning but I awoke enough when the first chase came on. So with that said, this probably wasn't one of the most exciting movies I've seen this year though it did get better as the movie went on. Tom Hanks is fine reprising his role he previously did in The DaVinci Code though it's Ewan McGregor as a priest that was the most compelling part here. Ayelet Zurer as the leading lady was adequate here but she wasn't bad as adequate parts go. Ron Howard provides his own compelling direction to the fore though, like I said, it didn't completely jell for me. Still, it wasn't a bad time I spent with my friend who works at the theatre seeing this film it was playing especially since, once again, I got to watch for free..." -"I read the book before I'd heard anyone talk about it. This was before the huge upheaval of praise for the late Stieg Larsson's three novels. This is a very well done film which benefits from being filmed in Sweden. It is dark and intriguing. Lisbeth Salander, the heroine, is pretty much one-of-a-kind. She has led a dark life after a horrible upbringing. She has been abused by the ""system."" She hooks up with a high profile investigative reporter who is known as a bit of a womanizer. The two find themselves in the middle of a case involving the disappearance, many years before, of the daughter of a very rich man. This leads them to uncover many unsettling facts. Lisbeth is a self taught technologist and uses this, along with her almost catlike resolve. to deal with the worst of the worst. I have not seen the second film yet, but look forward to it." -"Good, but not great. Takes forever to get going, leading to it being 150 minutes long. Once it does get going, however, it is excellent. Intriguing, edgy, intense, layered.Great, intense performance from Noomi Rapace in the lead role.Some good selective editing, or at least faster pacing, and this would have been a great movie." -Great Golfing rom com. Very accurate reflection of the book -"THE KARATE KID (2010) ***1/2 Jaden Smith, Jackie Chan, Taraji P. Henson, Wenwen Han, Rongguang Yu, Zhenewei Wang. Excellent remake to the '80s classic about a young boy (Smith in his first lead performance) finds solace and ultimately redemption in martial arts (this time in China and kung-fu) with help from an unlikely source: his apartment complex's seemingly broken down maintenance man (Chan in arguably his best work to date) who mentors him after he has been menaced by his roughneck classmates. Instilled with purpose, tenacity and heart by Christopher Murphey's stoic screenplay and sharp direction by Harald Zwart sweeps the audience's leg and wins them over with great élan. Smith's folks, Will & Jada Pinkett executive produced this winning crowd-pleaser." -"This is a review of the 2-D version. In ancient tines King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) seeks a magic bow that will help him control the Earth (yeah--it's stupid but go with it). Young hunky Theseus (Henry Cavill) decides (for no reason) to fight him for it.The plot is a shambles with HUGE holes, bad dialogue and pointless character motivation--but who sees this for a plot? This movie always gives you something to look at. The whole cast (almost all male) is pumped up and frequently shirtless. There's STRONG violence and some truly incredible CGI backgrounds. Also there's a violent battle every 10 or 20 minutes to keep you awake. There's a thunderous music score and the acting is as good as can be expected. Cavill and Dorff especially are very good. Silly but full of action and adventure." -"I have not got a clue where to start with Sleeping Beauty. I have not got a clue what i was watching but most of the time although i found it strangely compelling and interesting in a voyeuristic kind of way. Emily Browning stars as a young woman who makes her money in every way she can although seemingly not needing the money . She get a job as a nude silver service waitress for a strange group of retired man and woman and it involves a ritual of which she could never have imagined.Although this film is extremely strange and obviously has hidden meanings that are so hidden i couldn't find them , i still found this film to very watchable. Emily Browning is stunningly beautiful and i could watch her all day long and i think that's the hook i had on this film.I can't see this film appealing to many people but i wouldn't say it's a total disaster. If you like your films arty , then you will love it , but if you like structure and explanation then Sleeping Beauty mike make you nod off." -"SLEEPING BEAUTY (2011) ** Odd and uneven drama about a young coed (Emily Browning, the film's saving grace in a brave turn) attempting to make ends meet – and a reason to exist – finds herself between odd jobs as a high-priced, super confidential lingerie waitress that leads to an elite clientele involving her sedated and literally being the eponymous object. Novice filmmaker Julia Leigh seems to have airlifted the bizarre sexual sequence from Stanley Kubrick's EYES WIDE SHUT and run with it to the best of her titillation abilities which are more awkward than sensuous. While it is decently paced and offers a glimpse of humor (i.e. Browning's ongoing temp job contentiousness with her icy co-worker/boss rings far too true for the drones!) the film as a whole seems to be missing an essential item: a reason to be told." -"That is not to say this Fright Night is terrible. It is not, in fact it is watchable, it's just that it didn't ignite my fire as much as the original Fright Night(an 80s classic) did. As far as remakes go, Fright Night is somewhere in the middle, not amazing like The Thing or The Thief of Baghdad but not abominations like Psycho or The Wicker Man. Starting with what was good, it is very well made, I'd say it is somewhat slicker than the original in terms of effects and how it was edited. The music is also great and very memorable as well as successfully enhancing each scene. The direction shows moments of imagination too particularly in the impressive gory moments, and the acting from David Tennant, Imogen Poots and especially Colin Farrell was excellent. However, there are two weaknesses, Anton Yelchin who was likable enough but bland and Christopher Mintz-Plasse who was really quite awful. The story is not as well paced, and seemed drawn out to me with some awkward scenes such as towards the end with the mother, while the script has the odd witty moment but lacks bite, fun and could've done with being more creepy too. The characters aren't as well written or as incorporated either, some of the relationships also felt rushed and forced. All in all though, definitely not bad or pointless, just didn't entirely satisfy me. 6/10 Bethany Cox" -"Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) lives with his mom (Toni Collette) in a isolated suburb in the desert. He's a teen on the rise. When Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) a dorky friend from his past comes to Charley to find another friend who's gone missing, he is unimpressed. When Ed himself disappears, he starts to suspect his new neighbor Jerry Dandrige (David Farrell) is a vampire. Peter Vincent (David Tennant) is a self proclaimed vampire killer and Las Vegas magician. Amy (Imogen Poots) is Charley's girlfriend.This is a remake of the 1985 original. There are a couple of differences from the original. Some improved the movie, others not so much. Colin Farrell is revealed too soon as the vampire. Supporters would say that it was always a given. But I would say that they got to go thru the motion. Anton Yelchin's character is a little unlikeable. The whole conflict with his former friends really distracted from the main issue, and drag the story down. The first half started slow. But Colin Farrell is a pretty good vampire. What's also missing is the Rear Window aspect of the original. The 2nd half pace started to pick up. The 360 car chase is quite interesting. At least it's not the same old car chase. It's not necessarily better than the original. It's just different." -"Disappointing. I haven't read the book, so had no prior knowledge of the plot, and can't comment on how faithful the movie is to the book. However, for all its potential, the movie ends up feeling quite listless, especially in the latter half. It started well - Jane's background and upbringing was heart- wrenching, giving the movie an edge and the feeling that this was to be a rising-above-one's-background sort of story. However, from a point it stops being a human drama, and is just a romantic drama, dully told. It drifts and when the end comes, it is a relief.Cinematography and costumes are great.Performances are OK. Mia Wasikowska's performance is solid, though her accent seems to vary from scene to scene. Michael Fassbender is intense, maybe too much so. Found him a bit irritating.Surely there are better adaptations out there." -"I don't really think that people will think of Alice in Wonderland, when they see the main actress. She is too good for anyone to even think about the other movie. While I haven't read or seen a prior work of art on the subject matter, I really liked the movie. The performances are superb (even if as I understand Michael Fassbenders character was much older and uglier in the book or so I've been told) and the script does work in the environment it places itself.But it's about the subtle performances and about things that are not being said out loud. If you like those things, then you will like the movie too. Don't expect it to be grandiose or spectacular, but try to embrace the movie as it is, if you can." -"Middle-aged parents are raising their three teenage children completely quarantined from society, teaching them that the outside world is unsafe, and that only the father is strong enough to survive outside of their compound. This is an incredibly strange film. Honestly, I have no idea what the point is. I like strange movies, and I didn't really dislike this one until it started slipping into cheap pornography (it seemed fairly obvious to me that the director has a pretty unhealthy incest fetish). And it also doesn't help that the film's ending is very unsatisfactory. There are actually some other films that this reminds me of, most notably M. Night Shyamalan's The Village, which, while far from perfect, at least had some context and a far more intriguing story. Dogtooth is pretty much just people acting odd for 93 minutes." -"Wow. I mean, I actually didn't enjoy this at all throughout much of its running time, yet I couldn't look away. Very hard film to stomach, it's some sort of horror film and it packs an impact, while at other times it's just dull and self-indulgent. Still, such an interesting film. I don't think it's great, it could've been though, had it been executed a bit different (although I really don't know how) but it's definitely worth it. The performances are definitely worth it, and some of the imagery unlikely to be forgotten by me. Yeah, many people will hate this (and I'm shocked it was nominated for the Oscar and even chosen by its country as its submission)." -"An incredibly bizarre, peculiar yet oddly fascinating story of a family that goes to extreme lengths to keep their kids ignorant of the world outside their home well into their adulthood, Dogtooth takes its interesting premise and goes full whacky with it. A surreal, madcap nightmare, it is original, it is intriguing, and it is just as frustrating.Co-written & directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, his breakthrough feature is a wicked mix of contrasting elements. It is distant yet alluring, meandering yet well-aware of where it's headed, straightforward yet evasive, farcical yet disturbing, and even though it unfolds like an absurdist comedy, there's an undercurrent of horror that keeps things tense.Its otherworldly scenario is what piques our interest in the first place while the search for the why of it all is what keeps us invested in the journey for the most part. Actors play their respective roles in ways that further amps the film's oddity. Things do take a thrilling turn when the family's domestic balance is disturbed at last but the ending is still heartbreaking.Overall, Dogtooth is a story of subjugation, power & deceit that's both impressive & underwhelming. A commentary of sorts on destructive homeschooling & über-controlling parents, this Greek tragedy is a crazy, weird & creepy ride that isn't for everyone but despite the dry, elusive & uncanny treatment, it somehow manages to be a singular & stimulating cinematic experience." -"about refuge and empty world. about protection, fear and people as shadows. about evil as perfect good. about lies as way to be. slices from Ionesco as furniture feelings for a family. a tyrant-father, a wife out of others and three teenagers - material for a bizarre experiment. captivity in skin of strange normality. words out of ordinaries senses. and seeds of tragedy. for sensitize every instrument is perfect. dark humor, sexual act, incest, violence, crumbs of Salo or Bunuel. the result - gray and bitter. fall of refuge and myth as sacrifice. love as mutant plant and truth as ash of fake Paradise. a satire. or just a parable in Swift style. a mirror for a sad society full of himself and protected by a kind of autism. a movie like a strange thing on beach - object of curiosity, repulsion, fascination and fear. each part of it is familiar but the entire object is mystery. a image out of any mask. sort of Greek tragedy in very new clothes." -"In Colorado, the lonely Milton (Nicolas Cage) hunts down a gang of worshipers of a satanic cult trying to find where their leader Jonah King (Billy Burke) is. King has killed Milton's daughter and abducted her baby to sacrifice him at midnight of a full moon in Stillwater and Milton wants to rescue his granddaughter. Milton reaches Oklahoma and finds that Stillwater is a deactivated prison in Louisiana. Then he helps the waitress Piper (Amber Heard) first with her damaged car and then he protects her against her brutal boyfriend. In return, she gives a ride to him to Louisianna. Soon they discover that a mysterious stranger called The Accountant (William Fichtner) is chasing them. What is the secret of Milton and The Accountant? ""Drive Angry"" is a brainless, but also a highly entertaining movie with the trash story of a man that escapes from hell to save his granddaughter and is hunted by the reaper. There is non-stop action and havoc, with car chases; shootings; and the hot Amber Heard. The cast has Nicolas Cage, William Fichtner in a parody of the role of Alex Mahone in ""Prison Break"" and David Morse. My suggestion is to shutdown your brain and to enjoy this funny movie. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): ""Fúria Sobre Rodas"" (""Rage over Wheels"")Note: On 19 June 2015, I saw this movie again." -"Raunchy comedy. Elizabeth Halsey(Cameron Diaz)is a reluctant middle school teacher, who gets dumped by her wealthy boyfriend. The blatant gold digger now must rely on teaching middle school. Miss Halsey is foul mouthed and a definite looker; and she desperately wants to save money for breast-implant surgery(as if she really needs it). Miss Squirrel(Lucy Punch)is a two-faced co-teacher and the complete opposite of Elizabeth. Russell Gettis(Jason Segel)is a gym teacher that to Miss Halsey is...well, just a gym teacher. When Scott Delacorte(Justin Timberlake)arrives as the new substitute teacher and is obviously well healed, the bad teacher Elizabeth tries to get close to his wallet. Miss Halsey tries to earn a big bonus by having her class score the highest on the Illinois state exam. She gets partially clad to help her class with the annual car wash in hopes of pocketing some more cash for her expensive breast implants. Miss Squirrel doesn't like the fact that the hot Elizabeth is moving in on her boyfriend...the handsome Delacorte. She starts a campaign to get the bad teacher fired. Some big laughs, most induced by raw language. Diaz is hilarious and so damn easy to watch. This is one movie I don't recall seeing her in what seems her obligatory pantie prance scene. Although the car wash sequence will suffice. Also in the cast: Phyllis Smith, John Michael Higgins, Jillian Armenante and Katherine Newton." -"Cameron Diaz plays an extremely self-centered individual who is looking for a rich man to marry after her fiancee dumped her because she was a gold digger. (She claims she caught him with the dog and peanut butter.) Teaching junior high gets in her way as she ""needs"" augmentations to be able to compete with all those Barbie Dolls out there. She uses movies to babysit her class. The gym teacher is interested in Cameron (she don't date gym teachers). Cameron in turn has her eyes on a nerdy substitute teacher (Justin Timberlake) whose family comes from money. He however likes Amy Squirrel.Meanwhile in class there is a student who could be a young self centered Diaz who badgers a boy who shows her interest, sort of a parallel to her ""miserable"" life. Lucy Punch plays Amy Squirrel (as a red head) an overly perky teacher who becomes Diaz's school nemesis. Diaz helps the junior high car wash using moves she learned watching Paris Hilton commercials, pocketing some of the money for her ""t#t jar.""The movie changes gears when Cameron finds out the teacher whose class gets the best test scores gets a bonus. The outrageous practices of Diaz both as an apathetic and serious teacher is the core of the movie.F-bomb, nudity(not Diaz or Punch), crude sexual humor, Timberlake dry humping Diaz, bad music, worse poetry, and Lincoln rolling over in his grave." -"Diaz plays the titular character who has just been dumped by her rich boyfriend and decides the only way to attract another rich man is to get a boob job, so she lies and cheats her way through teaching in order to get the bonus....The film just doesn't work. No matter how much effort the cast put in to the film, the script is dire and the story is boring.It's good to see Diaz play off character and to see Timberlake as a nerd, but the novelty soon wears off and we are left with the getting high jokes and Pop culture references to get a cheap laugh.Even though her accent isn't the best, Punch is the best thing about this movie, and is the only one on screen who appears to have a little bit of life in her eyes.From the title, i was expecting something along the lines of Bad Santa, but the title to this should have been 'I'm Cameron, look at me, I can play cheap, and i've brought my cool ex along to play a nerd!!' I'd rather watch one of the films she was showing than sit through this again.Turgid stuff, no wonder Segel looks embarrassed." -"This film is about a bad teacher who is primarily focused on finding a rich husband. Before that, she has to find enough money for breast enhancement.As the title suggests, this film is all about the bad teacher. She is selfish, self-centred and manipulative. Somehow, Cameron Diaz manages to make this unlikable character funny and likable. Whatever Miss Halsey does is just full of laughs, sometimes even outrageously funny. The best thing is that there is no formula to be adhered to, so ""Bad Teacher"" keeps on surprising viewers with great jokes and plot developments. And Justin Timberlake's weirdo character is funny as well. I really enjoyed ""Bad Teacher""." -"Clay (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) leads Jensen (Chris Evans), Roque (Idris Elba), Pooch (Columbus Short) and Cougar (Óscar Jaenada) in a special operations in Bolivia. They try to stop the strike when they see the cartel using kids as mules. They try to evacuate the kids on their helicopter. However, they are doublecrossed and their helicopter gets shoot down thinking the team is on it. In the ensuing bad press, the government declares them deceased and deny any knowledge of their operation. Agent Aisha (Zoe Saldana) tracks down the team for a mission to stop Max (Jason Patric) who is trying to sell a high tech weapon to the highest bidder.The movie doesn't waste any time on exposition or introducing the characters. The plot is simplistic. The villain is a cartoon. It doesn't build much upon it comic book identity. That's both its weakest and its strength. The actors are solid although the team probably needs one comedian. The sardonic jokes are simple fun. It needs a more interesting script and some crazier action. The action is probably prohibited by the lower range budget." -"Great crime drama with an excellent Matthew McConaughey portraying a suave lawyer who works out of his car and demands great fees to get the desired results for the defendants.Marisa Tomei's role as his wife is greatly under-stated here. Her part needed to a lot more developed. William H. Macy appears as Matt's investigator, but he soon takes a bullet ending his role in the film.What made the film so good were the many twists and plenty of irony here. While defending a client, Matt discovers his guilt in another crime and the guy comes from a rich family with mother Frances Fisher providing plenty of surprises by film's end.Ethics is a great subject and plot in this very interesting film." -"Movies based on novels are usually different and can be difficult in keeping up with the source material. Not having read about the original novel or knowing anything about the material, opinion is based upon the film solely. One Day is quite similar to the Notebook in some sense but overall the film does do a good job at appealing to its demographic. The acting is decent but overall, as with many romantic comedies. Anne Hathway is likable as usually but Jim Sturgess character appears to be less (although he becomes better as the film passes). One Day is quite predictable at certain points. The completely ending and final scenes were most so different than expecting and not predictable though he story as a whole.One Day also somewhat reminded of (500) Days of Summer but that film as a whole was more complete in almost every aspect, as likable characters, plot, humor and overall engagement. Overall, One Day is just somewhat depressing in the end and not in a touching way." -"""If we can't talk to each other then what is the point of us?"" While their friends are having fun and wind up leaving them alone Emma (Hathaway) and Dexter (Sturgis) begin a friendship that grows over time. This movie follows the two on the date of July 15th from 1978 to 2011. Each year on that day the meet each other and catch up with each other. This is a definite ""chick-flick"" type movie but I did actually enjoy this. The movie starts off and grabs you and keeps you interested for the entire time, even though it tends to drag quite a bit in the the middle. The last half hour though makes you glad that you continued to watch and made it till the end. The movie, while being good has the type of ending that sticks with you and makes you think long after it's over. This movie has the feel of ""Atonement"" so if you enjoy movies like that then this will be one for you. Overall, a definite chick flick that some guys may like, or at least I think so. I also may be the only one. I give it a B+.