tomassparups

"District 9″ was one of the most ambitious and dare I say most creative films in recent memory. The film's director, Neil Blomkamp showcased his directorial talent not only with the stylistic aspects of the film, but with the overall pacing and story. With that in mind, I would be lying if I were to say that the film did not have it's fair share of problems. "District 9″ was laced with inconsistencies and plot holes, but it's gripping story and meticulous attention to the production design forced me to ignore these nitpicks. Blomkamp's newest film "Elysium" is yet another sci-fi thriller. It stars Matt Damon, Jodie Foster and Sharlto Copley and is set in the distant-ish future. Basically, earth has become a poverty stricken, overpopulated wasteland due to mass amounts of pollution. The upper echelon of society has built a large space station in which the wealthy population can live. The space station is known as "Elysium", any virus disease or injury can be cured there with the help of the station's state of the art medical technology. Elysium's tight security is helmed by Secretary Delacourt, played by Jodie Foster who has a crazed thirst for power. The story mainly revolves around the character of Max, played by Matt Damon. Max is an engineer working at a large factory, building droids. After serving his time in prison for various crimes, Max has decided to turn his life around. Unfortunately, after a fatal accident at the factory, Max is exposed to a lethal dose of radiation and has only got five days left to live. His only hope is to get to Elysium and cure his disease. To infiltrate the stations wide array of security, Max is forced to risk his own life.

This is a pretty over the top film, especially Jodie Foster's performance. Foster plays the cliché sophisticated villain that is always bearing a snobbish grin. She speaks in a very strange accent that is sort of a mix between British and..middle eastern or south African and to top it off, she exaggerates all of her lines to the point of laughter. Not a good performance on the part of Foster. Matt Damon gives an alright performance, I would have liked for his character to have more depth and development. Otherwise, he was alright. On an entertainment level, Sharlto Copley shines bright, his character, although over the top provides for some great entertainment. He is both psychotic and likable. The production design is just wow, it is beautiful. Neil Blomkamp seems to love to indulge in the look of his films. In the case of "Elysium" we see two different worlds, both equally impressive. We see the sleek and sterile Elysium and the ruined, dingy Earth. It is fair to say that the stylistic aspects of the film are a win on behalf of Neil Blomkamp. Like "District 9″, "Elysium" has a fair amount of political and social commentaries. This time regarding healthcare and immigration. I'm not going to go into great depths in regard to the film's underlying themes, because i'm just not up for it.

Here is a film that is incredibly over the top and at times ludicrous, even for a science fiction film, but it still holds up as an entertaining watch. It relies on it's stunning production design and overall style as well as the well played out action sequences. Jodie Foster did not live up to the expectations set by her previous films and at times was even laughable. Matt Damon delivered an alright performance and Sharlto Copley was as entertaining as ever. "Elysium" is no "District 9″, but it still holds it's own in the large spectrum of science fiction cinema.

James Wan's "The Conjuring" is one of my most anticipated films of this year. Wan, the director of the original "Saw" film as well as 2011's "Insidious" has a fair amount of experience in the field of horror. Although, he has had some missteps, 2007's "Dead Silence" was a joke of a horror film and did not live up to the expectations set by his previous work. He is also directing the upcoming sequel to "Insidious", which I am looking forward to. His newest film, "The Conjuring" is packed with an all star cast. Starring are Vera Farmiga, Lily Taylor, Ron Livingston and Patrick Wilson. Based on the true story of famed paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren (Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga), who have participated in such paranormal investigations as the infamous "Amityville Horror" case as well as many others. The film is centered around their supposedly "most terrifying" case that has not been revealed until now. In the first few scenes we see the Perron family, Carolyn Perron (Lili Taylor), Roger Perron (Ron Livingston) and their many daughters. They are moving into their new home, a remote farmhouse located in Rhode Island. Having settled in, the family heads to bed. In the morning, they wake up to find that every single clock in the house has stopped at exactly 3:07 AM as well as a foul stench seeping through the floor and walls. Not to mention a shocking discover made by their youngest daughter, Christine. Over the course of a few days, strange events begin to occur in the Perron house and it becomes evident that something is terribly wrong. In desperate strides to protect her family, Carolyn seeks the help of noted paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren, it takes her some convincing, but the two decide to help her. After inspecting the Perron house, it is clear to the Warren's that something evil has latched itself onto it.

First of all, I will say that I greatly enjoyed this film, but it did not genuinely frighten me. Normally, I would dismiss a horror film if it would fail to frighten me, but in the case of "The Conjuring" there is so much more backing up the film that the scares don't feel as important as they should. This is a very well made film, the set design and camera-work showcase James Wan's impressive directorial presence as well as set up a chilling atmosphere. If I were to pick a work to describe my feelings whilst watching the film, it would probably be, "unsettled". The entire cast deliver exceptional performances, which is no surprise when working with such highly talented actors. My main problem with "The Conjuring" is that at times it feels very predictable and uninspired story wise. Other than that, I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed "The Conjuring". I am convinced that James Wan has the potential to be a fantastic director.

It did not scare me, but the fantastic production value and the performances delivered by the actors along with James Wan's eerie direction had me invested in the film all the way through. "The Conjuring" managed to unsettle me as well as provide a gripping story and worthwhile characters.

After the outright terrible "X Men Origins: Wolverine", "Marvel" has come out with another "Wolverine" movie in hopes of redeeming themselves after their colossal failure. When it comes to "Marvel" character's, "Wolverine" must be my favorite of them all. I was a big fan of the "X-Men" movies (except for "The Last Stand"), despite their many plot holes and missteps, I remained a fan. The character of "Wolverine" has always to me been the most fascinating of the "X-Men" team. With his backstory being so vast, there seemed to be an unlimited amount of potential for his character. This is a character that always had a more mature feel for him, even when placed in campy stories. In "The Wolverine", Hugh Jackman returns to play the title role of the film for the sixth time. Following the events of "X-Men: The Last Stand", Logan, also known as "The Wolverine" has gone back to Canada to hide in a cave in the mountains surrounding a small, town. Once a proud member of the "X-Men" Logan has become a reclusive nobody, growing a large beard and regressing to the state of a broken man. After getting into a bar fight, Logan is approached by a mysterious woman named Yukio (Rila Fukushima), who offers him to go to Japan to visit a friend from his past. This friend is none other than Japan's wealthiest man Yashida (Hal Yamanouchi), who's life Logan saved during the second world war. Yashida is dying of an unknown disease and has invested billions of dollars to keep him alive, but his time is running out. He gives Logan a proposition, for Logan to transmit his healing powers to Yashida so that he can live a normal life and eventually die. Or as he puts it "liberating" him from his eternal pain.