*Also try - Last Night & Atonement" -"romanticism. humor. slices of drama. meetings. and the same July 15Emma and Dexter. the seed of graduation and the passing years. and the inspired performance of Jim Sturgess in a film who seams ignore the characters. because One Day is only chronicle of a relation. the characters are only silhouettes who the public must imagine. the story is nice and seductive and emotional but not always coherent. or credible. something missing. and it is not exactly a small detail. because on the screen is presented a growing up relation . but the subject is far to be original and the end reminds too many similar. I admit, I have not read the book. and this does to supposed that the film is just a part of the industry around a popular literary success.but it is not a sin. because it is a nice story of a relation, better then many contemporary romantic films." -"When Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) is informed that his beloved Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) was assassinated, he returns to Los Angeles to find the murderer. Meanwhile, his former friend and FBI agent Brian Conner (Paul Walker) is assigned to capture the mysterious drug lord Braga that is looking for replacement drivers, working undercover as his courier, driving from Mexico to USA through the desert. Dom discovers that Letty was working as a courier for Braga when she was killed and he decides to join his gang to find the killer. Their lives entwine substantiating their friendship and Brian dates Mia Toretto (Jordana Brewster) again. But they need to find the true identity of Braga. ""Fast & Furious"" is a great adventure and an excellent entertainment as good as the first movie of this franchise. The chemistry between Paul Walker and Vin Diesel is amazing performing very likable characters. The talented Jordana Brewster is for me one of the most (if not the most) gorgeous actresses of her generation and I look forward to see her works. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): ""Velozes e Furiosos 4"" (""Fast and Furious 4"")" -"When street-racer Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) is murdered by a member of the Braga drug cartel, Dom Toretto (Vin Diesel) teams up with FBI agent Brian O'Conner (Paul Walker) to bring those responsible to justice.Fast & Furious, the inventively titled fourth film in the popular Fast and Furious franchise, delivers more pedal to the metal, full-throttle, high-octane thrills and spills. But where the series was originally little more than 'car-porn' geared towards young petrol-heads and custom car fans, this entry takes a slightly different route, the action more accessible to those who, like me, drive a very sensible family hatchback with zero street cred and nothing under the hood, but who still enjoy slick, undemanding popcorn blockbuster fun.With a plot that offers broader appeal, Vin Diesel back in the driving seat, accompanied by Walker, Rodriguez, and Jordana Brewster as his sexy younger sister, and an early role for Gal 'Wonder Woman' Gadot, part four is the most enjoyable Fast & Furious so far." -"Least of the series has the original stars returning to the series to solve the murder of a mutual friend. Paul Walker turning a blind eye to the wanted Vin Diesel hopes to not only track down said killer but also get in good graces with his boss who seem to think he may have made a mistake taking him back.(I won't say more since to do so would reveal too many spoilers and several people I know were upset that reviews gave away too much-which I don't think is really possible) This is my least favorite of all of the films. Sure the races/chases/action are pretty good in an unreal Hollywood sort of way, but the rest of it just sort of lays there. Its purely by the numbers and fill in the blanks and I'm guessing that anyone who sees this will be way ahead of our stars. Me,I was bored and wondering why I bothered. Its not bad, its just dull. I felt no excitement and wondered why I bothered to run out on a Saturday night to see it. I should have waited for cable." -"Remake of the inexplicably successful 2008 Swedish horror film ""Let the Right One In"". Owen is a 12 year old boy who is mercilessly bullied by male classmates and has no friends. Mysterious 12 year old Abby moves next door to him. Owen is interested in her but he says they can never be friends at all. It seems she's a vampire whose father kills people and drains their blood to feed her. Despite herself Abby starts falling for Owen and he falls for her...but doesn't know she's a vampire.Part horror film, part DARK coming of age story. I'm no great fan of the original. I find it boring, badly acted, painfully slow and stupid. This one is just a little better. It's still far too slow and the bullying scenes are more than a little disturbing but I kept watching. It's better-acted, some of the attack scenes are vicious and frightening and it has the proper depressing mood. In some ways it's virtually a shot by shot redo of the original but makes the bullying angle more explicit. So I like it a little more than the original but it's still not a great, let alone good, horror film." -"I haven't seen the Scandinavian original of which this is a Hollywood remake, so I am judging this entirely on its own merits.Loner Owen is bullied at school, so he is pleased to meet a soulmate in new neighbour Abby. When savage murders start taking place in the neighbourhood, we know it's vampire Abby feeding, but Owen is a bit slow on the uptake. Meanwhile, bullying continues, Owen's parents are getting a divorce, the police are searching for the murderer, Abby's Dad goes off the rails....This film is a bit of a mess. It's bitty, leisurely when it should get a move on, rapid fire when it should be taking a bit more time, far too happy to leave unexplained things which need explaining, explicit when it should be a little more circumspect, and not explicit enough when the audience wants it to be.But it has a weird and unusual atmosphere of its own, a genuine and touching relationship at its heart, and another excellent performance from Chloe (Kick-Ass) Moretz, all of which are good reasons to go and catch it." -"Not a bad movie! I like the movie. My wife's pick; I noticed the movie had a bigger women audience then men. I found the men in the audience did not mind this film. The protagonist in the film, plays a person who tells the Ugly truth about dating. In the end, he was right. The movie's message was about if one has a check list for the perfect mate, and he or she has to fit his or her mode then the relationship will not last; I see this thesis as the Ugly truth about love. The movie had a few funny parts, and a few Amerian Pie style humor in it. In the end, I would give The Ugly Truth a six out of ten. I think my wife would give the movie eight out of ten. Not a bad movie, but a rental." -"Not a bad movie! I like the movie. My wife's pick; I noticed the movie had a bigger women audience then men. I found the men in the audience did not mind this film. The protagonist in the film, plays a person who tells the Ugly truth about dating. In the end, he was right. The movie's message was about if one has a check list for the perfect mate, and he or she has to fit his or her mode then the relationship will not last; I see this thesis as the Ugly truth about love. The movie had a few funny parts, and a few Amerian Pie style humor in it. In the end, I would give The Ugly Truth a six out of ten. I think my wife would give the movie eight out of ten. Not a bad movie, but a rental." -"PLOT SPOILERSIt was an excellent movie on all levels. There were some scientific stuff going on that was not brought out. Clones are not as good as the originals. They tend to have defects and die young. It is not a perfected science.In this movie we see some of the aspects incorporated but never stated: testing of the clone when revived and disposal after 3 years. Today we are speculating that He3 mining on the moon could produce fusion energy in the future. I believe that was what the mining operation was doing, although not much was stated. It has several similarities to 2001, most have been listed. The most important one was that this was not an unreasonable science fiction with a long list of impossibilities, but rather a work which keeps within the realm of science fact, the way Arthur would have wanted it.The idea that they made the computer similar to HAL 9000 is not unreasonable. In fact I fully expect any NASA computer with the capabilities of the HAL 9000 to be named the same after the fictional work. The only thing I would have changed in the movie would be to show a glimpse of Sam viewing 2001 while on the space station." -"PLOT SPOILERSIt was an excellent movie on all levels. There were some scientific stuff going on that was not brought out. Clones are not as good as the originals. They tend to have defects and die young. It is not a perfected science.In this movie we see some of the aspects incorporated but never stated: testing of the clone when revived and disposal after 3 years. Today we are speculating that He3 mining on the moon could produce fusion energy in the future. I believe that was what the mining operation was doing, although not much was stated. It has several similarities to 2001, most have been listed. The most important one was that this was not an unreasonable science fiction with a long list of impossibilities, but rather a work which keeps within the realm of science fact, the way Arthur would have wanted it.The idea that they made the computer similar to HAL 9000 is not unreasonable. In fact I fully expect any NASA computer with the capabilities of the HAL 9000 to be named the same after the fictional work. The only thing I would have changed in the movie would be to show a glimpse of Sam viewing 2001 while on the space station." -"There are so many nods to great sci-fi movies here, that I understand if some might feel cheated. But I hope that you don't feel this way about this movie. It has a great (weird) little story at it's basis, that will keep you guessing, where it is heading next (especially if you haven't read anything about the plot before you go ahead and watch it). Which is a really rewarding experience! When I first heard about the director trying to push his lead actor into the Oscar run, saying his performance got overlooked, I was surprised at how persistent he was. Now that I have watched it, I have to admit, that he is right and that he did deserve to get a nod (at least). He had to work quite a few things out, while he was making the movies. Like the frame of mind and other stuff.It really is funny, dramatic and suspenseful and pulls it off, without any big problems. Kudos to the script, the director and our main actor. If you like Sci-Fi, you have to watch this!" -"Movies like this, ones that have open seams, are made for me.This happens to me a lot. This is a story with no intended ambiguities. A solitary man on the moon discovers he is an expendable clone, discovering then conspiring with one of his siblings. There is some plotting and a successful escape. We discover things slowly as our hero does, knowing only what he does. It is not complicated.But. But, the thing starts with dreams, and visions brought on by a three year weary solitude. There is a companion supercomputer voiced by (this time the aptly named) Kevin Spacey. We have some hints that we can enter ""his"" mind as well. There are three solid plot seams where we could be entering an imagined or artificial world of the clone's and two seams where we might similarly be entering the computer's. None of these contradict, and we could easily be watching a ping pong match (one is shown) where alternative universes driven by urges are buffeted by different consciousnesses. I do believe that strong stories have these seams, even though the writer expects few people to nuzzle into them. That some do, that I do, possibly adds to the richness for the average viewer, knowing that there is danger outside of the station.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching." -"Written by Melissa Rosenberg and directed by David Slade, ""The Twilight Saga: Eclipse"" is the third installment in the highly popular vampire-cum-werewolf teenage angst-fest based on the novels by Stephanie Meyer.Although Bella's tiresome romantic predicament – should she choose the vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) or the werewolf Jacob (Taylor Lautner)? – has been pretty much played out by this time (it's what ruined the second film, ""New Moon""), the script here does provide an intriguing internal conflict for the young woman (Kristen Stewart) as she debates the pros and cons of becoming a vampire herself after high school graduation. She has to decide whether what she'll be gaining from such a move – eternal youth, a fulfilling life with Edward - outweighs what she'll be giving up – her father and mother, Jacob's friendship, and any hope of ever having a family of her own. The movie also ramps up the drama a bit when a band of out-of-control ""newborn"" vampires start wreaking havoc across the Pacific Northwest, leading the more mature vampires and the werewolves – bitter, sworn enemies of one another – to join forces in defeating them.These ""Twilight"" films lack the cutting-edge wit and irony one finds in a series like ""True Blood,"" as Meyer opts for romantic sappiness over postmodern sophistication every step of the way. And the over-earnest and self-important tone leads to some intense silliness along the way. Still they do have their moments." -"Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and trusted friend Dr Watson (Jude Law) take on their arch-nemesis Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) with the help of Holmes' older brother Mycroft Holmes (Stephen Fry) and a gypsy named Simza (Noomi Rapace).Director Guy Ritchie creates this sequel to his reboot franchise. This time around Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) has little screen time, but she does drive the storyline. It is too bad she's not there because the chemistry between Irene and Sherlock jumps off the screen. The film feels the absence terribly. Simza is no replacement. I am getting a little tired of the speed up/slo-mo FX action style. It doesn't make the action any more dramatic. It just feels like Guy playing around and showing off. Other than that, it's good watchable grand action adventure." -"I didn't like the first SHERLOCK HOLMES film very much at all, so I had little hope for this sequel. Unfortunately, it's even worse than the original, moving further away from the source material in a bid to deliver big bucks, action packed excitement. Downey Jr. plays Holmes as a superhero type in a Victorian setting, utilising his physical prowess and mental skills in a bid to bring down some typically shadowy villains.First of all, for an action film, the action is very poor. A GAME OF SHADOWS was made during a trend for ultra slow motion in cinema, and the slow motion sequences are ridiculous. I don't know if they're meant to be edge of the seat or exciting, but despite the cutting edge technology they look very fake and the CGI augmentation is all too obvious.Downey Jr.'s acting here is rather pitiful and his Holmes is required to cross dress and do other stuff that's about as far away from the spirit of the literary Holmes as is possible. Jude Law and Jared Harris work hard in support, but Noomi Rapace's fortune teller is out of place and Rachel McAdams remains awful. The worst thing about all this though is the nonsensical script, which turns realistic detective fiction into teen-friendly grandiose fantasy that remains frequently incomprehensible." -"Kunis and Timberlake actually have good chemistry which gives this ""anti"" romcom a bit of charm. The storyline is basic and the premise a bit cliché. However, the characters are fun and the acting is decent. Keep expectations low and enjoy a few laughs." -"Friends with Benefits is a romantic comedy starring Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis. The film features a supporting cast which includes Patricia Clarkson, Jenna Elfman, Bryan Greenberg, Nolan Gould, Richard Jenkins and Woody Harrelson. The screenplay revolves around Jamie and Dylan, who meet in New York City and naively believe adding sex to their friendship will not lead to complications. Over time they begin to develop deep mutual feelings for each other, only to deny it each time they are together.They soon discover however that getting physical really does always lead to complications.It was directed by Will Gluck.For a romantic comedy to be fun and entertaining,it must have a great love story and a wonderful humor.Glad to say that the movie has both.Although it uses many rehashed elements of romantic comedies,the leads - Timberlake and Kunis - have wonderful chemistry and one would really care for their relationship and cheer for them to discover the power of love.Also,the humor in the movie is off the charts especially when the movie makes fun of other romcom movies and this implausible story made to be believable with its smart dialogues.Watch it to better appreciate the movie's benefits." -"FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS is a bit of a twist on the usual run of romantic comedies; hook-ups are for sexual gratification only with no emotional strings attached -unless.... And that is where this film starts out, with a lot of promise. The story is by Harley Peyton with assistance from Keith Merryman and David A. Newman who with director Will Gluck adapted the story for the screenplay. Sound like a lot of cooks to spoil the broth? Well, in part it probably is as there are many little subplots here that bump into each other.Jamie Rellis (Mila Kunis) is a New York head-hunter trying to sign Los Angeles-based Dylan Harper (Justin Timberlake) for her client. When he takes the job and makes the move, they quickly become friends. Their friendship turns into a friendship with benefits, but with Jamie's emotionally damaged past and Dylan's history of being emotionally unavailable, they have to try to not fall for each other the way Hollywood romantic comedies dictate. Add to this fairly substantial idea the gay character Tommy Bollinger (Woody Harelson in a fine little cameo) and Patricia Clarkson as Jamie's galavanting mother and the mix becomes funny. Despite a rather intrusive copout ending there is PLENTY of eye candy from Timberlake and Kunis and lots of bed romping. It's goofy but entertaining and it does show that Justin Timberlake is becoming a fine leading man on screen. Grady Harp" -"While the movie is aware of the clichés that are thrown into the mix when making (or watching) a romantic comedy and they also play with them at the beginning (with a kind of harsh comment concerning a Miss Heigl), it does fall back on the same ""mistakes"" it criticizes. And while it does so with a wink (and a great ""number"" towards the end, which in itself is a great payoff), it does feel a bit like a cheat. The movie should have stuck to its guns.But with Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake it has a great cast, that almost make you forget about those little mishaps. Even a sub-story with Richard Jenkins though, feels a bit forced. There are quite a few funny moments and there is no doubt where this will lead, but it could have been a real good stab at romantic comedies. As it is, it's just another one of them ..." -"I have tried to watch Lars von Trier movies on and of for years and the only one I liked was Epidemic. Melancholia, I am afraid to say, was a beautiful movie, but I couldn't, no matter how much I tried, to like it. It starts with a wedding between Kirsten Dunst and Alexander Skarsgaard where just about everybody is a jerk. The biggest asshole there, though, is the bride! She is depressed and moping no matter what other people are trying to do to cheer her up. It basically looks like that 1998 Danish film Festen so much, that I thought it was also by Trier until I checked, and it is not.There is also a rogue planet that is supposed to pass near the Earth and not hit. People has called it Melancholia for some reason. It does provide some beautiful imagery, but not many. Also Kirsten is naked in a couple of scenes. But that's about it. The rest is a slow, excruciating wedding and then an even slower bit where the bride is depressed together with her sister.Bottom line: Lars von Trier fans will probably enjoy it, the other will just rant in frustration afterwards." -"Director/writer Lars von Trier gives us a beautifully filmed drama that seems to lumber at some points; although more than not...scenery and special effects are magnificent. If you are already depressed during the terrific slow-motion intro...you may be in a darker mood as the closing credits roll. A straight forward story about opulent people at a sumptuous party celebrating the marriage of Justine(Kirstin Dunst)and Michael(Alexander Skarsgard)at the same time a blue planet called Melancholia is heading directly toward Earth. Justine's sister Claire(Charlotte Gainsbourg)and brother-in-law John(Keifer Sutherland)are paying for the extravagant wedding, and despite Claire's efforts, the whole affair slowly unravels. Tensions mount between the two families and Claire tries to keep everyone in-line, as the bride ignores the timing schedule meticulously planned out. The marriage itself seems to be a sham from the beginning. The guests, including the disappointed bride's groom, have finally left the mansion leaving the two sisters trying to understand the tension in their relationship. John keeps his eyes on Melancholia as it keeps getting closer and closer to Earth. This actually is a beautiful movie, albeit with a dark mood and the fear of impending disaster. Expect graphic nudity and sexual content. Also in the cast: John Hurt, Charlotte Rampling, Deborah Fronko and James Cagnard." -"Justine is getting married, even though she doesn't seem that interested in it. Her sister Claire tries desperately to keep up appearances in the large dysfunctional family. This is about the relationship between them, and the possible impending doom threatened by another planet approaching Earth... it may hit us, it may not. I have not watched that many Lars von Trier films, but I expect them to be visually and thematically interesting. And going by that, this is fine. It is attractive, and without being gratuitous. However, it does not seem to have that much to say, or a terribly compelling manner of communicating it. The acting is great, from all other than the child(who, to make matters worse, is clearly there to deliver exposition), no surprise given that we get Stellan Skarsgaard, John Hurt, Kiefer Sutherland and Udo Kier(who has a pretty funny running gag that I won't give away, in his role as the wedding planner). The psychology seems pretty realistic, and we understand how these people are as a unit without it being spelled out. There is strong sexuality and frontal nudity in this. I recommend this to fans of artistic cinema, as long as one doesn't go in thinking it will be on the level of Dogville or Manderlay. 7/10" -"Supercops Samuel L Jackson and Dwayne Johnson start this movie off with an outrageous sequence typical of bombastic action thrillers. Events soon conspire to throw the improbable partnership of deskbound accountant cop Will Ferrell and disgraced would-be action cop Mark Wahlberg into the limelight, however, as they pursue an unlikely investigation in the fact of mishaps and pressure to drop it.This film generated a lot of laughter throughout its length. I'm not a big Ferrell fan, but his character was amiable and often funny. Bigger laughs came from Wahlberg, however, who showed considerable comic chops deadpanning to Ferrell's broader character. And Eva Mendes as Ferrell's wife was both funny and sexy. Jackson and Johnson clearly enjoyed sending themselves up. Michael Keaton did the best he could with a part which was not written helpfully, and poor old Steve Coogan was swimming against the tide a bit.But overall this was an enjoyable movie." -This opened in London in a ho-hum week and whilst the Press were mostly negative virtually all the reviews stressed that the first half hour was hilarious but one a plot of sorts kicked in it tended to go downhill. On the strength of that I decided to check it out. I didn't find anything all that excruciatingly funny in the first half hour or indeed at any point but it was a fairly painless way to kill a couple of hours. One think the Press did get right: Steve Coogan was pathetic and as unfunny as he continually strives to be. Much - possibly too much - is made of Ferrell's nerd proving to be a babe magnet and apart from that the plot is pretty much formulaic. -"This film is about two incompetent policemen who tries to do everything right, but in the wrong way.""The Other Guys"" is such a funny movie! This is a surprise to me as I normally do not enjoy Will Ferrell's humour, but this time. the sense of humour is just right. It requires no crude toilet humour, just two cops doing the most outrageous things. The stunts are great, and the action is believably spectacular. It is actually better than many action films out there! The big budget shows in form of blowing up random buildings and smashing numerous cars in cool ways, which I really enjoyed. The ending credits of the film make a statement against the unscrupulous greed of Wall Street firms, which is satisfying to watch. I enjoyed ""The Other Guys"" a lot!" -"Dark story of Andy going to college and the toys in danger of being thrown out or given away.I won't go into the details of the plot because odds are you already know it. Basically all thats left is for me to take a stand on the small side of people who don't like the film. Beautifully animated with several nice set pieces, the film emotionally and character wise didn't work for me. The film, for what ever reason just seems terribly wrong. Its not the dark tone of the film that bothers me, except perhaps that the people at Pixar seem intent on making this black and bittersweet. I know part of th problem is that several of the characters, especially Woody, seem to have been shipped in from another film. How did Woody end up so psycho? I don't know.I don't see the point of ripping the film apart since odds are you're going to love this. Personally I think this is probably Pixars biggest mistake, but then again thats just my opinion." -"Better than the second one, this one returns many more toys in this movie. The gang is mistakenly thrown out as trash when Andy is about to go to college. The toys escape just in time and decide to go to be donated to the daycare. It becomes clear that there is a dictatorship when the new toys are tricked into the more rambunctious toddlers room. Meanwhile Woody gets out of the daycare only to be taken by another kid.There are two things I love about this installment of the franchise. First is the fact that there are more toys, and the whole gang is around. The interactions and the comradery that was a little thin in the second installment. All of it is back. And Barbie gets Ken to go along with her.Second is the great escape concept. It really works for these toys. The danger has never been more compelling. The victory has never been more sweet. It's a great idea for the story." -"I recommend no one watches the trailer before they see this movie. Cause it just ruins the movie by giving away a twist, not that this movie is good or anything. But it at least makes the first half of this movie bearable. The thing is the movie just isn't well directed and seems like a below average straight to DVD movie. The little girl played by Jodelle Ferland is once again playing the creepy girl like a lot of the stuff she is in. This feels more like a TV movie than a legit movie. Not saying TV movies are always bad or anything like that. It's sort of slow and a bit dry, it can be a bit creepy but not necessarily scary. When it comes down to it, it seemed longer than it should be and just seem to drag a bit, by making the movie tighter it would have been better. Although this movie is only slightly above 1 and 30 minutes it seemed longer. The plot and direction just doesn't make much sense especially when it comes to the characters. The direction of this movie just wasn't thrilling or entertaining, it has a somewhat interesting premise but the execution wasn't well done. Almost everything in this is flat out predictable and gets even worse as it progresses. The ending was also a bit disappointing.3.9/10" -"This is one of the new horror films building on ""The Omen"" revival theme. Compared to ""Orphan"" it isn't as good. That was neater and more reality based and logical. But it isn't that bad either. I don't regret watching it but it leaves one feeling a bit let down at the end.This is quite engrossing in the beginning during the social worker investigation part.Acting is quite good. Renee is good at acting scared and sad. Bradley doesn't have enough of a role. Ian McShane looks scary for the wrong reason - his face is scary. Young actress Jodelle is quite good.The end is a bit formula. And it's a bit unexplained how she got out of the house. Or how Renee will explain the car crash." -"I recommend no one watches the trailer before they see this movie. Cause it just ruins the movie by giving away a twist, not that this movie is good or anything. But it at least makes the first half of this movie bearable. The thing is the movie just isn't well directed and seems like a below average straight to DVD movie. The little girl played by Jodelle Ferland is once again playing the creepy girl like a lot of the stuff she is in. This feels more like a TV movie than a legit movie. Not saying TV movies are always bad or anything like that. It's sort of slow and a bit dry, it can be a bit creepy but not necessarily scary. When it comes down to it, it seemed longer than it should be and just seem to drag a bit, by making the movie tighter it would have been better. Although this movie is only slightly above 1 and 30 minutes it seemed longer. The plot and direction just doesn't make much sense especially when it comes to the characters. The direction of this movie just wasn't thrilling or entertaining, it has a somewhat interesting premise but the execution wasn't well done. Almost everything in this is flat out predictable and gets even worse as it progresses. The ending was also a bit disappointing.3.9/10" -"I recommend no one watches the trailer before they see this movie. Cause it just ruins the movie by giving away a twist, not that this movie is good or anything. But it at least makes the first half of this movie bearable. The thing is the movie just isn't well directed and seems like a below average straight to DVD movie. The little girl played by Jodelle Ferland is once again playing the creepy girl like a lot of the stuff she is in. This feels more like a TV movie than a legit movie. Not saying TV movies are always bad or anything like that. It's sort of slow and a bit dry, it can be a bit creepy but not necessarily scary. When it comes down to it, it seemed longer than it should be and just seem to drag a bit, by making the movie tighter it would have been better. Although this movie is only slightly above 1 and 30 minutes it seemed longer. The plot and direction just doesn't make much sense especially when it comes to the characters. The direction of this movie just wasn't thrilling or entertaining, it has a somewhat interesting premise but the execution wasn't well done. Almost everything in this is flat out predictable and gets even worse as it progresses. The ending was also a bit disappointing.3.9/10" -"Although I haven't really been much into gangster movies, this one proved to be quite interesting. But of course, with an impressive list of actors like this, it would be odd if it turned out anything less but impressive.The story was quite compelling, and you were never left boring. There was always something happening, from action such as gun fights to the more delicate matter of character building and growth. The characters in the movie are given adequate time to grow and unfold on the screen.As for the list of actors and actresses, well nothing much need to be said here, obviously. Everyone here were doing one fine job, and lots of good acting going on.The ending was nice as well, though you would already know how it ends as you sit down and start the movie. But still, that doesn't weigh against the movie in any way.This movie is well worthy of a place up there with the ""Godfather"" movies. Definitely a movie that you should watch." -"Although I haven't really been much into gangster movies, this one proved to be quite interesting. But of course, with an impressive list of actors like this, it would be odd if it turned out anything less but impressive.The story was quite compelling, and you were never left boring. There was always something happening, from action such as gun fights to the more delicate matter of character building and growth. The characters in the movie are given adequate time to grow and unfold on the screen.As for the list of actors and actresses, well nothing much need to be said here, obviously. Everyone here were doing one fine job, and lots of good acting going on.The ending was nice as well, though you would already know how it ends as you sit down and start the movie. But still, that doesn't weigh against the movie in any way.This movie is well worthy of a place up there with the ""Godfather"" movies. Definitely a movie that you should watch." -"Although I haven't really been much into gangster movies, this one proved to be quite interesting. But of course, with an impressive list of actors like this, it would be odd if it turned out anything less but impressive.The story was quite compelling, and you were never left boring. There was always something happening, from action such as gun fights to the more delicate matter of character building and growth. The characters in the movie are given adequate time to grow and unfold on the screen.As for the list of actors and actresses, well nothing much need to be said here, obviously. Everyone here were doing one fine job, and lots of good acting going on.The ending was nice as well, though you would already know how it ends as you sit down and start the movie. But still, that doesn't weigh against the movie in any way.This movie is well worthy of a place up there with the ""Godfather"" movies. Definitely a movie that you should watch." -"An absolute Grade A wacky, witty and weird animated feature directed by Gore Verbinski. And it doesn't hurt to have Johnny Depp voicing the lead character. A nameless pet chameleon(Depp) is jettisoned from a family's car on vacation and lands in the middle of a desert. He narrowly avoids being buzzard food when he is approached by another four legged creature walking upright, Beans(Isla Fischer). She eventually guides him to a desert town called Dirt. The thirsty stranger takes on the name Rango and goes from meek and mild to cocky and grandiose accepting the job of sheriff that carries the task of solving the mystery of the town's missing water supply.The animation is fabulous with not a stale moment to be found. Every cliché of western movies is touched and a lot of the humor may actually go above younger children's heads, but there are laughs a plenty to enjoy for everyone. Not exactly a clever story line, but still a hoot! The obligatory potty humor seems to be missing; but the music is cool and then there is the puzzle of figuring out what kind of creature each character is. The animation is fantastic and the voice work is top shelf. Depp's voice is spot on and gives Rango personality and depth.A few of the other stars lending voice to the characters: Ned Beatty, Harry Dean Stanton, Abigail Breslin, Bill Nighy, Stephen Root, Alfred Molina, Ray Winstone, James Ward Byrkit, Claudia Black and Timothy Olyphant." -"Rango manages to appeal to many interests. First of all, the recreation of the old West is charming. The animators have done a masterful job of producing a setting that really works. The chameleon star finds himself in Dirt, the aforementioned town, and is given the task of saving the water supply. Yes, it is a bit dark and the plot is sophisticated. So why so many 1's and 2's. Is it that people are so easily bored when their minds are a bit challenged by an animated film? This is one of the better films of the year and works on many levels. It also parodies tough Westerns that we have seen in contemporary times." -"I've gotta admit up front that I am not a huge Johnny Depp fan and frankly think I've seen enough of him for some time. Now I am not saying he isn't talented—he certainly is. But so often his films have 'mega-hit' written all over them and the public throngs to his films like lemmings—and I just think I've seen enough. Plus, he's in practically EVERYTHING these days and I just wish he'd take a break. This is especially true in ""Rango"" as if you love Depp, great...but if you don't, you'll probably REALLY hate the film. That's because Depp's character talks practically non-stop--and is about as subtle as Ebola. And, frankly, so many of the characters and the music to this film is just LOUD, LOUD and LOUD!!! I just kept wishing the film hadn't tried so hard. In my daughter's words, ""there doesn't seem to be any plot...just Johnny Depp screaming a lot"". Ditto.This is all a big shame, as apart from being a loud and obnoxious film, the CGI is AMAZING--and among the best I've seen so far. It's a quality production but annoying--and the rottenness of the Best Animated Film category was terrible for 2012 if this film ended up winning! In my opinion, they should have just not given an award instead of rewarding such a film." -"There is a certain amount of predictability in this film, which is not really bad. The movie picks up 2 years later. Ed Helms is getting married in Thailand (pronounced Thigh-land). His future father-in-law hates him. His wife has a 16 year old brother who is pre-med. Ed wisely chooses not to have a bachelor party or invite Alan (Zach Galifianakis) along. He is talked into inviting Alan who worships the time the ""Wolf Pack"" was together. Of course once the guys get back together and raise their glasses in a toast...The movie uses the same formula as the first one. It takes a seemingly impossible situation and reconstructs a humorous story around it. Their mission in this episode is to locate Teddy, the pre-med student. On par with the first film.F-bomb, nudity, she-male nudity, crude humor, n-word, Ed Helms bent over and taking it up the..." -"The Hangover Part II is a sequel to the 2009 blockbuster hit The Hangover and the second film in The Hangover franchise.This time around,it tells the story of Phil,Stu,Alan and Doug when they travel to Thailand for Stu's wedding.Just like Doug,Stu throws his own bachelor party before the wedding.But things do not go as planned and the group once again find themselves having no memories of the events of the previous night the following day.The movie stars Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Ken Jeong, Jeffrey Tambor, Justin Bartha and Paul Giamatti.The screenplay was co- written and directed by Todd Philips just like the first film.Overall,the movie is visually dazzling,well-shot and obviously richer in personalities and characters.Unfortunately,it wasn't clever,refreshing and funny compared to the first film.It was practically almost the same too as the first film as the only difference happens to be that the bachelor party and the group who are at a lot are in Bangkok instead of Last Vegas. Despite the fact that it has a talented cast,it does not deliver enough laughter and humor to hold a candle to the first Hangover film." -"My vote for the biggest guilty pleasure of Summer 2010.Big screen restart of the TV show has Hannibal Smith and company coming together and then getting set up by some bad guys for nastiness in Iraq. Going to prison they are given a chance at redemption...and I wish this did better because damn I want a sequel.Mindless brainless and as joyous as a brain filled with popcorn and soda this is everything you want to do when you take a mindless TV series and go big screen. Great actors, funny lines, characters that stretch the TV counterparts and set pieces that are just a blast.Wow Wow and Wow.There is no message no meaning nothing to get in the way of snide remarks and big explosions.I'm a six year old again.Intellectually this film is utter trash but damn if I didn't enjoy the hell out of it like a spin around the test track in a race car.I can't wait to see if I can convince myself not to put this on the best of year list come January." -"A Russian defector, under interrogation by the CIA, exposes one of the agency's top operatives--a beautiful blonde veteran--as a Russian spy; she maintains her innocence, but escapes security anyway to warn her husband of the impending danger. Is she a spy, trained by the Russkies as a child into overthrowing the US government--and if so, where do her sympathies lie after her husband is abducted? Cold War revisionist balderdash, 'written by' Kurt Wimmer though seeming cobbled together from various (and familiar) action-adventure clichés. In the lead, Angelina Jolie shows up; she narrows her eyes in suspicion, she purses her famous lips in concentration. After rolling off an overpass onto a semi, Jolie's extraordinarily lucky Evelyn Salt is grazed by a bullet yet still manages to leapfrog through heavy traffic, later riding a police van off another overpass onto a taxi-cab (where she ridiculously walks away, unnoticed and unharmed). There's no logic to the film (not even crazy logic), and a character twist in the extended final reel is predictable. Those of us who were rooting for Jolie in her earlier, ""Girl, Interrupted"" days might be excused for giving up hope she'll become our next great movie star. She's the perfunctory stunt-woman here--and if that isn't Jolie but an actual stunt-woman on the screen, then she had even less of a reason beyond her paycheck to show up. *1/2 from ****" -"Salt is an action/thriller espionage film that stars Angelina Jolie in the title role as Evelyn Salt,who is accused of being a Russian sleeper agent and goes on the run to try to clear her name. Liev Schreiber, Daniel Olbrychski, August Diehl and Chiwetel Ejiofor co-star.It was written by Kurt Wimmer and directed by Phillip Noyce.As a CIA officer, Evelyn Salt swore an oath to duty, honor and country. Her loyalty will be tested when a defector accuses her of being a Russian spy. Salt goes on the run, using all her skills and years of experience as a covert operative to elude capture. Salt's efforts to prove her innocence only serve to cast doubt on her motives, as the hunt to uncover the truth behind her identity continues.It was good that Angelina Jolie gives it her all in the title role.Her seasoned performance is almost enough to save Salt from its predictable and ludicrous plot.Also,the movie is implausible and lightweight as many elements in the story were simply too good to be true." -"Lame, contrived and implausible. Vigilante movies are squarely aimed at the lowest common denominator, and this is certainly no different. Exception here is that instead of a straight find 'em-and-kill 'em story, the plot gets more and more unnecessarily convoluted and bizarre the further you go on. Eventually the plot twists get predictable, and tedious.The other problem is that in the end it is the justice system that is painted to be the problem, not the misguided villain. You are normally meant to sympathise with and support the vigilante, here, no matter what brought him to this situation, he is beyond sympathy.Dead giveaway that this is a pile of excrement is the presence of Gerard Butler. He is a one-dimensional action actor and can't do an American accent.Jamie Foxx is better than this, as his Oscar win and another nomination attest to. His choice in movies needs to be better though. Despite his clear acting talent, he is fairly unconvincing, and even irritating, here.Good supporting cast - Colm Meaney, Bruce McGill, Leslie Bibb - are wasted.Only plusses are that it has a fair degree of intrigue, the action sequences are well done, and the movie is reasonably short." -"I felt the concept was interesting, but that the execution lacked finesse. An angel defies gods wish to destroy humanity by protecting an unborn child and his mother. There was a lack of explanation on some key plot points (what was the message on the tattoos about?) and really a lack of action. The lead up to the final battle was too long winded and could have been streamlined, the final battle was too short. A bit of a let down." -"The movie is really long and might feel like it never ends too. But apart from the fact, that I thought it would have ended earlier (I knew how it would end, I just imagined it to be an earlier scene), there was only one other scene that I might have felt better if it would have been shorter. It's the very first visual trip we see after a few minutes into the film. It almost looks like a screen-saver. And I am not really a big fan of that in movies.But then again, it's not about where the movie ends up being, but how it gets there. Very visual and very first person, this might feel very dizzy and like with Irreversible (you get overhead shots until you break ... you won't yearn for more I reckon though) it feels like long shots pasted together.The other thing of course is the fact, that Noe is very explicit. He will not hold back (though there are some effects that will diffuse one or two scenes) on violence and or sex. Be aware of that, because he does not care if you think it is good taste or not. There is also quite a few moments that will shock you ... An experience you have to make, if you feel up for it." -Oscar (Nathaniel Brown) and his sister Linda (Paz de la Huerta) live in Tokyo. He's a small time drug dealer. His friend Alex (Cyril Roy) gives him The Tibetan Book of the Dead about the Buddhist belief in the afterlife. Oscar goes to a club called The Void. They are raided by the police. He holds out in the bathroom trying to flush his drugs and is shot through the door. His spirit rises out of his body and witnesses his life.This gets boring after about ten minutes. The bright colors and Japanese location are visually interesting with the first person POV. It is so hypnotic that it almost puts me to sleep. This is strictly experimental and not for the wider audience. I don't know how anybody is expected to sit through the over two hours unless they're actually on something. -"ENTER THE VOID takes us along for the ultimate trip. No drug on earth could possibly match the effects of death, and the soul's flight from the body. Director Gaspar Noe uses his entire bag of cinematic tricks to enable us to experience Oscar's (Nathaniel Brown) out-of-body adventure. We are given the backstory of what led to Oscar's untimely demise via spurts and flashes, allowing us to piece things together.As a Noe film, it contains his signature violence, though not nearly as much as in some of his other projects. There are also a few disturbing / numbing sexual situations, as in the Love Hotel, where sexual intercourse is presented as a sort of carnal wallpaper. The requisite perverse characters are also on hand.What sets this movie apart is its more hopeful, downright sunny -for Noe- sense of renewal, rebirth, and life after death. Recommended for fans of the Director, and those not easily offended..." -"This is the film that asks the questions, ""What if there really were vampires?"" Apparently a lone bat caused an outbreak and in ten years most of the world were vampires with a critical blood shortage. Vampires who do not feed on blood turn very ugly and attack fellow vampires.Meanwhile a group of humans have a possible cure, i.e. convert vampires to humans, but what vampire wants that?Ethan Hawke stars is our protagonist and center point for the film. He is aide by Willem Dafoe, a former vampire who drives a Trans Am and Claudia Karvan against the evil vampire capitalist Sam Neill.The film has what you would expect from a vampire film, ugly bat people, people on fire, people getting bit, etc. The film is entertaining, but lacks the great characters and dialog of being a hit. It needed to take Dafoe over the top and give personality to the rest of the cast.Parental Guide: F-bomb. No sex. Brief nudity of dormant humans." -"But the movie they made out of it, is pretty good. The brothers at helm here, did a really good job, but of course they also had a great cast for their project. Their idea is pretty neat and take the whole vampire thing to another level. But it might try to be a bit too clever to be successful. It's still not a film that is without entertainment value, quite the contrary.William Dafoe might be a bit underused and the ""twist"" might seem a bit too easy, but in the end, if you just try to enjoy this movie, there is a very good chance that you will. Not perfect in any way, but you still will get you (rent) moneys worth." -"This film is about a futuristic world where humans are turned into vampires, that in turn hunts humans.""Daybreakers"" is a gory vampire film. If you like blood, then the never ending scenes of gore will keep you interested. As I am not a fan of blood, I try to look for other things that might keep me interested. The plot is fairly interesting, but gets weaker as time goes by. Some scenes exist just for the sake of graphic shocks, increasing the unnerving visuals at the expense of a logical subplot. As for the ending, it leads me to believe that there is a solution on one direction, but it suddenly changes direction to another. Unfortunately how the new solution is discovered is poorly explained. It also makes me wonder why the vampires or humans have not found that secret out sooner. Overall, ""Daybreakers"" is an adequate film but it is not so memorable." -"The message from Daybreakers is. If vampires destroy humans they then destroy themselves as they have no blood to survive. Daybreakers has a subtext which could be about environmental destruction.Set in the year 2019, vampires have taken over the earth after a virus. Humans are now fewer in numbers and vampire society is being damaged. Some turning into bat like subsiders attacking other vampires.Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke) is a vampire with human sympathies. He is searching for a blood substitute that can be successfully used on vampires which could also save the last remnants of humanity.A strange woman one day tells Edward that there can be a cure for vampires and he meets Lionel 'Elvis' Cormac (Willem Dafoe) a former vampire.Daybreakers tries to break out of its B movie roots with a better acting cast. Sam Neill lends class along with Hawke and Dafoe. It starts out as a moody piece which has a gory final act. At least it tries to do something different in the crowded vampire genre by having a thoughtful approach." -"I'm with Team I-hope-they-all-die-soon-so-this-crappy-series-will-end.The first one was bad enough, this is even worse. It still has the wooden, looking broody instead of acting, performances of the first, and the limited dialogue. However, the plot is even duller this time. And now, to add to the lack of acting, we have one ""actor"" whose only function seems to be to show off his abs at any opportunity!Even worse, it just goes on and on. 130 minutes for something this bad - that's 120 minutes longer than the concentration span of its intended female teen audience.Watch True Blood instead." -"Second in the TWILIGHT SAGA, a touching and heart breaking love affair continues in NEW MOON. Bella(Kristen Stewart)goes into a deep depression following her 18th birthday, when her true love Edward(Robert Patterson)leaves Forks with his vampire family. His intent is to make life easier for her, but Bella in her sadness seeks comfort in the arms of her friend Jacob(Taylor Lautner). Drowning in her sorrow Bella discovers that Edward's family secret may not be a match for what Jacob is forced to reveal. Some eye catching violent special effects; the only outstanding thing in this atypical love story. Others in the cast: Jackson Rathbone, Rachelle Lefevre, Ashley Greene, Michael Sheen, Peter Facinelli, Graham Greene and small role for Dakota Fanning." -"I think that this is sightly better than the first instalment. ""Bella"" (Kristen Stewart) is now fairly firmly attached to ""Edward Cullen"" (Robert Pattinson) and that puts her life in danger. When they realise that, he and his family move away leaving her bereft and sad. After some months of moping she starts to hook up with ""Jacob"" (Taylor Lautner) who turns out to have some secrets of his own that give ""doggy style"" a whole new meaning... This has more pace than the first film, the absence of the ponderous falling in love scenes and of a moody Pattison for much of it helps liven the thing up a bit but the performances and screenplay are all still pretty weak, though. The frequently half-dressed Lautner is very easy on the eye but as wooden as they come and Michael Sheen is positively hammy as Voltari supremo ""Aro"" who has a menacing smile straight out of ""Rocky Horror"". It's far too long, it resorts to the soundtrack to replace meaningful (?) dialogue a few times too often and some judicious pruning in the middle might have made this a bit better - but the series appears to be, very gradually, picking up steam..." -"BURIED, a Spanish-made production with US backing and an American lead, is the latest in a long line of shot-in-a-single-location movies; other recent entries include PHONE BOOTH, 127 HOURS (trapped in a canyon) and DEVIL (shot in a lift). This one takes a more extreme approach to the premise than the others, as the entire film is set inside a coffin where a guy has been buried alive.For the most part, this is watchable drama and it's rarely boring, as you might expect given the premise. The writer has carefully worked everything out, so that there's incident at regular intervals (Reynolds has to contend with plenty of dangers, including sand and snakes) and dialogue thanks to the handy mobile phone he's been buried with.I'm no fan of Reynolds as an actor, but he acquits himself quite well with the material and gives a believable performance as a guy driven to desperation and the edge of his mind. The most impressive talent belongs to director Rodrigo Cortes, who manages to keep everything interesting despite the limitations of his story - it's a bravura job, and the ending nails it perfectly." -"It's a bit hard to review this special movie. You can't go into special effects because there were non. You can't say anything about the cast because it's just one person you see. And the set is simple too, just a coffin. Yes, indeed, it all takes place in a coffin. So that's already tricky to watch because I know a lot of people who didn't liked it because there was nothing to see or watch and I must agree with them. It takes indeed almost an hour before the suspense comes in. The first hour you will learn everything about the character, perfectly played by Ryan Reynolds. But it's all done on phone. Of course, being buried you can't do anything else than phone but for me it was a bit too long, an hour as I said. But from then on it goes faster and things go from worse to terribly wrong. The ending was a surprise for me. I won't spoil it just watch it. Still, I won't state it as a horror either a suspense or thriller. But you have to experience the coffin setting to sit it through. Simple story, excellent camera tricks." -"I believe Ryan Reynold's career must be on stall. The film is done entirely on a low budget. One only sees Reynold's inside a buried coffin. I would buy the film if the coffin scene was only half the film, but the whole film kills the movie. Boring! The viewer would like to see the face of the terrorist etc, but no such luck! Reynold's acting keeps the film half interesting, but even Reynolds acting cannot save this film. The ending is disappointing! I gave the film a 6 out of 10, because of the first half. The second half of the film I say the movie is a rip off! The film needs a bigger budget then one room one actor movie. The movie would be a better play." -"I believe Ryan Reynold's career must be on stall. The film is done entirely on a low budget. One only sees Reynold's inside a buried coffin. I would buy the film if the coffin scene was only half the film, but the whole film kills the movie. Boring! The viewer would like to see the face of the terrorist etc, but no such luck! Reynold's acting keeps the film half interesting, but even Reynolds acting cannot save this film. The ending is disappointing! I gave the film a 6 out of 10, because of the first half. The second half of the film I say the movie is a rip off! The film needs a bigger budget then one room one actor movie. The movie would be a better play." -"it is a trap for expectations. for need of realistic details. for theories about survive. for image about war in Irak. it is courageous, smart and honest. and , more important, it is provocative. a good director and a brilliant actor. a precise script. a splendid idea. and a film like a parable. far by ordinaries clichés. far from old recipes. only image of fight. and picture of resistance against indifference of the others. it is a gem. not exactly for its many virtues but for the force of story and surprising acting of Reynolds. and, sure, for measure. and the final part remains admirable. a movie. more than interesting. only precise art." -"COWBOYS & ALIENS (2011) *** Daniel Craig, Harrison Ford, Olivia Wilde, San Rockwell, Paul Dano, Adam Beach, Clancy Brown, Walton Goggins, Noah Ringer. Cosmic oater set in the American Old West circa 1873 Arizona, where an amnesiac cowboy (Craig exuding a McQueenian stoic vibe) awakens in the desert of a dying town when aliens invade, kidnapping its citizenry, forcing him to regain his memory in the process of a rescue posse with a motley crusading group including an ex Civil War colonel/cattle rancher (Ford at his gruff best) and a mysterious beauty (the beguiling Wilde). Director Jon Favreau mixes all the popcorn crowd guilty pleasure with his comic book adaptation of Scott Mitchell Rosenberg's graphic novel in spite of six scribes involvement, the film comes on like gangbusters and is an enjoyable B-movie with A production thanks to the cool visuals and particularly Matthew Libatique's sweet cinematography. And the geeky pleasure of seeing James Bond & Indiana Jones kicking alien ass!" -"Ever since I first heard of Cowboys & Aliens it was actually one of my most-wanted-to-see movies of the year. However, when it came to seeing it I found it a let down. Not all of it is a mess though. It is a well made movie, with cinematography and editing to be admired and settings and costumes that are not only great but show some imagination. The soundtrack is fitting and memorable, and while the first action scene was a tad overlong, the action is beautifully choreographed and definitely one of the more interesting parts of the movie. Plus the title is great and one of the things that drew me in in the first place. The let downs however are in the writing and in the story. The writing is mostly awful, particularly in the slower moments where those moments are peppered with schmaltz, and the story is dull with little satisfactorily explained. Jon Favreau's direction is mixed, great in the action scenes, pedestrian at other points, while the characters are underdeveloped and little more than clichéd. Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford are decent enough but deserved much more than they got, while the female lead was annoying and forgettable. In conclusion, wanted to like it but there were too flaws that prevented me from properly engaging with it. 4/10 Bethany Cox" -"Great concept, but couldn't be more disappointing. Should have been a hoot. It deserves the boot.It took five writers to do this. Really? Given the mythology to draw from they should be ashamed of themselves and donate their salaries to MUFON or Real West magazine.There is nothing in this movie to recommend. The western portion is as stale as stable stuff and the alien element is completely clichéd and unconvincing. It all is presented with stodgy scenes with no suspense and no surprises. OK there is one twist in the middle, but that is so corny and contrived that all the characters react with nothing more than a dumb look as if to say, is it time for the next boring scene and they just move along as if nothing happened.The action is so routine and the aliens are so uninteresting that this comes off as something made by people who have never seen an alien film or a cowboy movie." -"Are you ready for some cowboy Sci-Fi? Jon Favreau directs this convoluted tale that takes place in Arizona in the late 1800s. Ranchers and cowpokes, led by a mysterious gunslinger Jake Lonergan(Daniel Craig)are fiercely feuding with the local Apache Indians. Having the most at stake is cattle baron Woodrow Dolarhyde(Harrison Ford). A spacecraft lands carrying some odd looking creatures with full intent of making slaves of the human race. Cattle rustlers, six-gun-shootin' cowboys and Apaches agree on a truce long enough to fight a swarm of uninvited extraterrestrials. Some nice special effects, actually filmed in New Mexico. A well rounded supporting cast includes: Keith Carradine, Sam Rockwell, Clancy Brown, Adam Beach, Buck Taylor and the ever fetching Olivia Wilde. Its like Star Trek meets the Wild, Wild West." -"There has been many a movie about people discovering important clues in seemingly random topics: ""The Da Vinci Code"" and ""The Number 23"" are examples. Now, director Alex Proyas (""The Crow"", ""Dark City"", ""I, Robot"") brings us ""Knowing"". Nicolas Cage plays a college professor who lost his wife a year earlier. In his MIT class, he teaches students about randomness (things just happen) vs determinism (everything happens for a reason).When a time capsule gets opened, his son finds a strange paper written by a girl fifty years earlier. While at first looking like a bunch of arbitrary numerals, he realizes that it shows the dates of famous disasters and the fatalities therein. Sure enough, it starts to look as if this relates to him.I found most of the movie intriguing - I've never come across any series of numbers (anything else) that looks like what the flick portrays - although it seemed as if the end got kind of religious. If you ignore that part, the rest of the movie is pretty enjoyable (although I still consider ""The Crow"" Proyas's best movie). Just pay attention the next time that you see a list of things." -"In 1959, in Lexington, Massachusetts, the students of the William Dawes Elementary leaves drawing in a time capsule to be open fifty years later. However, the outcast girl Lucinda (Lara Robinson) writes a series of numbers instead. Fifty years later, the capsule is open and the boy Caleb Koestler (Chandler Canterbury) receives her letter. When his widower father and professor of MIT John Koestler (Nicolas Cage) glances to the piece of paper with numbers, he recognizes dates and coordinates of the major global disasters in the last fifty years. Further he identifies that the numbers are the key to everything and together with the last date, it is written ""EE"" – meaning Everyone Else.The refreshing ""Knowing"" is one of the best (if not the best) movie about apocalypse that I have seen. I am a fan of Nicolas Cage, and the intriguing and human story is very well constructed and disclosed in an adequate pace and supported by good performances. The unexpected conclusion is both pessimist and optimistic, depending on the point of view of the viewer. In the end, we all will die, won't we? My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): ""Presságio"" (""Omen"")" -"In 1959, in Lexington, Massachusetts, the students of the William Dawes Elementary leaves drawing in a time capsule to be open fifty years later. However, the outcast girl Lucinda (Lara Robinson) writes a series of numbers instead. Fifty years later, the capsule is open and the boy Caleb Koestler (Chandler Canterbury) receives her letter. When his widower father and professor of MIT John Koestler (Nicolas Cage) glances to the piece of paper with numbers, he recognizes dates and coordinates of the major global disasters in the last fifty years. Further he identifies that the numbers are the key to everything and together with the last date, it is written ""EE"" – meaning Everyone Else.The refreshing ""Knowing"" is one of the best (if not the best) movie about apocalypse that I have seen. I am a fan of Nicolas Cage, and the intriguing and human story is very well constructed and disclosed in an adequate pace and supported by good performances. The unexpected conclusion is both pessimist and optimistic, depending on the point of view of the viewer. In the end, we all will die, won't we? My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): ""Presságio"" (""Omen"")" -"I think Roger Ebert hit it on the head; this is an example of ""when bad movies happen to good directors"". Story of two guys, (Michael Cerra and Jack Black) who get thrown out of their Stone Age tribe and end up crashing into early biblical history. In theory this is the sort of thing that should have worked, the cast is good, the script seems okay, the sets and such look like they spent a few bucks on it, and unfortunately none of it comes together. The performances are annoying, the sets and costumes look cheap and the jokes seem to have been written by someone one with no sense of humor. Nothing comes together. On paper this should have worked. It's understandable why director Harold Ramis was high on the project since he had some choice elements to work with, but the result is probably his worst film. In its way it's a train wreck since its one of those films that you really can't understand or grasp why it's not working. One of the biggest disappointments of the year, and maybe one of the worst films of the year because it is so painfully nonfunctional as a film." -"Harold Ramis has made entertaining films before this, made classics to be honest. I loved Ghostbusters, I am a huge fan of his underrated film 'Multiplicity'. But his latest offering 'Year One, which he has written, produced & directed disappoints.'Year One' could've been a classic affair, I mean Ramis had history in his hands. Agreed, no need to preach us with the goods & bads then, but why making an over-the-top comedy. Which has hardly a few jokes or moments that you take home! By Making Jack Black eat poop or showing Oliver Platt being oiled by Michael Cera funny, then I should be the funniest man in the planet. And the climax of the film is the weakest part of this venture.... it just doesn't create an impact as one expects. Acting-wise: Jack Black can never be doubted when it comes to comedy. He's fantastic, as ever. Michael Cera is excellent as well. Oliver Platt plays his character well, but it's sad to such a great performer like him being reduced to such roles. David Cross is strictly okay. Others lend able support. On the whole, are Ancestors are just not interesting." -"(Credit IMDb) After being banished from their tribe, two hunter- gatherers encounter Biblical characters and eventually wind up in the city of Sodom.I must confess. I shut this off, and couldn't finish it. I avoided this movie for over 4 years, because I read all the bad reviews, and it simply looked terrible. I should have stayed away from it, because it's as bad as I feared. For starters, these two speak awfully well for being ancient. I get that you're supposed to kick your brain to the curb, but must it be so moronic? Jack Black & Michael Cera, essentially play themselves, and are completely unfunny. I was especially annoyed by Jack Black. I usually like Michael Cera, but he has no idea how to handle this part. They wear these ridiculous looking wigs, and it just comes across as extremely lazy. I didn't see the intention to make people laugh. All I saw was the intention to con people out of their money by paying to watch this drivel. If you wanna see Paul Rudd & David Cross get into a painfully unfunny fist fight, or torture yourself, be my guest" -"Year One (2009): Dir: Harold Ramis / Cast: Jack Black, Michael Cera, Oliver Platt, David Cross, Olivia Wilde: Amusing idea that jumbles together a series of Biblical or historical events. It stars Jack Black and Michael Cera as tribesmen who are banned when Black eats from the tree of Eden. From there it's a series of subplots through ancient history all of which are offensive or vulgar. Directed by Harold Ramis with effective production throughout. He previously made the mediocre Bedazzled, which also takes shots at Christianity however its altered promises by Satan at least bare certain truth. While Ramis is efficient enough this hardly ranks among his funniest films which includes such superior comedies as Analyze This, Caddyshack, Groundhog Day, and National Lampoon's Vacation. Black and Cera are funny but historical moments are hard hitting to the most offensive degree, and as the film reaches its climax. Oliver Platt plays a high priest whom they must face and obviously overthrow. David Cross as Cain is hilarious but unfortunately this version of Cain showcases exactly why this film is offensive. Olivia Wilde plays a princess and it isn't one of her better roles. Christianity is mocked to the extremes, which indicates certain viewers will more than likely detest the spectacle. The result is a formula driven yet visually well made mockery of history. Score: 6 / 10" -"Am hoping that this film will capture the 2010 Oscar for best picture.Colin Firth gives a stupendous performance as George the VI, a man who is suffering due to his stuttering. Helena Bonham Carter gives an understated performance as his sympathetic wife, desperately trying to help her distraught husband.The film is so rich in history with the abdication of King Edward, and the coming of World War 11 discussed.Geoffrey Rush, as the speech therapist, is absolutely memorable. He not only is Bertie's therapist, the two develop an ever-lasting friendship that carries them into the king giving his pep-war speech to the British people.How many of us knew that George VI had this handicap? Firth's performance is such that you will develop an attachment and deep sympathy for him.Oscar night should be a night for people with stuttering to share in the greatness of this movie." -"One might think that writer/director Terrence Malick is trying to test your patience and ability to examine your own conception of his two-hour nineteen minute drama. Definitely thought provoking and you really don't need to pressure yourself to fully understand what you are watching; but be able to make sense of your own innermost thought of life in comparison to what is on the screen. This story takes place in 1950s Texas. We follow eldest son, Jack(Sean Penn), as he struggles through a confusing childhood; innocence doesn't seem to last long while trying to live up to his stern father's(Brad Pitt)concept of life. Jack's mother(Jessica Chastain)wants her son to approach life with an open heart in contrast to his father's belief to take care of yourself first and press on with your own private interests. One of Jack's brothers dies and effects him awkwardly different than his parents. Jack primarily seems to be a lost soul trying to survive in a brutal world that questions his own perception of the existence of faith. There are some magnificent scenes that may to some border on indulgence. Jack's complicated