The action and fight sequences are pretty impressive, but at times they feel so over the top that it is hard to take them seriously. I like the fact that this is a movie that was not scared to stray into more mature territory despite being rated PG-13. I'm not a fan of extreme violence, which granted there is none of in this movie, but it was interesting to see a fair amount of blood in this seeing as "Marvel" movies are usually on the more campy side of the spectrum. The problem with this film is that there are a fair amount of little plot holes and incoherences that took me out of the movie at times. The visual effects and cinematography satisfy, though this is definitely not one of the main focus points in the movie. The performances are nothing special, Hugh Jackman does what he did before, the brooding and dangerous character, but in the case of this movie, he did bring a more dramatic and intimate side to the character of Wolverine that we haven't seen that much before. All the performances were fine, except for Svetlana Khodchenkova's performance which was terrible. Her character felt so fake an exaggerated that it was downright painful to watch.

If you're looking for something fun and enjoyable, I would definitely recommend it, but as anything else than a fun movie, it does not really hold up. The action is over the top, despite having some well made fight sequences and the plot is lacking substance, although I am pleased to say that this movie went into mature territory and gave the character of "Wolverine" some much needed humane aspects.

I have stated many times that Ingmar Bergman is one of my favorite film makers of all time. I, like many others, see him as a visionary, a shining example of an amazing film maker. His films are like no other's, there are layers beyond layers that can only hope to be unraveled in his works. Few film makers have achieved such artistic success as Bergman and few ever will. Though his films may share similar themes, they all bear their own drastically defining characteristics. "The Seventh Seal" is a film I first saw nearly a year ago and did not fully appreciate until I revisited it more recently. Bear in mind that this like most or Bergman's films require multiple viewings to even begin a discussion. In the first scenes of the film we see a vast seashore and a knight awaking on it. He is approached by a mysterious hooded figure that reveals himself as Death. The knight, Antonius Block (Max Von Sydow) has recently returned from the Crusades to a plague infested Sweden. Death claims that he has come for him and that his time in the world of the living is up. In order to hinder Death's deed, Antonius proposes a game of chess between the two. If he is to win the game, Death will set him free. The film also follows a wide variety of other character's that towards the end come together. When reviewing an Ingmar Bergman film, I don't care to greatly indulge on the plot, especially with this film, as I fear it will take away from the film's charm.

Ingmar Begman seems to be very fascinated with God and faith. This is a film that shows you the burden faith can bring. I believe that Bergman directed this film by channeling his own inner struggles into his art, like many great artists have done and still do. The main character of the film is on the verge of loosing his faith in God, he wants to believe, but he does not see any proof backing God's existence. This is something most people have struggled with during the course of their live and I believe Bergman did as well. You don't see film's like these nowadays and I know everyone has been saying this over and over again, but "The Seventh Seal" possesses a type of beauty that could only be captured by someone like Ingmar Bergman and it is a rare occasion that someone like him comes around. The lighting and shadows in this film add to the already beautiful black and white visuals. In my opinion the most beautiful scenes visually have to be the opening scene and the ending scenes (not going to spoil it)

To take in the beauty and to somewhat understand "The Seventh Seal" you have to watch it multiple times. The visuals, music and the overall ambiance of the film added to the already outright fantastic story and powerful underlying themes creates a beautifully eery film. I have praised Ingmar Bergman and his films enough already, all I have to say it "The Seventh Seal" is a masterpiece and an untouchable classic.

Jeff Nichols has proved to be one of the most promising new directors. His 2011 film "Take Shelter" was a powerful, thrilling despite being slow moving drama. His newest film "Mud" tells the story of two boys named Ellis and Neckbone, played by Tye Sheridan and Jacob Lofland who live in Arkansas on the Mississipi riverbank. They spend their days exploring the river on their motorboat, until Neckbone tells Ellist about a strange discovery he found on an island in the river. He takes Ellis to the island to show him what he found. The discovery is a small motorboat lodged in a tree. The boys claim the boat as theirs, but soon find out that someone happens to be living in it. In shock, they decide it's time for them to leave. Upon running out to their boat, they notice a strange man standing on the shore of the island, fishing. This is Mud, a fugitive on the run from the police, played by Matthew McConaughey. He claims that the boat was found by him in the first place and that he intends to leave Akransas with his estranged girlfriend, Juniper, played by Reese Witherspoon. Mud is being tracked by the police and desperately needs to get the boat out of the tree. He also needs a new motor and various other parts to get the boat in working order. The boys and Mud arrange a deal, if they track down the parts for the boat, Mud will reward them with his 45. caliber pistol. As they begin to help Mud, they are in grave danger as Mud's troubled past is catching up to him.

"Mud" is a fresh new twist on a coming of age story. It provides us with a heartfelt tale of friendship, without buying into sappy cliché's. This is a film that takes some time to develop it's story and the characters, but doing so it does enrich the entire viewing experience. The actors do an extraordinary job at portraying their character's, I am convinced that Tye Sheridan has an unlimited amount of potential to be an amazing actor. Nevertheless, the film is helmed by Matthew McConaughey who in the past two years has redeemed himself as a serious actor rather than a typecast for cheesy chick flick's. With his last two films, Nichols has shown that he is an impressive visual director. In the case of "Mud", he beautifully captured the dense Mississipi terrain as well as the vast wetlands. He also creates great supporting characters that fit in alongside our main protagonists and add a much needed sense of genuineness. All the characters are fascinating and add their own charm to the story, even if they have little screen time. These are all great actor's that are excellently play their roles which are crafted for them with the notion of keeping realism in mind. My only gripe with the film is how the third act was played out. Instead of coming to a peaceful conclusion, the film became overly melodramatic and went in guns blazing. Other than that, I have to admit that I loved this film.

Reminiscent of such coming of age tale's as "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Stand By Me", "Mud" is one of the best films of the year so far. The acting, story and visuals provides for a well rounded and quite frankly, fantastic cinematic experience. McConaughey has proved that he is a great actor and Tye Sheridan showcases his talent in this film as well. "Mud" is a genuinely heartfelt story of friendship and a story of how children become mixed up in the lives of adults. A must watch!

Based on true events, "The Bling Ring" follows a group of celebrity obsessed teenagers who decide to burglarize the homes of famous celebrities while they are out of town. The victims include Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Orlando Bloom and many more. A wide array of talented young actors portray the film's "protagonists". Israel Broussard, Emma Watson, Katie Chang, Taissa Farmiga and Claire Julien star as the vapid group of teenagers and deliver exceptional performances. In the first scenes of the film we are introduced to Emma Watson's character, Nicki and her adopted sister Sam, played by Taissa Farmiga. They live in a large suburban villa in Los Angeles. Their mother, played by Leslie Mann homeschool's them by teaching them to live life according to the philosophy of the self help book "The Secret". They don't seem to show much interest in the homeschooling process and are too preoccupied with partying and social media to even remotely care about their mother's ramblings. We then shift to the Character of Marc, played by Israel Broussard who has just recently moved to Los Angeles and is the "new kid" at school after being thrown out of his previous one on account of too many absences. He is approached by Katie Chang's character, Rebecca with who he forms a close friendship. Marc is soon introduced to Nicki and Sam, as well as Rebecca's close friend Chloe, played by Claire Julien. Tired of longing for the celebrity lifestyle they crave, the group of teenagers decide to rob Paris Hilton. Using the internet, they discover that she is out of town, so they head out for a little bit of shopping. They find no difficulty at breaking in as the key to the door is placed under the welcome mat… Although they get away with the burglary, their future crimes will not go unnoticed by the police.