and disillusioned life's journey may now have your own under suspicion. If you watch THE TREE OF LIFE a second time, it is most likely you will see something entirely different." -"The trailer of this movie didn't hype me up at all to see it immediately, but overall it's a decent romantic comedy. It's formulaic in some aspects and goes in a direction where Ashton constantly brags about his features without proof to the audience. Which might be a good thing for guys but it kinda shows why he wanted to be in this movie, because of the dialogue that hypes him up. The plot is about a guy who is looking for a relationship with the girl he likes, but the girl just wants a sex friend. Also some guy audiences might be disappointed cause it shows Ashton being more revealing than Natalie Portman, in fact there is no nude scenes for her because she is under a contract or something. Overall it's a decent comedy, not all that funny and is overrated a bit by some reviewers in my opinion, but still a decent romantic comedy...Nothing all that special. The flaw of this movie is the formulaic and very predictable direction and parts and dialogue that is just not believable at all. Also the pacing of the movie slows down after the first hour. The main positive thing about this movie is that the two characters are relateable in some aspects.6.5/10" -"The trailer of this movie didn't hype me up at all to see it immediately, but overall it's a decent romantic comedy. It's formulaic in some aspects and goes in a direction where Ashton constantly brags about his features without proof to the audience. Which might be a good thing for guys but it kinda shows why he wanted to be in this movie, because of the dialogue that hypes him up. The plot is about a guy who is looking for a relationship with the girl he likes, but the girl just wants a sex friend. Also some guy audiences might be disappointed cause it shows Ashton being more revealing than Natalie Portman, in fact there is no nude scenes for her because she is under a contract or something. Overall it's a decent comedy, not all that funny and is overrated a bit by some reviewers in my opinion, but still a decent romantic comedy...Nothing all that special. The flaw of this movie is the formulaic and very predictable direction and parts and dialogue that is just not believable at all. Also the pacing of the movie slows down after the first hour. The main positive thing about this movie is that the two characters are relateable in some aspects.6.5/10" -"This film is about two sex friends who, slowly but surely, develop feelings for each other.Considering the cast and the big budget, ""No Strings Attached"" is very disappointing. The two leads are very attractive, but they have little chemistry with each other. Maybe it's to do with the nature of their initial relationship, they do not have any sparks with each other, and hence their subsequent feelings seem so forced and unrealistic. There is little comedy either, the whole plot is plainly delivered. With nothing much to laugh about, no romance to savour, ""No Strings Attached"" becomes a lacklustre bore." -"Sometimes a bit of attachment isn't that bad. And while I love Natalie Portman and she tries her best with her role, too many stock characters seem to fill the movie. And while it might sound neat on paper the time lapse thing didn't exactly work in favor of the movie, the feeling of it at least.Ashton K. performance is in the eye of the beholder. You either like him or you loathe him. I wouldn't say he's bad, but there's nothing special in his performance here either. Kevin Kline seems to be wasted also (another one of those stock characters).Still you get light fun, romance and comedy mixed together. So not bad, but nothing special either." -"Greetings again from the darkness. Directed by Shane Acker with screenplay by Pamela Pettler, the influence of producer Tim Burton cannot be missed, with recollections of Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice and even Frankenweenie. And the ties to Wizard of Oz and 2001 are inescapable.The reason this one scores as high as it does is purely visual. The animation is spectacular and ground-breaking. Yes, it is pretty bleak, but these are post-apocalyptic times, remember! The details and texture of the visuals are extraordinary.Sadly, I found the story flat out ridiculous and the characters underplayed. Christopher Plummer seems to be have found a second career voicing evil guys ... here playing the frightened leader #1. Jennifer Connelly found a movie she couldn't screw up voicing the near superhero #7 (is it just me or does #7 look a bit heavy - surprised the skeletal Connelly agreed to play her). Elijah Wood voice the chosen one sent by the originating scientist to save the world from his misused powerful machine monster.Religious and evil government commentary abounds, and I found most of it not up to par. Still the visuals are fascinating and I can't wait to see where this animation heads in future, better films." -"It may not have meant the same thing to viewers back in 2009 when it was released, but watching the film today, it comes across as a metaphor against allowing technology to control us instead of the other way around. That could apply to social media, artificial intelligence, video games, or take some other pick. The scientist who created the machine that ran amok in this dystopian world recognized his mistake in not providing it with a human soul, but how could anyone do that anyway? As with any technology, it's use can be easily corrupted by those who control it, and often with a nefarious purpose. I was intrigued by the idea of the principal characters stitched together from pieces of burlap, something very basic meant to represent the best instincts of human nature. And as with real human beings, the characters here met with failure and success in their quest to defeat the antagonist. Quite dark, but with a unique animated style, this film was not in any way produced by the numbers." -"I don't know how much of a market there is for animated films like this but as someone who appreciates good artwork and computer animation, I enjoyed it. Yeah, the story is only so-so but the characters keep your attention - both good and bad guys, and it is deceptively involving.The ""good guys"" in here are burlap-looking sewn puppets. Why they are who they are is explained near the end of the movie. The ""bad guys"" are the machines. Yes, this is familiar ""Terminator"" country, theme-wise, but the machines in this movie are brutal and scary. This movie is definitely not for little kids!If you keep your expectations in the ""fair"" range, and watch it on Blu-Ray, you should enjoy it. As mentioned, the story draws you in. On the other hand, if you are looking for something fantastic, you might be disappointed." -"After an apocalyptical war between human and machines, the world is completely destroyed and without human life. The burlap doll 9 awakes without voice and finds a weird object in the middle of the debris that he brings with him. While walking through the ruins, 9 is attacked by a machine called Beast but he is saved by another doll called 2 that fixes his voice. 2 brings 9 to meet his hidden community, leaded by the coward 1. When 2 is captured by a machine, the newcomer 9 convinces the other dolls to go with him to rescue 2. However, 9 places the device that he found in a slot and activates a lethal machine called Brain. The burlap dolls are chased by Brain and despite the advices of 1 that they should hide, 9 organizes an attack to destroy Brain.I had a great expectation with ""9"" and the bleak animation is really great. Unfortunately the flawed and unoriginal story is disappointing, a kind of rip-off of ""WALL•E"" and ""Terminator"" together and there are many holes and questions without answer or explanation. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): ""9 – A Salvação"" (""9 – The Salvation"")" -"Nine (2009): Dir: Shane Acker / Voices: Elijah Wood, Christopher Plummer, John C. Reilly, Jennifer Connelly, Martin Landau: Unique futuristic animation about completion. It regards the earth in a ruin after mankind loses the war against machines and little dolls that emerge numbered from one to nine. Nine is adventurous and seeks to help the other eight to win the battle against machines. Directed by Shane Acker with creative screenplay but the characters never really emerge as personalities. Another issue is that the violence may be too intense for children. Featuring voices from Elijah Wood as Nine, the only role in the film that contains any depth. The supporting roles are a long assortment of stereotypes. Christopher Plummer plays this old guy who is overly traditional and has a stick up his ass. He is always debating with Nine and encouraging him to be a self centred ass. John C. Reilly voices a healer but the only thing needing healing here is the screenplay. Jennifer Connelly is way too lovely not to be seen but in any case, her role is also cardboard. She plays a female ninja who kicks ass but she has no personality. Martin Landau also provides the voice of a type, and in this case, the creative area of the mind. The special effects and digital content is impressive but the screenplay is basic silly string intelligent. With a theme regarding mankind's legacy, or lack of it. Score: 5 ½ / 10" -"Juli just had to take one look at Bryce's blue eyes, and she knew it was true love. Bryce just had to take one notice of Juli's manic desperation, and he knew it was going to be a friendship of torment. I just had to take one look at the film's artfully designed poster, and I knew ""Flipped"" was a film to be savoured.A beautifully told film of first love, we flip from Juli's point of view to Bryce's point of view, very effectively giving us the true nature of their friendship, love and respect they have for each other. Except in the case of middle-school graders, that love and respect can frequently look like embarrassment, mistrust, and shame. All of those emotions are told with intelligence, subtlety and humour.""Flipped"" has all of the comedy, naiveté and bewilderment of first love. It takes the romantic comedy farther by actually giving us characters with real depth. There is more going on than just Juli and Bryce figuring out their love for each other, and every aspect of this film is well written, touching and relevant.""Flipped"" is a cute film for everybody who fondly remembers that fiercely independent girl or the guy with piercing blue eyes that lived across the street." -"Saw this on DVD from my local public library. Rob Reiner co-wrote and directed, it is set in the late 1950s then the early 1960s, 1963 to be exact, the year I graduated from high school. The characters seemed pretty authentic to the period.It is a story about a small boy whose family moves to a new neighborhood, and he is immediately befriended by a small girl his age that lives across the street. We learn later that she was taken by his eyes, his gaze, and immediately liked him. But as bold as the girl was, the boy was shy. She always told things as they were, he often evaded the truth because it seemed easier. At different points she doesn't ever want to talk to him again, or he doesn't ever want to see her again. As budding relationships often experience. Madeline Carroll plays the girl at about 13, Juli Baker. Australian actor Callan McAuliffe plays the boy, Bryce Loski, at the same age. Most of the story is told at that period of time when they were junior high students.It is a wonderful cast overall, with the likes of Rebecca De Mornay, Anthony Edwards, Penelope Ann Miller, and Aidan Quinn as parents and John Mahoney as a grandparent. Good family movie, very sweet in spots, and mostly very realistic." -"Although my (pre-)teen years were decades ago, it is sometimes nice to remind and compare - in particular, if script and directing are good. In Flipped, it is so indeed, plus a good choice of child actors provides additional value to the movie. Unlike many youth films made in this century, the story here focuses on human values, generation ties, friendship etc, not on ""cuteness"" or being popular on account of personal wealth. The two neighboring families depicted are different (creative vs. formal), and those differences bring interesting angles and twists into the storyline. The cast is evenly strong as well, the grown-up characters are performed by Rebecca De Mornay, Anthony Edwards, John Mahoney, Penelope Ann Miller, Aidan Quinn... The latter was the most interesting to me and his presence on screen was more frequent as well. Kevin Weisman performs a small, but very difficult role of a retarded person.Recommended to all families with children, although contemporary minor might consider the events as too naive from distant past... But family life can be without constant swearing, drugs, sexual hints etc. as well." -"It's the summer of 1957. Bryce Loski and his family move into the neighborhood before his second grade. Juli Baker clings onto him but Bryce is annoyed by her. In the sixth grade, he tries to shake her off by asking out Sherry Stalls but they break up after a week. Juli loves sitting in a tree. One day, landscapers come to cut down her tree. She tries to save it but Bryce abandons her. She starts raising chicken. She gives eggs to Bryce. Two weeks after the tree got cut down, she discovers that Bryce is throwing them out. Her feelings for him flips. Bryce's feeling for her also flips with prodding from his grandfather.Madeline Carroll is adorable. Callan McAuliffe is a little stiff although that's his character. The constant narrations should stop somewhere before the middle. Rob Reiner has created Norman Rockwell nostalgia and added melodramatic problems. The effect is partly endearing. The flipping between the two points of view is compelling. It's one of Reiner's better movie in his recent years." -"Redneck best buddies Tucker and Dale venture into the remote woods to fix up their rundown mountain vacation home. Things go horribly awry when the amiable duo are mistaken for murderous backwoods hillbilly psychopaths by a group of obnoxious college kids. Director/co-writer Eli Craig and co-writer Morgan Jurgenson ingeniously subvert and poke fun at the standard conventions and stereotypes associated with evil hicks in the sticks fright fare: The rednecks this time are hapless victims of unfortunate circumstance, the college kids are the judgmental and xenophobic villains of the piece, and the gruesome deaths of said college kids are the direct result of their own fear and stupidity. Better still, this picture makes a valid satirical point about the perils of buying into preconceived assumptions on people while still delivering plenty of tasty over-the-top graphic gore. Moreover, the fine acting by the bang-up cast keeps everything humming: Tyler Labine and Alan Tudyk display a winningly loose and natural chemistry as the lovable good-natured protagonists, Katrina Bowden contributes a hugely appealing performance as the sweet Allison, and Jesse Moss brings a deliciously hateful zeal to his juicy role as belligerent frat boy jerk Chad. The crisp widescreen cinematography by David Geddess gives the movie an impressively polished and atmospheric look. The twangy'n'shivery score by Mike Shields hits the stirring spot. An absolute hoot." -"Tucker and Dale vs Evil is an ingenious creation and a laugh riot, while also being somewhat endearing.They didn't have to stretch things that much in order for it to work, making it so funny. Tudyk and Labine terrific, don't think I've seen Labine in anything before this. The students purposely aren't good characters, but they could have been slightly better. The laughter dies down a bit in the last portion, once Tucker's taken." -"""You've done a heckofa job, Brownie."" George W. Bush New Orleans as the site of Hurricane Katrina's wrath has yet to be a ""helluva"" reclamation, even under Obama. But give Disney Studios a chance to catch the early 20th century charm of the city, and you have a superior fairy tale that recalls the city's glamour as it must have been before its date with Katrina.The Princess and the Frog retells the classic story of the transforming kiss with soul music, soulful food, and characters as charming as the voodoo that causes the trouble. Besides having the princess a black beauty and the prince of color as well, the old-fashioned 2 D animation holds a slew of eccentric characters rivaling Jiminy Cricket, Dumbo, and the whole forest of Disney's lovable animals.As is always the case with this studio, the homily is given in the sweetest way, this time through catchy jazz originals and characters immersed in the magic of Louisiana folk lore. For The Princess and the Frog, ""Love is all that matters"" best encapsulates the lesson of having ambitious goals that seek not money but happiness through good deeds seasoned with amour.This is one of the best animations of a sterling year (standing right there with Fantastic Mr. Fox, Up, and Coraline) and a prominent entry into the Disney canon.Princess Tiana: Just one kiss? Prince Naveen: Just one, unless you beg for more." -"Disney goes old school in its first hand-drawn animated feature in five years. They pull out all the stops in this one to produce something like they used to make in the old days, and they've pretty much succeeded. I think we can forgive them if they occasionally try too hard. At least it never ends up seeming false. A hard-working New Orleans restaurant worker (voiced by Anika Noni Rose from Dreamgirls) hopes to open her own restaurant, a dream that she shared with her killed-in-action father. Concurrently, a layabout European prince (Bruno Campos) comes to town, having recently been cut off from his inheritance, looking for girls, parties and jazz. He runs into a voodoo master known as the Shadow Man (Keith David) who turns him into a frog. Trying to get a kiss from a princess, he brings Rose, who is merely dressed like a princess, down into frogdom, as well. What follows is a simple but beautiful journey through the bayous of Louisiana. Two comic relief animals join the frogs, a trumpet-playing gator and a Cajun firefly, but, amazingly, they add to the fun instead of seeming like a cheap ploy to keep children interested. The artwork is gorgeous, and Randy Newman provides a fine score and songs (I smell a second Oscar coming). This is a very satisfying film for any Disney fan, I would guess. It's every bit as great as their fine run in the late '80s and early '90s." -"Perfectly cliche, the princess and the frog is a truly heartwarming Disney movie. The characters are fun and well developed, the storyline flows well, and the animation is good. The songs didn't flow as seamlessly as I would have liked, the movie almost didn't need them. The characters made this movie, loved ray the lightning bug." -"This sometimes raunchy, sometimes sweet buddy movie was for me everything that last year's ""The Hangover"" wasn't -- mainly, it was funny.Four guys go on a weekend jaunt to Aspen to recapture some of their lost younger days and, thanks to a supernatural hot tub and some kind of Russian energy drink, are transported back to 1986. The audience for this film is anyone who spent their formative years in the 80s, and it's chock full of pop culture references that keep the laughs coming pretty consistently and make it easy to overlook the fact that the film's story is a mess. John Cusack is the headliner and Chevy Chase makes a couple of cameos in a nod to his place as a major box office star of the 80s, but it was Clark Duke, playing the youngest member of the group who didn't even exist yet in 1986, who stole the movie for me.Grade: B+" -"This movie wasn't bad, but it wasn't super fantastic either.After having seen it, I was sort of sitting with a feeling of not knowing if this movie was meant as a tribute to the ""Back to the Future"" trilogy, or if it was meant to be something entirely different. Looking at the movie, there were some strong similarities. Heck, they even had one of the actors from ""Back to the Future"" in this one as well.Well, as for the story, it was fairly straight forward, and it had some nice moments. Nothing new here to make you swoon though. Well, maybe except for a cameo by Chevy Chase.The cast was good. Each person was well selected for their role, and they did a good job in bringing their characters to life on the screen.But there was something missing from the movie. I was left with a flat taste in my mouth when the movie was over. There was just something missing, something that would make this movie unique. To make it really stand out.If you like comedies, and if you really loved ""Back to the Future"", then definitely check out this movie. It is fairly good entertainment." -"I guess when push comes to shove, it is what it is and achieves its aims by pleasing the intended target audience.Plot finds 40-something pals John Cusack, Craig Robinson and Rob Corddry stuck in ruts and magically transported back to 1986 courtesy of a hot tub. So basically the guys, still in their 40 something bodies get to relive 86 knowing what they know already, if you get my meaning?What follows is a load of raucous behaviour, man child histrionics and crudeness as the mid-life crisis' come thundering out in a wave of bad hair, iconic 80s dudes and teen angst. The laughs are plenty, if a touch juvenile, and there is at least an air of regressive reflection trying to make its point amongst the testosterone.It does a job, just. 6/10" -"One normally expects the law of diminishing returns to set in with sequels. But Fast Five is fine.Diesel, Walker & Co are in Rio looking for a big score, with Dwayne Johnson's crack team looking to bring them back to answer for various crimes (the fact that these guys have no jurisdiction in Rio is mentioned, but otherwise overlooked).There are a couple of excellent set pieces bookending some entertaining character stuff and plot movement. And when I say ""excellent"", what I mean is not very probable, but immensely entertaining, with brilliant stunt work interlaced with visual effects so well that you can't tell which is which.I thoroughly enjoyed this." -Easily the best FATF. I like the bit with the cars -Easily the best FATF. I like the bit with the cars -"On 21 January 2007, I saw the great French thriller ""Anthony Zimmer"" with Sophie Marceau and Yvan Attal in the lead roles. The plot recalled Hitchcock's classic ""North by Northwest"", i.e., a man mistaken for another and pursued by criminals. Today I have unfortunately seen ""The Tourist"", a high-budget film with the expensive Angeline Jolie and Johnny Depp in the lead roles and fancy locations and costumes. However, despite telling the same story, this remake is a popcorn version of the original story and the director seems to be more interested in displaying the locations and the lead couple than telling the story.My advice: do not spend your time with ""The Tourist""; see ""Anthony Zimmer"" instead and enjoy a magnificent thriller. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): ""O Turista"" (""The Tourist"")" -"This is the typical film that Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn would have made in the early 1950s when the former was still relatively young.Steven Berkoff, who was so memorable in ""War and Remembrance,"" and ""Sins,"" is up to his old evil tricks here. Berkoff, a director, has gone in front of the camera to play an array of evil people including Adolf Hitler in 'Remembrance.'This one deals with the usual mistaken identity. Angelina Jolie brings Johnny Depp into her scheme to smoke out the real culprit in the film. Is she and the audience in for a surprise ending. The movie suffers from fatigue. It's too slow moving." -Zac Efron stars as a youthened Matthew Perry who is made young again in order to prove to him that being young wasn't as great as he thought and to appreciate what he has. It's a been there and done that plot that's actually done well here. There have been so many variations on this theme that one is tempted to throw up ones hands and say enough. Part of the reason this works is Efron who proves himself to be an amiable and assured screen presence. He's better than most of the Disney packaged actors and actresses to come down the pike who's talent seems to be confined to looking good and staying close to plan. I think Efron will have a long career if he wants to and doesn't do anything stupid. The film is worth a look. -"This is another movie I watched with my friend who works at a movie theatre. With elements of Big and 13 Going on 30, not to mention It's a Wonderful Life and Back to the Future, 17 Again is a pretty enjoyable meshing of those movies considering the cast which has Zac Efron, Michelle Trachtenberg, Leslie Mann, Margaret Cho, Thomas Lennon, and Melora Hardin. I also recognized Matthew Perry and Nicole Sullivan. I did not realize until the cast credits that the bearded janitor at the high school was Brian Doyle-Murray, Bill's brother. Now, parts of the plot and characterizations were a little uneven but despite that there were plenty of scenes that were hilarious especially those between Lennon and Hardin. With them, I also saw a little ""Big Bang Theory"" vibe. Oh, and there's a little touching pro-abstinence speech here as well (though it still is acknowledged that not all teens will feel that way). All in all, despite some adult humor, 17 Again was an enjoyable comedy that should be enjoyable enough for parents and offspring alike. Oh, and one more thing: I thought the Vanilla Ice reference in the 1989 sequence didn't fit since I remember him not even emerging until the following year..." -"This film is about a loser father going back to 17 when he was the high school basketball star.""17 Again"" is such a pleasant surprise. It has a great plot. I thought it is just a romantic comedy for teen girls, but it is so much more than that. The family subplot is well written and delivered, making it touching and emotional. The most surprising of all is that it preaches wholesome values without being preachy.Acting is also excellent. It's the first time I watch a Zac Efron movie. I have always thought he is just a pretty face, but his performance proved me wrong. I never thought a chick flick can be so good, and can be enjoyed by adults!" -"THE UNINVITED is ANOTHER redundant remake of an Asian horror, the original in question this time being the Korean A TALE OF TWO SISTERS. If it wasn't for the original movie, this wouldn't be bad at all, coming across as a mildly spooky horror/mystery combo with a decent twist at the end.Sadly, having seen the original first (thank goodness) I can report that this is the inferior film in every respect. It feels like it's been dumbed down for US audiences, the narrative simplified and the mystery reduced to its most basic levels, a simple whodunit-style murder yarn with a couple of ghostly scenes thrown in for good measure.The problem with THE UNINVITED is that it fails to be scary - the couple of ghost scares we're treated to having been too obviously copied on the likes of THE GRUDGE - and the acting isn't much to write home about. I didn't mind Emily Browning's protagonist so much, while David Strathairn is great given the right role (as in THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM) but wasted here while Elizabeth Banks is completely over the top and detracts from it. The twist ending would have been great if we hadn't seen it all before, leaving THE UNINVITED far from the worst of the remakes out there, but hardly a great movie in itself." -"Anna (Emily Browning) returns home from a psychiatric institution after her suicide attempt. She's been struggling after her mother's death in a fire. Her mother was ill and the caretaker Rachel Summers (Elizabeth Banks) is now her father Steven (David Strathairn)'s girlfriend. Her sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel) is convinced that Rachel killed their mother. She keeps having visions of 3 little kids. Her boyfriend Matt is killed presumably in an accident after she sees him in a vision. Her father is getting remarried to Rachel. The girls discover that Rachel is using a false identity. Anna suspects her to be Mildred Kemp who killed the 3 kids in her vision and disappeared.Emily Browning is great as a distressed teen and I like everybody in this. There is a moody ghostly sense through out the movie. This boils down to the ending. I completely understand if some people throw up their hands at the final twists. I personally scratched my head at first. In the end, I accepted it and like the movie. I could have easily gone the other way." -"it is a real spectacular show. not surprising for the meeting Herge - Spielberg. and the good thing is preservation of the spirit of universe of Tintin in a fascinating embroidery of stories, colors and breathless adventures. the taste of childhood is the basic key of this magnificent adventure who explores, saves, propose solutions and mix humor with slices of pirates story and crime. more than beautiful, fascinating. and this is the basic cause for see it. as a ball of memories about the comics and the flavor of dialogues, about the dreams in which to become Tintin was a great temptation. for remind other adaptations. and for this unspoken feeling who only the Spilberg films creates. more than good animation, a great adventure. and this could be the most important to see. again." -"I know it is ""performance capture"" and all, but there are still animators at work here. And they did a terrific job too. Before the Oscar nominations went out, I had one clear winner: This movie as Best Animated Feature. Didn't happen, because it wasn't even nominated. Puss'n'Boots was on the other hand. Really? Nothing against that movie, it's OK, but nominated for best Picture? Really? But back to this. Not only one of the better animated (actually the best I remember seeing in 2011) movies I saw last year, but also one of the best movies in 2011 period. Spielberg did it again. I can't explain how he did it, but the movie works very well. Great comedy and action value, the set pieces work very good. I even remembered some of the comics (characters) from way back when I read some of Tin Tins comics.Of course Tintin and the other characters do have many names in different countries. In Germany he's called Tim (the Dog is called Struppi). The original name of the dog also seems to be Milou and not Snowy (though I have no clue what that would translate to). But no matter what you call them, this movie is awesome" -"... is clearly gripping the viewers who have reviewed this film before me. I've never read a line of the Tintin books so I had no strong feelings either way; I have seen a couple of Spielberg films but again found them fairly ho hum. Nevertheless I decided to give this one a shot but it might have been a shot of strong liquor because I kept nodding off. This is not to say it was bad but clearly it wasn't that good. Unlike some posters the three D didn't bother me but neither did it enhance what seemed a fairly bland plot and I found myself straining a little too hard to discern the actors behind the effects. If I hadn't known, for example, that Andy Serkis was playing the old sea dog I'd have been hard put to get beyond the bulbous nose - I've seen Serkis on stage in London several times before he became well known, often in small theatres where one is close to the stage - and I still don't know who Daniel Craig was. On the other hand many posters have stated that this is a fine example of a 'family' film and I'll go along with that." -"I know it is ""performance capture"" and all, but there are still animators at work here. And they did a terrific job too. Before the Oscar nominations went out, I had one clear winner: This movie as Best Animated Feature. Didn't happen, because it wasn't even nominated. Puss'n'Boots was on the other hand. Really? Nothing against that movie, it's OK, but nominated for best Picture? Really? But back to this. Not only one of the better animated (actually the best I remember seeing in 2011) movies I saw last year, but also one of the best movies in 2011 period. Spielberg did it again. I can't explain how he did it, but the movie works very well. Great comedy and action value, the set pieces work very good. I even remembered some of the comics (characters) from way back when I read some of Tin Tins comics.Of course Tintin and the other characters do have many names in different countries. In Germany he's called Tim (the Dog is called Struppi). The original name of the dog also seems to be Milou and not Snowy (though I have no clue what that would translate to). But no matter what you call them, this movie is awesome" -"With a job that has him traveling around the country firing people, Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) leads an empty life out of a suitcase, until his company does the unexpected: ground him.On a technical level, the film is well made. It looks good, the script is decent, and any film with George Clooney has to be at least mostly good. He is one of the great actors of our time. And the ""twist"" was predictable yet redeeming to such a standard romance. Heck, I even appreciated the political message of what it is like to be unemployed.But I found the mix of comedy and drama to fail, especially because the drama was so boring compared with the comedy. The balance was off. A few good moments -- with Sam Elliott and Young MC -- did not make up for the lazy romance, Anna Kendrick's atrocious acting, or the awful soundtrack.I still have to give it a good rating because, heck, it is still a good movie. But so much was unbalanced, and it would probably have worked best as a straight comedy." -"Scientists who have created a new species with an eye toward genetically created products decide to splice in human genes in their next go round. The resulting animal human hybrid begins growing rapidly and there are complications.Hailed by some as a masterpiece of modern horror and by others as a mess I fall somewhere in the middle.The problem for me stems from the two leads played by Sarah Polley and Adrian Brody who are the two scientists. They are too cold and calculating too hard really like and its real easy to see their fall from hubris. On the other hand the film does create a certain amount of frisson from the situations. In a weird way the small creature (and the original species) are genuine creepy, especially intellectually. The film mostly manages to over come its weaknesses until the final half our or so when things begin to spiral out in well worn horror movie tropes. To me the fact that the film wasn't completely going the typical horror movie route won me over however the final twists (and too many abilities by the creature) make what could have been a really good film into an okay one.Worth a look, but its not something you need run out to see." -"SPLICE (2010) *** Adrien Brody, Sarah Polley, Delphine Chaneac, Brandon McGibbon, Simona Maicanescu, David Hewlett, Abigail Chu. Sci-fi thriller hybrid of ""Frankenstein""; ""The Island of Dr. Moreau""/""Species"" and Cronenbergian fear of the flesh fantasia in this absorbing tale of genetic splicing gone amok in the careful-what-you-wish-for-don't – mess-with-Mother Nature – tropes that still are buoyed by strong acting from its leads Brody & Polley who face their biggest challenge in containing their latest creation – ""Dren"" (wonderfully portrayed by Chu as a child and kudos to the ethereal Chaneac as the full-grown 'adult') – whose unique blend of human DNA with many animal mutations results in a chilling cocktail of playing God for a price. Sleekly directed by Vincenzo Natali (who co-wrote the smart screenplay with Antoinette Terry Bryant and Doug Taylor with some amazing CGI/make-up visual effects seamlessly blended making ""Dren"" a vision of reviled beauty. Guillermo del Toro is one of the executive producers." -"MY BLOODY VALENTINE: 3-D (2009) *** Jensen Ackles, Jaime King, Kerr Smith, Betsy Rue, Edi Gathegi, Tom Atkins, Kevin Tighe, Megan Boone, Karen Baum, Joy de la Paz. Far better than imagined remake of the camp Canadian 1981 slasher about a pick-axe wielding maniac stalking a small Pennsylvanian coal-mining hamlet with vengeance on his mind a decade after the events of his previous slay-ride. Filmed in amazing 3-D the bloody crime-spree packs a visceral wallop and does not go light on the grisly sequences ; thank you gore hounds! Fun and tense just like the old school killer-on-the-loose genre from decades ago; a real crowd-pleaser (dig that flying jawbone!) (Dir: Patrick Lussier)" -"Harmony, Pennsylvania has barely had time to forget a tragic mining accident that happened ten years ago. The lone miner to survive, Harry Warden(Rich Walters), awakens from a coma on Valentine's Day and brutally murders over twenty people with a pickax. Another survivor, Tom Harringer(Jensen Ackles), comes back to Harmony after a stint in a mental institute to sell that mining company inherited from his father. The mining company still means a livelihood for most of the town; but there is still those horrible memories of the deadly mineshaft. Once again there is a slayer on the loose wearing a miner's mask and brandishing a pickax.There is plenty of graphic murders...pretty damn gory; and you know that is what we all like. My favorite scene is where a naked bimbo is chasing a trucker in a motel parking lot wanting the recently shot homemade sex tape. She is then chased by the crazed miner that is running amok. Not totally cheesy, but a well paced horror/thriller in which director Patrick Lussier keeps the actual killer's identity a secret for as long as he can. Being disappointed is not an option.Also in the cast: Jaime King, Kerr Smith, Kevin Tighe, Ted Farmer and Betsy Rue." -"Nine out of ten times when a novel, play, or a film attracts rave reviews it will disappoint so I was prepared to be underwhelmed when I checked this one out on the strength of the positive press but I have to say that it lived up to all the hype and more. In one sense it is an old fashioned story told in an old fashioned way by which I mean a rock solid screenplay which draws equally rock solid direction and acting with nary a cgi to be seen just good old bread-and-butter master shot, two shot, long shot, close shot and so on, which is all you need when you have a tale to tell and know how to tell it. I didn't know a single person either in front of or behind the camera but that didn't matter because everyone was on the ball and seemed united in a common goal, to deliver solid entertainment. Congratulations, guys, you succeeded, in spades." -"This film is about a man working in the Justice Department trying to find justice in a rape and murder case, even with lots of obstacles and after 25 years has passed.""The Secret in Their Eyes"" has a very well written plot. The story is told engagingly in an interwoven series of flashbacks and the present time, but it is never confusing. There are slow parts, and the constant dialog makes it hard for me to keep up with the subtitles. However, the plot is still told in an engaging manner, that makes viewers connect and sympathise with the characters' tragedy and the injustice behind it. The ending is very powerful, I find myself holding my breath for fear of missing any bit of information due to my breathing sound. It's that intense!" -"This film is about a man working in the Justice Department trying to find justice in a rape and murder case, even with lots of obstacles and after 25 years has passed.""The Secret in Their Eyes"" has a very well written plot. The story is told engagingly in an interwoven series of flashbacks and the present time, but it is never confusing. There are slow parts, and the constant dialog makes it hard for me to keep up with the subtitles. However, the plot is still told in an engaging manner, that makes viewers connect and sympathise with the characters' tragedy and the injustice behind it. The ending is very powerful, I find myself holding my breath for fear of missing any bit of information due to my breathing sound. It's that intense!" -"Had potential, but ends up as another common-or-garden creature-horror movie. Plot is predictable and formulaic - pretty much Jaws In A Lake, and a b-grade attempt at that. Direction is paint-by-numbers. Most amazingly for a 3-D movie, the CGI isn't that great.Acting is so-so. Elizabeth Shue does her best with a dud script. Steven McQueen is one-dimensional. Jerry O'Connell only ever had one dimension to his acting. Ving Rhames has never had any pretense to be anything more than an action actor, and does that role well here.Jessica Szohr is good in her role, and Kelly Brook (and dozens of other girls) provide the eye candy.Brief cameo from Richard Dreyfuss, in a clear link and homage to Jaws. Christopher Lloyd does one of his usual over-the-top insane performances.Could have been a new and innovative take on a genre, but wasn't." -"Whether rich or poor, illness does descend upon us and while this is not a picture about arguing about letting go when someone is hopelessly ill with no chance of recovery, it is about the relations of the husband and his daughters, wealthy people, that ensue when their mother is critically injured in a boating accident.Imagine the shock of the father, George Clooney in a remarkably compelling, but restrained performance, learns that his wife was having an affair with a man who would ultimately benefit from the large parcel of land that is being sold in Hawaii.This excellent film details the human relations involved with a totally wealthy, but dysfunctional family. It also shows how they shall coalesce ultimately when the chips are down.Robert Forster, as the dying woman's father, has some acting stealing scenes as the hard driven materialistic person who only can think what a neglectful Clooney should have done and about the proposed sale of the land.A terrific film with fine performances by all." -"I liked the first Transformers, and while it did have its problems the second was better than I expected. I came into the cinema not expecting much, but I left feeling very underwhelmed. Other than the amazing effects, authentic sound, quite excellent action and above average cinematography and editing, this Transformers entry was a waste of time in my opinion.In my opinion Transformers:Dark of the Moon is the dullest and worst of the three. The first half is poorly paced and dull to the point of boredom, and while the second half fares much better due to the action it came too late and wasn't enough to stop the film from becoming a messy bore overall. The dialogue is stupid and formulaic, the film is much too long and the story is choppy and confused complete with a messy ending.Michael Bay's direction is another low point, it is murky and unfocused throughout, while the characters are either underused(the robots) or annoying(John Tuturro's character). The acting is not great at all, the voice work is decent, however John Malkovich is wasted, Shia LaBoeuf's easy going charm doesn't disguise the fact his performance is uncharismatic and dull, Patrick Dempsey(performance and character) is useless, John Tuturro tries hard but ends up over-compensating and the less said about the lovely but bland replacement for Megan Fox Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, the better.All in all, a mess and the worst of the three. 3.5/10 Bethany Cox" -"'The Raid: Redemption' is an action-packed film, about the good fighting the evil. Well-Made & agreeably claustrophobic, this one's A Rousing BloodBath.'The Raid: Redemption' Synopsis: A S.W.A.T. team becomes trapped in a tenement run by a ruthless mobster and his army of killers and thugs.Before I write any further, let me know inform the Faint-Hearted to stay miles away from 'The Raid: Redemption'. The brutality from start to end, will put you off completely. I myself looked from the screen, due to its relentless violence. But, for action-junkies, 'The Raid: Redemption' is their orgasm. I mean, wow! The Action-Sequences are brilliantly performed & executed. Each & Every Stunt packs a punch. The Action, here, is simply mind blowing!On the whole, despite a few narrative hiccups, 'The Raid: Redemption' pushes the action genre ahead with a fierce kick." -"Filmed in Jakarta with an Indonesian cast and crew this is an undoubted tour de force from Welsh director Gareth Evans. It begins at full pelt with an armed police team going into a notorious tower block inhabited by a motley crew of baddies, all connected, in one way or another with the drug trade and affiliated criminal activities. As soon as the ferocious action begins I am that, yes, I realised this was what the film was about (a clue is in the title) but can this hold my attention for forty minutes? Actually, although the trick here is not to cut to other activity or pause for a romantic interlude but instead to vary the instruments of war. So, from the automatic weapons of the opening we go all the way to extreme hand to hand and foot to foot martial arts and there is little time to stop to think. We even switch heroes to ring the changes and develop the story a little. But it is the fights, varied, fast and wonderfully choreographed that truly dominate this unique film, Not sure that I am ready for the two and a half hour follow up but this is very impressive and if you have fond memories of early Hong Kong movies and 70s Jackie Chan, this is for you." -"Atmospherically Glum and Goosebumby with its well Mounted Cinematography and Stunning, Captivating, Realistic, Scientific Devices makes this Muddled Movie Forever Watchable.The Good Acting from the whole Cast Lead by Rebecca Hall and Dominic West also can Attract Attention.But after the Story Unfolds and Certain Things are Revealed, the Film just Collapses under the Weight of Ambiguity, Confusion, and a Desire to Wallow in its Own Cleverness. It is one of the most Mysterious Missteps in Recent Movies about Ghosts, Haunting, and the Paranormal.It leaves the Viewer Deflated of the Awesome Spectacle and Spectres Previously on Display. A Display that Captured and set a Convincing, Terrifying Tone. But what Followed was, in the Last 20 Minutes, so Mishandled and Unfocused that it seemed like Another Writer and Director Took Over the Project.Everything that made the Jarring Journey Unsettling was Discarded for a Wispy Wind-Up that Wanders All Over the Place with an Aloof Attitude about the Devastating and Consequential Considerings that made the Story so Profound to Begin with." -"It's 1921 after the horrors of WWI, England is full of charlatans trying to scam grieving people. Florence Cathcart (Rebecca Hall) is a professional skeptic driven to exposing hoaxes and getting the cons arrested. Robert Mallory (Dominic West) invites her to investigate a ghost at a boarding school. There was a murder long ago that could be the source, and recently a student had died. Florence is met by governess Maud Hill (Imelda Staunton) and the boy Thomas Hill. Teachers and staff soon goes on vacation leaving Florence alone with Robert, Maud and Tom in the school.This setting has a good old fashion atmosphere. It's basically a big old isolated building with a handful of people and a ghost story. You can't really get any more classic than that. The story does have a convoluted twist that could be quite problematic. I was able to follow the twist, and I'm fine with it. Rebecca Hall is a nice capable actress. And she makes a good avenging heroine and a damsel in distress." -"Anthony (Mario Cantone) and Stanford (Willie Garson) are getting married with Liza Minnelli doing a big performance. Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) is struggling to define her marriage to Mr Big (Chris Noth). Samantha (Kim Cattrall) is keeping her libido up with lots of 'natural' hormones. Charlotte (Kristin Davis) has a new buxom nanny Erin (Alice Eve). Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) is actually happily settled. Samantha is invited by an Arab movie producer to Abu Dhabi. The girls accept the free luxurious vacation. Samantha's drugs are confiscated and Carrie runs into Aidan (John Corbett).First of all, I was shocked by Alice Eve's wet T-shirt moment. I'm not complaining or prudish about the nudity but rather it's such a guy movie move. Charlotte's break down is actually a pretty good dramatic moment. Carrie is a bit whiny in her 'problem'. Samantha is over-the-top and has some ridiculous fun. Then the movie goes to Abu Dhabi and the movie becomes stupid. The hotel feels wrong. The high flying girls become condescending to the lowly help without actually even trying. The workers are so subservient that it simply looks bad. Then there is the clash of culture. It may work in a more serious franchise but the frivolity clashes with the seriousness. It also isn't the point. The movie basically challenges sex and takes the girls out of the city. The franchise is called 'Sex and the City'. It's all wrong-headed." -"I didn't expect anything more from this movie, so I guess it depends on your expectations going into it. I also think that there won't be many people watching this, that haven't at least seen the first ""SatC"" movie. Though most will probably have caught the series/TV show too. I'm saying that because this all builds into the expectations I was talking about. While the first movie did try to involve as much people as possible from the show, this actually does try to single out (no pun intended) our ladies! And it actually succeeds in doing just that. It peels off some of the layers, which also makes it less complex, but therefor more focused on the ladies. And the ladies do have fun (it's obvious), though especially Carrie has the biggest part of the pie (or so it seems). Which also incidentally was something that was argued about, if you believe the tabloid press.But those are things, that do not interest me (and I actually don't mind the ""singer"" in this movie, though she got quite some heat for her performance ... I just didn't take it seriously). The movie is quite nice as it is and might bring yet another (extended) episode to your home ... if you let it!" -"Sex and The City 2It is very important for a woman to have girlfriends that are not only caring and compassionate but also wear the same size as her.Fortunately, besides being fluent in fashion, the four females in this franchise follow-up are also interminable conservationists.When Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte (Kristin Davis), Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) and Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) are invited to Abu Dhabi, their Western ways, PDA and abhorrence of Muslim culture lands them in hot water with the locals.What's more, an old beau causes Carrie to question her marriage to Mr. Big (Chris Noth).A scant improvement over its 2008 predecessor, S&TC2 finds the characters returning to their crude confabs; unfortunately, those rude roundtables are interspersed with condemnations on how Muslim women dress.I mean, come on, how would we feel if four Muslim women came here and started complaining about how we let our daughters dress like sluts? (Red Light)" -"Sex and The City 2It is very important for a woman to have girlfriends that are not only caring and compassionate but also wear the same size as her.Fortunately, besides being fluent in fashion, the four females in this franchise follow-up are also interminable conservationists.When Samantha (Kim Cattrall), Charlotte (Kristin Davis), Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) and Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) are invited to Abu Dhabi, their Western ways, PDA and abhorrence of Muslim culture lands them in hot water with the locals.What's more, an old beau causes Carrie to question her marriage to Mr. Big (Chris Noth).A scant improvement over its 2008 predecessor, S&TC2 finds the characters returning to their crude confabs; unfortunately, those rude roundtables are interspersed with condemnations on how Muslim women dress.I mean, come on, how would we feel if four Muslim women came here and started complaining about how we let our daughters dress like sluts? (Red Light)" -"What's all the fuss about John Franco in this 2010 film? He is as bland here as we was as the emcee on the 83rd annual Academy Awards show.What excitement? Unfortunately, a man's hand gets trapped in a gorge and he spends 1 1/2 hours trying to free himself. He videotapes himself in the process as he thinks back to former times, which of course had to be better.We really don't have to know about his biological experiences during all this. Safe to say that it's all down-right disgusting.Who told him to go on such a desolate journey to begin with? This story, while true, is basically another Robinson Crusoe. It deals with man against the elements." -"What's all the fuss about John Franco in this 2010 film? He is as bland here as we was as the emcee on the 83rd annual Academy Awards show.What excitement? Unfortunately, a man's hand gets trapped in a gorge and he spends 1 1/2 hours trying to free himself. He videotapes himself in the process as he thinks back to former times, which of course had to be better.We really don't have to know about his biological experiences during all this. Safe to say that it's all down-right disgusting.Who told him to go on such a desolate journey to begin with? This story, while true, is basically another Robinson Crusoe. It deals with man against the elements." -"This film is about a young adventurous man's struggle to stay alive and free himself, as he gets stuck between rocks in a canyon during his solitary weekend hiking trip.""127 Hours"" is an extraordinary tale of survival. It tells how desperate measures are needed in desperate times. Viewers connect with Aron Ralston easily, as it is not unlikely that an average person encounters an accident during a hike like he did. The particularly graphic scene is disturbing and unsettling, and yet it makes viewers' spirits high in the hope of the better evil winning against the clock.The accompanying soundtrack is very good, particularly the appropriately triumphant music that plays at the end. It's good that this amazing tale of survival is told to a wider audience, as I for one would not have heard about it if it was not for this film. It inspires and provokes thoughts about life." -"Slick Camera work and Shiny Photography can't save this predictably Ponderous One-Man Show that tries very hard to keep our attention but is Doomed by the Restraint of the Situation. Much is done to give us a deep Understanding of the Psychology and Personality of this rather Boring Individual and Fails miserably to evoke any kind of Empathy or Interest. The dry barren Landscape unintentionally becomes a Metaphor for the Lame little Fellow it Imprisons. Flashbacks to Mom, Sis, and Dad are as Cliché as the Memories of His First Love and ""My life flashed before my eyes!"" Chestnut. Postcard Images and Yawn inducing Nature Shots are done with Professional competence but You can get those on the rack at the Bus Station. This is one of those Films that completely Misses the Mark on many of the Targets it so deeply wants to hit. Unfortunately the soft, Serene and Sappy Style counteracts the Need for Terror and Suspense." -"Ned is living a hippy lifestyle with his girlfriend and dog on a farm. Then and incident lands him in jail for a spell. Afterwards he decides to reunite with his three sisters. They are living more conventional lives and regard Ned as an idiot. Reunification might be difficult.Never thought I would dislike a movie that starred Zooey Deschanel and Elizabeth Banks, but here we are. Lacklustre. The humour is hit and miss, mostly miss, and the drama goes nowhere.All-star cast - the aforementioned Zooey Deschanel and Elizabeth Banks, plus Paul Rudd, Emily Mortimer and Steve Coogan - are wasted due to the aimless plot and ordinary direction." -"""Our Idiot Brother"" stars the always likable Paul Rudd as Ned Rockliffe, an idealistic ""bum"" who spends his days smoking marijuana, doing good deeds and selling organic fruits and vegetables at a local market. As he has recently been kicked out of his home, Ned spends several days living with each of his three sisters, all of whom regard him as an annoyance. By the film's end, however, Ned's friends and family have a change of heart, see the beauty of Ned's unorthodox behavior and learn to love and appreciate Rudd's kindness, optimism and willingness to forgive.It's no ""The Big Lebowski"", and the film should be smarter than it is, but director Jesse Peretz maintains an amusing tone throughout and Rudd is always a blast to watch. He's a cross between your ""slacker"" and ""holy fool"" archetype, the film recalling Dostoyevsky's ""The Idiot"", a 1868 novel in which a young man is wrongly viewed as being a naive idiot because he sees ""the truth"", rejects pretence and embraces goodness. Dostoyevsky's point: we send saints to madhouses because our world, obsessed with riches, power, ownership and sexual conquest, is simply not good enough for those brothers we, for the good of our own sanity, must label imbeciles. ""Our Idiot Brother"" co-stars the always cute Zooey Deschanel, the often underused Emiley Mortimer and the always out of place in American productions Steve Coogan.7.9/10 – Worth one viewing." -"The color animation was spectacular. A movie that should be seen in 3-D. The plot and dialogue are slightly less than colorful. It Is not one of those movies designed to keep parents overly entertained. There are a few things kids won't get, like the Carmen Miranda hat on the bull dog. The movie is about poachers, breeding almost extinct birds, and the question of animal captivity. Blu, the last blue Macaw is happy in captivity and can't fly. Jewel, his would-be mate, hates captivity and loves to fly. Animated girls in bikinis, booty shaking, and Anne Hathaway as the naked Jewel bird (She just can't keep her clothes on anymore, even in an animated film.)My 9 year old grand niece loves this movie and has seen it about 3 times." -A cute kids movie with a few actually funny moments and a unique storyline. The animation was well done and the voice acting fit the characters. An important message on a few fronts in an easy to consume format. -"On successive nights we saw two recent animated movies, ""Rango"" and ""Rio."" Both have excellent voice acting and stunningly good animation. Rio is brighter, more colorful, my wife enjoyed it more. While I enjoyed both of them, my preference tips a bit towards 'Rango."" But I really enjoyed RIO. It starts in Brazil when animal smugglers are illegally trapping various species of wildlife. A pretty blue one ends up falling off a truck in Minnesota, and becomes a lady's pet. Some years later an ornithologist from Brazil, looking for the rare blue Macaw, comes upon the bird, now an adult named Blu, and tries to convince the owner that they need to travel to Rio de Janeiro to hopefully mate with the last know female blue Macaw. They are reluctant but finally go.Most of the movie takes place in Rio, and Jesse Eisenberg voices Blu. Anne Hathaway voices Jewel, the female. In Rio they have many adventures and more than their share of misadventures, but in the end ... I wonder if Blu and Jewel actually get together? (wink, wink)SPOILERS: Yes, they do eventually escape capture and/or death several times. Well they don't really escape capture, but they figure out how to escape, even when chained together and Blu never learned to fly! But in the end he is the hero, and Blu and Jewel have a brand new litter of little blue Macaws." -"Get set for fun, action and adventure. This animated feature is about a domesticated Macaw named Blu(Jesse Eisenberg), who has yet learned to fly. He lives an ideal life with his best friend and owner Linda(Leslie Mann)in a small town in Minnesota. The thought of Blu being the last of his kind goes right out the window, when they discover there is another Macaw living in Rio de Janeiro. Upon arrival in the large and exotic Rio, Blu meets a female Macaw named Jewel(Anne Hathaway); the two are kidnapped by animal smugglers. Coming to the rescue is a group of smooth-talking, street smart city birds. After Blu is able to escape, he now relies on his new friends to help him learn to fly. Thus Blu is now a bird on the move and is able to stay ahead of the kidnappers still in pursuit.Outstanding animation and color; lively music and comedy for the entire family. Rounding out the talented collection of stars providing voices: Jamie Foxx, Will I Am, Tracy Morgan, George Lopez and Wanda Sykes." -"I did read the novel and I did get the same sense from the film. I wondered why this was chosen to be made into a film (probably in the aftermath of ""No Country for Old Men""). What we have here is our future. At some point it will look like this with the human species hoping to grasp that last straw as they sink in the mire. The acting is excellent, but everything is so hopeless. There's hunger, disease, infection, despair, and all that good stuff. There are two people we like and we relish each positive moment. A shower, a can of peaches, a kind word, whatever is enough to raise the spirits. At some point we will find a way to do this to ourselves or some fanatic will do it for us. I remember watching ""The Day After"" some twenty-five years or so ago. It left me with a hopefulness. As we ignore the forces in the world and they slip past the point of no return, I think Cormac McCarthy probably has seen a vision. I hope I'm wrong. When we lose compassion for our fellow human beings and judge them in our short sighted, petty ways, we get the future we've asked for." -"the job of John Willcoat was far to be easy. because the novel propose a style more than images. because the emotions seems out of decent translation in image. because the explanations about the catastrophe are more important in adaptation. but The Road is a beautiful film. not exactly as adaptation. but as shadow of Cormack McCarthy's lines. nothing new, nothing different. only subtle and precise definition of fragments from novel who gives more coherence to a image or another. the atmosphere, the fragments of past, the love for the son , the small gestures are presented in the most inspired manner. the end seams more clear. the run and fear and tension are almost tangible. the style of a great writer, an admirable novel are served by a film who ignore to propose answers but who represents a warning more clear than lines. a film who must see. for its special message." -"A man (Viggo Mortensen) struggles to survive a post apocalyptic world with his son (Kodi Smit-McPhee). It is a damned hopeless existence of cannibals and desolation. No animal has survived and even the trees are almost all burnt. They have a gun with only two bullets. In flashbacks, the man and his pregnant wife (Charlize Theron) initially survive the devastation.The difference between this movie and the rest of the apocalyptic genre is the utter hopelessness. Most of them would give some hope or a mission to save the world. This one has nothing but the bleakest of vision. There is a question about morality in a hopeless world. Exactly how far would he go to have his son survive. Could they still be the good guys? I would have liked him to face an ultimate choice in a final showdown." -"I did read the novel and I did get the same sense from the film. I wondered why this was chosen to be made into a film (probably in the aftermath of ""No Country for Old Men""). What we have here is our future. At some point it will look like this with the human species hoping to grasp that last straw as they sink in the mire. The acting is excellent, but everything is so hopeless. There's hunger, disease, infection, despair, and all that good stuff. There are two people we like and we relish each positive moment. A shower, a can of peaches, a kind word, whatever is enough to raise the spirits. At some point we will find a way to do this to ourselves or some fanatic will do it for us. I remember watching ""The Day After"" some twenty-five years or so ago. It left me with a hopefulness. As we ignore the forces in the world and they slip past the point of no return, I think Cormac McCarthy probably has seen a vision. I hope I'm wrong. When we lose compassion for our fellow human beings and judge them in our short sighted, petty ways, we get the future we've asked for." -"If you want 90 minutes of torture porn then this film is it served with a rather starry cast and a cherry pie.Samuel L Jackson is the torturer in chief and Michael Sheen is a Jihadist bomber being the interrogation victim.Of course the film is a morality tale and could equally work as a stage show. Stripped away from its film setting it is essentially a three hander of Sheen, Jackson and Carrie Ann Moss.The film asks the question of how far will you go in order to possibly save lives.?Would you break the constitution, rules of natural justice, human rights laws in order to gain the necessary information that will find bombs primed to go off and destroy thousands of lives?Will you torture and kill the suspect's friends and family who are innocent in order to get the information you require?The film is certainly provocative, it makes you ask questions and is uncomfortable viewing.Is it really entertainment that I enjoyed? The answer is no.The film just about stays on the right side of silliness although Jackson's kick ass special interrogator does not help and the filmmakers should had considered the roles between Jackson and Sheen being reversed." -"If you want 90 minutes of torture porn then this film is it served with a rather starry cast and a cherry pie.Samuel L Jackson is the torturer in chief and Michael Sheen is a Jihadist bomber being the interrogation victim.Of course the film is a morality tale and could equally work as a stage show. Stripped away from its film setting it is essentially a three hander of Sheen, Jackson and Carrie Ann Moss.The film asks the question of how far will you go in order to possibly save lives.?Would you break the constitution, rules of natural justice, human rights laws in order to gain the necessary information that will find bombs primed to go off and destroy thousands of lives?Will you torture and kill the suspect's friends and family who are innocent in order to get the information you require?The film is certainly provocative, it makes you ask questions and is uncomfortable viewing.Is it really entertainment that I enjoyed? The answer is no.The film just about stays on the right side of silliness although Jackson's kick ass special interrogator does not help and the filmmakers should had considered the roles between Jackson and Sheen being reversed." -"This film tells the story of a terrorist who is caught for putting three nuclear devices in urban areas of USA. The government has only a few days to interrogate him where the bombs are, and the interrogators will stop at nothing to get information out of him.I thought ""Unthinkable"" is about the consequences of the three massive explosions, but it is more about the unthinkable methods used in the interrogation. The plot is very engaging and disturbing. The actors do such a convincing job, especially Martin Sheen and Samuel L Jackson. The maniacal atmosphere, and the horror of suffering is very palpable. I'm in awe of the plot, it truly is thrilling from the first second right until the last second. I can see why it struggled to find theatrical release in the USA, which is a pity as this well made thriller deserves a wider audience." -"I have been a fan of the Muppets since I started watching ""The Muppet Show"" as a child during the 70s. Though after ""Muppets From Space"", I was starting to wonder if the magic had gone. Thankfully, this movie shows there is still life in this franchise. Although it will help if you're familiar with the Muppets, there's still enough in this movie to tickle and warm the heart of those unfamiliar with the characters. Personally, I was extra thrilled by the fact that they brought back Rowlf - my favorite Muppet - and gave him some lines of dialogue. In fact, many of the classic characters are resurrected and play a part in the movie.As much as I enjoyed the movie, I did have two minor quibbles:(1) The movie never really examines the issue of why the Muppets had disbanded. They split up years ago... but why? It's a noticeable gap in the narrative.