I have a mixed relationship with the films of Sofia Coppola. While I do think she is an incredibly talented director and her second film "Lost in Translation" happens to be one of my a favorite films of all time, she does tend to indulge into the visual style of her films and overwhelm the story. One of the best examples of this is with her 2006 biographical drama "Marie Antoinette". The cinematography, costumes and production design are great, but the character development and story are downplayed by the lavish visuals. The question is, where does her newest film stand in the scope of her directorial career. Going into "The Bling Ring", you can be fairly certain that the cinematography will be great. Like I said before, Coppola loves to indulge into the visual style of her work and this is no exception. As for the story and characters, it's a hit and miss situation. In the case of "The Bling Ring" Coppola doesn't seem to look under the surface of her character's and portrays them as one dimensional bimbo's. Apart from Israel Broussard's character, there is little to no character development in this film. The script is also uneven, though it has some moments of truly witty writing. Another problem I had with this film, is that the burglaries felt incredibly repetitive, apart from one particular steady shot where we can only see the outside of the house being burglarized and the teens ransacking it through the windows. These scenes felt boring and unimaginative apart from the first one and the one I mentioned. The film's major strong point to me is that it felt incredibly entertaining. On a satirical level, I would say this film succeeds, as a film…I wouldn't say it failed, but it is an uneven and problematic piece of cinema. Despite being one dimensional to a certain degree, the cast delivers exceptional performances and they embody the materialism that resides in their characters. I have always been a fan of films about the vacuousness of modern day youth, therefore I immensely enjoyed this one and managed to somehow ignore the problems, which I don't usually do.

Although I can't deny I greatly enjoyed this film, it does have a fair amount of issues. As expected from Sofia Coppola, the visuals are great. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about the character development and writing. The script is uneven and the characters tend to be one dimensional. In my opinion, "The Bling Ring" is a great satire, but not a great film. It is not for everyone, but I managed to really enjoy it.

The new hit horror film "Evil Dead" is a re-imagining of Sam Raimi's horror classic of the same name. You've probably heard this kind of plot before as it has been re-done over and over again. A group of teenagers head out to an old, dreary cabin in the middle of the woods to get away from the commotion of the city and help their friend overcome drug addiction. Upon arriving in the cabin, they notice a foul smell coming from the cellar. As they investigate, they find tons of animal corpses hanging from the ceiling, as well as a mysterious book full of strange writings and illustrations of satanic creatures. One of the teenagers begins to read the book despite the warnings written on the pages. He unleashes an evil force that is capable of unimaginable cruelty.

Bear in mind that this is an "Evil Dead" film, so it is pretty obvious logical thinking is thrown out of the door. I can't really say i thought this film was awful, but I really don't think it is very good. The acting is just like the rest of the film, not really bad and not really good. The film's major strong point is the outstanding special effects and the beautifully filmed shots, the visual style is beautifully haunting. It transmits the dreary tone of the film to the viewer as well as provides eye-catching visuals. Another major strength to the films is that the director, Fede Alvarez stays very faithful to the source material of the original "Evil Dead". He almost always uses practical effects for the gory scenes of the film as well as for the scenery. There is little to no CGI in this film, which is astounding. This made the film feel extremely brutal and at times hard to watch. The major problem with "Evil Dead" is that there is no character development for most of the characters, the two main characters have some character development, but the other three seem to be in the film just to be killed off later. It is also frustrating to watch the characters making completely ludicrous decisions, this is a regular problem is modern horror movies that continues to annoy the hell out of me.

This is a film that can be a lot of fun, but when you look at it from a logical perspective, it becomes really annoying. It's major strengths are the special effects and how faithful it is to the original. Although it is an enjoyable movie, it is full of plot holes and annoyances. I would recommend it if you are looking to have a entertaining movie experience, other than that, I can't really recommend it.

What looked like a somewhat promising thriller turned out to be plain awful, other than the creepy masks the purgers wear, this movie is not even remotely scary. Set in the near future, the United States government legalizes all crimes for a period of twelve hours every year for an event known as "Purge Night". Ethan Hawke plays a man named James Sandin, who has gained a substantial amount of wealth selling security systems to wealthy neighborhoods. The purge has reformed the United States. Crime is at an all time low and the economy is flourishing. Even Sandin's wealthy neighbors take part in the purge…for fun. At home, Sandin is awaited by his trophy wife Mary, played by Lena Heady and his two children, who do a great job at making the worst decisions imaginable and acting like total morons. As the purge begins, the Sandin's lock up as per usual. Later on, as the night falls, James' son Charlie sees an injured man walking down the street and begging for help through the house's security camera and gets an oh so sudden moral obligation to help him. He let's the man into the house. For the sake of the plot, purgers arrive at the Sandin's door.

This film is just, for lack of a better word..retarded! The characters make sudden horrible choices and make the story not only feel cheap, but incredibly stupid. The child actors in this film are horrible and the characters they portray are even worse. I mean (and I know i'm ranting) their father does everything to protect them and they basically spit in his face. The initial concept of "The Purge" seemed genuinely fascinating, but it is presented so badly and over-exaggerated to such extremes that it becomes laughable! Not to mention the horrible production. The blood/gore effects looked like something out of a student film and the cinematography felt like it was for a cheap, and I mean really cheap TV movie and the sound effects for the guns sound like their taken from "Garry's Mod" or some other video game. Ethan Hawke is the only one who delivers a decent performance. Lena Headey is not a bad actress and she could have had an exceptional performance if the plot and her character weren't as dumb. God, I couldn't stand this movie. I know i'm being very critical, but it was just awful! It could only pass as a cheap film that you watch on TV when you have absolutely nothing to do.

"The Purge" is predictable, dumb and annoying. Ethan Hawke gives the only decent performance, but still fails to save the movie in any way. Topped off by a ludicrous plot and horrible visuals, "The Purge" is an example of a interesting idea gone terribly wrong.

Director Steven Soderbergh has said that Side Effects is to be his last film. If he follows through on this statement, this would be an honorable film to finish a career with. Side Effects is a mystery, suspense drama starring Rooney Mara, Jude Law, Channing Tatum and Catherine-Zeta Jones. It follows a woman named Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) who's husband, Martin (Channing Tatum) is being released from prison after serving a four year prison sentence for "insider trading". Emily falls into a "depression" and decides to start attending therapy sessions. Her psychiatrist Jonathan Banks (Jude Law) give her a prescription for a wide number of anti-depressants. A mysterious and fascinating mystery ensues. Side Effects is a film that mostly relies on great acting and well though out plot twists. It is reminiscent of many classic mysteries like Marnie and Vertigo, but still provides a intriguing story.

On an acting level "Side Effects" is just great Rooney Mara gives a great performance and so does Jude Law an Catherine-Zeta Jones. Although, in my opinion Channing Tatum has to be the weak link in this film. His character seemed incredibly bland and under-developed and i felt like he was just a background extra that had no benefit to the story. The cinematography is very stylized and full of bright popping colors, though it is not overly stylish. It adds to the dark tone of the film and makes the film a treat for the eyes. "Side Effects" is a frightening examination of the effects of prescription medication and a bone chilling psychological thriller. I highly recommend it.

Derek Cianfrance's second collaboration with Ryan Gosling: "The Place Beyond The Pines" is an electric and heart-wrenching crime drama with an all star cast. The films shifts between three intertwined stories, at the beginning of the film we are introduced to Ryan Gosling's character, a famous traveling motorcycle stuntman named Luke Glanton. While on tour Luke performs a show in his home town where he encounters his former lover Romina, played by Eva Mendes. He soon finds out that hes is the father of Romina's infant son. Unfortunately Romina has settled with a man name Kofi, who does not approve of Luke's interference in they're family life. Nevertheless Luke decides to quit his job as a stuntman, settle into the town and start to provide for his son. He lands a job at an auto-repair garage, but soon understands that he is not making nearly enough money to provide for his son. He and the owner of the garage, a man named Robin, played by Ben Mendelsohn decide to earn money by robbing banks.

Chaos ensues and soon enough we are introduced to Bradley Cooper's character, an ambitious rookie cop who is connected with Gosling by fate. The film then follows two other different stories, all equally gripping. The Place Beyond the Pines is the best film i have seen in 2013 so far. I was thoroughly invested in the character's and the film grasped my attention to the very end. Derek Cianfrance showcases his directorial skill in this film with perfectly paced and dynamic story telling. The acting is superb from the entire cast and the writing is energetic. That being said "The Place Beyond The Pines" is not a perfect film, towards the end it does tend to drag on a bit and some of the plot points were a tad bit predictable. I would also have liked if the story would have explored the characters past in more depth. Though these are merely my personal nitpicks. The conclusion to the film completely blew me away and left me asking questions. "The Place Beyond The Pines" is a harsh, but beautiful film about crime and relationship's between fathers and sons. I highly recommend it.

Danny Boyle's new film "Trance" is a mystery, thriller and suspense film that stars James McAvoy, Vincent Cassel and Rosario Dawson. As the film begins we are introduced to Simon (James McAvoy), a fine art auctioneer who teams up with a group of criminals, led by a man named Franck (Vincent Cassel) to steal a valuable painting worth millions of dollars. While the robbery ensues, Simon suffers a blow to the head. As he regains consciousness, he realizes he has no memory of where he hid the painting. Franck is determined to find the painting. He starts by torturing and interrogating Simon who does not remember anything about the incident. After the interrogation proves to be fruitless, Franck decides to send Simon to a hypnotherapist named Elisabeth Lamb (Rosario Dawson), in hopes of finding an answer. Elisabeth begins to delve into Simon's mind and as she slowly begins to recover his lost memories she realizes there is more to her new patient than what meets the eye.

Danny Boyle's stylistic direction greatly benefits the film. The beautiful cinematography not only adds to the somewhat sterile atmosphere of the film, but also makes the film visually stunning. The sound design is shockingly effective, whenever a gun goes off or an object is broken the sounds feel extremely piercing. On a technical level the film is very well rounded and is topped off with a great electronic score.

The actors play their roles very well. The standouts have to be James McAvoy and Vincent Cassel. Even though Rosario Dawson delivers a great performance she has to be the weak link out of the three. The main issue with "Trance" is that the story seems to be walking on thin ice at times and has a few plot holes that seep through the whole story. It was very hard for me to distinguish reality from imagination while watching this film, which can both be of benefit and at the same time be rather off-putting to the viewer.

Looking back at the film after seeing it just a few hours ago it may be hard to come to a definitive conclusion on my opinion, but i will say that overall, "Trance" is a entertaining and innovative mystery that is boasted by great performances and beautiful cinematography.

The newest film by director Terrance Malick (Badlands, The Thin Red Line, The Tree of Life) is an ambitious, beautiful and moving piece of cinema, starring Ben Affleck, Olga Kurylenko, Rachel McAdams and Javier Bardem. To The Wonder is mostly set in a small town in Oaklahoma and tells the love story of Neil (Ben Affleck) and Marina (Olga Kurylenko) which spans over the course of many years as they go through they're trials and emotional hardships. I will start off by saying that this is one of my favorite films of 2013 so far.

Though it has received mainly mixed reviews i managed to thoroughly enjoy it. One of the films major strong points is the cinematography. Terrance Malick has proved countless times that he is a master at capturing beautiful images with such films as "Badlands" and the more well known "The Tree of Life". The style and cinematography is very reminiscent of "The Tree of Life" in the sense that it alters between the regular story and a series of images from nature. Which in a sense can damage the story and be rather off-putting. Although i, personally felt it added to the overall feeling and increased the atmosphere of the film. The film deals with such subjects as the yearning for fulfillment in life and how people search aimlessly for happiness when they don't fully understand what they're looking for. If i had to summarize my interpretation of the film i would have to say that To The Wonder is an analysis of the human condition because it shows how people contemplate they're own faith, make mistakes and most importantly learn from those mistakes. My major issue with this film is that there is little or no character development at all and how underused Javier Bardem and Rachel Mcadams were. I felt if the story had also revolved around they're characters the film would have been more interesting and dynamic. Although Terrance Malick has been known to over-edit his films and shamelessly cut out pivotal plot points of the story.

The actors do a overall good job at portraying their characters, but they feel as if they were background extras in Terrance Malick's vision. To The Wonder is a fascinating piece of cinema and more of an artistic experience than a film, some may see it as pretentious, but i really liked it. I would recommend it to fans of Terrance Malick and people who are open minded to unconventional films.

The third installment in the "Iron" Man film franchise has been hyped up for quite some time now. Though it has gained a lot of positive reviews, I have to say I was a tad bit disappointed. As per usual it stars Robert Downey Jr as billionaire Tony Stark, also known as "Iron Man" and Gwyneth Paltrow as "Pepper Potts". Ben Kingsley plays a terrorist known as the "Mandarin" who is executing various terror attacks that not only threaten the safety of U.S inhabitants, but the safety of "Iron Man" himself. As the story progresses we find out that the Mandarin's co co conspirator is a scientist named "Aldrich Killian" (Guy Pearce) who stark had humiliated years ago. Needless to say, one liners and explosions ensue

I have never been a fan of the "Marvel Comics" movies. I have always found them rather annoying and somewhat obnoxious. Although, I did enjoy the first "Iron Man" film i was not a big fan of "The Avengers", nor "Iron Man 2". The main problem with this film is the story. I am going to reveal some major plot points, so if you don't want spoilers do not continue reading this review. The entire plot twist involving the Mandarin being an actor hired by Aldrich Killian was completely ludicrous. It felt incredibly lazy and damaged the story to great extents. I understand that superhero films tend to be over the top, but "Iron Man 3" goes to such extents of absurdity that it goes from being regular popcorn action to being completely unbearable. The best part of the film is probably Robert Downey Jr. He manages to still remain charismatic and likable.