(2) Some of the Muppets don't sound quite like they did years ago. Now, I realize some of the classic Muppet performers have died, and that Frank Oz couldn't be coaxed out of retirement, but I think they could have searched harder for voice actors who sounded more like the original performers.But apart from those minor flaws, the movie is definitely worth seeing, whether you are 8 or 80." -"If you haven't already that is of course. And while I tried to tell myself that I didn't like the movie, it just is impossible not to like it (at least for me). It really is sweet and innocent (compared to other movies trying to reach mature audiences with some weird adult jokes), but still has a lot going for itself.The success at the Box Office showed that there is an audience for the Muppets. It also seems that a second movie has been green-lit. It'd be great if Jason Segal would again take over the scripting duty (even if it doesn't look like it right now). Even character turns do not feel as bad as in other movies. Those last minute I'm gonna change who I am and be another ""character"" are tricky. Yes those are puppets and yes it's not for everyone. But if you let yourself into this world, you will be entertained!" -Disney (with a little help of Jason Segel) bring The Muppets back to the big screen and re-introduce them to an audience that knew and loved them first time round while also setting them up for new viewers.It has all the warmth and charm you'd expect to see in a kids film while also smartly not taking itself too seriously. The songs are good and Man Or A Muppet lives up to the hype. The characters are as endearing as ever and Disney do justice to Henson's classic creations.The story has it's problems and in five years time some of the people who appear in cameos will have faded from memory but for 2012 audiences they work.I'm no Jason Segel fan but you can't fault him for the sheer enthusiasm that he brings to the film and is supported well by Amy Adams who does this sort of film in her sleep. If you like the Muppets or just want a good family film then this could be the one for you. -"Thank you, RiffTrax. Without you, I couldn't have made it through The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1. This movie is awful, plain and simple. The acting and dialogue are terrible, as I've come to expect with this franchise, and it's an incredibly boring movie. You can practically hear the filmmakers stretching scenes out so the razor-thin plot could be spread over two movies. The only redeeming quality of Breaking Dawn - Part 1 is the visual effects that were used to make Kristen Stewart look terrible. This isn't a good movie - if you think it is, you're lying to yourself." -"My wife just could not wait to see Breaking Dawn! I took my wife to Breaking Dawn, and I was one of the few guys in the theater. The movie is different from Expendables! Breaking Dawn is like a Romance Novel. Edward and Bella get married and go on their honeymoon. Then a problem arises! The movie has it all. Conflict, babies, two guys interested in one girl etc. The movie picked up in the second half when the conflict began. The usual Edward/Jacob feud continues. Well, acted, and directed movie. There was no inconsistencies or bad acting with Breaking Dawn. I would give the movie a 6 out of 10, but my wife would give it a 10. She is upset that she has to wait a full year for part 2 especially since it is already filmed. The movie company and actors are just trying to make more bucks off of the series just like Harry Potter." -"Bella (Kristen Stewart) and Edwards (Robert Pattinson) get married gathering the disparate parts of their lives together. Jacob (Taylor Lautner) is not happy. On their honeymoon, Bella gets pregnant which is impossible. The baby grows abnormally fast and the wolf pack fears it as a threat.This is basically fan service. Of course, nobody has any reasons to watch this other than fans of the franchise. The first half hour is the wedding and it's not anything other than a few soap opera highlights. The second half hour is the honeymoon most notable for breaking the bed. When Bella gets pregnant, it becomes fully a soap opera. The baby is a little creepy like 'Rosemary's Baby'. This installment feels like it's mostly setting up for a big finale." -"he is the only realistic motif to see this bizarre film. but a flower does not a season. the good intentions of an actor, the hope to resurrect a brand, the darkness in new nuances are not the good choice. first - the theme is part from another cinema age. then , Jason Momoa does his the best.the presence of Stephen Lang and Ron Pearlman is symbolic. maybe, to act in a film who could be reduced at few fight scene, eccentric costumes and a lot of clichés is not a good option. except colors and remind of old fairy tales theme, Conan has nothing interesting.because the script is a joke and the respect for poor Momoa is high scene by scene because except his physical virtues, far being by a new version of Schwarzenegger, he tries to do a decent work. but nothing helps him. so, a film for a too precise target . for the others, convincing invitation to return to the original Conan." -"CONAN THE BARBARIAN (2011) *** Jason Momoa, Stephen Lang, Rachel Nichols, Ron Perlman, Rose McGowan, Leo Howard. Better-than-expected and brutally violent bloodletting origin story of the pulp fiction/Marvel Comics' warrior hero cum remake with Momoa fitting into Ah-nold's sandals nicely as the beefcake barbarian out to vanquish the murderer of his father (respectively Lang having a field day & Perlman at his burliest) and saving a virginal princess (the lush Nichols) in the process . Director Marcus Nispel gets all the graphic but none of the novel thanks to the flat-footed screenplay by Thomas Dean Donnelly, Joshua Oppenheimer and Sean Hood. But the film's saving grace (and no, not the hit-miss 3-D) is McGowan as Lang's sexily evil witchy offspring with her delish Lady Ga-Ga homage if you will; bewitching indeed" -"This movie was a waste of a big budget and an alright cast. Jason Momoa actually looks quite the part and his demeanour is quite good. Rachel Nichols is quite pretty. However the story is so lacking in adventure, romance wit or thrill nothing can save it. You don't feel for any of the characters. The excessive graphic violence from beginning to end just overwhelms this movie. I know they were aiming to make something darker and less family oriented than Scorpion King etc but they went overboard here. There are just too many slashings and dismemberings. Don't bother with this one - it's terrible from start to finish. The original with Arnold was better." -"There is many reasons why you shouldn't like this movie. It's dialogue, the acting and the story as it is. But while all those things appear very mindless and barbaric, this might also be something might somehow appeal to you. I thought it was so senseless that it kinda was fun to watch in a strange way.Of course Momoa will not delete Schwarzenegger from our memory and the latter will be remembered as the ultimate Conan yet. But while I have no idea how the Comic Conan is, I can tell you that you are better off, finding something to cling on in this, then just wince your way through it. Plus you have to give them kudos for going R-rated from the get-go (could you imagine a PG-13 Conan? Exactly!). So while not really good, it kinda can be fun" -"I've now seen all four Shrek movies in first run in theatres. The first two were great and the last one wasn't so bad to me but this one, which should be the last one considering the way it ends, had a little more heart in characterization that got me quite touched which probably shouldn't surprise anyone who's read many of my comments under my username if they know that my favorite movie is It's a Wonderful Life since there are many elements here inspired from there. Kudos, as always, to the voices of Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Antonio Banderas, and especially Mike Myers, for providing great pleasure these characters have provided me over the years. Seeing the character of Rumpelstiltskin as the villain was quite a good new twist here. And having the witches battle the ogres was also an exciting touch. And how about the way Puss in Boots lets himself go... Okay, I'll just say I highly recommend Shrek Forever After. And so long, Far Far Away...P.S. This was another animated movie I enjoyed watching in 3-D." -"The fourth movie in the Shrek franchise is the last of the feature-length cartoons. But don't despair, because you can always watch the Halloween and Christmas specials! Speaking of Christmas, Shrek Forever After is pretty much the fractured fairy tale's take on It's a Wonderful Life. While bogged down with domestic burdens, Shrek yells at his wife and kids and storms out of the house in a huff. He meets up with a mysterious magical being who makes it so that he was never born. Sound familiar? Alright, so in this movie, Shrek makes a deal with Rumpelstiltskin, not with Clarence the Angel, but it's still a similar premise.That's where the similarities stop, though. Instead of a touching tribute to family life or the love he really feels for Fiona, Shrek is thrust into more fighting, kidnapping, underground rebels, and weird futuristic time problems. Pretty much all audience members agreed that the fourth installment was the weakest, which might be why Dreamworks stopped before making a fifth. But I don't feel too bad about it, and I hope you don't. It's pretty rare for a series to end in a way that pleases everyone, and we can always go back and watch our favorite ones from earlier, can't we? And let's all remember how much joy and laughter Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Dreamworks studio, all the assorted screenwriters brought us throughout the past nine years. A big thank you all of them!" -"This film is about Shrek the ogre missing his old days when he was an ogre that people feared. He signs a magical contract with grave consequences, and he had to rectify his mistake.The beginning of ""Shrek Forever After"" was not so promising, as the scenes were filled with the same jokes over and over again. And the jokes, which consists of mostly belching and other annoying things, were not even that funny. After the unpromising start, the film remains dull and unfunny. The plot is thin, even considering that I know I am not watching an Oscar worthy film. The jokes and novelties are wearing thin, and they should have stopped at ""Shrek the Third""." -"Dreamworks have smartly ended this series before it continued its decline. The first two films were excellent and while these last two have still had a lot of charm and humour they have lacked that vital punch that separates a good family film from being a great family film.This film may be a slight improvement on the last one but there are still a lot of weaker jokes and already dated pop culture references that miss the mark. All the beloved characters return but by now the format is looking slightly tired. It is a nice final chapter for the fans but it feels right that this is Shreks last outing. Overall the Shrek saga has been an enjoyable one with lots of nice lines and characters. You could quite happily buy the whole box-set and find good moments in all four films, the problem is that these moments got a little far and few between in the last two films." -"Samantha (Jocelin Donahue) is a college student who is trying to get her own place off campus. She secures the house, but is desperately short of funds. After some strange occurrences lead her to a babysitting job, Samantha figures she still has a chance of escaping her current, slob-of-a roommate. Of course, nothing is as it appears to be. When Samantha arrives at the home, the macabre, dreadful fun begins!Ti West's THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL is a slow-building, ultimately gruesome / shocking throwback film. West perfectly captures the look and feel of the 1980's, then, ups the satanic factor slowly until he hits utter chaos and nightmare mode, for the frenzied finale!Ms. Donahue is great as the unwary one, drawn into the increasingly dark unknown. Greta Gerwig is also good as Samantha's goofy friend, Megan.However, it's Tom Noonan and Mary Woronov who steal the whole, devilish show! Noonan is imposing and enigmatic, but Ms. Woronov is absolutely menacing! Having seen her in many of her more off-beat, humorous roles, it's wonderful to witness her being so disturbing and scary!Some have dismissed this film as being ""boring"". Well, it's not, though it does demand our attention, and rewards it generously..." -"In the 1980s, college student Samantha Hughes (Jocelin Donahue) takes a strange babysitting job that coincides with a full lunar eclipse. She slowly realizes her clients harbor a terrifying secret.I absolutely love that director Ti West did everything he could to make this come off as a 1980s movie -- the style, the 16mm camera, releasing the film in a clam shell box (I am surprised they actually allowed this last one). Opinions vary, but I think it is safe to say the (modern) golden age for horror was the 1980s. And here we are, adding another 80s film to the list (sort of).West also managed to hire genre actors Tom Noonan, Dee Wallace and Mary Woronov for the picture, which I think fans appreciate. Larry Fessenden served as a producer, and this may be the best project Fessenden was ever attached to.What I find as strange is how this film is very highly rated by people. Not that it is a bad film. I enjoyed it. But I think it is interesting that the film gets a lot of credit for working in the 1980s style. Had this identical film come out in the 1980s, it may have hardly registered among its peers. This film rides the wave of nostalgia... and it rides it well." -"As a deadly battle rages over Jigsaw's brutal legacy, a group of Jigsaw survivors gathers to seek the support of self-help guru and fellow survivor Bobby Dagen, a man whose own dark secrets unleash a new wave of terror.Let us just say it: the best film in the series was the first one. Part two was decent, but after that it was a convoluted mess and it became more and more challenging to keep the characters and plot straight. While this film does its best to tie everything together (especially by bringing back Dr. Gordon), it is still part seven within seven years... and if not the weakest, at least among the worst. The 3D was not needed, and we have moved far away from the tight story we started with.For what it is worth, I have to give credit to writers Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan. First of all, they are nice guys. And second, they have done a fine job writing this film (and the other films they have done). If I was given the chance to write a film, I would too, so I cannot put the blame on them. If anything, they deserve credit for writing a script that kills the series. I cannot hold it against the director, either... he has been involved since day one in the series, so this could be seen as his baby more than anyone else's, perhaps." -"The SAW franchise does not finish quietly. The ruthless,insane Jigsaw(Tobin Bell)with his brutal and twisted spirit are recalled by survivor Bobby Dagen(Sean Patrick Flanery), whose own dark secrets are brought to the forefront. The infamous and terrifying human traps are recalled in flashbacks by the few that escaped with their lives. To be exact this is probably the most interesting plot since the original movie. A satisfying conclusion to the series responsible for hundreds of screams, flinches and white knuckles. There is the suspicion that Dagen is not the survivor, he claims; but actually a Jigsaw wannabe. Featured in this installment: Betsy Russell, Cary Elwes, Gina Holden, Rebecca Marshall, Chad Donella and Laurence Anthony." -"As a deadly battle rages over Jigsaw's brutal legacy, a group of Jigsaw survivors gathers to seek the support of self-help guru and fellow survivor Bobby Dagen, a man whose own dark secrets unleash a new wave of terror.Let us just say it: the best film in the series was the first one. Part two was decent, but after that it was a convoluted mess and it became more and more challenging to keep the characters and plot straight. While this film does its best to tie everything together (especially by bringing back Dr. Gordon), it is still part seven within seven years... and if not the weakest, at least among the worst. The 3D was not needed, and we have moved far away from the tight story we started with.For what it is worth, I have to give credit to writers Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan. First of all, they are nice guys. And second, they have done a fine job writing this film (and the other films they have done). If I was given the chance to write a film, I would too, so I cannot put the blame on them. If anything, they deserve credit for writing a script that kills the series. I cannot hold it against the director, either... he has been involved since day one in the series, so this could be seen as his baby more than anyone else's, perhaps." -"I thought that this film would appeal to both men and women - I was wrong. This film was over-the-top and fairly uncomfortable to watch. It had a few bright spots, but even my wife didn't like it that much. Oh, and single men should NOT watch this movie - it will make them never want to get married." -"This film is about two childhood best friends who always dreamed of being each other's bridesmaid. However, their marriage accidentally falls on the same day.The fights in ""Bride Wars"" are pretty harmless and light hearted. They are simply mischiefs that does no permanent damage. This is important as fights can make the characters appear malicious and disgusting, as it happens with some other films that follow a similar plot. Hence, Liv and Emma still come across as likable and charming, despite their on going fights. Anne Hathaway is great in this film, she has a natural charm that breathes innocence and happiness into her character, and these qualities are exactly what ""Bride Wars"" need.I really enjoyed watching ""Bride Wars"". I found it funny and heart warming. You will enjoy it too if you put down your preconceived ideas and try to enjoy it." -"The problem with some people is that, they never wanna change with time, everyone in the world has his/her heyday... but one day it ends and a new subject starts. That's the sole problem with 'Bride Wars'. The film is plain mediocre and that's it biggest flaw. Agreed you don't go inn watching this one with gargantuan expectations, but come on... this film is routine stuff which we have seen so many times before. In a nutshell, These 2 Brides marriages are far from awaited.Performances: Anne Hathaway looks a million bucks and does a good job. Kate Hudson, the Goldie Hawn of today is pretty energetic. Others are okay.on the whole 'Bride Wars' is been there done that stuff. Watch this one, with having zero expectations." -"While out enjoying a cruise, a group of friends get stranded on the water and are rescued by a mysterious, abandoned ship, only to find themselves trapped in a nightmarish reality that none of them can prepare for and try to find a way off the cursed ship.This was a pretty tough one to get a handle on due to the fact that this one deals with changing worlds and different times, so it's nearly impossible to figure out what time you're in, especially since this one manages to wrap itself around the different time periods at once, so generation 3 is interacting and affecting generation 1 so to speak so it all just gets utterly complicated and head-spinning confusing. While this is pretty original and comes off as being intelligently-done, that's still a lot to take in. That also manages to make the film pretty bloody with all the different generations getting killed off, and the atmosphere works pretty well as the corridors of the ship are utilized to pretty good effect at times with it's long hallways and cramped rooms providing the perfect cover for the different generations to get picked off in, but overall it's just way too confusing to be anything more than that.Rated R: Graphic Language and Graphic Violence." -"Another Film that plays the Same Scenes again and again and again and again with slight Variations so We can get to the End with some kind of Resolution that Fits the Films Plot Point.By the way, the Name of the Boat is Triangle and there is No Mention of that Area of the Sea that they are Sailing, so...Who knows? Actually there is No Attempt at an Explanation for any of the Movie's Madness and this is really Lame, considering the Length it goes to be Mysterious, Terrifying, and Complex.If you are Sick of this Type of Time Bending, not Mind Bending Films (and they are wearing thin about now) You won't find Anything Fresh here, if not, You can go along for the Ride. But Don't Forget there is something Wrong when You do the Same Thing over and over expecting Different Results, expecting Different Results, expecting Different Results, expecting Different Results..." -"I would love to hate Richard Gere. He's too good-looking, and knows it. The problem is that I always enjoy his performances. His star-making turn was in AMERICAN GIGOLO, where the montage in which he makes himself beautiful using name brands began the 1980s.Yet, he takes his craft seriously, flew to Japan to work with Kurosawa, and has excelled in a wide variety of roles. So when I realized that he was working with Lasse Hallstrom in this one, I steeled myself to watch it. I love most of Hallstrom's films, but every once in a while, his weird losers just repel me. He's the Babe Ruth of the movies: the Home Run King, who is struck out more often than anyone else.Well, they don't strike out in this one. I smiled and leaked tears when the film maker thought I should. The three dogs who play Hachi at various ages are handsome creatures With Joan Allen and Jason Alexander.This movie is based on the story of Hachiko, a dog owned by a Japanese professor, who waited for him every day when his train brought him home from the university. Even after the professor had collapsed and died, the dog waited every day until his own death nine years later. Hachiko became a symbol of loyalty and inspired the revival of his breed, the Akita -- there were only thirty of them left. I don't know how many there are now, but more." -"An Akita Inu puppy, transplanted from a Japanese monastery to a picturesque town in Rhode Island, becomes lost at the train station but is soon adopted into the home of a music professor and his wife. Low-keyed American remake of a 1987 Japanese film, ""The Tale of Hachiko"", itself based upon a true story, has sweet and lovely passages, though overall content is lacking. Family-friendly movies about the bond between humans and animals nearly always work if the casting is right; here, the canine who portrays the older Hachi is a gorgeous, expressive creature--so how could the filmmakers miss? Co-produced by its star, Richard Gere, and directed by Lasse Hallström, the film touches on universal emotions when it comes to our beloved pets, but the human interaction (disconcertingly subdued throughout) is under-nourished. Playing Gere's wife, Joan Allen is unable to find a character in the writing; and when the dog is moved around in the film's latter stages, Allen's actions (and her subsequent disappearance) are puzzling. Gere doesn't really have a character to portray either, but he's appealing and unhurried in his scenes with the dog, projecting a warmly lackadaisical presence. Hallström, minus his barbed sense of human dynamics, must have helmed this project as a lark. He indeed guides the narrative with an assured, steady hand, but ""Hachi"" is far too subdued overall to make a big impact. **1/2 from ****" -"Based on the true story of a faithful Akita, the titular Hachikō, 'Hachi: A Dog's Tale' An Emotional & Beautiful Film, that will melt your heart. A True-Story about a Dog's loyalty towards his master, even after he dies, left me in tears.'Hachi: A Dog's Tale' Synopsis: A drama based on the true story of a college professor's bond with the abandoned dog he takes into his home.'Hachi: A Dog's Tale' stunned me because of how faithful a pet can be. The dog waited for his deceased master, and never gave up. Hachikō's love & faithfulness to his master, even cinematically, melts your heart & the penultimate portions, are very emotional. I cried! Stephen P. Lindsey's Screenplay is emotional & very touching. Lasse Hallström's Direction is heartfelt. Cinematography & Editing, are perfect.Performance-Wise: Hachiko, played by three Akita named Chico', Layla and Forrest — each playing a different period in Hachiko's life and his home, are the life of the show. Richard Gere as Hachiko's Master, delivers a lovable performance. Joan Allen does well. Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa, Erick Avari & Sarah Roemer are wonderful. Jason Alexander is decent.On the whole, 'Hachi: A Dog's Tale' is a GEM of a film." -"Well it's now a few years since The Unborn was released and we can safely say that its reputation as a below average horror movie is set in stone. Much like many other lazy horror movies made by directors out of their depth (here David S. Goyer proving he should stick to writing), The Unborn just plays out as a choppy experience.Good moments do dot themselves within, a couple of well executed jumps impact on those not waiting for such things, the creepy kid is a bonus, while the core menace of the story, a Dybbuk of Jewish folklore, is interesting and fresh. But Goyer has no idea in how to build suspense around his thrills, an ignorance in how to utilise the scary premise on offer. He also telegraphs the final revelation way too early, which in turn crowns a hopelessly weak last fifteen minutes, and to under use Gary Oldman (who turns up for the money) is a crime in itself.Insidious, itself proving to be a divisive film in horror fan circles, had the nous to take a similar premise to The Unborn and spin something extra into the mix, which accounts for its considerably better reputation. Until more horror film makers realise that more brains in narratives are needed, we will continue to get reams of mediocre horrors made. Sadly, such is the size of the horror fan world, these mediocre films will still get support at the box office and from rental outlets. 5/10"