Though, I was expecting more out of this film, I did find it enjoyable to some extent. Robert Downey Jr, Guy Pearce, Gwyneth Paltrow and Ben Kingsley were fine on a performance level, but the sloppy storytelling and silly plot twists ruined the movie for me. Iron Man 3 is a fun movie, but in my opinion a disappointing one.

Harmony Korine is a director that I generally can't stand. From such films like "Gummo", to the unwatchable "Trash Humpers" I tend to be very wary of seeing any of his work. "Spring Breakers" is one of the films that I missed during the past six moths and now that it is available pretty much everywhere, I decided to give it a watch. The plot is basically a "good girls gone bad" type scenario. It stars Selena Gomez, Ashley Benson, Venessa Hudgens and Korine's own daughter, Rachel Korine as four teenage girls who desperately wish to abandon the mediocrity of every day life and go on a marathon of partying for spring break. Unfortunately, they don't have enough money so they decide to rob a restaurant. After the robbery proves to be successful, they embark on a drug and alcohol fueled rampage through Miami until they are arrested and charged for possession of illegal drugs. Just as all hope seems lost, they are bailed out by a rapper named "Alien", played by James Franco who gets them involved in his illegal activities, which involve even more drugs as well as gang violence. Although, he fails to convince Selena Gomez's character "Faith" so she leaves Miami and heads back home. As for the other three girls, they head down a dark, dark path.

While I can't say I enjoyed it, it is a great improvement compared to Korine's previous films. By that, I mean it's watchable. "Spring Breakers" is stylized very well. The gritty camera-work combined with the colorful visuals provide for a genuinely interesting experience. Franco delivers a dynamic performance and it is clear that he was completely invested in his character. Benson and Hudgens prove that they can do a great job at playing sluts… In all honestly though, it was interesting to see these young actresses break out of their childish personas and portray genuinely filthy characters. The film is sleazy, messy and undoubtedly lazy, but in it's own silly way it helps set the tone. Ultimately, "Spring Breakers" is a satire as well as a social commentary on modern youth culture and it's obsession with sex and drugs. The girls in the film long for a break from every day life, but in the end discover that they just can't handle it.

It is lazy, but very interesting. Harmony Korine's nauseating satire on modern day youth provides us with over the top scenes of violence, sleazy sex and beautiful visuals. It isn't for everyone, but I managed to somewhat enjoy it. I think that the only way I can accurately express my opinion on the film is with a one to ten rating. I don't usually do this, but a film like "Spring Breakers" requires it.

Nicolas Winding Refn's newest film is officially my second most anticipated film of the next six months just behind Martin Scorsese's "The Wolf of Wall Street" and I am proud to say that I finally got the chance to watch it. My patience had run out and I was tired of waiting for it to start showing at cinema's. Luckily, with the help of some friendly IMDb users, I got a hold of a link to a stream of the film. "Only God Forgives" was not well received upon it's premiere at the "Cannes Film Festival" this year and was greeted by walkouts and even booing during the end credits of the film. The question is, was this due to the high expectations set by Refn's previous film "Drive" which won the "Best Director" award at the festival in 2011? Or is this film really that bad? In the first few scenes of the film we are introduced to Julian, a drug smuggling foreigner and underground fight club owner living in Bangkok, thriving on the city's depravity. Julian is played by Ryan Golsing, who also starred in "Drive". This is Refn's second collaboration with him. We are also introduced to Julian's brother Billy a psychotic sex fiend, who walks the city streets at night looking for underage prostitute's. Billy gets into some serious trouble after he brutally rapes and murders an underage girl, with the permission of her father (not to murder). The police arrive at the scene, but these officers do not abide by the traditional rules of law enforcement. The group of policemen is lead by a retired cop named Chang, played by Vithaya Pansringarm. He is self appointed vigilante who calls himself "The Angel of Death". He lets the daughter's father brutally murder Billy, but does not exempt him from punishment. After Billy's death, the news quickly spreads to Julian and his mother, Crystal, played by Kristin Scott Thomas. She is the leader of a massive organized crime family located in the United States and upon hearing the news, she quickly flies to Bangkok to find and punish her sons killer in any means necessary. As the film progresses, extreme violence ensues and Julian's dark past begins to unravel.

On a technical level "Only God Forgives" is a cinematic gem. The cinematography, soundtrack and production design are fantastic. Refn seems to have indulged in meticulous little details like the placement of objects and furniture as well as the lighting and sound design to create an atmospheric adventure. Unfortunately, if you haven't read the script prior to watching this film, it might be hard to become immersed in the story because of Refn's strange directorial decisions. For example, the film might be going along smoothly and then suddenly be interrupted by a strange, dreamlike vision experienced by the main character. Or the dialogue could become inaudible for a few good seconds. The film tries to do so much and to a certain degree is too ambitious. It tries to be a thrilling action film and at the same time an intellectual art house experience. Refn did this well with his two previous film, but totally missed the mark with "Only God Forgives". It is too unfocused and fails to satisfy equally on all fronts, therefore it also fails at being a well rounded film. I understand that he has probably intended for the action and violence to be presented in a poetic light, but being someone who thoroughly enjoyed the screenplay, I was a tad bit disappointed. Personally, I think the film would have worked much better if Refn had stuck to the original script. The acting is solid, there is not much dialogue from anyone apart from Kristin Scott Thomas, who is probably the best part of the entire film, playing a poisonous, domineering mother. Ryan Gosling is doing the "silent psychopath" routine again, which the director seems to love. Nevertheless, Gosling works well with what he is given, which isn't really a lot. Vithaya Pansringarm delivers a solid performance as well, but also hasn't got very much to work with and is overshadowed by the film's stylistic aspects. People have complained about the excessive violence in the film, but in many instances the actual violence is not shown on screen, rather the outcome of the violence, which to be fair can be just as gruesome and I wouldn't recommend this film for the weak of heart.

Nicolas Winding Refn's gruesome, nightmarish thriller does not match up with the high standards set by his two previous films, "Bronson" and "Drive", but it is most definitely an interesting cinematic experience. Packed with impressive visuals, which is no surprise from a great visual director like this, "Only God Forgives" is undoubtedly a treat for the eyes. Unfortunately, the main problem with the film is that it feels alienated from it's audience and totally unfocused, it is clear that Refn made this film purely for himself rather than for his fans. However, there are many fascinating underlying themes in this film that undoubtedly require multiple viewings to discover and understand, therefore I will be doing a sort of retrospective on the film in a few weeks time when I will have analyzed it. The actors work with what they are given, which is not very much, apart from Kristin Scott Thomas who is just great in her role. "Only God Forgives" is most definitely not for everyone, I will definitely watch it again and I'm glad I saw it

Just recently, I had read F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic novel "The Great Gatsby" in preparation for Baz Luhrmann's new film that bears the same name. "The Great Gatsby" stars Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway, an aspiring writer and war veteran who is struggling to make a profit after entering the bonds business. He moves into a small cottage on Long Island, where just over on the other side of the bay lives his cousin Daisy Buchanan, played by Carey Mulligan and her snobbish husband Tom, played by Joel Edgerton. Next to his humble cottage stands a massive palace owned by a wealthy businessman shrouded in mystery named Jay Gatsby. New York inhabitants flock to his home every weekend where he holds grand parties. In this case invitations are not necessary, though Nick seems to be the only one invited. Upon his arrival, Nick is bedazzled by the shear scale of the party. He bumps into a woman named Jordan Baker, a famous sportswoman who he had met earlier whilst visiting his cousin's house. They decide to search for the party's host, Mr. Gatsby. Purely by accident, Nick seems to come face to face with the man himself. As the story progresses we discover more about Gatsby and his somewhat unusual past.

The film has been constantly advertised as a thrilling and energetic adaptation of the novel, but after seeing it i'm not sure that's a good thing. Where the novel was subtle and elegant, the film is outlandish and at times even a bit obnoxious. As with such films as "Moulin Rouge" and "Romeo + Juliet", Luhrmann seems to focus more on the style of the film and undermines the story. Though, I can't deny that the film looks beautiful, even if the style feels overbearing. People have criticized the use of modern day music, I personally thought this was a bold choice that played out very well on screen. The music helped set the scene for the parties and added a certain charm to the classic setting. Surprisingly, the 3D was unusually well done. I'm really not a fan of this so whenever I go see a 3D movie it tends to feel like a chore. In this case it really helped to immerse me in the story, as well as create beautiful visuals. On an acting level everyone delivered solid performances. Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan, Tobey Maguire and Joel Edgerton were all fine. The supporting actors were also just as good. Isla Fisher and Elisabeth Debicki did a great job at showing the contrast between different types of people in the society of the late 20′s. Whilst Fisher's character was vulgar and provocative Debicki's was sleek and classy.

In hindsight, Luhrmann's adaptation of Fitzgerald's classic novel can be obnoxious due to the overbearing style of the film, but it also provides the viewer with beautiful visuals, well acted performances and a well paced story. It establishes itself as a faithful and energetic imagining of the book. It certainly is not as great as it has been advertised to be, but it still is pretty good.

"Paradise: Love" or "Paradies: Liebe" is Ulrich Seidl's first installment in his "Paradise" trilogy. It premiered at the "Cannes Film Festival" last year, but only recently has been widely available. Even on your first glance at a promotional poster or still of the film, it is pretty clear that the word "paradise" is meant to be sarcastic. The film stars Margarete Tiesel as a middle aged Austrian housewife named Teresa,who lives in an apartment block in Vienna with her overweight, teenage daughter. Teresa is a single mother and longs for a man to satisfy her sexual needs as well as show her love and passion. She and her two friends decide to go on a vacation to Kenya to unwind from the stresses of everyday life. Teresa's friend, Inga has visited Kenya multiple times and is a regular patron of it's wide range of male prostitute's. She convinces Teresa to try out their services and claims that the experience is fantastic. Unlike Inga, Teresa faces a psychological dilemma of whether on not the young men find her attractive. This leads her to backing out of the sex that she is offered, until she meets a man named Munga, played by Peter Kazungu who offers his services for free and only asks for love. Unfortunately, for him love qualifies as financial aid to his relatives. Teresa soon realizes that she is being used and how low she has sunk

Director, Ulrich Seidl seems to have a very bleak and distorted view of the world. "Paradise: Love" is an incredibly depressing examination of the human condition, but at the same time it is painfully honest. Similar to Lars Von Trier, Seidl seems to enjoy exploring the filth hidden inside human beings and seeing how much humiliation a human being can endure. In no way could I possibly say that I enjoyed this film, but it most definitely is good cinema. Despite it being utterly repugnant, it does provide some intricate social commentary not only on prostitution, but on the state of decay in which Africa is currently in. The film forges it's own sick brand of cynical humor, which intentionally does not bring some light to the story, but make it feel even more cringe worthy. On a technical level "Paradise: Love" succeeds at showcasing Kenya's beauty as well as diving into it's dark recesses which is topped off by very long takes and tracking shots, which are always a great addition to a film.

I'm not sure I would like to see it again, but nevertheless "Paradise: Love" is a painfully honest example of great social commentary and an examination of Africa's recent decay. Margarete Tiesel gives a great and incredibly brave performance, which is topped off with Ulrich Seidl's fantastically disgusting direction. After seeing this, I'm very keen on seeing the next installment in the series, "Paradise: Faith"

Set in the early nineteen hundreds, Terrance Malick's cinematic gem "Days of Heaven" is regarded as one of the greatest cinematic achievements in regard to it's beautiful visuals. "Days of Heaven" is Malick's second feature film and much like 1973′s "Badlands" it faced an enormous amount of difficulties during it's production. Not to mention the three years it spent in a post production stage whilst Malick was editing it. The main problem with the film was that it didn't flow very well, the scenes seemed very alienated from each other and would make it difficult for the viewer to be immersed in the film's story. After Malick decided to make Linda Manz (who plays a supporting role in the film) the narrator, everything seemed to be tied together well. The story follows a hot tempered laborer named Bill (Richard Gere) who works in a Chicago steel mill to provide for his younger sister (Linda Manz) and his girlfriend Abby (Brooke Adams). After a heated argument with his boss, Bill looses his temper and strikes him down with a shovel, killing him instantly. To escape the law, Bill takes his sister and girlfriend and heads for Texas by train to work for a rich landowner referred to in the film as "The Farmer" (Sam Shepard). From then on we get to see The Farmer's point of view as well as Bill's, Linda's and Abby's. The Farmer slowly falls in love with Abby and wishes to marry her. Unfortunately, he is dying from a terminal illness. Bill encourages Abby to marry hims so that after his death, they can exploit his wealth.

"Days of Heaven" is one of those rare films in which small dramatic, maybe even melodramatic moments become incredibly meaningful. Gere, Adams and Shepard deliver exceptional performances and carry the film alongside Malick's smooth direction. What can I say about the cinematography that hasn't been said hundreds of times before, it's amazing. The vast wheat fields and the dusty American terrain are a treat for the eyes. Malick sets up his impressive visual style with his first two films and has continued to impress with the visuals of his more recent work. Ennio Morricone's soundtrack creates a dreamlike atmosphere and, as with many of his soundtrack's brings an indelible beauty and charm to the screen. Ultimately, "Days of Heaven" is a story of poverty, desperation and greed. Bill is forced to sink so low that he sacrifices that which is truly important to him for wealth. It is also a retrospect on the hardships that the working class population went through during the industrial era. Though it is presented in a way that showcases the story's beauty, it is a harsh and hard hitting tale.

Great story, great acting, great cinematography and great music. This is all part of Terrence Maclick's fantastic vision and are just some of the reasons this film has stood the test of time. "Days of Heaven" is a showcase for Malick's cinematic mastery and is one of cinema's greatest achievements

Seth Rogen's directorial debut "This Is The End" is the newest hit comedy to tear up the "Box Office". Surprisingly, it has not only gained the acclaim of cinema audiences, but of film critics as well, earning a stable 83% on "Rotten Tomatoes". James Franco, Jonah Hill, Danny McBride, Jay Baruchel, Craig Robinson and Seth Rogen among many other well known celebrities play themselves. Or rather over the top versions of themselves. It follows a fairly simple plot, Jay Baruchel arrives at Los Angeles to spend some time with his old, somewhat estranged friend Seth Rogen. They immediately head to Seth's house where they smoke weed and binge eat. Later on Seth tells Jay that he is invited to James Franco's housewarming party and that he would like Jay to accompany him. Despite being wary of going, Jay finally accepts Seth's offer and they head out for the night. Upon arriving at Franco's house they are greeted by James himself. In the film Franco is portrayed as an art loving pseudo-intellectual in contrast to Rogen who is presented as a stereotypical pothead, the kind he plays so often. We soon see Jonah Hill and Craig Robinson. Hill is portrayed as ultra nice and Robinson as a sex obsessed smooth talker. Among the party guests there are stars like Michael Cera, Emma Watson and even Rihanna, who luckily is killed off soon enough. Jay and Seth decide to go to a local kiosk to get cigarettes. Just as they approach the shop's counter blue lights shoot through the roof and lift several store customers up to the sky. They both panic and attempt to flee back to the party. The streets are filled with chaos, from explosions to vehicle crashes. They manage to get back to the party, but a massive earthquake will soon shatter their relief and begin none other than the apocalypse.

This is quite frankly a genuinely funny film. Yes, it does sometimes buy into cheap slapstick gags, but it is entertaining at all times and even has some golden moments. Jonah Hill's performance was by far my favorite part of this film. He has proved that he can be great in dramatic and comedic roles, or even a both at the same time. He proved this with 2011′s baseball drama "Moneyball", even with his early films like "Superbad" and I have no doubt that he'll prove it again with Martin Scorsese's upcoming crime drama "The Wolf of Wall Street". I love the fact that these actors aren't afraid to poke fun at themselves and doing so provide some great, subtle humor. One of my favorite moments in the film is a certain reference, to a certain film where someone is impregnated by the devil (Rosemary's Baby). The reference was extremely obvious, but to me it was incredibly funny mostly because "Rosemary's Baby" is one of my favorite films.

It feels a bit childish at times, but ultimately "This Is The End" is a fresh, new comedy that will most certainly make you laugh at least once. It has a fair share of loud , blaring humor, but it also has some moments of subtlety that if noticed will definitely enrich the comedic experience. I immensely enjoyed it and would love to see it again in some time.

"The Heat" is a new twist on the "buddy cop" sub genre of films. It stars Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy as two female law enforcers who are forced to work together due to a strange twist of circumstances. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Anyway, Sandra Bullock plays an uptight conservative federal agent named Sarah Ashburn who is desperately trying to earn a promotion that will raise her to the position of…I don't remember it's just some high ranking job. Ashburn's colleagues don't particularly like her, they find her obnoxious and incredibly arrogant. To see if Ashburn is truly qualified for the promotion, the department head assigns her as the partner to a vicious and rude inner city police office named Shannon Mills, played by Mellisa McCarthy to see if she has the skills to work side by side with people. They are assigned to capture the head of a cartel that is distributing drugs throughout the streets of Boston. Despite their personalities being polar opposites, they develop an unlikely bond.

"The Heat" does provide it's fair share of laughs, but ultimately it does not live up to the hype that it was surrounded by. Yes, you could call it a "homage" to the classic "buddy cop" movies, but it is extremely predictable. Melissa McCarthy's character seemed so over the top and I understand that it was intentional, but her performance tended to become progressively annoying as the film went on. Some people might disagree with me, but I think Sandra Bullock gave a much superior performance compared to McCarthy. Her arrogance and at times outright stupidity made her character enjoyable and funny. Where as McCarthy was just loud and up in your face with her blaring humor. The whole film is rather raunchy and the look it is going for is something between the detective movies of the 90s and something like the look of "The Fighter" mostly because of the Boston setting.

This is undoubtedly a sloppy and predictable comedy, but it does provide some laughs and Sandra Bullock gives an exceptional performance. I normally like Melissa McCarthy, but her shtick is waring out and she is steadily becoming extremely annoying. This review is going to be a little bit shorter than my other reviews simply because I can't see myself going into depth on my thoughts about this film. It is what it is, a generic comedy.

The prequel to one of my favorite animated films, "Monsters University" brings back the classic characters from "Monsters Inc." and tells the story of their university days. John Goodman and Billy Crystal return as the voices of Sully and Mike and the supporting cast is full of stars like Helen Mirren and Steve Buscemi who returns as Randall Boggs. The story mainly revolves around Mike. Ever since he was a child he had dreams of becoming a "scarer" and has waited almost his whole life to go to "Monsters University". Upon his arrival, he doesn't seem to fit in well at the "Scare School" despite all his efforts, he just isn't scary. During the final exams of the semester Mike starts an argument with Sully, who then was a jock and accidentally destroys a famed relict. both of them are kicked out of the "scare program". They are forced to team up with a fraternity and put their differences aside to participate in the annual "Scare Games" because it's their only chance to get back into the "scare program".

As expected from "Pixar", the animation is sleek, colorful and just plain beautiful. They animators have done a great job at bringing the monsters to life and making them as creative as can be. Billy Chrystal and John Goodman display their impeccable talent for voice acting and make the characters even more vivid and comical. The problem with this film is that it tends to feel really campy at times and strays from the original, which can be a good thing, but since "Monsters Inc." was going for a darker tone when it came to the overall style, I would have liked for this film to do the same. The one thing that struck me about "Monsters University" is that it didn't go for the idealistic, predictable ending, but took a more realistic approach to the story even if it was about monsters.

It is campy, but it is a lot of fun. The beautiful animation and superb voice acting make the monsters in the film visually impressive as well as comical. It does not buy in to family movie cliché's despite being reminiscent of a "Revenge of the Nerds" type story. "Monsters University" is a visual delight and will go by in a flash.

"Star Trek: Into Darkness" is the highly anticipated sequel J.J. Abrams' 2009 reboot of the "Star Trek" franchise. After the events of "Star Trek" the crew of the USS "Enterprise" have returned to their regular routine. They are sent to a distant planet to observe an alien race. Their mission goes terribly wrong as a natural disaster threatens the lives of the planet's indigenous civilization. In efforts to protect the planet, the ship's first officer Spock tries to control the situation, but his life is soon in grave danger. Captain James T. Kirk is forced to disobey the "Prime Directive" to safe Spock's life and exposes the enterprise to the planet's civilization. Upon returning to the starfleet's headquarters, Kirk is stripped of his position as ship captain, but is appointed as the first officer to admiral Montgomery Pike, who takes Kirk's place as commanding officer of the "Enterprise". Parallel to this, an unknown terrorist is plotting an attack that not only threatens the safety of the starfleet, but the entire "Galactic Federation"

Despite director J.J. Abrams overly stylistic direction, I immensely enjoyed "Star Trek: Into Darkness". The awe-inspiring action sequences gave me chills and Benedict Cumberbatch's performance was excellent. His voice literally made his character so great. When I went out of the theater, I wasn't sure if I liked the film, but now after some consideration I have come to the conclusion that I loved it. Even though it is action packed, it still provides a great story and plenty of substance to keep the viewer engrossed all the way through the film (though it dragged on a bit close to the end). Often times big budget action films have mediocre acting, again this is not the case with this film. The entire cast provides good performances, but Benedict Cumberbatch stole the show.

I don't have a whole lot to say about this film other than it had great special effects, great action, great pacing and great characters. The only downside was that towards the end the film dragged on a bit. Other than that, "Star Trek: Into Darkness" is another win on the behalf of director, J.J. Abrams.

Steven Soderbergh's biographical drama about the late, great pianist and entertainer, Walter Liberace premiered at the Cannes Film Festival about a week ago and has received mostly positive reviews from film critics. Actually, this is not a biography of Liberace at all. It is based on the autobiographical novel of the same name by Scott Thorson. It tells the story of his obsessive sexual relationship with Liberace. Matt Damon plays Thorson in the leading role of the film and Academy Award winner Micheal Douglas plays Liberace. The film opens with Scott sitting in a club, a man approaches him and begins to flirt with him. It becomes obvious that he is gay. By day, Scott works on film sets with animals used for stunts and hopes to become a veterinarian. One day he is invited to accompany a film producer to one of Liberace's shows. After the show, Scott is invited backstage to meet the man himself. They get along well and soon enough he is invited to Liberace's house. Liberace takes a liking for him and invites Scott to work for him. They soon develop a bond that becomes a serious sexual relationship.

I will start off by saying if you decide to watch this movie be ready for some uncomfortable moments. That aside I have to say that I thought this film was excellent. Micheal Douglas delivered a fantastic performance and I would not be surprised if he will be nominated for an "Oscar" next year. Damon also did a great job at portraying a naive, young and troubled man. The film itself was just fascinating. Soderbergh perfectly balanced comedy and drama as well as doing a great job at creating the overall tone and style of the film without coming off as overly stylish. It's really a shame that he has said that this is to be his last feature film.

This is a daring, engrossing and incredibly well made film. Though some scenes may seem gratuitous and the style may be too flashy for some, Matt Damon and Micheal Douglas deliver stellar performances that boasted the film to even greater heights. "Behind the Candelabra" is one of my favorite films of 2013 so far, I highly recommend it.

"Stoker" is the newest film from director Chan-wook Park, who also directed the modern cult classic from 2003 "Oldboy", a film which I greatly admire. "Stoker" centers around a young girl named India, played by Mia Wasikowska who has recently lost her father Richard Stoker in an "accident". Her mother, Evelyn, played by Nicole Kidman is in a state of mourning and has not taken the incident lightly despite her having had a cold, distant relationship with her husband. Soon enough Richard's estranged brother, India's uncle Charlie, played by Matthew Goode shows up and begins courting Evelyn. India seems to somewhat loathe her mother and does not take kindly to Charlie's untimely arrival. Charlie tries to act friendly towards India, but she remains hostile and starts to notice something strange about his behavior. Despite India's hostility towards Charlie, they begin to form a strange friendship. Although, we soon discover that Charlie is harboring many secrets and has a very dark past.

"Stoker" is most definitely worth a watch. I personally really liked it, but I can totally understand someone not enjoying it. The main problem that hinders the story is that the film feels trivial or more likely, bloated. The characters seem to be extremely melodramatic and their actions are very predictable. This is not a problem with the performances, it is the script. Not to say that the writing is terrible, it's just feels…dull. On the other hand the film's strong point is the beautiful cinematography, great performances, and the slow, creepy atmosphere. Chan-wook Park shows that he can deliver beautiful imagery as well as showing us pure violence. Mia Wasikowska delivers a solid performance and has established herself as one of the brightest new actors working today. Nicole Kidman and Matthew Goode both deliver well rounded performances as well. The atmosphere of the film feels rather "Hitchcockian". The mystery and the plot twists make "Stoker" seem like a modern day Alfred Hitchcock film and is very similar to his classic mystery "Shadow of a Doubt".

"Stoker" has many flaws, but is ultimately an entertaining mystery as well as a powerful thriller. It is boasted by great performances, beautiful cinematography and most importantly a chilling atmosphere, reminiscent of the classic films directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Most definitely flawed, but ever so entertaining. A great, dark coming of age story

"Now You See Me" is the newest film from french director Louis Leterrier, the man behind the "Incredible Hulk", the two "Transporter" films as well as the ever so disappointing "Clash of the Titans". "Now You See Me" tells the story of a group of magicians that call themselves "The Four Horsemen". The group consists of (big surprise) four people: "Daniel Atlas" (Jesse Eisenberg), "Henley Reeves"(Isla Fisher), "Jack Wilder"(Dave Franco) and "Merritt McKinney"(Woody Harrelson). They all possess very colorful and somewhat obnoxious personalities. Before banding together to form their group all of them were either street performers or rogue magicians. After each of them receive a mysterious card that leads them to a dingy apartment where they are given access to blueprints depicting amazing magic tricks they establish "The Four Horsemen". We then fast forward a year later, they have all become accomplished magicians and are pulling off mind bending performances together. During their show in Las Vegas they claim that for their final trick, they will rob a bank. They pick an audience member "randomly" and supposedly teleport them to a large bank in Paris. Inexplicably, they manage to steal the money. Soon enough FBI detective "Dylan Rodes" is teamed up with a young "Interpol" agent named "Alma Dray"(Melanie Laurent) and are assigned to capture "The Four Horsemen", but they just keep slipping through his fingers.

Whilst undoubtedly being fun and entertaining, the story of "Now You See Me" is so over the top and ludicrous that at times it feels a bit insulting to someones intelligence. The magicians pull off stunts that could only be described as "paranormal" and since this movie is supposed to be grounded in reality, it seems rather silly. The acting is..alright despite being overly comical that comes off as being pretty obnoxious and annoying. The visual effects aren't great, but they're not bad either. The problem with them is that it is extremely obvious that everything is computer generated. The best part of the film has to be Morgan Freeman. He can always make a film feel entertaining and always brings life to the screen. The greatest damage to the film has to be the utterly stupid plot twists. Although everything seems to add up and come together, the plot twists feel childish and unnecessary.

The film is entertaining, but chances are that you will forget it in a few days. The characters are shallow, the plot is ludicrous and the twists are childish. The best that "Now You See Me" provide is some good popcorn entertainment that you can watch with your friends. This film continues Louis Leterrier's streak of mediocrity.